Dogecoin fell 4.5% and ether dropped 2.5% on Friday, leading a broad but shallow retreat across the majors as the market consolidated a strong week, per CoinDesk data. XRP and Solana each slipped about 2.5%, while bitcoin held up better, down 0.6% to around $65,400.

The pullback barely dented the weekly picture. Bitcoin is still up 3% over seven days, ether 1.8%, and most majors remain green on the week, with Hyperliquid the exception at down 3.5%.

There was no single catalyst behind Friday’s move, more a pause after the run-up than a reversal.

LayerZero and Keeta have partnered to make tokenized commercial bank deposits transferable across Ethereum, Solana, Base and the Keeta Network. 

The companies plan to launch the service later in July 2026, giving institutions a way to move bank-backed digital money across several public blockchains.

The system will use Keeta Stablecoins, which the companies describe as tokenized commercial bank money. Commercial bank deposits held through Bivo and its partner-bank network will back the tokens. The initial release will cover the U.S. dollar and eight other fiat currencies.

Keeta Stablecoins target multichain settlement

According to the official LayerZero announcement, the first currencies will include USD, EUR, JPY, CNY, GBP, CAD, MXN, AED and HKD. The companies did not provide a specific launch date or name the institutions that will use the product at launch.

The product targets treasury, payment and settlement work. An institution could hold a token linked to a commercial bank deposit and transfer it between supported networks. Keeta CEO Ty Schenk said, “The future of institutional money isn’t a walled garden.” He said Keeta wants regulated bank money to move across chains rather than remain inside one closed system.

LayerZero supplies the cross-chain token standard

Keeta Stablecoins will use LayerZero’s Omnichain Fungible Token Standard. LayerZero’s technical documentation says the OFT model lets one fungible token exist across several chains while maintaining one global supply. A transfer removes tokens from circulation on the source network and credits the same amount on the destination network.

The partnership says the issuing institution will retain contract authority across the supported networks. LayerZero also offers stablecoin controls such as transfer restrictions, rate limits, pause functions and separate operational roles. These controls allow an issuer to apply internal policies while keeping the token available on more than one blockchain.

Bivo provides the deposit and payment connection

Bivo will provide access to U.S. payment rails and its partner-bank network. Keeta identifies Bivo as a licensed money transmitter with NMLS number 2572288. California’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation also lists Bivo as a regulated money transmitter in the state.

The announcement does not state whether every token holder will receive deposit insurance or hold a direct claim against a named bank. It only says that commercial bank deposits held through Bivo will back the tokens. The companies also did not disclose reserve reporting rules, redemption fees, minimum transaction sizes or which entities will issue each currency.

The structure differs from many stablecoins that hold cash, Treasury bills or other reserve assets outside a customer deposit account. Keeta and LayerZero still use the term “stablecoins” for the product, but they describe the backing as commercial bank money rather than a mixed reserve portfolio.

Tokenized deposit projects gain wider attention

Banks and crypto firms have tested several forms of tokenized deposits in 2026. JPMorgan and other large U.S. banks have worked on a shared network for tokenized deposits, with a possible 2027 launch. That project would operate through a bank-led system rather than distribute deposits across several public chains.

In another model, Custodia Bank and Vantage Bank tested a dual-purpose token that acts as a bank deposit inside their Hazel network and as a stablecoin when it moves outside the network. The Keeta and LayerZero plan instead focuses on issuing several fiat-linked assets across Ethereum, Solana, Base and Keeta from the start.

LayerZero already supports cross-chain distribution for payment and tokenized-asset products. As previously reported, PayPal expanded PYUSD to additional networks through LayerZero infrastructure. Ondo Finance also used LayerZero for cross-chain transfers of tokenized stocks and exchange-traded funds.

Cross-chain systems also carry technical and operational risks. In April, attackers drained about $292 million from Kelp DAO’s rsETH bridge after compromising infrastructure used by a LayerZero verifier. LayerZero said the attack affected Kelp DAO’s single-verifier setup rather than the core protocol. The company later stopped signing messages for applications using one-verifier configurations and urged projects to use several independent verifiers.

Keeta will also add LayerZero as an anchor inside its network. Keeta uses anchors to connect blockchains and traditional payment systems. The company says its network reached 11.2 million transactions per second during a public stress test conducted with Google’s Spanner engineering team, although that result does not represent normal production volume.

The companies have not disclosed launch partners, expected transaction volume or pricing. Their July rollout will test whether institutions want tokenized commercial bank money that can move across public chains while the issuer keeps control over transfers and compliance settings.

