Crypto World

Strategy stopped buying Bitcoin. The flywheel runs backward

Published

1 hour ago

22 July 2026

Four weeks without adding a coin, two of them spent selling, a $1.25 billion sale authorization on file, and stock sales now funding a cash pile instead of Bitcoin. The most influential machine in crypto has shifted into reverse, and the entire treasury sector is watching its own future run at MicroStrategy speed.

Summary

Strategy has gone four consecutive weeks without increasing its Bitcoin position, its longest such stretch in two years: two weeks of selling followed by two weeks of no purchases, with holdings parked at 843,775 BTC since selling 3,588 coins for roughly $216 million to fund dividends.
The famous flywheel has inverted. The company is still raising money, $466.7 million one week, $263.5 million the next, but proceeds now build a US dollar reserve of $3.2 billion instead of buying coins.
The trigger is arithmetic: MSTR trades below the value of its own Bitcoin, with enterprise mNAV under 1, making share issuance to buy coins dilutive, while preferred dividends, with STRC raised to 12%, must be paid in cash the model never budgeted for.
The reversal is systemic, not just corporate: Strategy invented the treasury-company playbook that dozens of imitators copied, and its shift to selling coins and hoarding cash rewrites the template while Capital B reverse-splits and MARA liquidates.
The question the market is actually pricing: whether this is a disciplined pause by a company managing through a 50% Bitcoin drawdown, or the beginning of the sequence skeptics always predicted, where the largest corporate holder becomes the seller of last resort.

For five years, the most reliable event in crypto was not the halving or the Fed meeting. It was Michael Saylor’s Sunday night chart. The orange dots, the coy caption, the Monday 8-K, another tranche of Bitcoin added to the largest corporate stack on earth: 108 purchases, 843,775 coins, a ritual so dependable that traders built indicators around it and dozens of companies built entire business models by imitation.

The ritual has stopped. Strategy has now gone four consecutive weeks without adding a single Bitcoin, its longest fallow stretch in two years, and the composition of those weeks is the story: two of them were spent selling, 3,588 BTC liquidated for roughly $216 million to pay preferred dividends, under a standing authorization to sell up to $1.25 billion more. The company is still raising hundreds of millions weekly through stock sales, and the money now flows to a $3.2 billion cash reserve instead of coins.

NEW: Strategy’s Chaitanya Jain says Bitcoin holdings cover 31 years of dividends
The firm’s treasury includes 843,775 $BTC alongside 3.2 billion dollars in cash pic.twitter.com/Tj7mBfbdG4
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) July 21, 2026

Every component of the famous flywheel, issue stock, buy Bitcoin, watch the premium expand, issue more, is still moving. It is simply moving in the other direction, and because Strategy wrote the playbook that a whole sector runs on, the reversal is not one company’s capital management. It is the treasury era’s first controlled test of its own exit ramp.

The machine, and what seized it

To understand the reversal, state the original machine precisely, because its elegance was always its fragility.

Strategy’s model was a premium harvester. The company sold MSTR shares through at-the-market programs at a market capitalization above the value of its Bitcoin, the mNAV premium, and converted the proceeds into coins. Each purchase grew Bitcoin per share, the premium justified itself as amplified BTC exposure with index membership and options liquidity attached, and the loop compounded: at the peak, the market paid well over two dollars for a dollar of Strategy’s Bitcoin, and the machine converted that enthusiasm into 45,000 coins in a single month as late as the spring, the fastest accumulation pace in a year. Layered on top came the preferred stock complex, STRK, STRF, STRC, perpetual instruments sold to yield-hungry buyers, whose dividends were comfortably serviceable as long as the common-stock machine ran.

Then the input variable moved. Bitcoin’s slide from its October peak near $126,000 to below $60,000 dragged MSTR down 82% from its high, and on June 27 the number that governs everything crossed its threshold: enterprise mNAV, the company’s market value including debt and preferreds measured against its Bitcoin, fell below 1. The market now values Strategy at less than its own coins. At that level the flywheel’s core transaction inverts: issuing stock to buy Bitcoin destroys Bitcoin-per-share instead of growing it, every ATM dollar is dilutive by construction, and the premium harvester has no premium to harvest. Simultaneously the preferred complex’s dividends, obligations in cash, kept compounding against a falling asset, with STRC’s rate raised to 12% in an effort to defend a price that had collapsed into the seventies. The machine’s two assumptions, a durable premium and trivially fundable dividends, failed in the same quarter.

What the company actually did

Strategy’s response, reconstructed from a month of filings, is more coherent than the headlines suggest, and the coherence is what makes it consequential.

In late June, the company paused purchases and announced a Digital Credit Capital Framework: a board-level policy requiring a defended US dollar reserve, a $1 billion repurchase program for its own preferred instruments, and, in the filing that broke a five-year taboo, authorization to sell up to $1.25 billion of Bitcoin to fund dividends and interest. The first week of July it used the authorization, selling 3,588 BTC for about $216 million, the sales that reduced holdings to 843,775. The following weeks it sold no coins and bought none, while the ATM kept running, $466.7 million raised one week, $263.5 million the next, with proceeds routed to the reserve, which reached $3.225 billion, roughly 20 months of dividend coverage. On-chain and market observers who had spent June recommending exactly this sequence, CryptoQuant’s analysts prominent among them, graded the company as having substantially adopted the advice: stop buying, rebuild cash, cover the dividends, survive the drawdown.

Read as treasury management, it is defensible, arguably overdue. Read as signal, it is seismic, and markets trade signal. The company that defined itself by never selling has sold; the founder who answered every drawdown with a purchase now posts teaser charts, “What’s next?”, over an unchanged holdings number; and the equity sales that once meant more Bitcoin per share now mean more cash per share, a phrase no one bought MSTR to hear. The stock’s behavior confirms the regime change: shares rose on the news of the extended pause, investors relieved by liquidity rather than excited by accumulation, which is how the market tells a growth story it has been reclassified as a survival story.

The sector downstream

Strategy’s reversal would matter less if Strategy were merely large. It matters because it is upstream of an entire corporate category’s logic, and the category is visibly straining.

