Key Highlights

• With more than $153 million invested, Goldman Sachs holds the top position among spot XRP ETF investors — controlling roughly 15% of total ETF assets.
• Ripple’s XRP currently hovers near $1.38, consolidating between a critical floor at $1.34 and ceiling at $1.44.
• The XRP Ledger is processing approximately 2.7 million daily transactions, while tokenized real-world assets on the platform total $461 million.
• Combined XRP ETF assets have reached nearly $971 million, distributed among 83 institutional investors.
• Bulls could target $1.50 if price clears $1.44 resistance, while bears may drive toward $1.30–$1.32 if support at $1.34 fails.

Ripple’s XRP remains in a tight consolidation pattern near $1.38 as traders anticipate the next directional move. For approximately 30 days, the digital asset has been locked within a range defined by $1.34 support and $1.44 resistance.

While price action has been relatively muted, this week brought two notable developments: increased blockchain activity and new disclosures revealing significant Wall Street exposure to spot XRP exchange-traded funds.

Data analyzed by Bloomberg’s James Seyffart reveals that Goldman Sachs commands the largest institutional stake in spot XRP ETFs. The investment banking powerhouse maintains exposure exceeding $153 million, accounting for approximately 15% of the combined $971 million held across all XRP ETF vehicles.

Numerous prominent financial institutions have joined Goldman in establishing XRP ETF positions. Millennium Management, the multi-strategy hedge fund managed by Izzy Englander, has committed $25 million to XRP ETF exposure. Ken Griffin’s Citadel maintains a position valued above $4.5 million. Additional holders include Jane Street Group, Jain Global, and Gallagher Capital Management. Collectively, 83 institutional entities now hold stakes in these investment products.

Wall Street Interest Builds Despite Recent Outflows

XRP ETF products have experienced net redemptions exceeding $22 million during the current month. This represents the first period of negative flows since these funds debuted. By contrast, February saw $58 million in net inflows.

According to previous disclosures, Goldman Sachs maintains a combined $2.3 billion position across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP investment vehicles.

Ripple’s CEO Brad Garlinghouse has outlined ambitious plans for the coming year, emphasizing initiatives in artificial intelligence and payment infrastructure.

Network Activity Shows Robust Growth

Blockchain metrics indicate that the XRP Ledger is currently processing roughly 2.7 million transactions per day. Real-world assets tokenized on the network have climbed to approximately $461 million in value.

Spot market trading volumes have declined from recent peaks. XRP made a brief attempt at $1.44 during one trading session before encountering selling pressure, confirming this price point as a meaningful near-term barrier.

The $1.34–$1.35 region continues to serve as the primary downside defense zone. Technical charts display a double-bottom formation on the daily timeframe around $1.3363, which market observers interpret as a potentially constructive signal.

Should price action sustain levels above $1.3363, the subsequent upside target sits at $1.6703, representing the neckline of the double-bottom structure. Conversely, a decisive breakdown below $1.34 could trigger a retracement toward $1.30–$1.32 or potentially the year-to-date bottom at $1.12.

As of March 11, XRP is changing hands at roughly $1.38 with 83 institutional participants maintaining positions in spot XRP ETF offerings.

Bitcoin fell over 2% on Wednesday as investors remained on the sidelines ahead of the release of U.S. CPI data later today.

According to data from crypto.news, Bitcoin (BTC) fell from an intraday high of $71,612 on Tuesday to $69,936 last check on Wednesday, March 11.

Bitcoin price movement has fallen as traders braced for the US Bureau of Labor Statistics to publish the February Consumer Price Index (CPI) data at 8:30 a.m. ET.

Economists expect the monthly CPI to rise by 0.3% in February, up from 0.2% increase seen in January, with the year-over-year reading holding steady at 2.4%. Meanwhile, Core CPI figures are estimated to come in at 0.2% on a monthly basis and 2.5% YoY. 

While inflation data has often been very pivotal for Federal Reserve officials on determining the next policy step, Bitcoin’s initial reaction following the announcement would most likely remain muted as the February CPI print would not factor in the impact of crude oil prices on inflation. 

In the wake of an aggressive attack by Iran on commercial vessels traversing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital strategic waterbody, global energy supplies were severely disrupted, causing crude oil prices to surge past the $100 mark for the first time in years as the market reacted to the sudden threat to one of the world’s most critical transit chokepoints.

