Bitcoin’s bounce appears to be running into a familiar constraint: trading momentum is improving only superficially, and market participants are still leaning heavily on whether major geopolitical risks ease. At the same time, institutional-scale buying continued, with Michael Saylor’s Strategy adding another tranche of BTC and pushing its total holdings to 846,842 Bitcoin.

On the regulatory front, the US CFTC also made a personnel move that underscores its widening use of data and blockchain analysis. In a development that links crypto enforcement and market-structure oversight, CFTC Chair Michael Selig said the agency has appointed Donald Battle—previously an adviser to the SEC’s crypto task force—as its chief data innovation officer.

Key takeaways

• Swissblock and LVRG Research both indicate Bitcoin’s recovery lacks “conviction,” pointing to weak participation and soft on-chain signals.
• Geopolitics remain a dominant driver: a potential US-Iran peace deal is expected to be signed soon, but any breakdown could raise volatility.
• The CFTC has appointed Donald Battle, an SEC crypto task force adviser with blockchain forensics experience, as chief data innovation officer.
• Strategy bought 1,587 BTC for $100 million between June 8 and 14, bringing its total holdings to 846,842 BTC.

Bitcoin’s rebound depends on peace odds, but on-chain signals stay subdued

Bitcoin’s price strength has been notable—especially after it reclaimed the $67,000 level on Monday—but analysts caution that the underlying flow of activity is not strong enough to confirm a durable trend. According to reporting that cites Swissblock and LVRG Research director Nick Ruck, the market is still operating in a “weak momentum” environment.

Ruck told Cointelegraph that while Bitcoin reclaimed $67,000, “momentum remains weak,” citing declining volume and on-chain metrics that appear stagnant. His view is that the rebound could fade quickly if confirmation doesn’t show up in participation and network data.

Swissblock echoed the same theme, stating that Bitcoin’s price-momentum measures and on-balance volume (OBV)—a commonly used gauge of buying versus selling pressure—are stuck in a “weak momentum and participation regime.” In other words, price is rising, but the market behavior around that move has not fully shifted into a sustained accumulation phase.

The timing of the next test may be geopolitical. Ruck warned that if the US-Iran peace framework fails, spillover effects—ranging from renewed instability to potential oil-market shocks—could put Bitcoin on a “volatile path.” In that scenario, geopolitical catalysts would continue to dominate crypto price action rather than technical recovery signals.

US President Donald Trump said Sunday that the US has completed a peace deal with Iran to end months of conflict, with the expectation that it would be signed on Friday. Trump also said the arrangement would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and lead the US to lift its blockade—though the details remain largely unknown, and uncertainty itself can keep risk assets sensitive.

The CFTC appoints a data-and-forensics specialist from the SEC crypto task force

The US futures regulator’s staffing move is likely to matter beyond headlines because it ties together enforcement capability, data innovation, and crypto market oversight. The CFTC announced that Donald Battle—described as an adviser to the SEC’s crypto task force—will become the agency’s chief data innovation officer.

According to a CFTC notice quoted via Cointelegraph, CFTC Chair Michael Selig said the appointment reflects Battle’s experience in “data science, blockchain forensics, programming interfaces, and cutting-edge AI solutions.” Battle previously served as a blockchain data adviser for the CFTC and worked as a crypto enforcement specialist with the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

The key implication for market participants is that the CFTC is positioning itself to process and act on blockchain-related information more systematically. While the agency’s broader approach to crypto regulation has been evolving for years, appointments like this suggest an internal emphasis on analytics and investigative tooling—areas that can influence how quickly regulators can identify risks, trace activity, and respond to misconduct.

The move also arrives as Congress continues to discuss changes to the roles of the CFTC and SEC in digital asset market structure. In particular, the CLARITY Act—referenced in the same coverage—would reshape aspects of responsibilities across agencies. In that context, a chief data innovation officer with forensics experience can be read as a signal that the CFTC wants to be technically prepared for whatever additional responsibilities—or compliance burdens—follow legislative change.

Strategy continues its BTC buying streak, lowering average cost basis

While technical analysts debate whether Bitcoin’s rebound has enough support, the largest publicly known buyer continues to accumulate. Strategy, the company controlled by Michael Saylor, purchased 1,587 BTC for $100 million between June 8 and 14, according to an SEC 8-K filing referenced in Cointelegraph’s report.