The treasury-company playbook, raise capital at a premium to NAV, convert to crypto, let the premium compound, was licensed from Saylor by dozens of imitators across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP, and the license’s fine print always contained the same clause: the model works while the premium exists. The premiums are gone sector-wide. Strategy’s own compression below 1 put it, in The Block’s phrasing, into a cohort of treasury companies whose premiums have sharply collapsed, and the cohort’s weaker members are already running the exit sequence. Capital B, the European Bitcoin treasury pioneer, executed a 10-for-1 reverse split to keep its collapsed shares presentable. MARA, the miner whose treasury ambitions once rivaled Strategy’s accumulation, sold 15,133 BTC in March, over a billion dollars of coins, to deleverage. For context, crypto.news has also covered what miners did with the same drawdown. The marginal DAT is no longer a bid under the market; arithmetic says the marginal DAT is a seller, and the sector’s aggregate holdings, accumulated as a one-way flow through 2024 and 2025, now sit as overhang whose release schedule depends on dividend calendars and covenant math rather than conviction.

This is the channel through which one company’s capital framework becomes everyone’s market structure. Strategy alone holds roughly 4% of Bitcoin’s supply; the treasury sector collectively holds multiples of every month’s miner issuance; and the sector’s transition from programmatic buyer to conditional seller changes the demand curve Bitcoin’s price discovery runs on, at exactly the moment ETF flows have their own four-week negative streak. That is the other institutional bid and its own streak. The bull era’s reflexive loop, treasury buying lifts price, lifting premiums, funding more buying, ran in reverse for the first time this month, and the reverse loop has its own reflexivity: falling prices compress premiums, forcing sales, pressing prices. Strategy’s $3.2 billion reserve is, among other things, a firewall against its own participation in that cascade. The imitators without firewalls are the ones to watch.

The preferred stack, unpacked

The instrument class actually driving the reversal deserves its own examination, because the preferred complex is where Strategy’s engineering was boldest and where the constraint now binds.

Across 2025 the company built a capital stack unlike anything else in public markets: perpetual preferred securities, STRK, STRF, STRC among them, sold in the billions to buyers who wanted contractual yield adjacent to a Bitcoin balance sheet. The design logic was elegant. Preferreds raised money without diluting common shareholders’ Bitcoin per share, their dividends were modest against the scale of the coin position, and in the model’s happy path the common-stock premium machine would always fund them incidentally. The instruments effectively sold volatility insurance to income investors with the Bitcoin stack as collateral, and demand was strong enough that the company kept issuing.

The drawdown converted that elegance into the binding constraint, through three compounding mechanics. First, the obligations are cash and perpetual: unlike the coin position, which can wait out any winter, the dividends arrive monthly and quarterly regardless of price, which is how a company with $50 billion in Bitcoin found itself selling coins to make payments measured in hundreds of millions. Second, the instruments themselves broke: STRC, designed to trade near $100, collapsed into the seventies as Bitcoin fell, and the company’s response, raising the dividend rate 50 basis points to 12% and declaring a $99-100 price objective, defends the instrument’s credibility at the direct cost of enlarging the very obligations straining the model. A 12% perpetual coupon is distressed-issuer pricing, and the market can read it. Third, the stack inverted the shareholder hierarchy the flywheel depended on: with mNAV below 1, ATM sales dilute common holders to fund preferred payments, transferring value up the capital structure, the precise opposite of the accretion story that justified every prior raise.

The $1 billion repurchase program is the sophisticated response, and it is worth understanding why. With the preferreds trading far below par, buying them back retires a dollar of perpetual obligation for seventy-odd cents, mathematically the best Bitcoin-per-share trade available to the company, better than buying Bitcoin, at current prices. That the board authorized it is the clearest internal signal in any filing this month: management’s own arithmetic now ranks extinguishing its yield promises above accumulating its founding asset. For the treasury sector downstream, the lesson is sharper still, because the imitators copied the preferred playbook late, at smaller scale, with thinner reserves, and their versions of STRC are breaking without a $3 billion firewall behind them. The era’s defining trade was long Bitcoin, funded by promises. The promises are now the position, and Strategy, first into the trade, is first to show what managing out of it looks like.

The two readings, and the test between them

The bull and bear readings of the reversal are both fully available in the same filings, which is what makes the next quarter informative.

The disciplined-pause reading: this is what maturity looks like. The company saw the mNAV constraint, stopped dilutive purchases exactly as its own math demanded, funded twenty months of obligations, and built optionality, a $3.2 billion war chest that can resume buying at will, repurchase discounted preferreds at will, or simply wait. Nothing was liquidated beyond dividend needs; 843,775 BTC remains the largest corporate position on earth, untouched through a 50% drawdown that has bankrupted lesser structures. On this reading, Saylor’s teaser posts are honest: the machine is idling, not broken, and the resumption of purchases into a recovering market, funded by a reserve rather than dilution, would be the strongest possible refutation of the death narrative. The stock rising on pause news supports it; the market prefers a solvent accumulator to a compulsive one.

The flywheel-reversal reading: the model’s critics spent five years describing exactly this sequence, and it is now running on schedule. The premium was the product; it is gone. The dividends were the leverage; they now consume coin sales. The ATM was the engine; it now funds the dividend firewall, meaning new shareholders are diluted to pay old preferred holders, a structure with an uncomfortable genealogy. And the $1.25 billion sale authorization, only $216 million used, is the tell: the company has priced the scenario where it sells nine figures more, and a renewed leg down in Bitcoin, pressing the reserve’s 20-month runway against a 12% dividend rate, converts authorization into obligation. On this reading, the largest holder has quietly become the market’s most predictable future seller, and every treasury company below it in the capital structure follows the same gradient with less cushion.

NEW: Bitcoin long term holder supply reaches record levels
The onchain data shows growing accumulation by long term investors pic.twitter.com/vNNAvMURwN
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) July 20, 2026
Advertisement

The test between the readings is legible in advance. Watch whether purchases resume, and how they are funded: reserve-funded buying validates the pause; continued cash hoarding through any recovery says the premium era is understood internally to be over. Watch the mNAV line against 1, the boundary that decides whether the ATM builds or destroys value. Watch the preferred complex, STRC’s price against its defended $99-100 objective and any further rate increases, the dividend machinery is now the model’s binding constraint, and its cost curve is public. And watch the sale authorization’s utilization in each Monday filing, because the difference between a treasury program and a distribution program is, from here, a single 8-K. For five years the Sunday chart meant the same thing every week. The discipline now is reading what its absence means, and the honest answer is: the largest experiment in corporate Bitcoin ownership has entered the phase its design never specified, the one where the flywheel must prove it can stop without rolling downhill.

