Bitmine Immersion Technologies says it has boosted its Ether holdings by nearly 10,000 ETH over the past week, bringing its treasury to 5.79 million Ether. In a new disclosure, the company described how most of those holdings are deployed to earn staking yield through its validator operations.

According to Bitmine’s filings, the latest purchases take its exposure to Ether to roughly 4.8% of the cryptocurrency’s total supply. The company also indicated that its overall balance sheet—covering crypto holdings, cash, and marketable securities—totaled $11.8 billion as of July 26.

Key takeaways

• Bitmine reported holding 5.79 million ETH after buying nearly 10,000 ETH in the prior week.
• About 4.9 million ETH—approximately 85% of Bitmine’s Ether—are staked via its validator operations.
• Bitmine projected annualized staking rewards of about $299 million once all Ether is deployed across staking infrastructure and partner validators.
• The move coincides with Ether outperforming Bitcoin over the same seven-day period, based on CoinGecko data.

Bitmine’s growing Ether treasury

Bitmine Immersion Technologies said Monday that it currently holds 5.79 million Ether, following purchases of nearly 10,000 ETH over the past week. The company framed the accumulation as a continuation of its strategy to build a large corporate Ether treasury, placing it among the biggest public holders in the sector.

In its disclosure, Bitmine quantified the scale of its holdings: 5.79 million ETH represents about 4.8% of Ether’s total supply. The report also emphasized deployment readiness, noting that a large portion of its Ether is already working to generate staking rewards.

Staking deployment and yield projections

Bitmine said roughly 4.9 million ETH—around 85% of its Ether holdings—are staked through its validator operations. The company added that it expects annualized staking rewards of approximately $299 million once all of its Ether is deployed across its staking infrastructure and through partner validators.

For investors, the practical importance of that figure is that it ties Bitmine’s treasury strategy to a recurring value engine rather than relying solely on spot price appreciation. Staking also introduces its own set of variables, including network conditions and validator performance, but Bitmine’s disclosure makes clear that a majority of its ETH is already earning yield.

Why the ETH/BTC outperformance matters

Bitmine’s purchases arrive during a week when Ether has held up better than Bitcoin. CoinGecko data cited by Bitmine’s announcement shows ETH gaining about 2.4% over the past seven days while Bitcoin declined roughly 0.7%.

Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee pointed to the rising ETH/BTC ratio as a signal of strengthening momentum. He described the ratio as being at a three-month high, suggesting that relative demand for Ether has been improving rather than Ether simply tracking broader market direction.

Relative performance can matter for corporate treasury strategies because it affects the opportunity cost of accumulating one asset versus another. If ETH is strengthening against BTC—as Bitmine suggested—it potentially reinforces the company’s decision to allocate incremental capital toward Ether rather than pausing to concentrate on Bitcoin.

Strategy’s pivot and the shifting corporate crypto playbook

Bitmine also used its announcement to highlight how its accumulation approach is diverging from Strategy, another major public player. While Bitmine has continued adding Ether, the company said Strategy has paused Bitcoin purchases in recent weeks, marking a contrast in how these large treasuries are deploying capital.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that Strategy announced it raised $544.5 million through stock sales, repurchased $25 million of its STRC preferred shares, and increased its US dollar reserve to $3.75 billion—while maintaining holdings of 843,775 BTC. That set of actions underscores a broader theme in corporate crypto: balance-sheet management can shift the pace of buys even when long-term conviction remains unchanged.

For market participants watching treasury behavior, the key takeaway is that accumulation is not always linear. Bitmine’s continued Ether buying—paired with the emphasis on staking deployment—shows a model where holding and earning yield can progress in parallel. Strategy’s pause on Bitcoin purchases, meanwhile, suggests corporate allocations can be influenced by funding, liquidity targets, and operational constraints.

Next, readers should watch whether Bitmine’s stated staking plan—covering deployment across infrastructure and partner validators—fully catches up to its forecast, and whether the ETH/BTC strength referenced by Tom Lee persists alongside Ether’s price action. That combination—ongoing net accumulation plus higher relative performance—could further shape how investors evaluate corporate crypto treasuries moving into the next quarter.

Ondo Finance has launched the Ondo Network, replacing its planned blockchain with an execution layer built for fast, private, and non-custodial trading.

Ondo Network replaces the planned Ondo Chain

Ondo Finance publicly introduced the Ondo Network on July 27, describing it as an execution layer that combines centralized exchange-like speed with self-custody, privacy and blockchain-based settlement.

