MoonPay is betting institutions want broader access to onchain financial products beyond simple crypto purchases.

The crypto payments firm said Thursday it started MoonPay Trade, a platform designed to connect banks, fintechs and enterprises to tokenized assets, decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols and stablecoin liquidity across more than 200 blockchains through a single integration.

The service is underpinned by Decent.xyz, the cross-chain routing startup MoonPay has acquired for a “high eight-figure” sum, a person familiar with the matter said.

The expansion comes as tokenization is gaining momentum across finance, attracting global banks and asset managers. Tokenized real-world assets — blockchain-based versions of stocks, bonds and funds — now exceed $33 billion in market value, tripling in a year, RWA.xyz data shows. Boston Consulting Group projected the market could grow to $18.9 trillion by 2033.

Large asset managers including BlackRock, Franklin Templeton and JPMorgan have already introduced tokenized funds on public blockchains, while stablecoins increasingly serve as settlement rails for payments and trading activity.

MoonPay Trade will serve as the execution arm for MoonPay Institutional, the company’s business focused on regulated financial firms and led by former acting CFTC Chair Caroline Pham.

“Every major financial institution is building a tokenized asset strategy,” Pham said in a statement, adding that the platform gives institutions access to onchain markets “with full compliance.”

MoonPay Trade supports tokenized fund subscriptions, collateral transfers and integrations with DeFi lending protocols such as Morpho, Aave and Maple Finance. Those protocols allow users to earn yield or borrow against digital assets directly on blockchain rails.

The firm has been on an acquisition spree as it expands from crypto payments into broader financial infrastructure.

Earlier this month, the company acquired Solana trading infrastructure provider DFlow, which processed more than $12 billion in trading volume in the first quarter. This year, it also bought security startup Sodot, following last year’s acquisitions of payments processors Meso and Helio.

A few days after more abrupt departures of several high-profile Ethereum Foundation researchers and contributors, the silence from the EF has only deepened the uncertainty gripping the Ethereum community.

What began earlier this week as shock over more exits of core figures has now evolved into something more existential, according to some community members: a public reckoning over whether Ethereum’s most influential institution still understands the ecosystem it was built to steward.

The Foundation has yet to offer a detailed explanation for the departures or address the growing criticism of its leadership and strategic direction, which many have pointed out over the last few weeks. In that vacuum, community members, investors and former insiders have begun crafting their own narratives about what has gone wrong at the EF and what it may mean for Ethereum’s future.

On Thursday, former Ethereum Foundation researcher Dankrad Feist published one of the clearest articulations yet of a growing view among critics: that Ethereum’s governance and institutional structure are fundamentally misaligned with the economic interests of the network itself.

“The way to save Ethereum,” Feist wrote on X, “is for the community to create an organization that’s economically aligned with Ethereum and accountable to it.”

Feist argued that, despite its cultural influence, the EF does not have as much economic leverage over the ecosystem. The foundation now controls “less than 0.1% of all ETH,” he wrote, and receives no direct flow of staking or fee revenue from the network.

“If we want to get Ethereum back to winning,” he said, the ecosystem needs a new institution with permanent funding, explicit accountability and leadership focused on growth. Among his proposals: a $1 billion treasury, funded in part through staking revenues, overseen by a board incentivized to see ETH appreciate in value.

‘Original sin’

Crypto journalist Laura Shin, host of the Unchained podcast, framed the issue even more bluntly.

“I think Ethereum’s original sin was not considering tokenomics with every move it made from Dencun on,” Shin wrote on X, referring to the March 2024 upgrade that dramatically reduced transaction fees on Ethereum layer-2 networks.

The “ultrasound money” thesis, the idea that ETH would become increasingly scarce through fee burns, had once become central to Ethereum’s investment narrative. But critics argue that Ethereum’s scaling roadmap, particularly its embrace of rollups and lower base-layer fees, weakened that dynamic without offering a compelling replacement narrative to token holders.

“Most people,” Shin wrote, “don’t want to believe in something that isn’t also putting up points on the scoreboard.”