The historical rhyme worth logging before the FAQ: this is not the first time a dominant, levered accumulator defined an asset’s market structure, and the precedents are not comforting or damning so much as instructive about what to watch. The gold market of the late 1990s was shaped for years by central banks that had accumulated for decades becoming coordinated sellers, and the eventual solution was not abstinence but the Washington Agreement, a disclosed schedule that let the market price the supply instead of fearing it. Grayscale’s GBTC played the Strategy role of the prior crypto cycle, the one-way accumulation vehicle whose premium was the trade, and its premium’s collapse into a discount produced two years of overhang, arbitrage blowups, and, ultimately, conversion into an ETF that let the trapped supply exit in an orderly line. The pattern across both: concentrated positions built on premium mechanics do not unwind quietly by choice, they unwind on a schedule the market forces, and the difference between a crisis and a transition is disclosure. By that standard, Strategy’s current posture, weekly 8-Ks, a published sale authorization with a hard ceiling, a framework document stating the priority order of reserve, repurchases, and coins, is the Washington Agreement version of the problem and not the GBTC version: the supply risk is real, sized, and on a calendar anyone can read. Whether that discipline survives another 30% drawdown is the open question, but the market’s relatively calm digestion of the first corporate Bitcoin sales in the company’s history suggests the disclosure is doing its work. Panic needs surprise, and the filings have removed most of it. For market readers, crypto.news has explained reading positioning around MSTR and BTC and the macro regime pressing on the model.

Frequently asked questions

How long has Strategy gone without buying Bitcoin?

Four consecutive weeks without increasing its position as of the July 20 filing, the longest stretch in two years: two weeks that included selling 3,588 BTC for roughly $216 million to fund dividends, followed by two weeks of neither buying nor selling. Holdings have been unchanged at 843,775 BTC since the sales, with the last purchase disclosed in the week ending June 22.

Why did the company stop buying?

Arithmetic. MSTR’s enterprise value fell below the value of its Bitcoin in late June, with mNAV under 1, which makes issuing shares to buy coins dilutive to Bitcoin per share, the metric the entire model maximizes. Simultaneously, cash dividend obligations on its preferred stock complex grew while reserves had thinned, prompting a board framework requiring a defended dollar reserve before further accumulation.

Is Strategy actually selling Bitcoin now?

It has, in a limited and disclosed way. A June 29 filing authorized selling up to $1.25 billion of Bitcoin to fund preferred dividends and interest, and the company sold 3,588 BTC for about $216 million in early July under that authorization. No further sales have been disclosed since, and the remaining authorization functions as a standing liquidity mechanism the market now monitors weekly.

Where is the money from stock sales going?

Into cash. Strategy raised $466.7 million and $263.5 million in consecutive weeks through its at-the-market program, directing proceeds to a US dollar reserve that reached about $3.2 billion, roughly 20 months of dividend coverage. Under the new Digital Credit Capital Framework, the reserve and a $1 billion preferred-repurchase program take priority over Bitcoin accumulation while the mNAV discount persists.

What is mNAV and why does it matter so much?

Multiple to net asset value: the company’s market value, in enterprise form including debt and preferred stock minus cash, divided by the value of its Bitcoin. Above 1, issuing stock to buy coins adds Bitcoin per share and the flywheel compounds; below 1, the same transaction dilutes. Strategy’s enterprise mNAV crossed below 1 on June 27 for the first time, which is the single number behind the strategy shift.

How does this affect the broader treasury-company sector?

Structurally. Strategy invented the template dozens of companies copied, and its shift coincides with sector-wide premium compression: Capital B executed a 10-for-1 reverse split, MARA sold 15,133 BTC to deleverage, and the marginal treasury company has moved from programmatic buyer to conditional seller. A sector that was a reliable bid under Bitcoin now represents supply whose release depends on dividend calendars and covenants.

Is Strategy at risk of forced large-scale selling?

Not imminently, on disclosed numbers. The $3.2 billion reserve covers roughly 20 months of dividends, sales to date total $216 million against the largest corporate Bitcoin position in existence, and the company retains repurchase and financing options. The risk scenario is a prolonged further drawdown that erodes the reserve while the 12% STRC rate and other obligations persist, converting the standing sale authorization into a recurring funding tool.

What signals should investors watch next?

Four, all public. Whether and how purchases resume, with reserve-funded buying signaling a validated pause. The mNAV line against 1, which governs whether share issuance creates or destroys value. The preferred complex’s health, particularly STRC’s price against the company’s stated $99-100 objective and any dividend-rate changes. And each Monday 8-K’s disclosure of Bitcoin sales under the $1.25 billion authorization. This is not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. It describes corporate actions and market conditions that change quickly, and holdings, prices, and policies cited reflect disclosures available at the time of writing. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security or asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 21, 2026.

Source link

Crypto World

Trump Says Yes to Crypto Ethics Rule, Puts DOJ as Enforcer

Published

3 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Bitcoin is trading around $66,000 with muted directional conviction, while Washington has added another variable to the equation. President Trump agreed to ethics language that would bar senior federal officials from issuing crypto or any digital assets. He also backed giving enforcement authority to the Justice Department instead of state attorneys general. That decision is already drawing pushback, and its impact could extend beyond Bitcoin.

The ethics provision, confirmed during a White House industry call with crypto adviser Patrick Witt, would prohibit members of Congress, Donald Trump, and the vice president from issuing cryptocurrencies while in office. However, the DOJ enforcement structure has become the main sticking point. That disagreement could shape the next phase of crypto legislation.

Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, a key Clarity Act negotiator, dismissed the proposal as “unserious.” She pointed to Trump’s memecoin holdings and reported World Liberty Financial income as reasons why federal self policing would not be enough. As a result, the Clarity Act’s ethics provision has become a central issue that could decide whether the Senate advances the bill.

Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has repeated that Congress must establish clear federal rules for digital assets. He argued that regulatory certainty is necessary to keep capital and innovation in the United States. Until lawmakers reach an agreement, institutional investors may remain cautious despite Bitcoin holding near the $66,000 level.

Discover: The Best Token Presales

Can BTC Break Its Range While DOJ Enforcement Clouds Altcoin Flows? Is It a Bullish Trump Crypto Decision?

Bitcoin’s technical setup remains straightforward. Support sits around the low $64,000s, while resistance stands near the upper $66,000s. Price is still trapped inside that range, with no convincing volume surge confirming a breakout. Meanwhile, derivatives paint the same picture. Funding rates remain neutral, and open interest has yet to expand aggressively.

