Near Protocol’s native token, NEAR, has the potential to grow 20x by 2027, according to Arthur Hayes, co-founder of the crypto derivatives exchange BitMEX.

Key takeaways:

• Hayes said NEAR Intents could make privacy coins like Zcash more usable across blockchains without bridges or multiple wallets.
• NEAR has surged more than 90% since Hayes publicly highlighted the token alongside ZEC and HYPE in May.

NEAR makes privacy coins like ZEC usable: Hayes

Speaking on The Rollup podcast, Hayes said NEAR’s bullish case rests on NEAR Intents, a feature that lets AI agents move assets privately across blockchains without dealing with bridges, multiple wallets or fragmented liquidity.

The same infrastructure also supports NEAR’s broader AI-agent thesis, where autonomous apps can execute payments and trades on-chain.

Hayes linked NEAR’s upside to Zcash (ZEC), the privacy-focused cryptocurrency that has rallied more than 1,000% over the past year and revived investor interest in private money.

ZEC/USD daily chart. Source: TradingView

He said Near Protocol could become the next major beneficiary of that trend because it helps make private tokens like ZEC usable beyond a single blockchain, allowing users to move value across the broader crypto economy.

“I can now send any crypto asset I want to anyone across the internet in an anonymous way from shielded Zcash using Near Intents,” Hayes said, adding:

“I think NEAR has a 20x potential, where you know Zcash might have a 5x potential over the next year.”

Hayes’ NEAR calls echo his Zcash rally playbook

Hayes’ remarks add to a string of bullish NEAR endorsements from Hayes.

In a May 11 essay, Hayes explicitly positioned NEAR as one of his top speculative bets alongside ZEC and Hyperliquid’s native token, HYPE.

He reinforced that view in a May 22 post earlier this week, calling HYPE, ZEC and NEAR “the holy trinity.”

NEAR’s price has grown by over 90% since Hayes began publicly highlighting the token, as shown below.

NEAR/USD four-hour chart. Source: TradingView

Hayes’ endorsements have historically attracted significant attention from traders, as evidenced by his 2025 Zcash posts.

Related: Zcash is ‘running its own bull market’ as ZEC price paints 88% rally setup

In October 2025, Hayes’ bullish commentary, including “ZEC to $10k” and naming it a core holding, acted as a major upside catalyst. ZEC delivered over 350% gains in the following weeks.

ZEC/USD daily chart. Source: TradingView

NEAR fractal hints at 35% rally next

NEAR’s current breakout is starting to resemble its 2023–2024 recovery setup, when it bounced from the $0.91–$0.99 range before rallying by about 250%.

For instance, in 2026, NEAR has rebounded from the same $0.91–$0.99 bounce zone, while its daily relative strength index (RSI) has surged to around 88, showing aggressive buying pressure.

The token has also formed a golden cross, a bullish signal where the shorter-term moving average rises above the longer-term one.

In NEAR’s case, the 50-day exponential moving average (50-day EMA, the red line) at around $1.646 has been moving above the 200-day EMA (the blue line) at around $1.647.

Traders often view this as an early sign that a downtrend may be turning into a sustained uptrend.

The first major upside target sits near $3.38–$4.00, a former support zone that may now act as resistance. The $4 target sits roughly 35% above current prices and could become NEAR’s next test if the breakout holds.

A decisive move above $4.00 would strengthen the 2023–2024 fractal and open the door to a 250% rally toward the $9–$10 area in 2026.

Conversely, failure to reclaim the $3.38–$4.00 zone may lead to a sharp bearish reversal toward the 50- and 200-day EMAs. That would amount to roughly 45% downside from current levels.

Bitcoin (BTC) saw flash volatility around Tuesday’s Wall Street open as US-Iran nerves rocked risk assets.

Key points:

• Bitcoin briefly taps $78,000 as volatility returns to markets at the Wall Street open.
• US stocks hit new all-time highs, while crypto continues to underperform.
• Positive funding rates spark fresh warnings over Bitcoin’s immediate outlook.