The filing indicates an average acquisition price of $63,024 per Bitcoin. That purchase lowered Strategy’s overall average cost basis slightly, bringing it to about $75,656. Strategy’s reported position after the transaction is 846,842 BTC accumulated at a total cost of $64.07 billion.

CoinGecko data cited in the coverage places the current BTC price around $66,216, which the article estimates values Strategy’s holdings at roughly $56.1 billion. The gap between acquisition cost and current price highlights that—even amid recovery—Strategy’s entries are still largely underwater relative to today’s market level.

Funding mechanics also remain consistent with prior activity. As noted in the report, Strategy financed the latest purchase through sales of its Class A common stock (MSTR). The structure matters for investors because it can introduce additional dilution risk even when BTC supply dynamics are supportive—particularly during periods when the BTC market isn’t yet moving with full momentum.

What to watch next for BTC and crypto markets

For traders and long-term holders, the near-term watchlist should center on whether Bitcoin’s recovery earns stronger participation signals—something Swissblock and LVRG’s commentary suggest is still missing—and on whether the US-Iran deal proceeds without disruption. On the policy side, keep an eye on how the CFTC uses its new data leadership to tighten analysis and enforcement, especially as Congress continues to work through proposals like the CLARITY Act.

The company that settles almost every US stock trade is putting tokenized securities on a public blockchain, and it chose Stellar. What the deal actually covers, what the $114 trillion figure really means, and why XLM jumped.

In May 2026, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, the clearinghouse that sits behind nearly every stock trade in the United States, announced it would connect its tokenized securities service to Stellar, a public blockchain. It is the first time DTC-custodied securities will live on a public chain, and the news sent Stellar’s token, XLM, up more than 30% in a day with trading volume spiking over 400%. For a network long known mostly as a cross-border payments rail, the deal reframed Stellar overnight as a candidate for the core plumbing of US capital markets.

The deal has been widely covered and widely garbled, with headlines throwing around a “$114 trillion” figure that means something very different from what most readers assume. This guide explains the deal accurately: who DTCC is and why it matters, what is actually being tokenized and what is not, what the real numbers are, why Stellar was chosen, what it means for XLM, and the timeline that separates the announcement from anything going live.

The short answer

DTCC, the central clearinghouse for US securities, plans to issue tokenized versions of certain traditional assets, including Russell 1000 stocks, major index ETFs, and US Treasuries, on the Stellar blockchain. The plan was announced on May 27, 2026, runs under a three-year SEC no-action letter granted in December 2025, and targets live deployment in the first half of 2027.

The blockchain will hold tokenized securities that keep the same investor protections and entitlements as the traditional versions. XLM, Stellar’s native token, rose sharply on the news as traders priced in a major institutional use case for the network.

That is the deal. Everything else is detail and context, and the detail matters, because the most-quoted number about this deal is misleading.

Who DTCC is, and why this matters

Most people outside finance have never heard of DTCC, which is strange given that it touches almost every trade they ever make.

The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation is the invisible backbone of US securities markets. When you buy a stock through a broker, DTCC is the entity that clears and settles the trade behind the scenes, moving ownership records and ensuring the buyer gets the share and the seller gets the cash.

Its subsidiary, the Depository Trust Company, serves as the central securities depository for the country, holding the master records of ownership for the vast majority of US stocks and bonds. DTCC processes an almost incomprehensible volume of activity, on the order of $2.5 quadrillion in securities transactions a year, and oversees more than $114 trillion in assets across US capital markets.

That backdrop is why the Stellar deal is a significant event, not another partnership press release. When a crypto-native company says it will tokenize assets, the market shrugs, because crypto-native companies tokenizing things is routine and the assets are usually small.

When DTCC, the institution that literally keeps the ownership records for American securities, decides to put tokenized versions of those securities on a public blockchain, it is the core of traditional finance stepping onto crypto rails for the first time. The credibility of the counterparty carries the whole thing, and no counterparty in US markets is more central than DTCC.

What the “$114 trillion” number actually means

Almost every headline misleads here, and getting it right separates understanding the deal from being fooled by it.

The $114 trillion figure is the total value of assets DTCC oversees across all of US capital markets. It is not the amount being tokenized on Stellar.