Institutional desks also continue watching Washington. Many still see clearer regulatory language as the catalyst for Bitcoin’s next sustained move. Until then, large players appear comfortable waiting instead of chasing price.

With a clearer US policy or even a partial ethics agreement, sentiment could be lifted. That could send Bitcoin above the upper $66,000s, while Ethereum climbs from around $1,930 toward recent swing highs. Or Bitcoin stays range-bound, with Ethereum holding support until a stronger catalyst appears.

It could also become bearish if the ethics dispute drags on while DOJ enforcement is viewed as excessive. That combination could weaken risk appetite across crypto. Speculative altcoins and presale tokens would likely suffer larger losses than Bitcoin or Ethereum, as institutions often rotate into the largest assets during uncertain periods.

That downside scenario deserves the closest attention from presale investors. Tougher DOJ scrutiny of digital asset issuance by public officials could temporarily cool speculative narratives. For now, watching the Senate vote count before adding exposure to higher beta tokens remains the more cautious approach.

Trade Bitcoin and Altcoins on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop

Bitcoin Hyper Eyes Early Infrastructure Positioning as BTC Consolidates

Range-bound BTC at current levels offers limited near-term upside at large-cap market caps. Early-stage infrastructure plays are where asymmetric exposure still exists.

Bitcoin Hyper ($HYPER) is positioning in that gap. It’s a Bitcoin Layer 2 integrating the Solana Virtual Machine. It’s the first project to do so, targeting the core limitations that have historically kept Bitcoin sidelined from DeFi: slow throughput, high fees, and absent programmability.

The pitch is execution-layer speed on Bitcoin’s security base, with a decentralized canonical bridge for BTC transfers and sub-Solana-latency smart contract processing built into the stack.

Presale figures: $0.0136835 per $HYPER, with $32.9 million raised to date. Staking is live with a high APY. That raise figure at this price implies a meaningful early-mover discount relative to any post-launch liquidity event.

Research Bitcoin Hyper before the next stage opens.

Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio

The post Trump Says Yes to Crypto Ethics Rule, Puts DOJ as Enforcer appeared first on Cryptonews.

Source link

Crypto World

BIS Study Suggests Stablecoins Could Circumvent Capital Controls

Published

11 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Dollar-backed stablecoins are beginning to behave like a fast-growing channel for “digital dollarization,” according to new research from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). In a study spanning more than 130 economies, BIS researchers argue that stablecoin inflows react differently than traditional foreign-currency deposits—especially when governments impose capital controls or tighten foreign-exchange (FX) restrictions.

The implication for policymakers is straightforward but uncomfortable: rules built for banking systems may be less effective in a tokenized world, where part of stablecoin activity appears to move “outside the regulatory perimeter.” While BIS does not conclude that monetary policy transmission is broadly impaired, it warns that stablecoins could still weaken monetary sovereignty by encouraging households and businesses to hold and transact value in dollars outside conventional banking.

Key takeaways

BIS finds dollar-pegged stablecoin inflows rise during macroeconomic stress, similar to foreign-currency deposits.
Unlike bank deposits, stablecoin flows show little sensitivity to capital controls and FX restrictions, suggesting activity can sit beyond regulatory reach.
The study sees limited evidence that deposit dollarization disrupts monetary policy transmission, though higher foreign-currency deposits correlate with somewhat greater inflation risk.
BIS argues regulators may need new financial-stability tools tailored to tokenized systems rather than relying on frameworks designed for banks and deposits.

“Digital dollarization” that resists capital controls

The BIS paper examines how dollar-denominated value enters and circulates in economies facing pressure—tracking both foreign-currency bank deposits and inflows into dollar-pegged stablecoins across more than 130 countries. The researchers report that both categories tend to increase when macroeconomic conditions worsen.

That overlap matters because it suggests stablecoins are not merely a speculative phenomenon; they can reflect real-world incentives that emerge during periods of uncertainty, such as depreciation expectations, inflation concerns, and restricted access to reliable FX channels.

However, the key difference is in how the two behave under policy barriers. The BIS authors found stablecoin inflows were “largely unaffected by capital controls” and other FX restrictions. In their explanation, they argue this may be because stablecoins “are partly circulating outside the regulatory perimeter”—meaning restrictions designed to shape bank-based capital flows may not fully apply to token-based systems.

Monetary sovereignty concerns remain

BIS stops short of saying stablecoins automatically destabilize monetary systems everywhere, but it highlights a plausible pathway for damage: households and businesses could increasingly shift into dollars without relying on the banking infrastructure that typically channels and constrains foreign-currency holdings.

The risk is especially pronounced in emerging markets, where currency weakness and limited financial service depth can make dollar assets more attractive. In such settings, stablecoins can lower practical friction for users who want dollar-denominated value for saving, payments, or cross-border activity—potentially reducing demand for local-currency balances and moving more financial activity outside standard intermediation.

The BIS study also notes that even if monetary policy transmission is not obviously weakened in aggregate, the broader environment could still become more fragile. The researchers point out that countries with higher foreign-currency deposits face greater inflation risk, suggesting that dollarization—whether through banks or tokens—may still have macroeconomic consequences worth monitoring.

Why investors and builders should care

For market participants, the findings go beyond a theoretical policy debate. If stablecoin adoption is indeed less constrained by capital controls, then stablecoin liquidity may become a more persistent feature of macro stress—potentially affecting funding conditions, FX dynamics, and how quickly cross-border value can move when local conditions deteriorate.

For developers and payment operators, the study reinforces that compliance and risk management cannot be limited to traditional banking assumptions. When stablecoins circulate through rails that fall outside existing supervisory boundaries, regulatory effectiveness depends not only on formal licensing, but also on where tokens are held, transferred, and used in practice.

BIS’s message to policymakers—“regulations designed for traditional banking and foreign-currency deposits may be less effective in a tokenized financial system”—is a signal that future oversight may evolve toward activity-based frameworks or tools targeted at token ecosystems rather than account-based rules alone.

Stablecoin usage keeps expanding in key regions

The BIS research lands at a time when stablecoin usage is rising in multiple emerging markets, supported by both payments utility and the appeal of dollar-denominated value during periods of instability.