Her comments reflected a broader frustration emerging from some corners of the Ethereum community: that the EF has become overly focused on ideology while neglecting competition, business development and ETH price performance.

“When the main offering becomes ideology/communism and money/tokenomics/capitalism are overlooked,” she wrote, “the peasants are going to revolt.”

Others pointed to the EF’s recent internal controversies, including the “mandate” that some contributors were reportedly asked to sign, according to Shin, as well as lingering questions about recent leadership appointments and decision-making processes within the Foundation.

In the absence of direct communication from the EF, speculation has increasingly centered on what role new executive leadership may have played in the departures and whether the exits reflect a deeper cultural shift underway within Ethereum’s most important institution.

“I personally don’t think it’s good for Ethereum if its most competitive people depart,” Shin wrote. “Ethereum’s unwillingness to stop the brain drain will only benefit its competitors, or spawn new ones.”

Read more: ‘What’s happening at the EF?’ Ethereum community looking for answers after high-profile departures

Billionaire investor Mark Cuban said he has sold most of his bitcoin BTC$77,640.65 holdings after losing confidence in the cryptocurrency’s role as a hedge against weakening fiat currencies and geopolitical instability.

Cuban, who’s net worth is about $10 billion, said bitcoin’s price behavior during the recent Iran conflict challenged one of the core reasons he owned the asset during an episode of sports podcast “Portfolio Players,” where he mainly discussed professional sports and his ownership of the Dallas Mavericks.

“When all this shit hit the fan with the Iran war, bitcoin was always the best alternative to fiat currency losing its value and I always thought it was a better version of gold than gold. Well, gold just blew up… bitcoin dropped. And every time the dollar dropped, bitcoin should’ve gone up … and it just didn’t do that,” Cuban said.

The comments mark a notable shift for Cuban, who for years had publicly defended bitcoin as a superior version of gold because of its fixed supply and decentralized structure.

In a 2021 interview with “The Delphi Podcast,” Cuban said his crypto portfolio consisted of roughly “60% bitcoin, 30% Ethereum and 10% the rest.” At the time, he argued bitcoin’s scarcity made it a stronger store of value than gold and said he had “never sold it.”

Cuban also compared blockchain technology and smart contracts to the early internet era, at the time, particularly praising Ethereum (ETH) for enabling decentralized finance applications and NFTs.

His latest remarks suggest that enthusiasm has cooled, at least towards bitcoin.

“Not the hedge I expected it to be, and that was really disappointing, and so I’d say I’m more disappointed in bitcoin, not as disappointed in Ethereum and the rest … garbage,” Cuban said.

The criticism comes as investors continue debating bitcoin’s role in global markets. Supporters often describe the asset as “digital gold” that can protect wealth during inflation, geopolitical instability or weakness in traditional currencies. Yet bitcoin has frequently traded more like a high-risk technology asset, rising and falling alongside broader investor appetite for risk.

Gold prices recently climbed amid heightened geopolitical tensions and concerns around the U.S.-Iran conflict, while bitcoin struggled to maintain momentum despite a weaker dollar.

Cuban’s comments also reflect a broader divide within crypto markets. While some investors remain focused on bitcoin as a macro hedge, others increasingly see value in blockchain networks such as Ethereum that support trading, payments and tokenized financial applications rather than functioning primarily as stores of value.

Bankless is facing backlash after reportedly laying off most of its staff without a public announcement, even as co-founder Ryan Sean Adams declared the “end” of the media brand’s first era on X.

According to ChainCatcher, citing posts on X, crypto community member @0x_Lucas said Bankless has “allegedly laid off most of its team members,” claiming the media brand has not issued a public statement or expressed gratitude to help affected employees find new roles. In his posts, 0x_Lucas criticized the founders for continuing to publish unrelated content while remaining silent about the cuts, arguing that Bankless owed at least a basic acknowledgement and support to the people it had just let go.

