Crypto World
Solana price drops as BTC, ETH slip amid oil surge to $110
- Solana price dropped 5% to near $83 on Friday.
- The altcoin fell as Bitcoin and Ethereum declined to $66,500 and below $1,990, respectively.
- Risk assets sank as Brent oil surged to $110 amid Iran war concerns.
Solana (SOL) price has slipped more than 5% as altcoins mirror declines in Bitcoin (BTC).
The downturn coincided with a dramatic surge in oil prices to $110 per barrel, fueled by geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, with President Donald Trump’s announcement of a deadline extension for Iran seemingly not assuaging sellers.
Iran has largely dismissed US claims that talks have shown progress.
Solana drops to $83 amid crypto dip on oil surge
Solana’s price plunged to a low of $83 during Friday’s session, marking a decline of over 5% within 24 hours.
This aligned with the broader crypto market’s vulnerability to macroeconomic shocks, with Bitcoin sliding to below $66,500.
BTC’s drop below $67k marks the first time bulls have seen these levels since March 9.
Losses triggered massive long liquidations across top altcoins.
The sharp decline for BTC came as oil prices topped $110 despite US President Donald Trump’s announcement of a 10-day extension to the deadline for Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump had paused the move to strike Iran’s energy infrastructure by 5 days, but even then, the additional five days appear to have done little to soothe supply concerns.
US stocks faltered as the international benchmark Brent crude futures rose 2.7% to $110.94 a barrel.
Crude gains reversed earlier losses following the early March spike, which also saw BTC prices sink to support.
As risk appetite got a fresh bump, Solana’s trading volume spiked 13% to over $4.1 billion.
The surge in intraday volume across major exchanges signals panic, as the unwinding of leveraged positions has led to significant losses for long positions.
Solana price outlook
From a technical standpoint, Solana’s descent to $83 breached the 50-day exponential moving average (EMA) at $87.50, a critical support that now risks further erosion toward the 200-day EMA near $78.
The relative strength index (RSI) flashed oversold territory at 28, hinting at a potential short-term rebound if oil volatility eases.
However, the moving average convergence divergence (MACD) histogram remains deeply negative, confirming bearish momentum tied to the BTC correlation, which stands at 0.92 over the past month.
A sustained oil price above $110 could push SOL toward $75, but a de-escalation in Hormuz tensions might spark a relief rally back to the $95-$100 level.
Investors might also be looking to monitor US inflation data, with this likely to dictate the crypto market’s next move.
Coinbase rolled out prediction market bets for US-based users in January through a partnership with Kalshi, expanding the exchange’s product scope beyond traditional crypto trading. As March Madness unfolds, however, user feedback has highlighted a growing tension around how aggressively Coinbase is deploying event contracts and push notifications to drive engagement, with some describing the approach as akin to sports betting rather than crypto activity.
The rollout comes amid broader scrutiny of prediction markets in the United States, where regulators, lawmakers, and industry participants are navigating questions about jurisdiction, consumer protection, and potential misuse. Coinbase’s moves sit at the intersection of retail access to complex financial instruments and the evolving regulatory framework that governs how such markets should operate in the US.
Coinbase previously indicated that the Kalshi-backed service would bring a range of outcomes to the platform, from political events to sports results. In December, ahead of the public launch of its prediction market service, Coinbase filed lawsuits against regulators in Connecticut, Illinois and Michigan, arguing that the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission should have exclusive jurisdiction over its prediction markets rather than state gambling authorities. The company did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the user-reported experience during March Madness, as reported by Cointelegraph.
Key takeaways
- Coinbase’s January launch of Kalshi-backed prediction markets brought US users the ability to bet on event outcomes within the Coinbase app, bridging crypto trading with contract-based bets.
- During March Madness, some users reported an influx of push notifications urging bets on college basketball games, prompting criticism that the app is leaning toward sports gambling at a time of industry trust concerns.
- Regulatory tension surrounds prediction markets: state-level lawsuits against operators coexist with the CFTC’s push for exclusive jurisdiction over these markets.
- Legislative activity in Congress has considered curtailing use of prediction markets by politicians, amid concerns about insider information and potential conflicts of interest.
- Industry players are adopting safeguards: Kalshi bans political candidates from trading on election-related markets, while Polymarket has introduced measures to curb manipulation and insider trading.
Push notifications and the March Madness debate
Several users have voiced concerns about the frequency and framing of Coinbase’s market prompts during the March Madness window. A prominent example came from a poster on X who described receiving multiple basketball-related notifications within a single hour, arguing that Coinbase’s emphasis on sports betting reflects a broader shift toward monetizable gambling features on a platform many investors associate with crypto trading. The sentiment echoes a broader critique about trust erosion in the crypto industry and the perceived risk of platform strategies that monetize user engagement through gamified betting.