In a separate analysis of Nigeria, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) reported that households and small businesses have been using US dollar-pegged stablecoins for cross-border payments, remittances, and access to dollar-denominated assets as inflation, currency depreciation, and FX access constraints drive demand. The IMF also noted that stablecoins can reduce the cost and time of moving money across borders while expanding access to financial services for users outside the traditional banking system. At the same time, it warned that broader adoption could weaken monetary sovereignty by shifting demand away from local currencies and moving more activity outside conventional banking channels.

Stablecoin activity is also accelerating in parts of Latin America. Bitso Business, described as the enterprise payments arm of exchange Bitso, reported an 81% year-on-year increase in stablecoin payment volume during the first half of 2026. The company also said Circle’s USDC and Tether’s USDt accounted for 40% of all crypto purchases in the region in 2025, surpassing Bitcoin for the first time.

Meanwhile, broader market data points to continued growth in overall stablecoin supply. Stablecoin market capitalization has risen to about $309.7 billion, up from roughly $260 billion a year earlier, according to the figures referenced alongside the report. For tracking supply and distribution, the article cites DefiLlama’s stablecoin dashboard: DefiLlama.

What to watch next

The BIS study suggests that capital controls may not fully blunt dollar-pegged stablecoin flows during stress, but it also leaves room for further research on how adoption affects different policy regimes over time. Investors and compliance teams should watch for regulatory approaches that better address token circulation beyond banking channels—especially in emerging markets where local currency vulnerability and limited FX access make stablecoin adoption most likely to accelerate.

Source link

Crypto World

Binance Sees Largest Daily BTC Outflow Since Late 2024, CryptoQuant Data Shows

Published

21 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Binance Sees Largest Daily BTC Outflow Since Late 2024, CryptoQuant Data Shows

Bitcoin (BTC) buyers are showing “better absorption” at $65,000 after Binance saw its largest net outflow in nearly two years.

Key points:

Bitcoin exchange outflows are back on the radar after Binance sees net 9,000 BTC daily withdrawals.
Seller absorption is improving, even amid sideways price action, analysis says.
Institutional appetite persists with net positive ETF inflows.

Binance 9,000 BTC daily outflow raises eyebrows

New research from onchain analytics platform CryptoQuant released on Wednesday confirms that daily BTC withdrawals from the world’s biggest exchange are outpacing inflows.

“This usually reflects that short-term supply pressure on Binance is easing to some extent, as $BTC is not being sent to the exchange aggressively for potential selling,” contributor Rei Researcher wrote.

CryptoQuant data shows that on a day-by-day basis, Binance netflows toggle between positive and negative after a string of positive days which ended in early June.

Binance BTC netflows. Source: CryptoQuant

One date, however stands out: On Tuesday, Binance saw a net outflow of more than 9,000 BTC, the largest single-day tally since November 2024.

“When outflows hit this size, someone is moving serious volume into self-custody. Coins off exchanges are coins that won’t be sold into the order book,” fellow contributor Ruga Research commented in a separate post.

Binance BTC netflows. Source: CryptoQuant

Ruga said that on rolling 30-day time frames, netflows continue to repeat a pattern of fluctuations, and the latest spike could still reverse.

“Can this one fail? Absolutely. Momentum has been indecisive around the zero line for two weeks. It hasn’t committed. And what happens next, honestly, nobody knows,” he wrote, referring to the mixed net positive and negative inflow days.

“But someone just moved 9,030 BTC off the largest exchange while momentum recovers from extreme negative territory. That combination has historically resolved to the upside.”

Exchange flows don’t mean new BTC uptrend

Rei Researcher also avoided suggesting that a major BTC price trend change could come as a result.

“The notable point is that negative netflow is appearing while $BTC price has recovered to around $65K–$66K. This suggests that the market is showing better absorption compared to the previous weak phase,” he explained.

“However, negative netflow does not automatically confirm a new uptrend. It needs to be accompanied by spot demand, volume, and a more stable price structure.”

US spot Bitcoin ETF netflows (screenshot). Source: Farside Investors

As Cointelegraph reported, consensus currently sees a full bull-market rebound hamstrung by a lack of sufficient spot demand.

Only derivatives are seeing a turnaround compared to recent months, in part evidenced by net inflows to the US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

Source link

Crypto World

Talos Integrates Institutional Trading Tools into Kalshi Markets

Published

28 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Talos, an institutional crypto trading platform, has integrated with Kalshi so that select clients can trade Kalshi’s event contracts and crypto perpetuals through the same infrastructure. The goal is to remove the need for a separate technical connection when firms want regulated prediction market exposure alongside their existing digital asset workflows.

The integration also adds institutional trading functionality, including algorithmic order types such as Iceberg, TWAP and POV, plus multi-leg execution for perp-to-perp and perp-to-spot spread strategies. Talos said it will support block trades in Kalshi contracts via its request-for-quote (RFQ) system, using participating over-the-counter liquidity providers.

Key takeaways

Single connection for multiple products: Talos clients can trade Kalshi event contracts alongside crypto perpetuals without switching platforms.
Institution-grade execution: The integration supports algorithmic orders (Iceberg, TWAP, POV) and multi-leg spread execution.
RFQ block trading for contracts: Kalshi contract blocks can be executed through Talos’ RFQ flow with OTC liquidity providers.
Planned broader distribution: Later this year, Talos intends to extend dealer software so brokers and other platforms can offer Kalshi contracts where permitted.
Standardized prediction market data in the works: Talos plans a unified data feed to normalize events, order books, open interest and implied probabilities across venues.

Why Talos is pulling Kalshi into its institutional stack

For professional traders and market participants, friction between trading venues can be just as important as liquidity itself. By embedding Kalshi access inside Talos’ existing crypto trading infrastructure, the company is effectively reducing operational overhead for firms that already run execution, risk and connectivity through Talos for digital assets.

Talos’ stated approach focuses on execution capabilities: algorithmic order types and multi-leg handling for both crypto perpetual pairs and combinations of perpetuals and spot. For market makers and hedge funds, those features matter because spreads and execution quality can drive outcomes as much as the underlying market.

In addition, Talos’ plan to route block trades in Kalshi contracts through its RFQ platform gives institutions another mechanism for size execution, potentially improving how large orders are filled in less transparent trading environments—though actual availability and terms depend on the participating liquidity providers.

Distribution upgrades planned: from dealer software to a unified data feed

Talos says that later this year it will extend its dealer software to brokers and other trading platforms. If markets and jurisdictions allow, that would enable intermediaries to offer Kalshi event contracts directly to their customers while keeping the same execution framework they already use for crypto assets.