Without the inclusion of the surging oil prices in inflation that can be expected following next month’s CPI, Bitcoin price could continue to trade relatively sideways with no clear direction following the data release today.

If the CPI print instead comes out hotter than expected, it could trigger hawkish sentiment, while a cooler reading could encourage bulls to take control.

At press time, markets virtually see zero chance of a rate cut in March and minimal 25 bps reduction expectations in April, per the CME FedWatch tool.

Cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, have typically rallied when the odds of Fed rate cuts are high and retreated when they diminish.

For now, $71,000-$72,000 appears to stand as the next major resistance area for Bitcoin, which bulls have struggled to penetrate. On the other hand, a drop below the $66,000-$67,000 support zone could open the door for a deeper correction.

Next week could prove pivotal for markets, including bitcoin, as seven major central banks, including the powerful Federal Reserve, announce rate decisions amid war-driven oil price gains that threaten to reignite inflation in the global economy.

The week’s packed economic calendar includes the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) rate decision on March 17, followed by the Bank of Canada (BOC) and the Fed on March 18, and wraps up with the Bank of Japan (BOJ), Swiss National Bank (SNB), and European Central Bank (ECB) on March 19.

Until recently, markets expected most major central banks, led by the Fed, to steadily cut interest rates (or avoid tightening) this year. The rapid emergence of artificial intelligence as a disinflationary force — with the potential to disrupt the labor market — had reinforced this bias for lower borrowing costs. That outlook supported risk assets, including Bitcoin.

However, the war that began on Feb. 28 with coordinated U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, which has since involved widespread retaliatory attacks and disrupted energy shipments through the Middle East, has thrown a wrench into that outlook.

Rising oil prices have reignited concerns over inflation, forcing traders to reassess interest rate expectations. Some fear that central banks would respond to the evolving inflationary macroeconomic situation with higher borrowing costs.

As such, hawkish hints next week could trigger downside volatility across risk assets, including Bitcoin. This scenario looks plausible, as policymakers — remembering their 2021–22 misstep when they called inflation transitory and were proven wrong — may be extra quick to curb rising price pressures this time.

If they remain neutral or data-dependent in a wait-and-watch mode or downplay inflation fears, then risk assets could surge. This possibility cannot be ruled out either.

“Like all supply shocks, the first Fed response to an oil price spike is to watch and assess the damage,” Economist and Fed Watcher Ethan Harris said in a LinkedIn post.

“There are two reasons for this hesitation. First, oil shocks simultaneously lower growth and raise inflation. Before moving, the Fed wants to figure out which is the bigger problem. Second, most such shocks are transitory. The Fed does not want change rates, only to reverse the move weeks later,” he explained.

Historically, only the Fed — and possibly the BOJ — have exerted meaningful influence over Bitcoin prices. With oil prices already straining all corners of the Japanese society, next Friday’s BOJ decision could prove particularly pivotal for both domestic markets and bitcoin.

TLDR

• BTC declined 0.5% to approximately $69,583 during Wednesday’s Asian session
• The cryptocurrency momentarily climbed past $70K on Tuesday following Trump’s Iran peace comments
• Wednesday’s US CPI release could influence Federal Reserve policy outlook and digital asset markets
• Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $251 million in net inflows on March 10
• Market sentiment indicator Crypto Fear & Greed Index holds at 15, maintaining “extreme fear” status

Bitcoin retreated beneath the $70,000 threshold during Wednesday’s Asian session, declining 0.5% to reach $69,583.5 as of 01:55 ET. This pullback followed Tuesday’s temporary bounce above $70,000.

Tuesday’s upward momentum received support from statements by US President Donald Trump, who indicated the Iranian conflict might be “pretty much” concluded. This commentary temporarily boosted market sentiment and lifted Bitcoin from the mid-$60,000 levels observed earlier in the week.

Subsequently, Trump issued a message on Truth Social warning that any Iranian interference with petroleum supplies would trigger heightened US military action. Meanwhile, military engagements involving US, Israeli, and Iranian forces in the Gulf region have persisted.

🚨 BREAKING — PRESIDENT TRUMP SENDS NATION-ENDING ULTIMATUM TO IRAN

“If Iran does anything that stops the flow of Oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America TWENTY TIMES HARDER than they have been hit thus far.