“I have received three separate notifications about College Basketball from Coinbase in the past hour alone. It is absurd that, amidst arguably the worst collapse in trust in this industry’s history, the largest American CEX has completely pivoted to trying to get their customer base hooked on sports gambling, so that they can extract even more exorbitant fees.”
Industry observers have pushed back with concerns about how such notifications might influence user behavior, especially given the sensitivity around responsible money management and the reliability of on-platform yield sources. John Palmer, co-founder of PartyDAO, voiced a closely related concern, pointing to broader questions about risk controls and the integrity of internal risk management as prediction markets push into mainstream app experiences.
These reactions occur against a backdrop of legal action and regulatory debates that complicate Coinbase’s product strategy. In December, Coinbase argued in court that the CFTC should regulate its prediction markets rather than state gambling authorities. The company’s stance mirrors a broader industry argument that federal-level oversight may provide a clearer, more consistent framework for prediction markets—but it has also drawn pushback from state regulators who view these markets as gambling activities with their own distinct consumer protections requirements.
Regulatory landscape and how it shapes the market
The regulatory environment for prediction markets in the United States is plural and evolving. Prediction market platforms have faced multiple lawsuits from state authorities, asserting various legal and regulatory oversight challenges. At the same time, the federal regulator, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, has signaled a preference for exclusive jurisdiction over such markets, creating a jurisdictional dispute that complicates operations for platforms like Coinbase, Kalshi, and Polymarket.
The policy conversation has intensified as lawmakers consider proposals to limit or prohibit certain uses of prediction markets by public officials. Reports describe bills aimed at banning presidents or members of Congress from using these platforms, prompted in part by concerns about insider information and potential conflicts of interest. In response, Kalshi and Polymarket have taken steps to reduce risk: Kalshi announced it would ban political candidates from trading on election-related markets, while Polymarket introduced measures designed to limit manipulation and insider trading.
The headlines around regulation underscore a central tension: prediction markets could offer useful tools for forecasting and hedging, but they also raise concerns about market integrity, consumer protection, and access that policymakers are eager to address. The debate is not only about the legality of the markets themselves but about how they should be designed, who can participate, and what safeguards are necessary to prevent abuse or manipulation.
Industry safeguards, policy shifts, and what to watch next
Beyond high-level regulatory talk, the industry has begun layering practical safeguards into platform rules. Kalshi, for instance, has made an explicit policy choice to bar political candidates from participating in election-related markets, aiming to limit conflicts of interest and insider dynamics. Polymarket has rolled out updates intended to curb manipulation and insider trading, a move that some observers view as essential if prediction markets are to gain broader legitimacy among mainstream users and regulators alike.
For Coinbase, the strategy remains a test of how to merge traditional crypto trading narratives with newer, non-crypto product lines without eroding trust or prompting regulatory backlash. The company’s December lawsuits against state regulators, followed by January market rollout and ongoing user feedback, reflect a high-stakes balancing act: deliver value and diversification to users while navigating a maze of regulatory constraints that could redefine what constitutes a permissible service on a US platform. The tension between innovation and compliance will likely continue to shape both product design and public perception in the months ahead.
Investors, traders, and builders should monitor regulatory developments, particularly any moves by the CFTC or Congress that could standardize or constrain prediction markets in the near term. In parallel, observers will watch for how Coinbase and other operators adjust notification strategies, user onboarding, and risk disclosures to align with evolving expectations around responsible gaming, data privacy, and financial risk management.
The evolving landscape suggests that the next phase of prediction markets in the US will be defined less by a single breakthrough and more by a gradual harmonization of innovation with clear guardrails. Whether Coinbase’s approach will be seen as a model for responsibly integrating event contracts into mainstream financial apps or as a cautionary tale about flashy monetization remains contingent on regulatory clarity, user experience, and demonstrated safeguards against abuse.
Readers should keep an eye on potential policy updates, court decisions, and platform-level changes to betting and disclosure practices as the market seeks a stable path forward amid competing regulatory and commercial interests.
Negative reactions to cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase using its notifications to push bets on event contracts amid the March Madness basketball tournament range from “annoying” to “absurd.”
In January, Coinbase rolled out prediction market bets for US-based users as part of a partnership with Kalshi. However, for some users, the last two months have been seen as an opportunity for the exchange to get people “hooked on sports gambling” using an app that many had devoted to crypto trading.
“I have received three separate notifications about College Basketball from Coinbase in the past *hour* alone,” said X user AvgJoesCrypto on Thursday. “It is absurd that, amidst arguably the worst collapse in trust in this industry’s history, the largest American CEX has completely pivoted to trying to get their customer base hooked on sports gambling, so that they can extract even more exorbitant fees.”