Headlines reading “DTCC tokenizes $114 trillion on Stellar” are wrong, and the error matters because it inflates the immediate impact by orders of magnitude. What is actually being tokenized, at least in the defined service the SEC authorized, is a specific and far smaller set of highly liquid assets: the constituents of the Russell 1000 index, which are the 1,000 largest US public companies, ETFs tracking major indices, and US Treasury bills, bonds, and notes.

Even those are not being tokenized all at once; they define the eligible universe for a phased service. The accurate way to state the deal is that DTCC is launching a defined, regulated tokenization service, initially scoped to a set of liquid blue-chip securities, on Stellar, with the $114 trillion representing the size of the institution running the experiment, not the size of the experiment.

The distinction is not pedantic. A reader who believes $114 trillion is moving onto Stellar in 2027 will badly misprice both the opportunity and the timeline.

The real significance is not the headline number. It is that the most important institution in US securities settlement chose a public blockchain at all, which is a door opening, not a flood arriving.

The deal also sits inside the broader real-world-asset wave this deal rides. That matters because DTCC is not just another crypto-native issuer testing a small tokenization product; it is the core securities market infrastructure stepping onto public blockchain rails.

What is being tokenized, precisely

Three eligible asset classes sit under the announced service, and they are worth listing plainly.

Russell 1000 stocks: tokenized representations of shares in the 1,000 largest US public companies, the index that covers roughly 93% of the investable US equity market by capitalization. Major index ETFs: tokenized versions of exchange-traded funds tracking large indices.

And US Treasuries: tokenized bills, bonds, and notes, which are already the largest tokenized asset class and how it works in the broader real-world-asset tokenization market because of their safety and liquidity. Across all three, DTCC has stressed that the tokenized assets would carry the same investor protections, entitlements, and safeguards as the traditionally held versions, which is the regulatory bridge that makes the whole thing work for institutional users.

What is not in scope, at least initially, is everything else DTCC touches: the long tail of less liquid securities, corporate bonds broadly, and the bulk of the $114 trillion. The service is deliberately narrow, built around assets liquid and standardized enough to tokenize cleanly under regulatory supervision, which is both a limitation and the reason it is credible.

Starting with Treasuries and blue-chip equities means starting with the assets least likely to create a compliance mess. That is how a careful regulated first step should look.

Why DTCC chose Stellar

Of all the blockchains DTCC could have selected, the choice of Stellar surprised parts of the market, and the reasons reveal what institutions actually want from a chain.

Stellar was chosen for compliance-oriented architecture, not raw speed or ecosystem size. The network has built-in asset controls, including the ability to freeze or claw back tokens, features that crypto purists often dislike but that regulated institutions consider essential, because no institution will issue a regulated security on a chain where a court order or compliance requirement cannot be enforced.

Stellar’s design treats tokens as native base-layer assets instead of smart-contract constructs, which simplifies the issuance and lifecycle management of a security and reduces the surface area for smart-contract bugs. The network also offers low transaction costs, high throughput, and a long operating history oriented toward payments and asset issuance, not speculative DeFi.

Notably, Stellar is the second public blockchain DTCC has connected to in its multi-chain strategy, following the Canton Network, and DTCC has signaled it will connect to multiple layer-1 and layer-2 networks over time. That context matters for tempering the Stellar-maximalist reading: DTCC is not marrying Stellar, it is adding Stellar to a roster, and the exclusivity that would make this transformative for XLM specifically is not what was announced.

Stellar won a meaningful seat at the table, not the only seat.

What it means for XLM

XLM’s price reaction was immediate and large, and understanding what it does and does not imply is the most useful thing for anyone holding or watching the token.

XLM jumped sharply on the announcement, with reports of moves above 30% in 24 hours and volume up more than 400%, as traders priced in Stellar’s transition from a payments network into a potential institutional settlement layer. The bullish logic is real: if DTCC routes meaningful tokenized-securities activity through Stellar, the network gains a flagship institutional use case that no amount of marketing could buy, and sustained on-chain activity from regulated assets could drive genuine demand for the network.

That is why the full XLM price outlook on the back of this deal now depends less on the announcement itself and more on whether real securities activity actually reaches Stellar.

A second supportive signal arrived in June 2026, when the SEC approved an active crypto ETF from T. Rowe Price that is permitted to hold XLM, adding a regulated demand channel on top of the tokenization narrative.