BitMEX is facing a new US class action lawsuit that accuses the crypto derivatives exchange of engineering forced liquidations in order to take traders’ Bitcoin collateral. The complaint, filed in federal court in New York on Thursday by BKX Services Inc. and David Namdar, alleges losses of more than 622 BTC across the plaintiffs caused by liquidation events they say were improperly triggered and timed.

The dispute also arrives at a sensitive moment for BitMEX. The exchange has announced it will shut down after a strategic review by its owner, HDR Global Trading, with services scheduled to end in September—an end date that could affect how remaining users approach disputed positions and collateral claims.

Key takeaways

• The plaintiffs claim BitMEX’s liquidation system profited from forced liquidations even when, according to their allegations, collateral should have remained sufficient.
• They accuse an internal trading desk of having access to private customer information and of being able to continue trading during events that allegedly prevented ordinary users from acting.
• The lawsuit seeks the return of allegedly withheld Bitcoin plus compensatory and punitive damages, targeting US customers who bought BTC swap products from July 23, 2018.
• The filing references earlier BitMEX-related class action allegations that were dismissed without prejudice on June 30, 2025.
• The complaint was filed the same day BitMEX publicly announced its plan to close services on Sept. 23.

Allegations tied to forced liquidations and collateral handling

According to the complaint filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, the plaintiffs’ core allegation is that BitMEX’s system automatically liquidated positions in circumstances they say were not justified by the value of their collateral. The filing asserts that BitMEX enabled leverage of up to 100 times users’ collateral and then carried out liquidations while the plaintiffs allege collateral remained worth substantially more than the losses that were ultimately imposed.

In the plaintiffs’ account, the exchange’s insurance fund absorbed remaining Bitcoin after forced liquidations, which they say allowed BitMEX to benefit from liquidation events. The complaint argues that this mechanism effectively converted customer positions into profits for the exchange.

Central to the fraud claim is the allegation that BitMEX’s internal operations could continue while regular customers could not. The plaintiffs state that an internal trading desk had access to private customer information and that it could trade during “server freezes” that allegedly prevented ordinary users from accessing or closing their positions. The complaint frames this as a deliberate setup rather than a malfunction, alleging that the exchange deliberately developed a system that profited from liquidations.

What the plaintiffs want from the court

The lawsuit seeks the return of the Bitcoin that the plaintiffs say was withheld through forced liquidations, alongside both compensatory and punitive damages. The proposed class action would cover US customers who purchased BTC swap products in transactions dating back to July 23, 2018.

In terms of the specific amounts alleged, the complaint states that BKX Services Inc. claims losses of at least 305.81 BTC and Namdar alleges losses exceeding 316.85 BTC, for a combined total of 622.66 BTC.

Before this new filing, the dispute also has a history in the courts. The complaint points to a previous class action brought in 2020 by Brett Messieh and other traders, which asserted similar conduct and brought claims under the Commodity Exchange Act. That earlier case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on June 30, 2025, leaving room for new claims that mirror the allegations.

Case timing as BitMEX prepares to close

The new lawsuit was filed on the same day BitMEX announced it would shut down after 11 years of operation. BitMEX said it would stop providing services on Sept. 23 following a strategic review by HDR Global Trading, the exchange’s owner.

As part of the wind-down, BitMEX has stopped accepting new registrations and plans to block users from opening new positions starting on Aug. 26. The shutdown news was followed by market turmoil around BitMEX’s BMEX utility token, with Cointelegraph reporting a roughly 90% plunge after the closure announcement.

That timeline could raise practical questions for affected traders. With services scheduled to end in September and new position openings paused before then, users who believe their collateral was unjustly seized may have to focus quickly on legal remedies and any administrative steps available from the exchange—assuming any process exists while the platform winds down.

What happens next for traders and the exchange

For traders, the most immediate implication is that the legal fight may center on whether BitMEX’s liquidation behavior can be explained as ordinary risk management—or whether, as the plaintiffs allege, internal systems and access allowed outcomes that ordinary customers could not avoid. The claim that regular users were unable to close positions during “server freezes,” contrasted with the alleged ability of an internal desk to continue operating, is likely to become a focal point as the case progresses.

For BitMEX, the company’s exposure is heightened by the lawsuit’s attempt to frame the conduct as intentional fraud and by the scale of the alleged losses. BitMEX did not respond to Cointelegraph’s request for comment before publication of the report on the filing.

In the wider market, the case adds to the scrutiny that has long surrounded crypto derivatives exchanges—particularly when customer liquidations intersect with operational failures or internal market-making processes. As BitMEX approaches its planned shutdown, affected users may find themselves weighing whether to pursue claims now, wait for court outcomes, or rely on any remaining pathways the exchange may provide before services end.