Ian De Bode, CEO of Ondo Finance, described the product as an evolution of Ondo Chain, a previously announced Layer 1 blockchain designed for tokenized real-world assets. Ondo will not operate both systems at the same time.

“I’d frame it more as an evolution, but we will not be running the Ondo Network and the Ondo Chain in parallel.”

Ondo changed its approach while building Ondo Perps and consulting potential users. According to the company, those discussions showed that execution speed, rather than settlement capacity, was the main obstacle preventing onchain trading platforms from competing with centralized exchanges.

Traditional blockchains generally execute, verify, and settle transactions through the same public ledger. That structure provides transparency and a durable transaction history but can expose order flow and slow applications that require rapid trade matching.

The Ondo Network separates these functions, allowing trade execution to occur away from a public ledger while asset transfers still settle onchain.

How Ondo Network verifies private execution

Applications on the network run inside trusted execution environments, also known as secure hardware enclaves. These isolated environments process application code without revealing sensitive information, such as open positions and order flow, to the public.

A decentralized group of attestors determines which code the enclaves may run. The network also uses a multi-party structure under which no single operator can approve unauthorized code, reconstruct a signing key, or independently transfer user assets.

Asset transfers currently settle on Ethereum, while Ondo plans to support other public blockchains. The network’s settled state remains inside the enclaves for now, but the company intends to commit that record to public blockchains as the system develops.

Ondo also plans to introduce more attestors, independent watchers, bonded participation, and additional cryptographic proofs. The ONDO token is expected to support incentives and governance as those responsibilities become more decentralized.

The system is general-purpose rather than limited to trading. Ondo said developers could use it for spot markets, lending, structured products, settlement systems and non-financial applications requiring fast and verifiable private execution.

Ondo Perps becomes the first network application

Ondo Perps is the first application running on the network. The platform provides round-the-clock perpetual futures linked to equities and commodities while allowing traders to use tokenized real-world assets as collateral.

Perpetual futures allow users to take leveraged long or short positions without a fixed expiry date. The product launched earlier in July for users outside the United States and supports up to 20 times leverage on selected markets.

The platform’s initial role demonstrates how Ondo wants to use the network: trading takes place privately at near-centralized-exchange speeds, users retain control of their funds and transfers settle through public blockchain infrastructure.

Ondo said the network launch does not immediately alter the ONDO token’s role. The asset remains the governance and ecosystem token for the company’s real-world asset and market infrastructure.

Ondo (ONDO) traded near $0.40 following the announcement, up 1.1% over the past 24 hours with a market capitalization of approximately $1.96 billion, according to data from CoinGecko.

FINRA permissions support a separate U.S. rollout

Ondo’s network launch follows new U.S. regulatory permissions for Oasis Pro Markets, its SEC-registered broker-dealer subsidiary.

Oasis Pro received FINRA authorizations covering National Market System stocks, ETFs, mutual funds, index funds and securities issued through initial public offerings. The permissions cover activities including retail over-the-counter transactions, private placements and underwritten primary offerings.

The framework also supports settlement through fiat currencies or selected stablecoins, including transfers between blockchain wallets. It could allow eligible U.S. retail and institutional investors to access tokenized securities through existing brokers, advisers and retirement accounts.

However, the permissions do not automatically make Ondo Perps or every existing Ondo product available to U.S. residents. They provide regulated infrastructure through Oasis Pro Markets for securities offered under SEC and FINRA oversight, while individual products remain subject to separate eligibility and compliance requirements.

Bottom line: Clarity isn’t likely to come up for voting before next week — the final days before the chamber’s summer break is set to start on August 8. The hotly debated market structure bill isn’t yet ready for a vote, anyway, as the parties continue to try to seek a compromise on a contentious provision that’s stood in the way of a deal: the ban against senior government officials, including President Donald Trump, backing crypto projects.

Thune’s office had told CoinDesk last week that his next floor-time priority would go to the Russia legislation. While the majority leader also said he hopes to get to Clarity before the break, he said the leadership would have to “see where the votes are.”

At this point in the Senate calendar, every hour of floor time is a precious commodity, and the debate over the Clarity Act still hasn’t settled some of the major outstanding points — especially the section on government ethics, which was the topic of a Monday event hosted by Democrats opposing the Clarity Act and the president’s crypto activities.