Equally real, and less discussed, is the caution. The deal does not directly require large amounts of XLM, because tokenized securities on Stellar are their own assets, and XLM’s role is as the network’s native token for fees and as the asset whose value reflects network usage, not as a one-for-one claim on the tokenized securities themselves.

The price move is a bet on what DTCC activity could mean for Stellar’s long-term relevance and fee generation, not a mechanical consequence of dollars flowing into XLM. And the timeline is long: nothing goes live until 2027, the service is phased, and XLM has remained volatile, even dropping 10% in a single week during the broader market weakness of mid-June despite the tokenization news.

The narrative is a multi-year thesis, not an overnight re-rating, and the token will trade on the broad market in between catalysts. That is why the regulatory backdrop shaping institutional crypto matters: institutions need legal certainty, enforceable rules, and compliant settlement mechanics before they move at scale.

The timeline: announcement is not deployment

Almost nothing has happened yet in operational terms, and that is the single most important thing to keep straight.

The sequence is worth laying out. The SEC granted DTCC a no-action letter in December 2025, authorizing a defined tokenization service for three years.

DTCC and the Stellar Development Foundation announced the Stellar connection on May 27, 2026. Production testing is expected to begin around July 2026, with wider rollout phases potentially through late 2026, and the target for tokenized assets actually becoming available on Stellar is the first half of 2027.

So the gap between the headline that moved the price and anything going live spans the better part of a year at minimum, and large institutional deployments routinely slip.

This timeline is the reality check the rest of the coverage skips. The announcement is a statement of intent backed by a regulatory authorization and a named blockchain, which is more concrete than most crypto partnerships, but it is still an intention to deploy, not a deployment.

Between now and 2027, the testnet phases will reveal which asset classes go first, how many institutions participate, and how the registered-wallet and compliance mechanics actually work in practice. Any of those could reshape the impact.

The thesis is strong and the counterparty is serious, but the calendar says patience. The price has already priced in a future that has not yet been built.

Frequently Asked Questions

As of June 15, 2026. Cryptocurrency markets are volatile and details can change; verify current information with official sources before acting. This article is information, not investment advice.

The new fund offering comes as bitcoin struggles to break out of a bear market, trading around $67,000, down about 23% year to date. IBIT, which debuted in January 2024, has amassed nearly $49 billion in assets, making it the largest spot bitcoin ETF on the market. The fund has seen significant outflows since the beginning of the year, though, amid lower bitcoin prices and excitement around other asset classes, including the highly anticipated initial public offerings (IPOs) of SpaceX (SPCX) and Anthropic.

But Jacobs said BlackRock sees several potential audiences for the new fund.

One group consists of income-focused investors looking to diversify beyond traditional sources such as dividend-paying stocks and bonds. Another includes bitcoin holders who remain bullish on the cryptocurrency but want to generate cash flow from their positions.

“You could imagine this could be people who have a significant portion of their wealth in bitcoin but would like to have an income stream to support their lifestyle,” Jacobs said.

A third group may be investors who have historically avoided assets such as bitcoin or gold because they do not produce cash flow.

“We’ve encountered this type of investor for years,” Jacobs said. “How can I own gold in a portfolio if it’s not generating cash in any way? This product seeks to help address that market as well.”

When the game ended 0-0, both paid out. The wallet redeemed about $4.7 million on the Spain market and $8.5 million on the spread, per its public trading record, for a one-day profit of roughly $9 million.

On the other side, a trader using the name ‘betoor619’ lost nearly $1 million, Polymarket’s trading records reviewed by CoinDesk show. The bettor had put almost $1.1 million on a Spain win when the market priced the favorite at about 92%. Had Spain won, the payout would have been only about $85,000, the thin reward typical of betting on near-certain outcomes.

The account had never won or lost more than $9,000 on a single event before, history tied to the account shows.

Polymarket is a prediction market where people trade shares tied to real-world outcomes, with prices that act as implied odds and settlement in USDC, a dollar-pegged stablecoin, on a public blockchain.

Traders use crypto wallets and operate under pseudonyms rather than real names, a feature lawmakers have criticized because the platform does not collect the background information regulated sportsbooks do.