Readers should watch for the court’s initial handling of the complaint—especially any motions tied to whether the class can be certified—and for how the allegations will be tested against technical records of liquidation and access during the periods in question. With the shutdown already set in motion, the pace of legal developments may matter as much as the merits of the case for the traders seeking their Bitcoin back.

BitMEX has been hit with a proposed class action lawsuit in the United States accusing the cryptocurrency derivatives exchange of engineering customer liquidations that allegedly allowed it to retain hundreds of Bitcoin before its planned September shutdown.

Court filings in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York show that BKX Services Inc. and trader David Namdar filed the complaint on Thursday, alleging they lost a combined 622.66 BTC through forced liquidations on BitMEX. BKX claims losses of at least 305.81 BTC, while Namdar alleges losses exceeding 316.85 BTC.

Filed on the same day BitMEX confirmed it would wind down its exchange business, the lawsuit revives allegations that have circulated around the platform’s liquidation system for years. The plaintiffs argue that the exchange’s internal trading operations gave it an unfair advantage over customers during periods of market stress.

Plaintiffs seek return of Bitcoin

According to the complaint, BitMEX offered leveraged trading of up to 100 times customers’ collateral but allegedly liquidated positions before all available collateral had been exhausted. The filing claims customers often lost their positions while the remaining Bitcoin collateral was still worth substantially more than the trading losses.

The plaintiffs allege the excess Bitcoin was transferred into BitMEX’s insurance fund instead of being returned to users, allowing the exchange to benefit financially from forced liquidations. They further claim an internal trading desk had access to non-public customer information and was able to continue trading during server outages that prevented ordinary users from managing or closing their own positions.

“BitMEX deliberately developed a system that profited from the liquidations,” the plaintiffs alleged in the complaint.

Alongside the return of the allegedly withheld Bitcoin, BKX Services and Namdar are seeking compensatory and punitive damages. The proposed class action also seeks to represent U.S. customers who traded Bitcoin perpetual swap products in transactions dating back to July 23, 2018.

The filing also points to an earlier class action brought in 2020 by Brett Messieh and other traders, who made similar allegations under the Commodity Exchange Act. Court records cited in the complaint show that case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on June 30, 2025, allowing similar claims to be brought again.

Lawsuit coincides with exchange closure

The legal action arrives as BitMEX prepares to end more than a decade of exchange operations.

Earlier on Thursday, HDR Global Trading, the owner and operator of BitMEX, announced that it had decided to close the cryptocurrency derivatives platform following a strategic review of both the business and the digital asset industry. The company said exchange operations will end at 04:00 UTC on Sept. 23.

BitMEX has already stopped accepting new account registrations. Beginning Aug. 26, traders will no longer be able to open new positions and will only be permitted to reduce existing ones. During the weeks leading up to the closure, the exchange said it will progressively close outstanding positions, while any remaining open positions at the final deadline will be liquidated automatically.

The company also said contracts with limited liquidity may be settled early under its existing settlement procedures, with advance notice provided to affected users where necessary.

Although trading services will end in September, BitMEX said customers will continue to have access to their accounts for withdrawals and to review wallet balances and transaction history. Users who leave funds on the platform after the shutdown will be charged either the equivalent of $50 per month or 1% annually, whichever is higher, with fees deducted monthly from verified accounts.

BitMEX also warned customers to remain alert for phishing campaigns attempting to exploit news of the shutdown. It said no priority withdrawal service exists and cautioned users against anyone claiming they could accelerate withdrawals. The company added that increased withdrawal requests and Bitcoin network confirmation times could occasionally delay processing during the wind-down period.

Separately, BitMEX said its reserves remain higher than customer liabilities and pointed users to its proof of reserves and liabilities data as evidence that customer assets remain fully backed.

Exchange closes after months of restructuring

The closure follows several months of internal changes at the exchange.

Earlier this month, BitMEX replaced chief executive Stephan Lutz as part of a management restructuring that also saw chief financial officer Ina Steiner and chief growth officer Raphael Polansky leave the company. Former chief operating officer and global general counsel Peter Wilkinson was subsequently appointed chief executive.

The leadership overhaul came while reports indicated the exchange had been exploring a potential sale. BitMEX has not announced a transaction since those reports emerged.

The company has undergone several executive changes since 2020, when founders Arthur Hayes, Ben Delo and Samuel Reed stepped down after U.S. authorities accused the exchange of failing to implement adequate anti-money laundering controls. BitMEX later pleaded guilty to those charges.