Having significant disagreements at this stage could narrow the chances that Clarity can become law in 2026, potentially throwing the industry into some uncertainty over the timeline for U.S. regulations. If this legislation tanks, the next best avenues for regulatory legitimacy is the ongoing implementation of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act and the policy efforts at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Securitize, the tokenized-assets platform, said its subsidiary Securitize Capital has registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as an investment adviser—an update that expands the firm’s regulated advisory offering for institutional clients.

The company framed the move as a way to deepen regulated investment-advisory capabilities around onchain capital markets, building on an existing lineup of market infrastructure and financial-services licenses already held within the Securitize group.

Key takeaways

• Securitize Capital’s SEC investment adviser registration adds formal advisory capabilities to the firm’s current regulated business stack.
• The subsidiary previously operated as an exempt reporting adviser and is now subject to additional disclosure, compliance, recordkeeping, and examination duties.
• Securitize says the change is meant to support institutions designing and managing investment strategies that use tokenized, onchain capital markets.
• The registration complements existing regulated entities at Securitize, including an SEC-registered broker-dealer, alternative trading system, transfer agent, and fund administration services.

What the SEC investment adviser registration changes

According to Securitize, Securitize Capital’s SEC registration broadens how the subsidiary can serve institutional investors. The key operational shift is that the business is no longer relying on exempt status—meaning it must comply with the Investment Advisers Act’s baseline requirements for regulated advisers.

Securitize said the company previously operated as an exempt reporting adviser. Under the Investment Advisers Act, that status generally implies more stringent expectations around disclosure, compliance, recordkeeping, and SEC examination. For institutional participants, those obligations matter because they shape governance, supervisory controls, and documentation standards that regulators typically look for in adviser oversight.

The firm also positioned the upgrade as an expansion of “investment advisory capabilities” tied to Securitize’s broader infrastructure. In practice, that means institutions may be able to engage with Securitize not only as a platform for tokenization and related market services, but also through a more explicitly regulated advisory channel.

A regulated platform built around tokenized capital markets

Securitize said the adviser registration is being added to existing regulated businesses within the group. The company cited an SEC-registered broker-dealer, an alternative trading system, a transfer agent, and fund administration services—capabilities that are often described together in tokenization business models because they can support issuance, custody/transfer mechanics, trading venues, and ongoing fund administration.

By bringing adviser registration under the same umbrella, Securitize is effectively tightening the regulatory alignment across multiple layers of its tokenized-asset ecosystem. That matters for institutions deciding whether they want exposure to tokenized structures under familiar compliance frameworks, rather than relying on a less standardized set of arrangements across different vendors.

Industry scale and the broader push for RWA infrastructure

Securitize also reiterated its market position in the “tokenization” category. The company described itself as the largest tokenization platform by onchain asset value, citing around $4.8 billion in tokenized assets across funds from BlackRock, Apollo, KKR, VanEck, Hamilton Lane and other asset managers.

This context is important: as the real-world assets (RWA) sector continues to develop, competition is increasingly about more than token issuance. Platform operators are trying to combine issuance rails with trading, transfers, and governance that fit within U.S. financial regulation. Securitize’s move suggests it wants to add another leg to that structure—advisory oversight—while keeping the rest of its regulated-services suite in place.

NYSE listing follows a merger, while the stock faces pressure

The registration comes as Securitize’s public-company status continues to play out. Securitize began trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker SECZ on July 2 after completing a business combination with Cantor Equity Partners II.

Following the listing, the article notes that the shares have fallen about 46% from their first-day closing price.

While the SEC investment adviser registration is a regulatory milestone, it may also be read by investors as part of a broader effort to strengthen institutional credibility and expand monetizable services. At the same time, the stock’s drawdown since the NYSE start date underscores that market participants may be watching not only compliance progress, but also whether that compliance translates into durable demand and measurable business growth.

What to watch next

For institutions and market participants, the immediate question is how Securitize Capital’s adviser status will expand real advisory workflows—particularly how compliance, oversight, and recordkeeping will be implemented as clients engage with tokenized strategies. For investors, the next signal to track is whether the additional regulated capability converts into higher adoption, clearer revenue drivers, and continued traction across its tokenized-asset partnerships.

HashKey Holdings says it has consolidated its crypto exchange operations into a single platform and application, aiming to give customers one seamless entry point while keeping regulatory compliance tailored to local jurisdictions.