Bitcoin neutralizes longs and shorts in volatile moves

Data from TradingView showed BTC/USD hitting $78,000 — its highest since Thursday — before abruptly heading lower.

BTC/USD one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

In doing so, the pair liquidated both short and long positions, with the 24-hour total at $66 million, per CoinGlass.

BTC liquidation history (screenshot). Source: CoinGlass

Macro events once again drove the market, with US strikes on Iran calling the latest peace deal attempt into question.

WTI crude oil headed toward $95 per barrel, while US stock markets again shook off the concerns, hitting new all-time highs and continuing a trend of strength seen last week.

CFDs on WTI crude oil one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

Commenting, trading resource Material Indicators said that BTC price action “remains driven by liquidation hunts.”

“Purple Whales are not suddenly flipping macro bullish for fundamental reasons – they are swing trading the range in low timeframes,” it explained in a post on X alongside a chart of Binance order-book liquidity. 

“The bid liquidity at ~$75.5k is attempting to protect key support at the 21 WMA.”

BTC/USDT order-book liquidity data. Source: Material Indicators/X

Material Indicators referenced Bitcoin’s 21-week simple moving average at $75,800, one of several nearby trend lines on the radar.

Continuing on the topic, trader Daan Crypto Trades noted that the “biggest” cluster of liquidity below price was at $74,000.

BTC liquidation heatmap. Source: CoinGlass

Funding rates see “sharp reversal” versus April

In a potential warning to bulls, onchain analytics platform Glassnode drew attention to rising funding rates on the day.

Related: Here’s what happened in crypto today

Previously negative, these were now “decisively positive,” it reported, as BTC long interest increased.

“The move marks a sharp reversal from April’s heavily short-biased positioning,” Glassnode told X followers.

Bitcoin futures funding rates. Source: Glassnode/X

Overall trading activity, however, remained comparatively modest, crypto analytics resource K33 Research noted.

“Bitcoin has spent the past week consolidating and trading broadly flat, while activity across crypto markets remains muted. Weekly spot volumes are approaching yearly lows, derivatives activity continues to decline across both CME and offshore venues, and open interest has largely stagnated,” head of research Vetle Lunde wrote in its latest Ahead of the Curve update. 

“At the same time, realized and implied volatility have drifted toward historically low levels, reinforcing a broader wait-and-see environment with subdued participation and limited market conviction.”

Bitcoin historical volatility (screenshot). Source: CoinGlass

Former New York Fed chief Bill Dudley has warned that the Federal Reserve risks losing its credibility as an inflation fighter after more than five years of missing its 2% target, just as new Fed Chair Christopher Waller is trying to convince markets he can still anchor expectations.

According to coverage of Dudley’s recent remarks, the former New York Fed president said the “most remarkable thing about the last five years” is that inflation has consistently run above target, yet the Fed has behaved as though it has already done enough and can safely talk about cuts. In an earlier column and subsequent interviews, Dudley argued that the neutral interest rate, or r*, is “a lot higher than the Fed recognizes,” which means real policy is not as tight as officials like to claim and that the central bank has “not been doing enough to fight inflation.”

Dudley’s core warning is about expectations rather than backward‑looking data. He has repeatedly cautioned that if Fed officials allow inflation to sit above 2% for an extended period, households and markets will start to assume 3–5% is the new normal, making it much harder to bring inflation down without imposing a severe recession later. That concern is echoed in broader research on the Fed’s credibility: one RSM analysis noted that one‑year ahead expectations measured by the New York Fed had risen to around 3.2%, versus a five‑year, five‑year forward breakeven near 2.34%, a gap that suggests short‑term confidence in the 2% target has already eroded.

Waller inherits a credibility problem, not just an inflation problem

Dudley’s comments land awkwardly for Christopher Waller, who took over the Fed chair role with a reputation as one of the first officials willing to talk about cuts—only to reverse course as inflation stayed sticky. In a speech in Germany this month, Waller said he can “no longer rule out” voting to raise interest rates again if inflation does not slow, adding that he “would not hesitate” to support a hike if measures of inflation expectations show signs of becoming unanchored.