Like sports event contract betting on platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket, Coinbase Prediction Markets offers US-based users the chance to bet on the outcomes of a variety of events.
Prediction market platforms already face several lawsuits filed by state-level authorities, even as the federal regulator, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), pushes for “exclusive jurisdiction” over the market.
John Palmer, co-founder of PartyDAO, expressed a similar sentiment over the Coinbase notifications, pushing bets on March Madness games:
“This is essentially encouraging me to gamble. What does that say about the internal philosophy around money management? Can I trust the yield sources on USDC interest, can I trust internal risk management, etc.”
In December, before the launch of its prediction market service, Coinbase filed lawsuits against regulators in Connecticut, Illinois and Michigan. The exchange argued, likely in anticipation of its prediction market launch, that the CFTC, not state-level gambling authorities, should regulate the platform.
Cointelegraph contacted Coinbase for comment on the user complaints, but had not received a response at the time of publication.
Related: Coinbase launches token-backed down payments for Fannie Mae loans
Congress seeks to ban politicians from using prediction markets amid insider information allegations
Amid user feedback and state-level lawsuits, many US lawmakers have also been calling for legislation to address issues in prediction markets. Allegations of someone in government using Polymarket to profit from a bet on the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro have led to bills seeking to ban any US President or member of Congress from using the platforms.
Both Kalshi and Polymarket have introduced separate policies to curb insider trading. Kalshi said it would ban political candidates from trading on event contracts related to their campaigns, and Polymarket introduced measures to limit easily manipulated or ethically sensitive markets.
Magazine: Nobody knows if quantum secure cryptography will even work
Solana price just fell to $85, down 4% from the $89 area in a single session, and the $90 level that held as a prediction floor through much of Q1 has now flipped to hard resistance. What happens next depends on whether bulls can defend $80 before the chart pattern currently forming delivers its full verdict. Derivatives positioning data shows unusual imbalances that may be accelerating the move.
The March 26 decline extended a broader altcoin rout driven by macro risk-off sentiment, elevated rates, sticky inflation, and geopolitical friction all weighing simultaneously. Solana’s share of global on-chain transactions slipped to 44%, down from earlier peaks, raising questions about the quality of throughput given that validator votes, arbitrage bots, and automated systems inflate headline counts.
Weekly DEX volume on Solana has cratered, dropping by the day, so is its total value locked that sees 1.3% drop today.
Here’s our Solana price prediction:
Discover: The best pre-launch token sales
Solana Price Prediction: Can SOL Recover Before the Head-and-Shoulders Triggers?
SOL’s technicals are not pretty. The 14-day RSI reads a neutral 55.21, but short-term moving averages (10–30-day) still flash buy signals while the 50-day and 200-day MAs both signal sell, a classic split that signals indecision with a bearish lean. Only 24% of technical indicators currently point bullish, according to aggregated signal data.
Key levels define the battlefield. Immediate support clusters at $84 below that, $80 is the line bears need to crack to validate the head-and-shoulders pattern forming on the three-day chart, a setup that targets $59 on a confirmed breakdown. Resistance sits at $90–$92, with a meaningful recovery requiring a reclaim of $96.
The Alpenglow upgrade, targeting sub-second finality, remains the most credible near-term catalyst, with Q1 2026 mainnet timing potentially imminent. Whether it’s enough to shift sentiment in this macro environment is the question nobody can answer confidently right now.
Discover: The best crypto to diversify your portfolio with
Maxi Doge Targets Early Mover Upside as Solana Tests Key Levels
When a layer-1 blue chip trades 69% off its all-time high, and the dominant chart pattern targets a further 30% drawdown, some capital doesn’t wait; it rotates. Speculative flows have been extending into early-stage presales, where entry prices haven’t already been priced in years of hype. That dynamic is exactly where Maxi Doge ($MAXI) is positioned.
$MAXI is an Ethereum ERC-20 meme token built around a trading community identity—a 240-lb canine juggernaut embodying 1000x leverage mentality (the tagline is “Never skip leg-day, never skip a pump,” which is either brilliant or unhinged, possibly both).
The presale has more than $4.7 million at a current price of $0.000281. Features include holder-only trading competitions with leaderboard rewards, a Maxi Fund treasury for liquidity and partnerships, and huge 66% staking APY for early buyers. The meme-first marketing leans hard into viral gym-bro culture, a strategy that has worked for comparable projects when community momentum builds early.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Crypto assets are highly volatile. Always do your own research before investing.