At the same time, Bankless co‑founder Ryan Sean Adams posted that “the first era of Bankless has ended,” describing the moment as the conclusion of his six‑year collaboration with co‑host David Hoffman exploring crypto, DeFi and Ethereum. Adams’ remarks, shared in a reflective X thread, framed the change as a generational shift rather than a straightforward downsizing, emphasizing how far the show had come since its early days and hinting at a new, undefined chapter.

Bankless itself has not issued an official statement confirming or denying the reported layoffs, nor has it published a blog post or newsletter addressing the alleged restructuring as of publication time. Episodes continue to appear in the Bankless podcast feed, and the main Bankless site has instead focused on regular content such as its recent “17 Trends for Crypto’s 2026” piece, giving the impression of business as usual even as rumors of cuts spread.

X backlash over silence and “unrelated content”

The anger from former staff and community members is not about the existence of layoffs per se—media and crypto firms have been shedding staff for two years—but about how Bankless appears to be handling them.
In his posts, 0x_Lucas accused the founders of “not even bothering” to publicly thank or spotlight the departing team, arguing that a brand built on community owed its people more than private emails and quiet removals from internal tools.

He also called out what he described as “unrelated” posting from the founders, criticizing the decision to ship new content and personal reflections while staying silent about job losses and declining to use their platform to highlight affected employees for potential employers. That critique resonated on X, where users contrasted Bankless’ coverage of past industry layoffs—including pieces on Binance, Consensys and other firms—with its apparent unwillingness to subject itself to similar scrutiny.

The episode lands amid a broader wave of crypto and tech layoffs in 2026, from Coinbase’s latest cuts to ongoing staff reductions across exchanges, trading firms and infrastructure startups. For a brand that leaned heavily into “community” rhetoric and sought to position itself as the narrative voice of DeFi, the optics of a quiet cull amplified by disgruntled insiders is reputationally damaging, regardless of the balance sheet rationale.

If the reports are accurate, Bankless has effectively amputated much of the team that turned a podcast into a broader media operation—writers, producers, editors and ops staff who helped build newsletters, video content and research products around the core show. In practical terms, that likely means a narrower focus on the flagship podcast and select high‑leverage projects, with less capacity for daily news, deep‑dive analysis or side ventures.

More broadly, the Bankless saga underlines how fragile crypto media businesses remain even late in this cycle. Ad revenue is volatile, sponsor budgets are tied to token prices and trading volumes, and the collapse of easy VC money has left many outlets exposed when traffic or sponsorships dip. As covered in prior crypto.news reporting on crypto media layoffs and creator‑driven brands, projects built around personalities rather than institutions often end up treating everyone else as expendable when the macro turns.

Until Bankless issues a formal statement, the full story will remain partly speculative. But the core facts—that a co‑founder has publicly declared the “end of the first era,” that credible insiders allege most of the team is gone, and that there has been no transparent communication to the audience—paint a clear enough picture: whatever comes next, it will not be the same Bankless that helped narrate the last bull market.

Asset tokenization platform Securitize is moving ahead with a SPAC merger on Nasdaq, aiming to accelerate its expansion beyond stablecoins into a broader universe of tokenized securities.

Securitize’s efforts to “tokenize the world” just took an added-value turn, with the company doubling down on efforts to assemble on-chain securities infrastructure operational at scale.

The company is advancing a business combination with Cantor Equity Partners II, a Nasdaq-listed special purpose acquisition company sponsored by an affiliate of Cantor Fitzgerald and trading under the ticker CEPT.

The deal, first announced in late 2025, would see Securitize become a publicly traded company on Nasdaq under the ticker SECZ once the merger closes, but recently the company has described in greater detail how exactly that would play out.

Over a recent investor call, Securitize co-founder and CEO Carlos Domingo said the company has already reached profitability in the asset tokenization business, driven by partnerships with large financial institutions. Therein, Domingo emphasized that Securitize intends to use the SPAC transaction to “accelerate,” in what he called the desire to create expand the fund’s mission align more closely with their core vision.

The issue looking ahead seems to be how to trade more assets in tokenized form beyond the stablecoin and money market fund products that have dominated the early wave of tokenization, Domingo noted.

SPAC structure and listing roadmap, how does it function?