Additionally, we will take… pic.twitter.com/tl0DRl2nli

Advertisement

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 10, 2026

Crude oil valuations had surged near $120 per barrel following the practical closure of the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting critical maritime trade channels. While prices moderated following Trump’s preliminary statements, they continue trading at elevated levels.

Blockchain analytics provider Santiment documented a return to bullish sentiment on social platforms Tuesday. Favorable discussions increased across X, Reddit, and Telegram in response to Trump’s statements and the petroleum price decline.

🤑 Bitcoin sentiment has jumped back into FOMO territory after its market value exceeded $70K Tuesday. Across X, Reddit, Telegram, and other crypto-related discussions, the crowd is encouraged by Trump’s comments that the war may soon end, and oil prices reversing course. pic.twitter.com/S21cXOUM0F

— Santiment (@santimentfeed) March 10, 2026

Advertisement

Institutional Activity and Bitcoin ETF Momentum

US-listed Bitcoin spot exchange-traded funds registered combined net inflows totaling $251 million on March 10. Corporate Bitcoin accumulator Strategy acquired approximately 18,000 BTC last week and executed an additional purchase this week.

On March 10, Eastern Time, the total net inflow into Bitcoin spot ETFs was $251 million, with no ETF experiencing net outflows. The Bitcoin spot ETF with the highest net inflow in a single day was the BlackRock ETF IBIT, which saw a net inflow of $186 million. Ethereum spot ETFs… pic.twitter.com/wGLkZmUBJD

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) March 11, 2026

Merkle Tree Capital’s Chief Investment Officer Ryan McMillin observed that Bitcoin has maintained support above its February lows while demonstrating strength amid geopolitical turbulence. He suggested that bearish positions could experience pressure toward the $80,000 level.

Rachael Lucas, a cryptocurrency analyst with BTC Markets, indicated that recapturing the $70,000 level publicly triggers FOMO concerns, identifying it as a crucial resistance threshold.

Market Sentiment Remains Deeply Pessimistic

Notwithstanding enhanced social media optimism, Wednesday’s Crypto Fear & Greed Index registered 15, remaining firmly in “extreme fear” territory. Google Trends data for “Bitcoin” searches measured approximately 71, retreating from the March 5 peak of 100.

$BTC monthly RSI is indicating that a cycle bottom hasn’t happened.

IMO, when monthly RSI drops below 40, a cycle bottom will occur. pic.twitter.com/QiBeSaz6zn

— Ted (@TedPillows) March 10, 2026

The United States Consumer Price Index report arrives later Wednesday. These inflation metrics could reshape Federal Reserve monetary policy projections and impact risk sentiment across cryptocurrency markets.

Market participants are also monitoring developments around the stalled CLARITY Act. Reports indicate US lawmakers are pursuing a compromise regarding stablecoin yield regulations, which represents a contentious issue between traditional banking institutions and cryptocurrency companies.

A new U.S. Senate bill aims to prohibit betting markets tied to war, assassination, and an individual’s death, a move that could have implications for prediction-market platforms such as Polymarket.

The legislation, introduced by Adam Schiff, is titled the Discouraging Exploitative Assassination, Tragedy, and Harm Betting in Event Trading Systems Act, or the “DEATH BETS Act.”

The proposal would amend the Commodity Exchange Act to prohibit exchanges from listing or clearing event contracts that reference terrorism, assassination, war or similar violent activities.

Under the bill, trading venues registered with the U.S. CFTC would also be barred from offering contracts that relate to an individual’s death or events that could be closely correlated with a person’s death.

What the ‘DEATH BETS Act’ could mean for Polymarket

Prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi have gained traction in recent years, allowing users to speculate on the outcomes of elections, geopolitical events and other real-world developments.

The proposed legislation could tighten regulatory scrutiny around event-trading platforms that speculate on violent or tragic real-world outcomes. If passed, the DEATH BETS Act could also influence how prediction markets design future contracts.

The bill comes amid rising debate on how betting on tragedies or violent acts raises ethical concerns and could create incentives for harmful behavior.

Polymarket faced backlash recently over a controversial prediction market tied to the possibility of a nuclear strike. The platform later archived the market following criticism, highlighting the growing scrutiny surrounding event contracts linked to catastrophic or violent outcomes.