The post Solana Price Prediction: $90 Support Flipped to Resistance as Volume Drops appeared first on Cryptonews.
When one of the world’s largest card networks pays a significant premium over a company’s last valuation to acquire it, that is worth paying attention to. When the company in question builds stablecoin settlement infrastructure, it tells you something fundamental about where the payments industry believes it needs to be – and how urgently it needs to get there.
Mastercard had options. It could have partnered with BVNK. It could have taken a minority stake. It could have acquired a smaller stablecoin infrastructure player for a fraction of the price. Instead, it paid $1.8 billion – more than double BVNK’s $750 million Series B valuation from just over a year ago – for a company that has spent years doing the unglamorous work of building enterprise–grade stablecoin rails across 130 jurisdictions.
That number tells you more about where Mastercard sees payments heading than any strategy deck or earnings call ever could. And it eclipses Stripe’s $1.1 billion acquisition of Bridge, making it the largest stablecoin infrastructure deal in history.
More than $190 trillion moves cross–border annually through correspondent banking rails designed half a century ago. Those rails still function – in the same way a fax machine still functions. They carry the money, eventually, but they do so through layers of intermediaries that add cost, delay and opacity at every step. Mastercard has clearly concluded that patching this system is no longer a viable strategy. The question worth asking is why they reached that conclusion now, and what it means for the rest of the industry.
Compliance was worth the premium
Mastercard has no shortage of engineering talent. It could build a stablecoin settlement layer from scratch – and it would probably be a good one. So why pay a 140% premium for someone else’s?
Because the technology was never the hard part. BVNK’s value lies in its multi-jurisdictional licensing framework – painstakingly assembled over years of regulatory engagement across more than 130 countries. Walking into that many regulators’ offices and emerging with approval takes the kind of time that a card network competing for the future of settlement simply does not have. In payments, the compliance framework is the product. Everything else can be rebuilt.
This is what separates the companies that legacy finance acquires from the ones it ignores. The firms that treated licensing as a core investment – not an afterthought – are now the ones commanding billion-dollar valuations. Mastercard did not pay for BVNK’s code. It paid for the years it would have lost trying to replicate BVNK’s regulatory footprint. That distinction matters because it tells you exactly what the next acquirer in this space will be looking for, too.
The emerging market dividend
Most coverage of this acquisition will focus on what it means for Western payments modernisation. But the more consequential implications are in the corridors where BVNK’s infrastructure will matter most – and where Mastercard’s distribution can do the most good.
Remittance fees still average six to eight per cent in corridors serving Africa and Southeast Asia. A worker in Dubai sending $500 home to the Philippines loses $30 to $40 per transfer to intermediaries. Across the $685 billion in remittances flowing to low- and middle-income countries each year, that represents an extraordinary transfer of value away from the people who can least afford it.
This is precisely where stablecoin–native settlement changes the equation. The underlying rails do not require the chain of correspondent banks that traditional cross-border payments demand. Strip out those intermediaries and flat fees of one to two per cent become structurally possible – not as a promotional offer, but as a reflection of what settlement actually costs when the plumbing is modern.
Mastercard now owns that plumbing. Combined with its merchant network and distribution across emerging markets, this acquisition has the potential to reshape financial access for the 1.3 billion adults still outside the formal banking system. When a network of Mastercard’s scale plugs stablecoin settlement into corridors where people have been paying eight per cent to move their own money, the impact is not incremental. That is a far bigger story than a card network hedging its bets on crypto.
The regulated rails race
Stripe acquired Bridge. Mastercard has acquired BVNK. By all accounts, Visa is evaluating its own move. Within eighteen months, every major card network will have a stablecoin settlement strategy – or will be explaining to shareholders why it does not.
The interesting tension here is not between traditional finance and crypto. That framing is already outdated. The real contest is between regulated stablecoin infrastructure and the unregulated alternatives growing in corridors where compliant options remain inaccessible. Unregulated rails can move faster precisely because they bypass the licensing work that enables institutional adoption. But speed without regulatory legitimacy is fragile – and the sector has enough scar tissue from high-profile collapses to know where that leads.
Every month that regulated infrastructure remains unavailable in a given corridor is a month that shadow systems gain ground. Mastercard’s acquisition significantly compresses that timeline. With BVNK’s licensing across 130 countries and Mastercard’s global reach, the gap between regulated capability and market demand has just narrowed, benefiting everyone operating on the right side of compliance.
The premium Mastercard paid was never about the technology. It was about time – the time it would take to build a regulatory footprint from scratch while the market moves on without you. That calculus now applies to every legacy payments company that has been watching from the sidelines. The window for building is closing. The window for buying is getting more expensive by the quarter.