Those lines read almost like a direct response to Dudley’s critique. Dudley and other former officials have warned that cutting too quickly, or leaning on alternative inflation measures to claim victory, would only convince markets the Fed is looking for excuses, undermining its credibility rather than restoring it. One recent commentary noted that using “trimmed mean” or “supercore” metrics to declare the 2% goal achieved “would risk undermining the central bank’s credibility,” especially after years of missing the headline target.

The deeper issue is that the Fed has managed to irritate both sides of the debate. Critics like Dudley and Kevin Warsh say the central bank is underestimating neutral rates and letting inflation fester, risking a future where expectations slip and a harsher tightening cycle is needed. Others, writing in venues like Forbes, argue the entire idea of the Fed as an “inflation fighter” is a mythology rooted in Phillips Curve thinking, and that the central bank plays at best a peripheral role in actual inflation dynamics.

Why the “inflation fighter” brand matters now

Central banks live and die on expectations, and that is where Dudley is trying to land the punch. If markets, firms, and households stop believing the Fed will do whatever it takes to enforce 2% over time, wage‑setting and price‑setting behavior starts to bake in higher inflation by default, making the target self‑negating.

Advertisement

This is exactly the risk Waller has been flagging in his own way. He has emphasized that keeping longer‑term expectations anchored is “critical” for achieving the 2% goal and has warned that if those expectations move, the Fed will have to respond forcefully—even at the cost of short‑term growth—to salvage its credibility.

The uncomfortable truth underlying Dudley’s warning is that the Fed is no longer just fighting inflation; it is fighting the suspicion that it lost control of the narrative sometime in the last five years. Whether Waller restores that trust or confirms those suspicions will depend less on what he says about 2% and more on whether he is willing to back the target with policy choices that actually hurt.

Advertisement

Optimism’s OP mainnet has begun a four-week experiment that lets users boost transaction priority by staking at least 100,000 OP, marking the first time its sequencer has deviated from pure gas-fee ordering.

According to an official announcement from Optimism, OP mainnet has “adjusted its transaction sorting rules for the first time,” adding an experimental stake‑based priority track to the long‑standing “highest priority gas fee first” mechanism that currently governs the network’s sequencer. OP users can now voluntarily participate in a four‑week pilot, running through June 23, by staking no less than 100,000 OP into the new PolicyEngine Staking contract.

The goal, as outlined in Optimism governance discussions, is to test whether stake‑based ordering can dampen toxic arbitrage traffic, create new demand for OP, and give sophisticated users a more predictable way to secure blockspace during volatile periods. For now, the experiment runs in parallel to the existing priority gas auction (PGA), and transaction ordering for non‑participants remains unchanged, preserving standard fee‑based competition for block inclusion.

Two-phase design: FIFO to stake‑weighted gas

The pilot is structured in two distinct phases, each probing a different piece of the ordering puzzle. In phase one, covering the first week, all participating addresses that meet the 100,000 OP threshold are treated equally under a strict first‑in, first‑out (FIFO) rule, meaning that “exceeding the minimum staking amount will not affect priority,” according to Optimism’s description of the rollout.

From weeks two through four, the mechanism shifts to a “priority gas multiplier” that is explicitly “weighted by staking duration,” so that the longer an address has locked its OP in the PolicyEngine contract, the higher its effective gas‑priority weight becomes when competing for ordering. In practice, this gives long‑term stakers an edge in securing inclusion for latency‑sensitive flows such as arbitrage, liquidations or high‑frequency trading strategies, a design that resembles the way some exchanges reward resting liquidity over opportunistic takers.

Crucially, the rest of the network stays on the familiar rails. Users who do not opt into the experiment continue to be ordered solely by the PGA system that OP mainnet has used “for many years,” with no change in how standard wallet transactions compete on gas price alone. That parallel track helps isolate the behavioral impact of the new staking queue while reducing the risk that a flawed design could disrupt day‑to‑day activity on one of Ethereum’s most used layer‑2s.