Under the merger agreement, Cantor Equity Partners II will combine with Securitize at a pre‑money valuation of around $1.25 billion, according to earlier coverage by CNBC and Securitize’s own press materials.

The transaction is expected to deliver up to roughly $465 million in gross proceeds if there are no redemptions, Domingo noted in the recent investor call, including about $240 million from the SPAC’s trust and $225 million from private investment in public equity (PIPE) commitments from investors such as Borderless Capital and Hanwha Investment.

In January 2026, Securitize Holdings, Inc.—the post‑merger “Pubco”—publicly filed a Form S‑4 registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, formalizing the deal and detailing the combined company’s projected financials.

The filing notes that Securitize expects to be debt‑free on a pro forma basis post‑merger and is projecting around $110 million in revenue and $24 million in net income for 2026, according to an earlier X post from Domingo summarizing the investor deck.

Completion of the SPAC transaction still hinges on customary closing conditions, including SEC clearance of the S‑4, shareholder approval from CEPT investors, and satisfaction of Nasdaq listing requirements. Until those boxes are ticked, Securitize remains private, though it is already positioning itself as a de facto public‑market candidate in the tokenization sector.

Expanding beyond stablecoins into tokenized securities, how can Securitize buld it?

Securitize has built its reputation on tokenizing real‑world assets particularly private market securities and funds rather than on issuing generic utility tokens.

The company acts as a registered transfer agent and digital asset securities platform, and it has been a key infrastructure provider for high‑profile tokenization deals, including BlackRock’s BUIDL tokenized money market fund and KKR’s tokenized feeder funds.

Domingo has argued that tokenization’s real value lies in “upgrading” traditional assets to programmable, blockchain‑native formats that can improve access, fractional ownership, and secondary market liquidity.

During that same recent interview, he framed the SPAC listing as both a capital raise and a signaling device, saying that becoming a public company while simultaneously tokenizing its own equity on chain demonstrates how Securitize intends to operate at the intersection of traditional capital markets and on‑chain finance.

The firm’s strategy is explicitly broader than stablecoins. While stablecoins and tokenized treasuries have proven highly profitable for issuers, Securitize is betting that everything from private credit and equity to real estate and funds will eventually be issued and traded as digital tokens, and it wants to become the default stack for that transition.

What the SPAC means for tokenization

If the CEPT deal closes, Securitize would become one of the first large, pure‑play tokenization platforms listed on a major U.S. exchange, joining a small group of blockchain‑native firms that have used SPACs to reach public markets.

For that broader tokenization narrative to work, a successful listing with real revenue and profitability would be a significant proof of concept that on‑chain securities infrastructure can sustain a public‑company balance sheet.

It would also give public‑market investors a direct way to express a view on asset tokenization as a theme, rather than just buying tokenized funds or blockchain equities indirectly exposed to the space.

In parallel with other developments, such as Börse Stuttgart’s Seturion platform and a16z’s thesis that finance is undergoing a “cloud‑style” migration to on‑chain infrastructure, it seems that Securitize’s planned SPAC listing underscores that tokenization is no longer a thought experiment but a capital‑intensive, institutional business trying to scale.

The US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned six Ethereum addresses tied to a Sinaloa Cartel-linked money laundering network that allegedly converted drug proceeds into cryptocurrency.

OFAC added the addresses to its Specially Designated Nationals list (a US sanctions list of people, entities and assets subject to blocking restrictions) on Wednesday as part of sanctions against 11 individuals and two entities connected to two Sinaloa Cartel financial networks.

Treasury said one network, led by Armando de Jesus Ojeda Aviles, collected bulk cash in the US from fentanyl and other drug sales before allegedly converting the money into cryptocurrency for transfer to the cartel in Mexico.

The action highlights how cartel-linked money laundering networks are using digital assets alongside cash couriers and front businesses, raising sanctions compliance risks for crypto exchanges and other virtual asset service providers.

OFAC adds six new Ethereum addresses to sanctions list. Source: OFAC

Cartel cash moved into crypto

The Sinaloa Cartel is allegedly using blockchain technology to launder its illicit fiat money proceeds, according to OFAC.