Alexander Höptner became chief executive in 2021 before Lutz took over during the cryptocurrency market downturn in 2022.

Founded in 2014, BitMEX became one of the earliest cryptocurrency derivatives exchanges and introduced the 100x leveraged perpetual swap, a product that later became widely adopted across the industry. In announcing its closure, the company said it had operated for more than 11 years without losing customer funds to hacks and thanked users for supporting the platform throughout its history.

The exchange’s shutdown announcement was followed by a sharp decline in its BMEX utility token, which fell by roughly 90% after the closure plans became public.

Strategy, BlackRock, Coinbase and six other companies have formed the Bitcoin Security Consortium to fund work on Bitcoin’s long-term security. 

The founding members pledged a combined $15 million over three years for developers, researchers and organizations working on the network.

The other members are Anchorage Digital, ARK Invest, Block, Blockstream, Fidelity Digital Assets and Galaxy. Brink Executive Director Mike Schmidt will coordinate the group’s daily work as a volunteer. Each company will choose where to direct its own funding rather than pay into one shared pool.

Consortium targets Bitcoin’s long-term security

The consortium named post-quantum cryptography as its first area of focus. This field develops methods designed to resist attacks from classical and quantum computers. Bitcoin currently relies on elliptic curve cryptography to prove ownership and authorize transactions.

Large-scale quantum computers cannot break Bitcoin’s cryptography today. However, a powerful enough machine running Shor’s algorithm could derive a private key from an exposed public key. An attacker could then try to move funds from a vulnerable address. Researchers still disagree on when such a machine could exist.

“As long-term holders, we have every incentive to see Bitcoin remain secure for generations,” said Strategy CEO Phong Le.

BlackRock global head of digital assets Robert Mitchnick also said the member firms will make more funding available for Bitcoin Core developers and long-term security work.

Members will not control Bitcoin development

The group said it will not develop or direct Bitcoin’s protocol, endorse specific changes or speak for Bitcoin developers. The open-source community will continue to debate, test and approve any changes through Bitcoin’s existing process.

That limit matters because the consortium includes major companies connected to Bitcoin. BlackRock and Fidelity offer institutional Bitcoin products, while Coinbase and Anchorage Digital provide trading and custody services. Strategy holds Bitcoin as its main treasury asset. Blockstream and Block develop Bitcoin infrastructure and payment products.

Members will select developers, researchers and nonprofit groups independently. The consortium also plans to publish material about Bitcoin security for investors, the public and the media. It said those updates will track technical developments rather than establish policy for the network.

Quantum readiness work expands

The consortium arrived two days after Galaxy launched its separate Bitcoin Quantum Readiness Initiative. Galaxy committed up to $5 million in grants for post-quantum tools, wallet migration systems, signature research and security audits. It also formed an advisory council and research program.

Galaxy said no cryptographically relevant quantum computer exists today. Still, it warned that Bitcoin upgrades may require years of design, testing and adoption because the network uses decentralized governance. Galaxy is also a founding member of the consortium, but its separate grant program has its own review process.

As crypto.news reported, Coinbase’s independent advisory board urged Bitcoin developers to begin a quantum migration plan now. The board did not support a set policy for old or vulnerable coins. It called for technical preparation before the threat becomes practical.

Crypto companies have also started testing new tools. BitGo and Silence Laboratories completed a simulation using a post-quantum signing system in an institutional custody workflow. Developers are also discussing BIP-360, which would add a new Bitcoin output type designed to reduce future quantum exposure.

Estimates differ on exposed Bitcoin

Project Eleven’s Bitcoin Risq List estimated that 6,982,462 BTC sat in addresses with exposed public keys as of June 15. The figure includes coins affected by older address types and address reuse. The tracker does not claim that current hardware can steal those coins.

Other studies use narrower definitions. As previously reported, Glassnode estimated in May that 1.92 million BTC faced structural exposure because their output types reveal public keys by design. It placed another 4.12 million BTC in an operational category tied to address reuse and wallet practices.

Project Eleven’s 2026 quantum threat report placed its baseline estimate for “Q-Day,” when a quantum computer could break current public-key cryptography, in 2033. Its early scenario placed the date in 2030, while its later case extended to 2042. These estimates remain uncertain and depend on advances in hardware, error correction and algorithms.

The U.S. government has also accelerated its planning. A June executive order directed federal agencies to move high-value systems to post-quantum key establishment by the end of 2030 and post-quantum digital signatures by the end of 2031.

The consortium said it will publish further material and continue funding security work. It did not name grant recipients, list individual company contribution amounts or propose a deadline for a Bitcoin protocol upgrade.