The legislation has been referred to a Senate committee for further consideration, and it remains unclear whether it will advance in Congress.

Stani Kulechov, the founder of decentralized lending platform Aave (CRYPTO: AAVE), argues that the very premise of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) needs rethinking. In the wake of ongoing governance disputes surrounding the future direction of the protocol, Kulechov contends that tokenholder voting should not be the sole mechanism for steering a project, especially when daily operations require decisive leadership. His reflections come as Aave and the broader DAO landscape grapple with how to balance on-chain transparency and accountable decision-making with the friction inherent in collective governance.

Key takeaways

• DAO participation typically runs in the 15%–25% range, raising concerns about power concentration and governance deadlock.
• Kulechov advocates preserving code-based rules and on-chain accountability while ensuring token holders retain influence on major strategic decisions.
• The Aave community has seen governance tensions, including the March 1 temperature check for the “Aave Will Win Framework” proposal and the Aave Chan Initiative’s exit from DAO governance oversight.
• Leaders and dedicated teams are necessary for day-to-day protocol management, with accountability tracked on-chain to avoid the pitfalls of traditional corporate bureaucracy.
• The ongoing debates reflect a broader push to refine DAO structures without sacrificing decentralization’s core benefits.

Tickers mentioned: $BTC, $ETH, $COIN, $AAVE

Sentiment: Neutral

Market context: The episode underscores a broader trend in crypto governance where communities seek to formalize decision-making processes without sidelining accountability. As DAOs experiment with different models, governance votes, temperature checks, and delegated authority remain central to evaluating how decentralized networks can scale while maintaining trust among participants.

Why it matters

The discussion around Aave’s governance highlights a tension at the heart of decentralized networks: how to reconcile broad participation with effective, timely decision-making. In a model where rules, treasury visibility, and major policy shifts are encoded on a blockchain, the risk of paralysis or capture by the most vocal factions looms large. Kulechov’s critique focuses on the symptoms—lengthy forum threads, multi-stage voting processes, and the politicization of proposals—and points toward a middle path where decentralization does not mean abdication of accountability.

What makes this debate consequential is its potential impact on how future DAOs design their voting systems and governance workflows. If token holders are empowered to influence only high-stakes, long-term decisions, while professional teams handle day-to-day operations, the governance model could become more sustainable and less susceptible to factional infighting. The emphasis on keeping core rules in code, preserving treasury openness, and maintaining on-chain accountability could set a template for other protocols wrestling with similar governance frictions.

Observers note that the most successful experiments may blend on-chain transparency with structured, accountable leadership. In Kulechov’s view, the ultimate objective is to keep what works—transparent decision logs, automatic enforcement of rules via smart contracts, and a mechanism to hold teams to account—while trimming the parts of DAOs that resemble obsolete corporate bureaucracy. The aim is not to abandon decentralization, but to refine it so that it remains responsive, verifiable, and resistant to capture by the loudest voices alone.

“DAOs also become politicized very quickly and it’s easy for voting to become about attention. Participants take sides, lean toward the loudest voices, and form political alliances to get their own proposals passed later,”

The quote captures a core concern: without a balanced governance design, DAOs can devolve into popularity contests rather than strategic, outcomes-focused organizations. Yet the same on-chain transparency that enables coordination also provides a tool for real accountability. “The difference is that their decisions and performance are all on-chain and transparent, and token holders can fire the team when objectives are not met. Accountability is verifiable, and that is what separates this from a traditional company. There is no vendor lock-in,”

Aave governance in the spotlight

Kulechov’s remarks come amid active governance experiments within Aave. The protocol recently tested a framework called the “Aave Will Win Framework,” which passed a temperature check on March 1, signaling continued experimentation with how votes should be structured and how much weight should be given to different stakeholders. The move followed a chain of governance events, including the departure of a prominent governance delegate, the Aave Chan Initiative (ACI), which announced it would wind down its involvement with the Aave DAO over concerns with governance standards and voting dynamics during the proposal process.

Earlier in the year, another notable governance episode involved a proposal intended to transfer control of Aave’s brand assets and intellectual property to the DAO, a move that ultimately failed. Those debates have rekindled discussions about the protocol’s long-term direction and the governance architecture needed to sustain a large, active ecosystem. The tension reflects a broader pattern across the space: communities seek to preserve decentralization’s core advantages while layering on governance mechanisms that can enforce accountability and clarity around decision-making.