Cointelegraph contacted OFAC for more details surrounding the Sinaloa Cartel’s money laundering operations.

Related: Kelp DAO attacker moves $175M in Ether after exploit: Arkham

Treasury did not identify which crypto platforms or protocols were allegedly used by the network. The listed Ethereum addresses, however, create sanctions exposure for exchanges, wallet providers and other crypto firms that screen blockchain transactions.

Looking at some of the biggest cryptocurrency hacks, attackers laundered the majority of the $1.4 billion stolen during the Bybit hack, or about $1.2 billion, through THORChain, swapping funds from Ether to Bitcoin, according to Bybit co-founder and CEO Ben Zhou. 

Attackers behind the recent $293 million Kelp DAO hack also primarily used THORChain to swap the Ether for Bitcoin, generating about $910,000 in fee revenue for the protocol, Cointelegraph reported on April 23.

Magazine: 53 DeFi projects infiltrated, 50M NEO tokens could be ‘given back’: Asia Express  

Bitcoin (BTC) focused on $77,000 on Thursday as analysis eyed a minimum 5% BTC price move.

Key points:

• Bitcoin waits for a breakout move as it circles the $77,000 mark.
• Analysis sees risk in shorting price at current levels, with bears in the firing line.
• Macro hurdles keep risk assets down across the board, while US bond yields cool.

Trader sees 5% BTC price move “soon”

Data from TradingView showed BTC price action sticking to a narrow range, with leveraged positions on either side of spot.

BTC/USD one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

“Some big clusters right around price. Most notably: the ~$78K area and the $76.5K-$77K area in the short term,” trader Daan Crypto Trades wrote in his latest analysis on X. 

“Price has been in a pretty tight price range the past few days so expecting some larger 5%+ move to occur here soon again.”

Crypto liquidation history (screenshot). Source: CoinGlass

Data from CoinGlass revealed that short positions had taken the majority of losses across crypto over the 24 hours to the time of writing.

“Bears on $BTC are getting SQUEEZED in real-time,” X analytics account Cryptic Trades commented. 

“While the price is going up, the Open-Interest has dropped by over 12K. This is exactly why you don’t short a BULLISH BACKTEST.”

BTC/USDT one-hour chart with open interest data. Source: Cryptic Trades/X

Cryptic Trades remained optimistic about BTC market strength despite the loss of various support levels in recent days. Holding above $74,000, it continued, was the “most likely outcome.”

“Shorting here, or hedging your spot holdings simply doesn’t make sense from a technical perspective, because the market structure remains intact,” it argued.

BTC/USD three-day chart. Source: Cryptic Trades/X

Oil returns to triple figures on Iran cues

Bitcoin and other risk assets faced familiar macro headwinds on the day, with WTI oil prices heading back above $100 per barrel.

Related: BTC price ‘bull trap’ at $76.5K? Five things to know in Bitcoin this week

The US-Iran war remained the key catalyst amid mixed reports over uranium enrichment and a permanent toll on oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

CFDs on WTI crude oil one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

The day prior, US President Donald Trump had sent oil and US bond yields lower with hints that an Iran peace deal was near.

“It’s the same recipe, if this trend is prolonged and the deal is likely finalized, you’ll see yields continue to fall even more, especially in Japan,” crypto trader and analyst Michaël Van de Poppe responded. 

“If those yields come down –> risk-on assets to rally even higher.”

US 30-year treasury yield one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

In today’s newsletter, Sarah Cummings from Morgan Stanley Investment Management provides insights and considerations when assessing crypto exchange-traded funds.

Then, in “Ask an Expert,” Ryan Tannahill from iA Private Wealth USA, answers questions about borrowing against bitcoin assets.

