Bitcoin neared $64,000 in Asian morning hours Tuesday, up 2% over 24 hours and 1% on the week, recovering the $63,000 level it lost during Monday’s session. The low came near $62,250 before a steady bid carried it to just above $64,100 overnight.

Ether lagged near $1,865, up marginally on the day but still down 1% over seven days, the only major in the red on the weekly view. XRP rose almost 1% to $1.08 and is up 2% on the week. BNB added 1.5% to nearly $591 and leads the majors over seven days at almost 5%.

Solana gained over 1% to nearly $74, tron 1% to 33 cents and dogecoin the same to 7 cents. Hyperliquid’s HYPE bounced over 4% to $54 after last week’s slide, though it remains down 3% over seven days.

The recovery came without any resolution to the Coldcard situation. A fourth wave of sweeps against addresses generated by the affected firmware ran through Monday, taking roughly 449 bitcoin from 709 addresses on the revised count, and Galaxy Research has not confirmed whether the same operator is behind it.

Ripple said it has made two strategic investments aimed at expanding the infrastructure behind tokenized financial assets on its XRP Ledger (XRPL). In an announcement released Monday, the company disclosed funding into Zilo, a global transfer agency provider for wealth managers, and Licuido, a tokenization solutions firm regulated by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority.

While Ripple did not provide deal sizes or investment terms, the move signals a continued effort to reduce friction in tokenized markets—particularly around how collateral can move and be reused across issuance and settlement.

Key takeaways

• Ripple announced strategic investments in Zilo and Licuido to support tokenized asset workflows on XRPL.
• The company expects the partnerships to improve regulated transfer agency, issuance, and collateral mobility on its ledger.
• Ripple’s stated focus is addressing “idle collateral” by enabling tokenized funds to be used as collateral from issuance.
• The announcements follow recent XRPL-related product and adoption milestones, including Aviva Investors’ tokenized fund launch and Ripple Mint for RLUSD.

Why Ripple is tying tokenization to regulated market plumbing

For institutional tokenization to scale, networks need more than smart-contract functionality—they require operational layers such as issuance controls, transfer agency services, and mechanisms that support compliance and collateral management. Ripple framed its investments as part of that broader stack.

According to the company’s announcement, Ripple expects the Zilo and Licuido investments to bring “regulated transfer agency, issuance, and collateral mobility” to XRPL infrastructure. That positioning matters because the capital markets bottlenecks that slow adoption are often less about token mechanics and more about how assets move through regulated processes.

Zilo and Licuido: transfer agency and FCA-regulated tokenization

Ripple said it invested in Zilo, which provides global transfer agency asset solutions for wealth managers. The UK-based company has reportedly raised $58.7 million in total equity funding, based on data compiled by Traxcn.

Ripple also announced an investment in Licuido, a tokenization solutions provider based in the UK and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. The combination of Zilo’s transfer agency orientation and Licuido’s regulated tokenization role suggests Ripple is targeting multiple stages of a tokenized asset’s lifecycle—from issuance through custody-related and operational handling.

Collateral mobility and the “idle collateral” problem

Ripple’s announcement tied the investments to a specific market issue: collateral that sits unused. The company said that by combining the investments, it aims to help address problems related to idle collateral by enabling tokenized funds to be used as collateral from the point of issuance.

In practical terms, this is the type of improvement that could reduce inefficiencies in leveraged trading, structured financing, or other institutional strategies where capital availability matters. If tokenized instruments can be deployed as collateral more directly, it may reduce the need to lock value in separate pools for different steps of the workflow.

However, the company did not provide implementation timelines or technical details in the announcement, leaving open questions about exactly how quickly these partnerships translate into new product capabilities on XRPL. Investors and ecosystem participants will likely want to watch for concrete rollout plans or integrations that demonstrate the promised shift from token issuance to usable collateral.

XRPL adoption momentum: RLUSD tooling and tokenized fund activity

Ripple’s investment news arrives shortly after other XRPL-related developments highlighted momentum in institutional tokenization.

One week prior to the announcement, London-based asset manager Aviva Investors launched a tokenized share class of its US Dollar Liquidity Fund on XRPL after receiving approval from the Central Bank of Ireland, according to earlier coverage from Cointelegraph. That example illustrates how regulatory clearance and asset-manager participation are becoming central to XRPL’s institutional narrative.

In addition, Ripple last month introduced Ripple Mint, a platform designed to give institutions new ways to access, mint, redeem, and manage its US dollar-pegged stablecoin, Ripple USD (RLUSD). By building tools around stablecoin operations and management, Ripple has been advancing the practical infrastructure institutions need for on-chain settlement and token issuance workflows.