The company also outlined a separate effort: a unified prediction market data feed designed to standardize key market elements—events, trades, order books, open interest and implied probabilities—across venues. In practice, a normalized feed can help firms compare markets more easily and build consistent analytics, especially when prediction market venues differ in how they structure contracts or present pricing data.

Both initiatives point toward a broader strategy: not just connecting one operator to one platform, but making prediction market infrastructure easier to integrate into professional trading ecosystems.

Prediction markets surge as institutions begin to take a larger role

The Talos-Kalshi integration lands during a period of rapidly expanding prediction market activity. CoinGecko’s 2026 Q2 crypto report, cited in the coverage, shows that total notional trading volume on prediction markets reached $113.8 billion in the second quarter, up 48.7% quarter-over-quarter. The report also notes that June alone hit $52.8 billion in notional volume, which it described as a new monthly record.

CoinGecko attributed the spike to a heavy sports calendar, including major global events such as the UEFA Champions League final, NBA Finals, Stanley Cup, FIFA World Cup and Wimbledon. It also highlighted that sports-related contracts dominated activity: on Polymarket, sports accounted for 81% of June trading volume, compared with 40% in January.

Market share data presented alongside the growth reinforces Kalshi’s momentum. According to the same CoinGecko report, Kalshi increased its share to 58.9% from 42.4% in the first quarter, while Polymarket’s share declined to 30.2% from 35.8%. The venture backed by Robinhood and Susquehanna International Group-backed interests—Rothera—ranked fourth by June, with $2.1 billion in notional trading volume after launching in May.

Growth continues, but legal and market-integrity risks remain

Even with rising activity, prediction markets are still contending with uncertainty in the United States and heightened attention from regulators and market participants. Coverage notes that Kalshi is involved in disputes with state regulators regarding whether its sports event contracts could be considered illegal gambling—an issue observers expect could eventually reach the US Supreme Court, according to earlier reporting on Cointelegraph.

Beyond the regulatory backdrop, scrutiny has also focused on market integrity. The coverage references earlier reporting that six Polymarket traders reportedly profited by about $1 million from bets on US military strikes against Iran before the attacks became public. Separately, it mentions that a White House teleprompter operator was placed on unpaid leave after allegedly betting more than $100,000 on Kalshi markets tied to President Donald Trump’s speeches.

For investors and trading firms watching the segment, these developments underscore a core tension: prediction markets are drawing more mainstream participation and institutional attention, but the credibility and long-term expansion of the space depend heavily on how law and enforcement address both the product classification question and allegations of information misuse.

As Talos expands access and moves toward standardized prediction market data, market observers will likely focus on two things: whether distribution through brokers broadens participation without running into additional compliance complexity, and how ongoing legal outcomes and integrity enforcement shape institutional willingness to scale exposure in the months ahead.

Source link

Crypto World

BTC trades near $66K as a break above the 50-Day EMA strengthens bullish momentum

Published

35 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

BTC trades near $66K as a break above the 50-Day EMA strengthens bullish momentum

Key takeaways

Bitcoin (BTC) trades around $66,300, extending gains after reclaiming the 50-day EMA.
The leading cryptocurrency remains below the 100-day and 200-day EMAs, leaving key resistance levels intact.
Technical indicators, including the RSI and MACD, point to strengthening bullish momentum.

Bitcoin (BTC) remained firm around $65,800 on Wednesday, extending this week’s rally as the broader cryptocurrency market continued its recovery.

The world’s largest cryptocurrency strengthened its short-term outlook after closing above the 50-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA), a technical development that suggests buyers are gradually regaining control.

However, Bitcoin still faces significant resistance from longer-term moving averages that must be cleared before a stronger bullish trend can emerge.

Bitcoin reclaims key technical support

Bitcoin’s recent move above the 50-day EMA at $65,150 marks an important improvement in market structure after weeks of corrective trading.

While the breakout has strengthened short-term momentum, BTC continues to trade below the 100-day EMA at $68,082 and the 200-day EMA at $73,982, indicating that the broader recovery remains incomplete.

As long as Bitcoin holds above the 50-day EMA, buyers maintain a near-term advantage. However, reclaiming the higher moving averages will be essential to confirm a sustained bullish trend.

Technical indicators continue to support the improving market outlook. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) has climbed to 60, remaining comfortably above the neutral 50 level while staying below overbought territory. This suggests buying momentum is strengthening without showing signs of exhaustion.

Meanwhile, the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) remains in positive territory, indicating that bullish momentum continues to build. Although the indicator has yet to signal a decisive breakout, it reinforces the view that buyers are steadily gaining confidence.

Bulls eye the $68k resistance level

The next major hurdle for Bitcoin sits at the 100-day EMA around $68,082. A successful breakout above this resistance would improve the medium-term outlook and shift attention toward the 200-day EMA at $73,982.

If bullish momentum continues beyond that level, BTC could target the longer-term resistance zone near $84,410.

On the downside, immediate support is provided by the 50-day EMA at $65,150. A stronger support area lies around $64,004, where buyers may attempt to defend the recent breakout.

BTC/USD 4H Chart

However, a sustained move below $64,004 would weaken the current bullish structure and increase the risk of a broader correction.

For now, Bitcoin’s recovery above its 50-day EMA, coupled with strengthening momentum indicators, suggests bulls are regaining control. The next decisive test will be whether buyers can overcome resistance near $68,082 to extend the current rally.

Share this article

Crypto World

Zilliqa Ledger app vulnerability lets attackers recover signer’s private keys

Published

41 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Zilliqa Ledger app vulnerability lets attackers recover signer’s private keys

A security vulnerability in the Zilliqa Ledger app is enabling attackers to reconstruct private keys using publicly available onchain data.

Source link

Crypto World

Tesla, Alphabet, IBM Report Today: Why Are Options Traders Paying 86% Volatility?

Published

47 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

TSLA expected move by expiry table, July 24 at ±5.63%, Source: OptionCharts.io]

Tesla, Alphabet, and IBM all report second-quarter earnings after Wednesday’s closing bell. Options traders are bracing for big single-day swings from all three.

Recent history explains the nerves. Alphabet’s last report moved the stock almost twice as much as expected. IBM’s July warning erased a quarter of its value in one day.