When the next acquisition in this space lands – and it will – nobody will treat it as a surprise. They will treat it as inevitable. That shift in expectation is the clearest sign that stablecoin infrastructure has moved from the periphery of global payments to its centre.
Quick Overview
- Citigroup experiences 3.9% decline to $108 during trading session
- Bank evaluates regional institutions with $500B in assets for acquisition
- Recent asset sales generate $6.5B in capital for strategic initiatives
- Share price trails targets despite 78% surge in corporate banking revenue
- Digital asset infrastructure development continues with Bitcoin custody services
Shares of Citigroup retreated to $108.01, marking a 3.91% decline as market participants reacted to the financial institution’s strategic expansion initiatives. The stock experienced consistent downward momentum throughout the session, signaling investor uncertainty regarding the bank’s growth trajectory. Nevertheless, this pullback occurred against a backdrop of solid capital reserves and comprehensive organizational transformation.
Regional Banking M&A Strategy Takes Center Stage
Citigroup is actively assessing opportunities to acquire a US-based regional banking institution or wealth management firm to enhance its domestic footprint. This strategic initiative targets improved deposit gathering, expanded physical presence, and enhanced credit distribution capabilities. As a result, management seeks to narrow the competitive gap with dominant American banking rivals.
Discussions have centered on organizations managing approximately $500 billion in total assets, alongside established securities firms. Prospective candidates include wealth management platforms such as Stifel and Raymond James, both known for robust client advisory operations. Nevertheless, regulatory clearance remains a prerequisite given current supervisory restrictions.
Chief Executive Jane Fraser maintains her commitment to operational streamlining paired with targeted business expansion. The acquisition framework represents a pivot toward reinforcing American operations following extensive international portfolio optimization. Therefore, this approach complements broader objectives to amplify market presence and earnings potential.
Divestiture Program Bolsters Financial Flexibility
Citigroup has fortified its capital foundation through strategic dispositions and organizational restructuring measures. During February 2026, the institution finalized the transfer of its Russian operations to Renaissance Capital. This divestiture yielded approximately $4 billion in Common Equity Tier 1 capital enhancement.
Additionally, Citigroup divested a 49% ownership position in Banamex, its Mexican retail banking division. This transaction contributed roughly $2.5 billion while strengthening financial resources available for reinvestment. Furthermore, leadership has confirmed no additional Banamex asset sales are anticipated during the current fiscal year.
These strategic dispositions have unlocked substantial resources to finance acquisition activity and domestic market penetration. Consequently, Citigroup maintains significant capacity to allocate funds toward revenue-generating opportunities. This approach demonstrates a deliberate transition toward balance sheet optimization and prudent capital deployment.
Operational Performance and Blockchain Technology Advancement
Citigroup delivered impressive institutional banking results in its latest financial disclosure. Corporate banking revenues surged 78% on an annual basis, reaching $2.2 billion during the final quarter of 2025. This exceptional performance underscores heightened engagement from commercial and institutional client segments.
The stock continues trading substantially beneath the Wall Street consensus target of $135. The existing valuation disparity suggests a disconnect between current market pricing and analyst projections. Implementation success of strategic priorities may prove decisive for future share appreciation.
Citigroup has established foundational systems for cryptocurrency custody solutions and digital wallet capabilities. The organization intends to incorporate digital assets into conventional banking infrastructure while maintaining comprehensive risk management protocols. Beyond this, the bank is evaluating stablecoin applications and blockchain-enabled deposit instruments to enhance international payment settlement efficiency.
Approach by Fed Raises Concerns
The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City granted Payward Financial a limited purpose account that is operating under the name Kraken Financial. But authorities have said not much regarding the scope of services to which the account is related, and this has raised questions amongst legislators regarding openness and uniformity in the process of approving the account. Waters has formally requested Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid to clarify what legal framework is applied to handle the approval of the account. Further, she reported that existing laws and Federal Reserve access account regulations fail to specify or mention a limited purpose account, casting doubt on the interpretation of regulations.
The legislator has also questioned whether Kraken will be able to get important Federal Reserve products like payments processing, cash management, and securities transferring. Also, she needs to seek clarification regarding potential boundaries associated with the account, like limits on the balance or restrictions on overdrafts, which may limit its operation scope. The debate has been escalated given the comparisons with Custodia Bank that was seeking the same access over several years, yet it turned out in court. The resultant disparity has therefore given rise to an issue of fairness and equal treatment of the Federal Reserve System to various kinds of financial institutions.