In a Monday announcement, the Hong Kong-based digital asset services firm said it has merged its HashKey Exchange and HashKey Global businesses. The change brings core hubs—including Hong Kong, Singapore, the Middle East (Dubai), and Bermuda—under one platform experience.

Key takeaways

• HashKey is unifying separate exchange branches into one platform and one app for multiple regions.
• The company says it will use a “unified entry, localized compliance” model rather than region-by-region front ends.
• Customers across Hong Kong, Global, Singapore, and Dubai/Bermuda should download the same application.
• Compliance and controls are described as being managed based on each user’s legislative domain.
• The approach aligns with broader industry moves toward shared user interfaces over fragmented legal structures.

One app, multiple legal environments

HashKey’s stated goal is to reduce friction for users who would otherwise need to navigate different exchange offerings depending on where they operate. The company said the rollout follows a “unified entry, localized compliance” principle: the platform experience is meant to be consistent for end users, while compliance is handled according to the applicable regulatory framework for each jurisdiction.

Practically, HashKey says users in Hong Kong, Global, Singapore, or the Middle East can download the same application. From there, the platform would manage compliance across each user’s specific legislative domain—supporting the firm’s claim that the single front end can still remain aligned with local rules.

HashKey framed the move as a shift away from the early-era virtual asset industry pattern, when licensed exchanges often maintained siloed regional models to simplify compliance at the time.

How HashKey’s model compares with other exchanges

HashKey’s consolidation mirrors a trend visible in other major platforms: presenting a single consumer interface while distributing legal responsibilities across multiple entities behind the scenes.

For example, the company pointed to market precedents such as OKX, which markets its website and mobile apps as one platform. However, OKX’s terms historically allocate customers to different providers based on residence. In that setup, the outward experience is unified, but the legal backend remains fragmented across regions.

Similarly, HashKey referenced Kraken’s approach in Europe. Kraken previously consolidated its Dutch broker BCM into its platform following an acquisition in September 2024, and later began serving the European Economic Area through its Irish MiCA entity as part of a unified regulatory framework described in its own updates.

While HashKey’s announcement focused on front-end unification and localized compliance management, the comparisons underline a recurring industry reality: even when users see one platform, regulatory coverage often still depends on separate entity structures by region.

Why the consolidation matters for users and operators

For traders and other market participants, a single platform experience can reduce confusion—especially for users who operate across multiple regions or relocate. It can also streamline onboarding workflows by limiting differences in user interfaces, login flows, and product access that often vary between regional exchange branches.

From an operator standpoint, unifying applications can simplify support, infrastructure choices, and product delivery. Rather than maintaining parallel front ends and workflows for each jurisdiction, the firm can focus on one user experience and then apply compliance controls based on user location or jurisdictional classification.

Still, HashKey’s announcement also highlights a key tension in exchange consolidation: customer-facing simplicity does not necessarily mean one set of rules. The “localized compliance” framing suggests that while the application is shared, users may be governed by different legal and compliance arrangements depending on where they fall within HashKey’s described jurisdictional domains.

What to watch next after HashKey’s rollout

As HashKey moves to the unified platform, users should pay close attention to how access, account requirements, and compliance checks behave in each jurisdiction—particularly whether the transition changes onboarding steps or documentation expectations for customers in Hong Kong, Singapore, or the Middle East.

For the broader market, the move signals that exchange operators are continuing to modernize the customer layer of their businesses, even while regulatory requirements remain inherently local. The next phase to monitor will be how smoothly the migration completes across all described regions and whether HashKey expands the approach to additional products or services tied to licensing constraints.

New York Attorney General Letitia James has urged Congress to revise the CLARITY Act, warning that the crypto market structure bill could restrict states from prosecuting fraud and enforcing investor protection laws.

James challenges the CLARITY Act’s enforcement rules

James raised the concerns in written testimony submitted to a Senate committee as lawmakers continued negotiations over the federal crypto bill.

She argued that the CLARITY Act would interfere with state investor protection laws and reduce the authority of state and local agencies to prosecute misconduct involving digital assets.

“This is a mistake,” James wrote.

The New York attorney general said state and local law enforcement agencies conduct most enforcement work across the United States. According to figures included in her testimony, those authorities are responsible for about 98.8% of arrests, compared with roughly 1.2% by federal agencies.

“Despite this, CLARITY would neuter state and local law enforcement by preempting states and preventing them from fully prosecuting rampant fraud and violations of law by actors in the cryptocurrency marketplace.”