Taken together, these efforts point to a broader strategy: pair ledger-level capabilities with real-world finance counterparts—asset managers, transfer agency providers, and regulated tokenization services—so that tokenized assets can be issued, moved, and operationally managed under compliance expectations.

Tokenized assets onchain: growth, concentration, and what to watch

The broader tokenized real-world assets (RWA) market has continued to expand, reinforcing why firms are investing in infrastructure. According to data compiled by RWA.xyz, XRPL is the 11th-largest blockchain network with $368 million in tokenized RWAs. Ethereum ranks first with $17.1 billion in tokenized RWAs.

RWA.xyz data also showed that total RWA holders increased by 50% to 1.57 million over the past 30 days, while the total value of tokenized assets rose by 1.5% to $37.3 billion. Those figures suggest that, despite concentration at the top, the sector is not standing still—participation and capital have both been trending upward.

For XRPL participants, the key takeaway is that growth in tokenization demand may increasingly depend on the maturity of the operational layer. Ripple’s stated goal—improving collateral mobility and transfer agency and issuance capabilities—directly targets a set of constraints that can limit institutional use even when tokenization technology exists.

Next, market observers will likely focus on whether Ripple can translate these investments into measurable product outcomes on XRPL—especially around regulated issuance workflows and the ability for tokenized funds to function as collateral from issuance, as Ripple described. Concrete integrations, pilot deployments, and partner announcements will be the clearest indicators of how quickly the strategy moves from concept to capability.

Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour defended the prediction market operator on Aug. 3 after New York filed a lawsuit seeking at least $36 billion in damages, penalties and related relief. 

During a CNBC interview, Mansour compared Kalshi’s structure to Nasdaq and argued that the state’s allegations threaten the wider event contract business.

The legal case also moved away from New York state court. The prediction market platform removed the proceeding to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York shortly after Attorney General Letitia James filed it on July 31. 

New York Supreme Court Justice Melissa A. Crane then treated the state’s preliminary injunction request as moot because the case was no longer before her court, according to court records shared by gaming law attorney Daniel Wallach. The decision was procedural and did not reject New York’s allegations.

Kalshi lawsuit moves into federal court

New York’s verified petition accuses the firm of repeatedly violating state gambling laws by offering event contracts without a New York State Gaming Commission license. The state wants a permanent injunction, an accounting of customer activity, restitution, disgorgement and civil penalties. It also seeks $100,000 for each alleged unauthorized sports wagering offer. Those requests remain allegations and have not resulted in a final judgment.

The company transferred the case to federal court about eight hours after the state filing, arguing that New York was attempting to regulate a derivatives exchange overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. As crypto.news reported, the state had initially asked for immediate restrictions while the wider case proceeded.

Justice Crane’s order temporarily removes that state court request from consideration. Wallach said New York could file the motion again if a federal judge sends the case back to state court. A remand decision would determine the forum, not whether Kalshi’s products are lawful.

Mansour says Kalshi resembles Nasdaq

Mansour rejected New York’s description of Kalshi as an unlicensed sportsbook. He said users trade with other participants while the prediction market platform matches positions and earns transaction fees. He added that officials could “copy and paste that lawsuit and file it against Nasdaq,” extending his defense beyond sports markets.

The comparison reflects Kalshi’s central argument that event contracts are financial instruments rather than conventional wagers. The firm is registered with the CFTC as a designated contract market, and its contracts generally allow customers to take opposing positions on whether an event will occur. New York argues that this structure does not change the products’ gambling character under state law.

Mansour also compared Kalshi’s regulatory battles with earlier disputes involving Uber and Airbnb. He portrayed the state action as resistance from established gaming businesses facing a new competitor. That remains Kalshi’s interpretation. New York has said its case concerns licensing, consumer safeguards, tax obligations and access by users below the state’s minimum sports betting age.

The CEO claimed New Yorkers had collectively earned more than $200 million on Kalshi during 2026. He also said the company proposed a system that could produce almost $10 billion in state tax revenue over five years. Mansour did not publish supporting calculations during the interview, so those figures should be treated as company claims rather than verified totals.

New York says event contracts are illegal gambling

The attorney general’s office alleges that the company allows customers to risk money on future events outside their control, meeting New York’s definition of gambling. The petition cites contracts covering professional sports, college games, elections and entertainment programs. It also alleges that Kalshi charges customers fees for entering those positions.

New York further claims that people aged 18 to 20 can use the platform even though state law sets the minimum age for mobile sports betting at 21. The state says licensed operators must follow local consumer protection requirements and contribute gaming taxes. The prediction market operator disputes the state’s authority to apply those rules to a federally registered exchange.