Tesla Options Price Their Widest Earnings Move in a Year

Tesla (TSLA) options point to a move of about 5.6% by Friday, per OptionCharts data from Wednesday morning. That widens to 7.4% a week out. In dollar terms, traders see the stock landing between $356 and $399.

That is a wide range. Tesla has averaged just a 4.4% move after its last four reports, per CNBC.

Many traders are bracing for a fall. Put options, which pay off when a stock drops, outnumber calls in Friday’s expiry. The biggest bets sit at strikes far below the current price.

CNBC options analyst Mike Khouw counted roughly $550 million in net bets against the stock. That is the same $550 million options bet backing chart analyst Carter Worth’s bearish call.

TSLA open interest, puts vs. calls for July 24 expiry, Source: OptionCharts.io] — TSLA open interest, puts vs. calls for July 24 expiry, Source: OptionCharts.io

BeInCrypto’s Tesla earnings preview flags margins and robotaxi updates as the things to watch.

Alphabet and IBM Earnings Show Opposite Risk Profiles

Alphabet (GOOGL) is the opposite trade. Options price a 5% move, and bullish calls outnumber puts almost five to one.

GOOGL open interest showing call-heavy skew, Source: OptionCharts.io

Traders remember April. Alphabet earned $5.11 per share when Wall Street expected about $2.65. The stock jumped 10% and added $421 billion in value, the second-biggest one-day gain ever, per Bloomberg.

The Google earnings preview points to cloud growth and AI spending as the first tests.

IBM is the strange one. It already revealed its numbers on July 14. Revenue came in at $17.2 billion, below forecasts. The stock lost a quarter of its value that day, its worst drop on record, per CNBC.

CEO Arvind Krishna blamed big deals that slipped past quarter-end.

“This quarter we faltered.”

Yet IBM options are now the priciest of the three. Implied volatility, a measure of expected swings, sits above 86% for Friday.

Traders are not paying for the results. They are paying for protection against bad guidance.

What Options Flow Can and Cannot Confirm

One caution. Options data is anonymous. It shows the size of bets, not who made them. Hedge fund positions only become public in filings 45 days after each quarter ends. Sentiment was already split after Jim Cramer dumped tech stocks days before the reports.

Expected moves are estimates, not limits. Alphabet and IBM both proved that this year.

The post Tesla, Alphabet, IBM Report Today: Why Are Options Traders Paying 86% Volatility? appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Crypto World

SecondFi to shut down after $2.6M ADA loss tied to wallet flaw

Published

54 minutes ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Cardano-focused wallet provider SecondFi says it will shut down its SecondFi and Yoroi wallet services after a security incident exposed a cryptographic weakness in its wallet software. In a public update published Wednesday on X, the company stated that attackers stole about 16.1 million ADA—valued at roughly $2.6 million at the time of disclosure—affecting 374 wallets.

The news arrives nearly a month after SecondFi first disclosed the exploit in late June, when it said it had identified a path toward recovery and expected the process to begin soon after security reviews. Now, users are being told to wait for new tools targeted for release in August, even as the company prepares to wind down operations.

Key takeaways

SecondFi plans to wind down both its SecondFi and Yoroi wallet services following a cryptographic flaw that enabled theft of about 16.1 million ADA.
The breach impacted 374 wallets, according to SecondFi, and involved external activity assessed by an independent investigation.
SecondFi is developing a recovery tool using zero-knowledge proofs, with testing and third-party review before an August launch.
The company also plans wallet export functionality for migration, but has not announced whether it will reimburse losses.

Shutdown after an ADA theft tied to a wallet weakness

SecondFi’s Wednesday update marks a decisive shift from its earlier stance that recovery would follow after additional work. The company said the attackers exploited a cryptographic flaw in its wallet software to gain access to user funds, resulting in the theft of approximately 16.1 million ADA.

SecondFi’s post further states that an independent investigation conducted with blockchain intelligence provider Groom Lake identified a “sophisticated external actor” and found indicators potentially consistent with North Korea’s Lazarus Group. Importantly, SecondFi’s update does not claim confirmed attribution.

For affected users, the immediate practical consequence is that the wallet services are being phased out rather than remaining fully operational while remediation continues. That increases the urgency for recovery and migration options, since users may no longer be able to rely on the same support channels tied to the compromised service.

Recovery tool planned for August, pending testing and audit

SecondFi said it is building a recovery tool intended to help exploited users retrieve assets while limiting what information they must disclose. According to the company, the approach uses zero-knowledge proofs, a technique designed to prove certain facts without revealing underlying sensitive data.

The wallet provider added that the tool is still in testing and will be reviewed by a third-party auditor before it is released. SecondFi’s stated goal is an August launch, aligning with its broader plan to provide recovery and migration functionality on a delayed timeline.

Alongside recovery, SecondFi said it is also preparing wallet export functionality. The export feature is meant to help users move their assets to another service, giving them a concrete migration path even if SecondFi and Yoroi services are being wound down.

However, SecondFi did not announce any direct reimbursement plan, nor did it specify whether it would compensate users from its own funds. For many in the Cardano ecosystem, that omission matters as much as the technical plan, because wallet recovery typically depends on the quality and timeliness of tooling rather than on centralized discretion.

Timeline criticism: from “two weeks” guidance to an August target

SecondFi’s operational change has been met with frustration from users who say earlier messaging implied a faster recovery window. Nearly a month after the initial disclosure, some users claim they still lack a clear, dependable path to regain or migrate their funds.

In guidance SecondFi posted earlier during the investigation, the company advised affected users not to restore recovery phrases into new Cardano wallets. The stated rationale was that moving funds elsewhere “does not mitigate the risk” while SecondFi investigated the incident.

SecondFi’s recovery expectations were also time-bound during the initial disclosure phase. On June 27, according to earlier reporting by Cointelegraph, the company said it had identified a recovery path and expected to begin the process within roughly two weeks after completing testing and security reviews. Wednesday’s update effectively pushed that horizon further out, saying recovery tools were now targeted for August due to ongoing development and review.

One user response posted to X criticized the mismatch between the earlier “two weeks” expectation and the updated delay, stating that they had been told recovery could occur within that shorter timeframe but are now being asked to wait longer.

Cointelegraph attempted to obtain further details from SecondFi about possible reimbursement plans but did not receive a response by publication time. The report also notes that EMURGO did not respond to earlier requests for comment.