The ruling has attracted interest in financial and crypto industries since companies are looking at the way the regulators address access to the central infrastructure. Other than the industry players, consider the development as a milestone to closer integration of crypto companies into the conventional ones that provide financial and payment systems in the US. Waters highlighted that the steady enforcement of regulations is critical towards ensuring that there is trust in the regulation processes. Therefore, she compelled the Federal Reserve to give more disclosures that justify why Kraken was able to clear such requirements using the same circumstances that other candidates were unable to do.
The problem appears in the context of broader uncertainty in the monetary policy and regulation of the direction of the financial system of the United States. In addition, the continuous controversy about interest rates and regulatory models also determines the way the interactions between the institutions and the central bank services and regulatory standards are involved.
Iran escalation and $171 million in ETF outflows drive BTC below $66,000.
Bitcoin fell to its lowest level in more than two weeks on Friday, dropping below $66,000 as a $14 billion options expiry collided with escalating Middle East tensions and a broader risk-off rout across global markets.
BTC was trading near $65,900 at press time, down roughly 4.5% over the past 24 hours, according to CoinGecko. Ether slipped to $1,983, also off 4%, while Solana tumbled 5.5% to $83. The total crypto market cap fell 3.4% to $2.36 trillion.
The Crypto Fear & Greed Index sits at 13, deep in “Extreme Fear” territory
Nearly $443 million in long positions were liquidated over the past 24 hours, compared with just $58 million in shorts, according to Coinglass, suggesting traders had been positioned for a rally that has not materialized as the U.S.-Iran conflict entered its 28th day.
Almost all of the Top 100 digital assets posted losses over the last 24 hours.
Ondo Finance bucked the bearish trend, rising more than 8% over 24 hours — though it gave back most of its gains by midday — after announcing a partnership with Franklin Templeton to tokenize five ETFs across growth, large-cap, fixed income, equity income, and gold strategies through Ondo Global Markets.
Worldcoin (WLD) and MORPHO are today’s biggest losers, plunging 10% and 8%, respectively.
Macro Pressure Mounts
The selloff extended across traditional markets. The Nasdaq 100 fell to 23,300, now 10% below its January high. Oil topped $96 per barrel as diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the Iran conflict stalled, fueling inflation fears and pushing back expectations for Federal Reserve rate cuts.
The CME FedWatch tool shows a 96% probability that the Fed will hold rates steady at its next meeting, with 4% of the market now pricing in a 25-basis-point hike, a scenario that was virtually unthinkable a month ago.
U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a net outflow of $171 million in a single day, the largest in three weeks, per CoinGlass data. Institutional demand has cooled notably since the Fed’s hawkish March rate decision, with recent days showing mixed, low-conviction flows.
Crusoe Unveils Massive AI Campus Partnership with Microsoft in Abilene
Microsoft is significantly expanding its artificial intelligence computing capabilities through a strategic collaboration with Crusoe in Abilene, Texas. The ambitious development features a 900 megawatt AI factory campus engineered to handle cutting-edge computational workloads. This facility represents one of the most substantial AI infrastructure projects currently emerging across the nation.
The planned campus will be positioned next to Crusoe’s current Abilene operations and will comprise two state-of-the-art data center structures. A dedicated onsite power generation facility will be integrated to enhance energy dependability and strengthen grid stability. When fully operational, the entire complex is projected to deliver 2.1 gigawatts of total capacity.
Development activities have commenced with initial land preparation and clearing operations now in progress. The inaugural building is scheduled to begin operations by the middle of 2027. Consequently, this rollout maintains Crusoe’s aggressive deployment schedule for enterprise-scale AI infrastructure projects.
Power Requirements Drive Design of Advanced AI Computing Facilities
The new campus architecture prioritizes energy infrastructure to accommodate escalating artificial intelligence computational needs. The facility will incorporate 900 megawatts of onsite power generation alongside battery storage capabilities. These systems will enable ultra-dense computing environments optimized for demanding GPU-based processing tasks.
Both structures will provide substantial computational capacity while employing closed-loop liquid cooling technology. This engineering approach minimizes water consumption and optimizes thermal control. Accordingly, the infrastructure design addresses the specific demands of high-performance artificial intelligence platforms.
This development represents the latest phase of the Abilene project, which has experienced rapid growth in recent periods. The original deployment began with 200 megawatts and subsequently expanded to 1.2 gigawatts spanning several buildings. Thus, this new campus consolidates the area’s position as a critical hub for large-scale AI implementation.
Geographic Advantages Position Abilene as AI Infrastructure Hub
Abilene has become an increasingly strategic location for AI infrastructure deployment, primarily due to reliable power supply and available land resources. Microsoft has secured approximately 700 megawatts of data center capacity from Crusoe in the surrounding area. This arrangement demonstrates the dynamic evolution of client requirements and infrastructure strategy.