For context, the conversation is not happening in a vacuum. It aligns with a growing set of discussions around AI-assisted governance, executive oversight in decentralized structures, and how best to translate the benefits of on-chain governance into practical outcomes. In related discourse, Vitalik Buterin has explored potential AI-assisted governance approaches, underscoring that the field is actively seeking tools to augment human decision-making in DAOs. The debate has extended to how, if at all, AI could help moderate proposals, synthesize inputs, and highlight trade-offs in complex governance processes.

In parallel, this ongoing discourse continues to influence how creators, developers, and investors view DAO-based ecosystems. While critics worry about dilution of accountability when projects become too automated or too diffuse, proponents argue that the on-chain record and the ability to replace or rematch participants creates a form of governance that is fundamentally different from traditional centralized leadership—and potentially more resilient in the long term.

What to watch next

• March–April: Follow the outcome of subsequent votes and any formal revisions to the Aave governance framework, including how proposals are scoped and how powers are delegated.
• Regulatory and legal developments that may influence DAO structures and on-chain governance transparency.
• New proposals addressing treasury management, asset diversification, and branding/IP control within Aave’s ecosystem.
• Updates to AI-assisted governance experiments and any public pilots or white papers from related projects.

Sources & verification

• Aave Will Win Framework temperature check and governance votes: https://cointelegraph.com/news/aave-temp-check-split-vote-arfc-governance
• Aave Chan Initiative exit from DAO governance: https://cointelegraph.com/news/aave-aci-exit-dao-governance-vote
• Aave governance and branding/IP transfer discussions: https://cointelegraph.com/news/aave-founder-strategy-after-governance-vote
• AI-assisted DAO governance discussions with Vitalik Buterin: https://cointelegraph.com/news/ai-assisted-dao-governance-vitalik-buterin

DAO governance in focus: Aave’s push for accountable decentralization

Stani Kulechov, the founder of decentralized lending platform Aave (CRYPTO: AAVE), has emerged as a prominent voice in the evolving debate over how DAOs should function. In remarks and on-chain discourse, he emphasizes that the current model—where tokenholders vote on a labyrinth of issues—often yields suboptimal outcomes due to slow processes, internal schisms, and the tendency for controversy to eclipse substance. He notes that DAOs, by design, eschew traditional corporate leadership, but the practical reality increasingly mirrors bureaucratic challenges when proposals require extended discussion, a cascade of polls, and multiple rounds of voting. The central question is whether tokenholder input should be scaled down for day-to-day operations while preserving it for high-impact decisions.

In his view, the solution lies in a hybrid approach that preserves what DAOs do well—on-chain rules, transparent treasury management, and public accountability—while ensuring that the leadership layer has the capacity to act swiftly when necessary. “Rules should stay in the code, DAOs typically resolve decisions through smart contracts on a blockchain, the treasury should stay visible to everyone, and token holders should still have input on major decisions,” he argues. Acknowledging that governance will never be perfect, he suggests designing mechanisms to reduce the risk of capture by the most vocal participants while maintaining a high degree of transparency that distinguishes crypto governance from conventional corporate governance.

Proponents of the status quo point to the counter-argument: a fully centralized team could undermine decentralization. The challenge is to strike a balance that preserves broad participation without allowing endless politicking to derail execution. A pivotal part of the conversation is about accountability. If the decisions, performance, and outcomes are recorded on-chain, token holders can evaluate results and potentially replace leadership that underdelivers. The on-chain trail offers a form of verifiability that is not easily replicable in traditional company structures, even as it requires careful governance engineering to prevent fragmentation.

As this debate unfolds, the Aave governance experiments, including the temperature checks and the strategic assessments around IP and branding, will likely influence other DAOs exploring efficient governance models. The dialogue underscores a broader industry trend: builders and communities are actively seeking to reshape governance to be both more accountable and more scalable, without sacrificing the decentralized ethos that attracted many participants to Web3 in the first place. The path forward, as Kulechov and others suggest, may lie in blending codified rules with pragmatic leadership, all while maintaining the transparency that crypto enthusiasts regard as its defining strength.

Ripple is on its way to obtain an Australian financial license, further expanding its international presence.