The petition refers to a reported $22 billion company valuation and annualized transaction volume of $178 billion. Those figures appear as the firm reported numbers in the state filing. They are not findings by the court, and the final monetary exposure cannot be known before an accounting and judgment.

Federal and state regulators remain divided

The new removal follows an earlier setback for the prediction market operator. On July 7, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres refused to block the New York State Gaming Commission from applying state gambling laws to Kalshi’s sports contracts. She found that Kalshi had not shown at the preliminary stage that the Commodity Exchange Act displaced New York’s rules. Kalshi appealed, but its requests for emergency protection were also rejected.

The CFTC takes the opposite position. In an April federal complaint, the regulator argued that Congress gave it exclusive authority over swaps and other contracts traded on registered derivatives exchanges. New York maintains that states retain their traditional power to police gambling within their borders.

Courts have not applied one consistent approach nationwide. In related coverage, a Washington judge blocked Kalshi sports contracts after finding that state gambling laws could apply. A Minnesota federal judge reached a different early conclusion and temporarily blocked that state’s prediction market ban.

The federal judge assigned to New York’s newly removed case must now consider whether federal jurisdiction exists and whether the proceeding should remain in federal court. A remand would allow New York to renew its injunction request in state court. Keeping the case in federal court would move the immediate dispute into the same court system already handling related questions about CFTC authority and federal preemption.

Since July 30, attackers have drained thousands of BTC from Coldcard-generated wallets, exploiting a flaw dating back to March 2021. According to researchers at Galaxy, total damage so far is about $130 million in BTC.

Over the weekend, some analysts pointed to increased inflows of BTC onto exchanges as the hack dented confidence in self-custody safety.

The 500 BTC isn’t an isolated case

On-chain data from CryptoQuant tracking the so-called spent output age bands, an indicator which groups all bitcoin moved on a given day by how long each coin had sat dormant before being spent, reveals a clear spike in old-coin movement around the same window.

Coins that had been dormant for 10 years or longer saw roughly 935 BTC move on Aug. 3, the largest single-day total since March 20. Separately, coins dormant for five to seven years saw a much larger spike, with roughly 6,388 BTC moving on July 31.

Old coins move for all kinds of reasons, such as estate transfers, exchange consolidations, custodial migrations that have nothing to do with any single hack.

But the clustering of large, long-dormant movements in the days immediately following the Coldcard incident gives the impression of holders proactively migrating funds for security reasons.

Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.

Blockchain Association sent Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer an eight page response on Aug. 3, disputing the National Sheriffs’ Association’s objections to the latest CLARITY Act draft.

The trade group argued that the July 22 Senate text does not give decentralized finance platforms, software developers, mixers or bridges a “blanket exemption” from anti money laundering and sanctions laws. It said the bill separates financial intermediaries that control assets or transactions from developers who only create neutral software.

The exchange arrived during a narrowing legislative window. The Senate ended Monday without acting on H.R. 3633. It invoked cloture on a continuing resolution vehicle and scheduled further work on that measure for Tuesday, leaving the market structure bill without a publicly announced vote.

CLARITY Act dispute turns on who controls transactions

The sheriffs’ group told Senate leaders on July 31 that the bill’s developer protections were too broad and could make financial crime investigations harder. Its attachment argued that Congress should regulate “everyone who receives revenue” from the digital asset marketplace and asked lawmakers to remove or narrow Section 10604.

Blockchain Association rejected that approach. It said revenue alone does not determine whether a person is a financial institution under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN’s 2019 guidance says money transmitter status depends on a business model’s facts and circumstances. FATF guidance also focuses on whether a person performs covered financial functions for another party.

The US Senate’s schedule is becoming a key variable for the crypto industry as lawmakers prepare to enter summer recess at the end of this week, according to Bernstein, a wealth manager. Bernstein says that the odds of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (CLARITY) advancing are falling, raising the risk of another short-term downturn in crypto valuations—particularly for Bitcoin.

In a Monday report shared with Cointelegraph, Bernstein also warned that a missed legislative push could spark a “knee-jerk” reaction from market participants. Still, the firm points to a counterbalance: if Congress stalls, regulators may intensify efforts already underway under existing authorities, including the SEC and CFTC’s Project Crypto.

Key takeaways

• Bernstein says CLARITY momentum is weakening as the Senate approaches its summer recess, increasing the risk of additional downside for the market.
• The firm expects the crypto market to bottom and regain momentum toward late Q3 or early Q4 ahead of the mid-term period, if timing pressures persist.
• Prediction market activity on Polymarket puts CLARITY passage before the end of 2026 at 31%, down from 38% week-to-date.
• Bernstein argues that legislative delays could lead to more proactive SEC and CFTC policy releases tied to token classification and DeFi rules under Project Crypto.