The region has garnered significant industry interest due to multiple large-scale AI projects currently under development. Technology companies are actively realigning their asset portfolios to guarantee long-term access to computing resources. This pattern underscores the escalating competition within the AI infrastructure sector.
Crusoe is simultaneously establishing a production facility for modular AI infrastructure components designed to accelerate deployment schedules. The organization seeks to create standardized infrastructure solutions while navigating energy limitations affecting the broader industry. As such, the Abilene expansion exemplifies a significant industry transition toward scalable, energy-optimized AI development frameworks.
Crypto World
Why TRON price turned bearish even as Anchorage Digital added institutional TRX custody
- TRX dips despite Anchorage Digital enabling institutional custody.
- $0.309 is the key support, with $0.3189 acting as the immediate resistance.
- Market awaits active institutional adoption to boost TRX price.
TRON (TRX) has seen a slight dip to around $0.309, even as news broke that Anchorage Digital, the only crypto firm with a US federal banking charter, will add institutional TRX custody.
On the surface, this might seem contradictory since institutional adoption is usually bullish for digital assets.
But TRX’s price action suggests the market is not always immediately responsive to structural developments.
What Anchorage Digital’s move means for TRON
Anchorage Digital’s integration of TRON into its platform gives US institutional investors a regulated avenue to store, manage, and potentially stake TRX.
It is also part of a phased rollout, with plans including TRC‑20 token support and native staking.
From a technical standpoint, this is a strong signal of growing infrastructure and trust around TRON.
It lowers barriers for institutions that previously faced compliance or custody challenges.
In theory, such developments should increase demand for TRX and push the price upward.
However, markets often take time to internalise these structural changes.
Understanding the current bearish trend
There are likely several reasons for the temporary bearishness.
First, broader crypto market trends have been mixed, with key assets showing minor declines over the past 24 hours as oil rises over $110.
Second, some traders may be waiting for confirmation that institutions are actively using the custody service before entering positions.
Finally, TRX is facing a strong resistance near $0.3189, and on the lower side, there is a strong support around $0.3090 that, if broken, could trigger further downward pressure toward $0.3012.
Going by these levels, it is evident that the TRX price is currently bound in a narrow range, reflecting a period of consolidation.
What to expect over the weekend
While the short-term trend may seem bearish, the institutional integration remains a positive signal.
If adoption by institutions picks up, it could unlock new price ranges for TRX in the coming weeks.
The market may also respond to growing stablecoin activity on the TRON network, which highlights its ongoing utility.
For now, traders should watch for a breakout on either side of the current consolidation range.
A breakout above $0.3189 would confirm the continuation of its recent bullish momentum, while a break below $0.3090 would mean the beginning of a pullback after weeks of bullish trend that has seen it gain over 8%.
A new working paper from the European Central Bank examined four major protocols and found that a small number of actors control the bulk of governance token holdings.
A European Central Bank working paper challenges the notion that decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) deliver on their promise of distributed governance, finding that token holdings and voting power across four major DeFi protocols are heavily concentrated among a handful of actors.
The study examined governance structures at Aave, MakerDAO, Ampleforth, and Uniswap using data from late 2022 and mid-2023. The researchers analyzed the top 100 token holders and top 20 voters for each protocol, reviewed 248 governance proposals, and attempted to trace the real-world identities behind pseudonymous blockchain addresses.
The findings land at a moment when governance disputes are roiling some of the very protocols examined in the study, and DeFi projects more broadly are grappling with whether the Labs-plus-DAO structure is fit for purpose.
Top 100 Holders Command Over 80% of Supply
Across all four protocols, the top 100 holders controlled more than 80% of the total governance token supply during both snapshot periods. At Aave and Uniswap, the top five accounted for roughly half of all holdings. MakerDAO was the relative outlier, with the top five holding around 36%.
The concentration proved sticky over time, with distributions remaining largely unchanged between October 2022 and May 2023.
When the researchers dug into who sits behind the top addresses, they found that for most protocols, roughly half or more of holdings traced to addresses associated with the protocols themselves — encompassing treasuries, founders, and developer allocations — or to centralized and decentralized exchanges.
Protocol-associated addresses held 43% of Uniswap’s UNI supply. Centralized exchange holdings were particularly notable at Aave (16%) and Ampleforth (19%). Binance emerged as the dominant exchange holder across all four protocols, with holdings ranging from 2% to 15% of total supply.
The researchers cautioned that available data doesn’t distinguish between tokens held by exchanges on their own behalf versus those held in custody for customers.
Delegates Dominate Voting
The most active voters on governance proposals turned out to be predominantly delegates — entities to whom smaller token holders assign their voting power. This dynamic has long been a known issue in DAO governance, where low voter turnout and outsized whale participation leave a small group of recurring participants shaping protocol decisions.