About $64 million traded on the Spain match alone. Polymarket’s market on the overall tournament winner has drawn about $2.4 billion, making the World Cup its biggest event since last year’s U.S. election and pushing it past the roughly $1.4 billion wagered on this year’s Super Bowl.

For decades, financial systems have operated on fixed rules, rigid infrastructures, and predetermined processes. Traditional banking products, investment portfolios, lending models, and payment systems were largely designed around static assumptions about users and markets. However, as technology advances and financial ecosystems become increasingly digitized, a new paradigm is emerging: Adaptive Finance.

Adaptive Finance represents the evolution of financial services from static systems into intelligent, responsive, and personalized financial networks capable of adjusting in real time to changing market conditions, user behaviors, and economic environments. Powered by artificial intelligence, blockchain technology, machine learning, programmable assets, and real-time data infrastructure, Adaptive Finance has the potential to fundamentally reshape how individuals, institutions, and machines interact with capital.

The rise of Adaptive Finance signals a future where financial systems no longer merely process transactions—they actively learn, optimize, and evolve.

What Is Adaptive Finance?

Adaptive Finance refers to financial systems that continuously adjust their behavior in response to incoming data, changing circumstances, and user objectives.

Unlike traditional financial products that require manual intervention to update strategies or parameters, adaptive systems automatically modify their operations based on predefined goals and real-time conditions.

Examples include:

• Investment portfolios that rebalance automatically during market volatility.
• Lending protocols that dynamically adjust collateral requirements.
• AI-powered savings accounts that optimize allocations based on spending habits.
• Payment systems that automatically select the most efficient settlement network.
• Yield strategies that migrate capital across protocols to maximize returns while minimizing risk.

At its core, Adaptive Finance combines automation, intelligence, and programmability.

The Technologies Driving Adaptive Finance

Artificial Intelligence

AI serves as the decision-making layer of Adaptive Finance.

Machine learning models can analyze enormous amounts of financial data, identify patterns, predict market conditions, and execute strategies faster than any human operator.

Applications include:

• Risk assessment
• Fraud detection
• Portfolio optimization
• Credit scoring
• Market forecasting
• Autonomous trading

As AI models become increasingly sophisticated, financial systems gain the ability to respond intelligently to changing environments.

Blockchain Infrastructure

Blockchain provides the programmable foundation for Adaptive Finance.

Smart contracts enable financial agreements to execute automatically when predefined conditions are met.

This creates systems capable of:

• Dynamic asset management
• Automated settlements
• Conditional payments
• Real-time treasury operations
• Decentralized governance

Unlike traditional financial infrastructure, blockchain systems operate continuously and globally without requiring centralized intermediaries.

Real-Time Data Networks

Adaptive systems depend on accurate and timely information.

Modern financial networks leverage:

• Market feeds
• Economic indicators
• Consumer spending data
• Blockchain analytics
• On-chain activity
• IoT-generated information

The ability to process data instantly allows financial systems to react as events unfold rather than after the fact.

Programmable Assets

The tokenization of assets creates financial instruments that can adapt automatically.

Examples include:

• Yield-bearing stablecoins
• Dynamic insurance contracts
• Tokenized treasuries
• Automated dividend distributions
• Self-executing collateral systems

Programmable assets transform financial products from passive instruments into active participants within the financial ecosystem.

Adaptive Finance in Decentralized Finance (DeFi)

DeFi is becoming one of the most fertile environments for Adaptive Finance.

Because DeFi protocols are built on programmable infrastructure, they can implement adaptive mechanisms directly within smart contracts.

Examples already exist:

Dynamic Interest Rates

Many lending protocols automatically adjust borrowing and lending rates according to supply and demand conditions.

When borrowing demand rises:

• Interest rates increase.
• Liquidity providers earn more.
• Market equilibrium is restored.

The system adapts without requiring centralized management.

Automated Yield Optimization

Yield aggregators continuously scan multiple protocols and move funds toward the most efficient opportunities.

Users benefit from:

• Higher returns
• Reduced manual management
• More efficient capital allocation

Risk-Adaptive Collateral Management

Future lending systems may continuously evaluate market conditions and borrower risk profiles to adjust collateral requirements dynamically.

This could reduce liquidations while maintaining protocol security.

The Emergence of Autonomous Financial Agents

One of the most exciting developments in Adaptive Finance is the rise of autonomous financial agents.