Recess risk and the “knee-jerk” market reaction

Bernstein’s central concern is timing. With the Senate preparing to start summer recess, the window for passing CLARITY appears to narrow. The wealth manager said that if the legislation does not advance, the market could interpret the outcome as a near-term delay in US crypto market structure reform.

In Bernstein’s view, that could trigger an immediate negative “industry knee-jerk reaction,” potentially translating into another leg down for Bitcoin and the broader crypto market. The firm’s outlook is not purely bearish, however: it also anticipates that—tactically—the market could find a bottom and begin building momentum toward late Q3 and early Q4 before the mid-terms.

What Project Crypto could do if CLARITY stalls

Bernstein’s report highlights an important asymmetry. While markets may react negatively to legislative delays, the same outcome could push regulators to move faster within their current legal frameworks.

Project Crypto is a joint initiative intended to use existing agency authority to develop a workable regulatory approach for digital assets while Congress finalizes broader legislation under CLARITY. The SEC first announced Project Crypto under Chairman Paul Atkins in July 2025, and it was later expanded into a joint staff effort between the SEC and the CFTC in September 2025. (SEC announcement: https://www.sec.gov/about/sec-launches-project-crypto; CFTC/SEC expansion referenced by Cointelegraph: https://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/FederalRegister/finalrules/2026-05635.html.)

According to Bernstein, the SEC and CFTC could respond to Congress’s slowdown with additional interpretive releases and clearer guidance. The firm specifically points to potential developments involving:

• Token “taxonomy” and interpretive guidance tied to how different types of tokens should be treated.
• Clearer rules related to decentralized finance (DeFi).
• Acceleration of an “innovation exemption” concept for issuing tokens that would be exempted from securities status during a finite period.

For investors and builders, the practical takeaway is that regulatory clarity might not arrive only through CLARITY. If Congress can’t deliver in the near term, markets may increasingly price regulatory outputs—such as guidance, interpretive releases, and rulemaking momentum—emanating from the SEC and CFTC.

Polymarket odds slip to 31% for passage by end-2026

Bernstein’s concern about dwindling prospects for CLARITY is echoed by market-implied probabilities. Polymarket data shows the odds of the act being signed into law before the end of 2026 at 31%, down 7% over the past week and down 9% over the past month. The market reports roughly $3.7 million has been wagered on the outcome. (Source: Polymarket.)

The drop matters because prediction markets often reflect shifting expectations around legislative scheduling and political willingness—especially when credible procedural deadlines approach. In this case, the timing implied by summer recess is a direct catalyst for priceable uncertainty.

Earlier coverage also indicates that expectations have moved in recent months: on June 26, Galaxy Digital cut its odds of CLARITY becoming law in 2026 to 50%, warning that the US Senate was running out of time to pass the market-structure bill before its August recess (as noted in Cointelegraph’s reporting: https://cointelegraph.com/news/galaxy-cuts-2026-clarity-act-odds-50).

Political and industry friction around the bill

Beyond Senate calendar risk, CLARITY is navigating political and institutional scrutiny. Cointelegraph reported that White House officials are reportedly weighing a bipartisan ethics counterproposal received on Thursday after weeks of negotiations between Republican Senator Thom Tillis and Arizona Democrat Ruben Gallego.

Per sources familiar with the matter who spoke to crypto journalist Eleanor Terrett, the proposal would allow state attorneys general to sue the Department of Justice if it fails to enforce ethics laws against federal officials. (As reported by: https://www.cryptoinamerica.com/p/president-trump-weighs-bipartisan.) The relevance for crypto stakeholders is indirect, but it underscores how broader political processes can consume attention and time that might otherwise be directed toward stalled legislation.

CLARITY’s substance has also faced resistance. The banking industry has pushed back, arguing that the draft could let crypto firms offer yields on stablecoins without meeting requirements they say apply to traditional financial institutions. Cointelegraph also flagged that the act’s stablecoin yield provisions have drawn concern from banking groups (related link referenced in the source material: https://cointelegraph.com/news/aba-banking-associations-clarity-act-yield).

As those tensions persist, the bill’s path becomes less predictable—one reason prediction market odds and institutional forecasts can move quickly as legislators approach procedural inflection points like recess.

With the Senate headed into recess, traders and long-term participants should watch two things in parallel: whether CLARITY gains any late-stage momentum before lawmakers leave, and whether the SEC and CFTC accelerate practical guidance under Project Crypto—especially around token classification and DeFi—if Congress fails to deliver the legislative clarity the market is pricing.