The top voter at Uniswap in both snapshots was a16z, the venture capital firm, which saw its delegator count grow from 100 to 125 over the study period. At Aave, the protocol’s own smart contracts held the top-voter position.
Of the 68 top voters identified across all protocols, the researchers could not determine the identities of roughly one-third to nearly half of them. Among those they could identify, individuals made up about 21%, followed by Web3 companies at 19%, university blockchain societies, and VC firms.
Uniswap had the highest delegation rate at 27%, with its top 18 voters holding more than half the delegated power.
The ECB team also systematically categorized the 248 proposals and found that “risk parameters” — covering loan-to-value ratios, liquidation thresholds, borrowing rates, and debt ceilings — were the most common, accounting for 28%. Asset listing proposals made up 23%.
Implications for Regulation
The findings carry direct implications for the ongoing policy debate over how to regulate DeFi. The EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation exempts services provided in a “fully decentralized manner,” but the ECB researchers argue the protocols they studied fall well short of that standard.
Governance token holders, protocol developers, and centralized exchanges have frequently been proposed as potential regulatory entry points. However, the researchers concluded that the ambiguity surrounding who actually controls governance makes all three difficult to use in practice.
“It is not always clear who in the end is responsible or can be held accountable based on publicly available data,” the authors wrote.
The paper also drew parallels between DeFi governance and traditional corporate shareholder governance, noting that both systems suffer from low voter turnout and outsized influence by a small number of recurring participants.
But DeFi lacks the institutional safeguards — proxy voting rules, stewardship codes, disclosure requirements, and fiduciary obligations — that help mitigate those dynamics in public companies. As DAOs increasingly adopt formal legal structures, the researchers suggested that hybrid models integrating traditional legal frameworks with blockchain-based governance may ultimately be needed.
This article was written with the assistance of AI workflows. All our stories are curated, edited and fact-checked by a human.
Get Ready for a New Vikings RB
Paedophile asked nine-year-old to be his ‘boyfriend’
Mukesh Ambani’s mega IPO Reliance Jio is said to set bank fees in line with NSE
-
Crypto World7 days agoNIO (NIO) Stock Plunges 6.5% as Shelf Registration Sparks Dilution Worries
-
NewsBeat2 days agoManchester United reach agreement with Casemiro over contract clause amid transfer speculation
-
Politics7 days agoJenni Murray, Long-Serving Woman’s Hour Presenter, Dies Aged 75
-
Crypto World6 days agoBest Crypto to Buy Now: Strategy Just Spent $1.57 Billion on Bitcoin During Fear While Early Investors Quietly Enter Pepeto for 150x Potential
-
Crypto World6 days agoBitcoin Price News: Bhutan Sells $72 Million in BTC Under Fiscal Pressure, but the Smart Money Entering Pepeto Sees What the Market Does Not
-
News Videos2 days agoParliament publishes latest register of MPs’ financial interests
-
Sports4 days agoRemo Stars and Kano Pillars Strengthen Survival Hopes in NPFL
-
Sports4 days agoGary Kirsten Accuses Pakistan Cricket Board Of ‘Interference’, Mohsin Naqvi Responds
-
Business5 days agoNo Winner in March 21 Drawing as Prize Rolls to $133 Million for Next
-
Tech5 days agoGive Your Phone a Huge (and Free) Upgrade by Switching to Another Keyboard
-
Tech5 days agoAI enters the chat: New Seattle dating app relies on tech to facilitate meaningful human connections
-
News Videos4 days agoCh 9 Financial Management Part 1 | Detailed One Shot | Class 12 Business Studies Boards 2026
-
Business7 days ago
Columbia Sportswear enters $500 million credit agreement with JPMorgan Chase
-
Tech6 days agoToday’s NYT Connections Hints, Answers for March 22 #1015
-
Business22 hours agoInstagram, YouTube Found Responsible for Teen’s Mental Health Struggle in Historic Ruling
-
Business5 days agoWill Duke Basketball Win It All? Duke Basketball Enters Second Round as Third Favorite to Claim NCAA Title
-
Sports5 days ago2026 Kentucky Derby horses, odds, futures, preview, date: Expert who hit 12 Derby-Oaks Doubles enters picks
-
NewsBeat5 days agoUpdate on Wisbech river crash as search for teenage boy enters fifth day
-
Entertainment4 days agoCynthia Bailey Dishes on ‘RHOA’ Season 17, Discusses Kandi
-
NewsBeat2 days agoTesco is selling new Cadbury Dairy Milk bar and people can’t wait to try it
You must be logged in to post a comment Login