These AI-powered agents can:

• Manage investment portfolios
• Execute payments
• Monitor risk
• Rebalance assets
• Optimize tax strategies
• Negotiate financial agreements

Instead of manually managing finances, users may increasingly delegate decision-making authority to intelligent software agents operating within predefined parameters.

As agent-based economies develop, machines may become active participants in global financial markets.

Personalization at Scale

Traditional finance often forces millions of customers into standardized products.

Adaptive Finance enables mass personalization.

Future financial products may automatically tailor themselves to:

• Individual income patterns
• Spending behavior
• Risk tolerance
• Financial goals
• Market conditions

Rather than selecting from a limited menu of products, users may receive continuously evolving financial solutions designed specifically for their circumstances.

This represents a major shift from product-centric finance toward user-centric finance.

Benefits of Adaptive Finance

Greater Efficiency

Adaptive systems can allocate capital more effectively than static structures.

Resources move automatically toward productive opportunities, improving overall economic efficiency.

Improved Risk Management

Continuous monitoring allows financial systems to identify and respond to threats before they escalate.

Enhanced Accessibility

Automation reduces operational costs, making sophisticated financial services available to broader populations.

Better User Experience

Users spend less time managing financial complexity while receiving more personalized outcomes.

Faster Innovation

Programmable infrastructure enables rapid experimentation and deployment of new financial products.

Challenges and Risks

Despite its promise, Adaptive Finance introduces new challenges.

Algorithmic Errors

Poorly designed models may make incorrect decisions, creating systemic risks.

Data Quality

Adaptive systems are only as reliable as the information they receive.

Inaccurate or manipulated data can produce harmful outcomes.

Transparency Concerns

Complex AI systems may become difficult for users to understand or audit.

Regulatory Uncertainty

Governments and regulators continue to explore how adaptive and autonomous financial systems should be governed.

Security Risks

As automation increases, vulnerabilities within smart contracts and AI models become increasingly important.

Building secure, transparent, and accountable adaptive systems will be essential.

The Future of Adaptive Finance

The financial industry is entering an era where systems increasingly behave like living networks rather than static infrastructures.

Over the next decade, we may witness:

• Self-optimizing investment funds
• AI-managed treasuries
• Autonomous financial agents
• Dynamic insurance products
• Adaptive lending markets
• Machine-to-machine payment networks
• Real-time personalized financial services

As intelligence becomes embedded directly into financial infrastructure, finance itself evolves from a set of tools into an adaptive ecosystem capable of learning, responding, and improving continuously.

Conclusion

Adaptive Finance represents one of the most important shifts in the evolution of modern financial systems. By combining artificial intelligence, blockchain technology, real-time data, and programmable assets, financial services are becoming more intelligent, personalized, and responsive than ever before.

The transition from static finance to adaptive finance mirrors the broader transformation occurring across technology and society. Just as software evolved from fixed programs into continuously learning systems, finance is now evolving into a dynamic network that adapts to users, markets, and economic realities in real time.

The institutions, protocols, and builders that successfully embrace adaptability may define the next generation of global finance.

REQUEST AN ARTICLE

In BITA’s case, if bitcoin rallies, the ETF benefits from its IBIT holdings, but the gains are capped by having to pay out on the calls. If BTC holds steady or falls, the call-writing premium offsets some of the decline. In effect, investors give up potential gains for a steadier stream of income.

“By deploying a covered-call strategy on its Bitcoin-linked exposure, the fund seeks to convert Bitcoin’s historically high volatility into a recurring income stream with a target of +15% annual yield while retaining around 70% participation in its underlying capital appreciation potential,” Tagus Capital said in an email.

The strategy could also affect the broader market, which is influenced by demand-supply balance of options. Selling call options systematically, or overwriting, suppresses bitcoin’s implied volatility. Bitcoin’s 30-day implied volatility has been dropping since 2022, and call overwriting is a major reason. (Check Daily Signal, below)

Now BlackRock is institutionalizing that at scale. More systematic selling of options means more premium supply hitting the market, and more downward pressure on volatility.

Bitcoin, already less wild than it used to be, is about to get a little tamer still.

As for price action, bitcoin’s recent bounce to over $66,000 from under $59,000 still lacks institutional support. The spot ETFs listed in the U.S. registered an outflow of $64 million on Monday, taking the month’s withdrawals to $2.10 billion.