Her intervention adds to Democratic concerns about whether the bill gives state authorities enough power to pursue crypto fraud and enforce its proposed ethics restrictions. James has asked Congress to add stronger investor protection, anti-money-laundering and ethics safeguards to the legislation.

State enforcement becomes a Senate sticking point

Some Democratic senators have objected to giving the Department of Justice sole responsibility for enforcing provisions that restrict digital asset activities by public officials. They want state prosecutors to share that authority rather than relying entirely on federal enforcement.

The dispute matters for New York because the state has its own financial laws and an active enforcement record covering crypto companies. Federal preemption could limit how New York and other states apply their existing laws when federal and state standards overlap.

For US investors, the disagreement centers on who can act when a crypto company is accused of fraud. Supporters of state authority argue that local prosecutors provide another route for enforcement, while advocates of a national framework say consistent federal rules could reduce conflicting requirements across states.

The CLARITY Act would establish a broader federal market structure for digital assets and divide oversight responsibilities between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The Senate Banking Committee advanced the legislation 15–9 in May, but Democratic support at the committee stage does not guarantee enough votes on the floor.

Republicans still face a 60-vote hurdle

Senate Majority Leader John Thune is considering starting the floor process before lawmakers leave Washington for the August recess, even though passage before the break appears unlikely.

The process could begin with Thune filing cloture on a motion to proceed. That filing would typically set up a vote two Senate session days later, with at least 60 senators needed to advance.

If cloture succeeds, the Senate could debate the motion for up to 30 hours before voting on whether to formally take up the bill. Clearing that stage would not pass the CLARITY Act, but it would bring the measure closer to a full floor debate.

Republicans hold 53 seats and therefore need Democratic support even if the party remains largely united. Senator Mitch McConnell is expected to remain absent, while Republican Senators Josh Hawley and Rand Paul have not confirmed whether they would support the measure.

Both Hawley and Paul opposed the GENIUS Act during its initial Senate procedural vote in 2025, increasing uncertainty over how many Democratic votes Republicans may ultimately need.

Banking dispute adds pressure before the recess

Stablecoin rewards remain another obstacle in the negotiations. Thune told reporters that lobbying by banking groups over provisions allowing crypto platforms to offer stablecoin yield was affecting the talks.

Banks have argued that yield-bearing stablecoin products could pull deposits away from traditional financial institutions. Crypto companies have resisted broad limits, treating rewards as an important way to attract and retain customers. The same disagreement previously contributed to delays in the market structure talks.

Thune has also indicated that senators could offer numerous amendments if leadership files cloture. Meanwhile, other bills, including the SAVE America Act and proposed sanctions against Russia, are competing for limited floor time.

Charles Schwab has joined crypto industry groups in supporting the CLARITY Act, but James’s warning shows that enforcement powers remain a barrier to a bipartisan agreement. Without a deal on state authority, ethics rules and stablecoin rewards, starting the floor process may expose the Senate’s divisions without producing final passage before the recess.

X Money has begun rolling out to Premium and Premium+ subscribers in the United States, adding deposit accounts, instant transfers, and a Visa debit card directly to the social media platform.

X Money brings banking tools inside the social platform

X Money combines peer-to-peer payments with financial services commonly offered by banks and digital payment applications. Users can send funds instantly to other X accounts without paying a transfer fee.

The service also includes interest-bearing deposit accounts with annual percentage yields of up to 6%. Eligible purchases made through the X Card, a Visa debit card connected to the account, can receive 3% cashback.

A federal judge ruled that Minnesota’s law banning prediction markets likely runs afoul of the Commodity Exchange Act, granting a preliminary injunction against the law to Kalshi, Polymarket and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Judge Katherine Menendez, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, ruled Monday that Minnesota’s recently passed law that would ban prediction market operators from offering their products in the state seems to be preempted by the federal CEA, and that the companies and federal regulator “are likely to succeed” in showing so after a full trial.

Kalshi, Polymarket and the CFTC sued Minnesota earlier this year after the state passed the law criminalizing the operation of prediction markets, arguing that the statute violated the CFTC’s jurisdiction to oversee “swaps,” which prediction market contracts are structured as.

In her ruling, Judge Menendez said that the three parties had shown they were likely to succeed in their arguments that the law underpinning U.S. commodities exchanges preempts the state law, that the CFTC has jurisdiction over these products and that the plaintiffs would likely succeed on the merits of the case.