Why this incident matters for Cardano wallet users

Wallet security incidents are often assessed not just by how much was stolen, but by how quickly users can safely regain control of funds and whether the remediation process is both verifiable and operationally feasible. In this case, SecondFi’s plan—recovery via zero-knowledge proofs plus export tools—shows an effort to create a safer workflow for exploited users, particularly by reducing the need to share sensitive material.

At the same time, the decision to wind down wallet services introduces a second challenge: continuity. Even a well-designed recovery tool can become harder to coordinate when a provider is closing down and users need to migrate away during remediation. For impacted users, the next steps hinge on whether SecondFi’s August release aligns with its testing and third-party audit schedule, and whether the export function is available in a way that supports migration without introducing new risk.

For the wider Cardano ecosystem, the incident also underscores the fragility of cryptographic assumptions inside wallet software. The company has not attributed the attack with certainty, but the mention of indicators possibly linked to Lazarus suggests that the event may reflect a persistent, externally driven threat model rather than an isolated bug.

As August approaches, the most important questions for affected users are straightforward: will the recovery tool and wallet export features ship on schedule, will they work reliably for all impacted wallets, and will SecondFi clarify whether any compensation is planned. Until those details are confirmed, the practical recovery timeline—and the safety of any migration steps—remains the central uncertainty.

Source link

Crypto World

SpaceX IPO banks yell ‘buy’ as stock craters

Published

1 hour ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

SpaceX IPO banks yell ‘buy’ as stock craters

Wall Street analysts are trying to rescue Elon Musk’s floundering IPO, SpaceX after the stock erased $1.1 trillion of market capitalization in five weeks.

Almost every Wall Street analyst has a price target (PT) higher than the stock price, with reiterations and upgraded forecasts arriving by the day, and all 12 IPO underwriters whose analysts have published research on SPCX rated it a “buy” or equivalent.

Bullish analyst ratings have showered Musk’s company with weeks of praise as the stock price has crashed. Yesterday, Macquarie reiterated its “outperform” rating with a PT 100% higher than SPCX’s closing price.

Last week, Piper Sandler initiated coverage with a $156 PT, $32 higher than yesterday’s close. The same week, Needham maintained its buy rating and increased its PT 25% to $250, Evercore ISI Group initiated at outperform with a $230 PT, and Zephirin Group initiated coverage at buy with a $310 PT.

The tone around these ratings has been one-sided for weeks. Ratings by the investment banks that actually helped sell the stock during the IPO have sustained a sound wall shouting nothing but buy.

Raymond James initiated coverage at “strong buy” and an $800 PT. Eight hundred dollars.

The stock closed yesterday below $125, down 45% from its June 16 high.

SpaceX stock has erased $1.1 trillion of market capitalization in five weeks.

Hiking PTs and buys since the SpaceX IPO

Goldman Sachs led a record-shattering, 23-bank syndicate that priced SpaceX’s record $75 billion IPO at $135 a share on June 11. It would open for trading on the Nasdaq at $150.

For that one day in the sun, the banks split roughly $500 million in fees, with Goldman and fellow lead Morgan Stanley collecting about $100 million apiece.

Their gratitude showed. Bank of America crowned SpaceX the “King of the Cosmos” alongside a $235 PT. Deutsche Bank called the company the “apex of civilizational ambition” and set a $255 PT.

Citi described its $200 target as a “milestone along the path to $900.” Morgan Stanley titled its SPCX analysis “AI’s Final Frontier,” attaching a $300 PT.

Gushing affirmations reeked of conflicts of interest.

Raymond James, a co-manager on the IPO, called SpaceX “one of the defining industrial infrastructure companies of the 21st century.” Its $800 PT, Wall Street’s highest, is more than six times the current share price.

Analysts without conflicts of interest have lower PTs

Firms that didn’t directly benefit from the IPO saw a different, far more accurate future.

MoffettNathanson initiated at neutral with a $131 PT and wrote, “There is simply no credible financial model that can support what is at the time of this writing a roughly $2 trillion valuation. Our own certainly does not.”

CFRA issued Wall Street’s only outright “sell” rating and a $115 PT on the stock’s first day of trading. It was the most accurate PT to date, with shares falling to within $5 of that forecast this week.

Another IPO outsider, KeyBanc, added the first “hold-equivalent” analyst rating on June 22, a session in which the shares dropped 16%.

So far, the stock price is rewarding skeptics, not the conflicted banks and Wall Street giants that SpaceX compensated to remain permabullish.

SpaceX peaked at $225.64 on June 16, when the company was briefly worth more than $2.9 trillion. The shares broke below their $135 IPO price on July 15 and closed under it a day later.

This week, they traded below $120 after SpaceX delayed its highly-anticipated Starship test flight when some of its engines failed to start.

Meanwhile, some SpaceX bonds have already declined to 90.7 cents on the dollar with junk-like, 7.5% yields. Yet 29 analyst ratings still average a $236 PT, as though the stock has a realistic chance of nearly doubling from Tuesday’s close near $124.

Whatever the stock does next, Wall Street’s IPO fees settled weeks ago.

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Source link

Crypto World

Here’s why bitcoin bulls should take a closer look at interest rates: Crypto Daily

Published

1 hour ago

22 July 2026

NewsAdmin

Here's why bitcoin bulls should take a closer look at interest rates: Crypto Daily

As bitcoin BTC$65,998.56 regains its footing, optimism has returned to the market, and several observers are calling the recent price rise the start of a decisive bull run for valuations well beyond last year’s $126,000 peak.

But a look back at trends in bitcoin and Nasdaq valuations, adjusted for the cost of capital represented by the U.S. 10-year yield (US10Y), suggests bull runs may be more measured. (check Today’s signal)

Both the BTC/US10Y and Nasdaq/US10Y ratios have failed to eclipse their 2020-2021 peaks, even though their dollar-denominated prices set new record highs over the past 12 months. In other words, when adjusted for the cost of capital, the true macro tops for bitcoin and the broader tech sector likely occurred in 2020-21.

This divergence between nominal prices and yield-adjusted valuations can resolve in one of two ways. Either interest rates collapse, shrinking the denominator and propelling these ratios toward a fresh breakout, or the dollar prices of these assets decline to realign with the structural weakness revealed by the ratios.

The latter scenario appears the more likely for two reasons. First, recent rhetoric from Fed officials has remained decidedly hawkish, with some even floating the possibility of interest-rate increases.

Source link