Ripple – the firm behind one of the world’s leading cryptocurrencies, XRP, announced plans to secure an Australian Financial Services License.

The move aims to further enable the company to expand its payments offering in the country, allowing financial institutions, fintech businesses, and enterprises to move value more efficiently and quickly across borders while working within established regulatory frameworks.

Speaking on the matter was Fiona Murray, Managing Director at Ripple for the Asia Pacific region, who said:

“Licensing is fundamental to Ripple’s strategy, ensuring we can deliver secure, compliant solutions to customers worldwide. […] Australia is a key market for Ripple, and an AFSL strengthens our ability to scale Ripple Payments across the region. By leveraging blockchain technology and digital assets, we enable customers to move value globally with greater speed, transparency, and reliability. We remain focused on working closely with regulators to support the next phase of growth for digital asset infrastructure.”

Ripple’s Plan Regarding the AFSL

The goal is to obtain the license by acquiring BC Payments Australia Pty Ltd., subject to finalizing the standard completion process. The move will supposedly strengthen Ripple’s capabilities to offer a licensed platform for moving funds across the globe.

Once obtained, the license will allow the company to manage the full lifecycle of a transaction – from onboarding and compliance through funding, forex, liquidity management, as well as the final payout.

Additionally, Ripple will be able to directly oversee settlement, connect customers to local payout partners, and optimize transaction routing, resulting in quicker settlement, more transparency, and reduced counterparty risk, according to the official blog post.

International Licensing Underway

Obtaining the Australian Financial Services License will be just the last in a series of similar moves for Ripple, which is evidently seeking international licensing. As CryptoPotato reported earlier this year, the firm secured a preliminary electronic money institution license in Luxembourg, which allows it to issue digital cash and provide digital payment services within jurisdictions regulated by the CSSF (Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier in Luxembourg).

You may also like:

With that, the US-based firm now holds licenses in several jurisdictions, including but not limited to the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, Ireland, New York, Japan, and more.

Bitcoin needs to make up just one-sixth of the global “store of value” market, currently dominated by gold, to reach $1 million per coin, argues Bitwise chief investment officer Matt Hougan.

In a blog post on Tuesday, Hougan said that most dismiss the lofty forecast for Bitcoin, as it would require Bitcoin to muscle into 50% of gold’s current market value.

However, Hougan said the “mistake” most people are making is ignoring the growth of gold and the broader “store of value” market.

Gold’s market cap has grown at around 13% annually since 2004, from $2.5 trillion to around $38 trillion, driven by “rising concerns about government debt, geopolitical uncertainty, easy monetary policy, and other factors.”

“If this growth rate continues, the global ‘store of value’ market will be [around] $121 trillion in 10 years. At that level, Bitcoin only needs to take 17% of the market to be worth $1 million a coin.”

Related: Bitcoin undervalued relative to gold signals potential rally: Analyst

Hougan cited the growth of institutional investment, such as exchange-traded funds, sovereign wealth funds, and increasing portfolio allocations as potential catalysts.

“There are still miles to go, but with these undercurrents, capturing one-sixth of the store-of-value market in 10 years doesn’t seem extreme,” he said, adding:

“As I see it, the base case — that the store-of-value market will continue to grow as it has, and Bitcoin will continue to gain market share as it has — leads you to much, much higher prices than we have today.”

Bitcoin and gold divergence deepens

Hougan’s million-dollar Bitcoin (BTC) thesis depends on the asset continuing to converge with gold; however, the last several months have shown that Bitcoin hasn’t been moving in lockstep with gold.

The price of gold hit an all-time high of $5,327 per ounce in late January, and it is just 2.2% away from that today, whereas Bitcoin is currently trading down 44% from its October peak.

Billionaire investor Ray Dalio cautioned against Bitcoin as a long-term store-of-value and safe-haven asset in early March, stating that gold was much better.

He argued that central banks are not buying BTC, which he said behaves more like a tech stock.

Greg Cipolaro, global head of research at NYDIG, said on March 6 that it appears Bitcoin is “not currently being priced as a macro hedge, a sovereign risk hedge, or a real-rate or inflation trade.”

“That dynamic helps explain the ongoing frustration around Bitcoin’s failure to ‘act like gold’ despite the digital gold label.”

Magazine: China’s ‘50x’ blockchain boost, Alibaba-linked AI mines Bitcoin: Asia Express