Assessing Crypto ETPs in an Evolving Market

When evaluating exchange‑traded funds (ETFs), investors typically focus on factors such as fees, liquidity and tracking. Spot bitcoin exchange‑traded products (ETPs) introduce additional dimensions of due diligence that investors may be less accustomed to assessing. First launched in January 2024, these vehicles — structured as grantor trusts under the 1933 Act — seek to track bitcoin BTC$77,061.06 performance using a designated pricing benchmark. Understanding how their structure, custody arrangements and benchmarks operate is central to evaluating these products.

Core ETF considerations

As with any ETF, headline costs and trading characteristics matter.

Fees and waivers. While fee compression has occurred since the first spot bitcoin ETPs entered the market, expense ratios still vary meaningfully across products. Investors may wish to distinguish between gross and net expense ratios, particularly where fee waivers are in place. Such waivers may be subject to asset thresholds or expiration dates that could affect costs over time.

Liquidity and execution. Trading volume, bid/ask spreads, and overall fund liquidity remain important inputs when assessing the total cost of ownership. However, because bitcoin itself is a highly liquid underlying asset, onscreen fund liquidity may not fully reflect execution quality. In practice, similarly priced execution may be achievable across products despite differences in visible trading activity. Engaging with a trust sponsor or liquidity provider ahead of a trade may help manage execution costs.

Tracking and fund design. Given their single‑asset, passive structure, spot bitcoin ETPs tend to exhibit limited sources of tracking error. Expense ratios are typically the primary driver, with lower‑fee products generally expected to track more closely over time. In‑kind creation and redemption mechanisms may also support tighter tracking by reducing frictional costs.

Considerations specific to crypto ETPs

Beyond traditional ETF metrics, several factors are more specific to crypto‑based products.

Digital asset custody. Holding bitcoin requires specialized custody arrangements, a relatively new function within asset servicing. While early infrastructure was largely developed by crypto‑native firms, traditional custodians have increasingly entered the space. Custody practices, regulatory status and bankruptcy protections can differ across providers, making it prudent to understand how and where digital assets are held.

Sponsor profile. The issuer’s background may also warrant consideration. Crypto‑native sponsors and traditional financial institutions may operate under different regulatory frameworks and governance standards, which can influence risk management, operations and investor protections.

Benchmark methodology. The growth of digital asset products has led to the emergence of new benchmark providers. Evaluating a benchmark’s construction—such as exchange inclusion criteria, pricing methodologies and review processes—can be important. A poorly designed benchmark may diverge from broader bitcoin pricing, potentially affecting tracking outcomes.

Bringing it together

In a developing asset class, the structure and design of an ETP can be as consequential as the exposure it seeks to provide. Beyond headline fees, evaluating custody frameworks, sponsor profiles, benchmark methodologies and execution characteristics may help investors better understand potential costs and risks. As the market for crypto ETPs continues to evolve, a disciplined and holistic due diligence process remains essential.

– Sarah Cummings, executive director, ETF Strategist, Morgan Stanley Investment Management

Important risks and disclosures.

Ask an Expert

Q: Do I need to move my bitcoin to get a loan against it?

In many cases, yes — centralized lenders typically require custody of your bitcoin for the loan’s duration. However, structures vary across platforms, so it’s worth understanding who holds your assets and how they’re protected before committing.

Q: What’s the main risk advisors should flag?

Margin calls. If bitcoin drops sharply, clients may be forced to post additional collateral or face liquidation — often at the worst time. That forced sale can also trigger a taxable event, compounding the loss.

Q: Should I do this instead of selling some of my position?

It depends on conviction. If you believe bitcoin appreciates, borrowing preserves that upside while meeting liquidity needs. But if you’re uncertain about the position, adding leverage isn’t the answer — sometimes a clean sale is the simpler move.

– Ryan Tannahill, Investment Advisor Representative, iA Privabecoming

Keep Reading

• The U.S. Senate Banking Committee advanced its crypto market structure bill, the Clarity Act, to the Senate floor on Thursday, bringing it a step closer to passing it into law.
• Japan’s Financial Services Agency recognizes foreign-issued stablecoins as electronic p.yment methods under domestic law, effective June 1.
• Bank of England Deputy Governor Sarah Breeden says the BoE will publish draft stablecoin rules next month and finalize them by year-end.