Broader L2 and staking context

The Optimism pilot lands at a moment when Ethereum layer‑2s are experimenting aggressively with new ways to price and allocate blockspace, from shared sequencer proposals to intent‑based architectures and order‑flow auctions. Similar to how liquid staking protocols such as Lido Finance have used incentives to pull staked assets onto networks like Optimism and Arbitrum, OP’s PolicyEngine design explicitly tries to turn governance tokens into a lever for transaction priority rather than just voting power or emissions farming.

The OP ecosystem has also been positioning itself as a core venue for both DeFi and speculative flows, vying with other layer‑2 and sidechain environments that pitch lower fees or specialized features. That competition has helped drive experimentation across the stack, from token economics to sequencer design, and echoes earlier phases of infrastructure innovation that saw protocols from Bitcoin to Ethereum re‑think everything from fee markets to MEV capture.

For now, the stake‑priority experiment is explicitly time‑boxed. Optimism has said that after the four‑week window, OP mainnet will revert to its standard PGA‑only ordering, while governance and core contributors digest the on‑chain data and decide whether stake‑weighted ordering should return in a more permanent form. If the numbers show meaningfully better outcomes for users without unacceptable centralization or fairness trade‑offs, the pilot could become a template for how other rollups treat blockspace as a policy instrument, not just a commodity to be auctioned.

Within the broader crypto market, OP trades alongside other major assets such as bitcoin and ethereum, with investors increasingly weighing not only tokenomics but also how aggressively each ecosystem pushes on scalability and user experience. As more networks, from Ethereum staking leaders like Lido to emergent layer‑2 experiments highlighted in recent crypto.news coverage, try to differentiate on design, Optimism’s stake‑priority gamble will be closely watched by anyone who believes the next phase of competition will be fought at the sequencer, not just in the application layer.

Advertisement

Crypto investment products posted a net outflow of about $1.47 billion last week, extending a retreat that began in the prior period. The majority of the selling came from Bitcoin-focused exchange-traded products (ETPs), according to CoinShares’ latest weekly flows report. While Bitcoin funds bore the brunt, some altcoin ETPs and thematics still attracted fresh money, underscoring a market that remains skittish on the leading asset but selective about where to deploy capital.

Total assets under management across crypto ETPs stood around $148.7 billion, with Bitcoin funds accounting for roughly 80% of that stack, or about $120.2 billion. The slide in Bitcoin products marked the largest weekly withdrawal of 2026 for BTC-focused vehicles, while Ether funds shed $223 million, CoinShares noted. Analysts pointed to a risk-off mood tied to geopolitical and macro concerns, even as the CLARITY Act seen by some as a potential catalyst for domestic innovation moves closer to reality.

Key takeaways

• Bitcoin ETPs faced roughly $1.3 billion in outflows, the largest weekly withdrawal of 2026, while Ether funds fell by $223 million. Overall crypto ETPs carried about $148.7 billion in AUM, with BTC representing about $120.2 billion of that total.
• Altcoin ETPs attracted selective inflows: XRP led with about $31.8 million, Solana around $7.7 million, and a broader mix showing continued demand for non-BTC exposures.
• The Hyperliquid (HYPE) ETF segment recorded notable inflows—about $72.3 million—signaling appetite for diversified or innovative strategies within crypto ETFs.
• Smaller inflows appeared for Sui (SUI) and Chainlink (LINK) at roughly $0.6 million and $0.4 million, respectively, while short Bitcoin products drew in $10.2 million amid risk-off sentiment.
• Geographically, the US led the exodus with about $1.43 billion in outflows, including $1.26 billion from US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs. Europe showed more resilience in prior weeks, but outflows also appeared in Switzerland, Canada, Hong Kong, and Germany, with the Netherlands and Australia registering inflows.

Bitcoin’s retreat defines the broader flow dynamic

According to CoinShares, Bitcoin products accounted for the lion’s share of last week’s traffic, with net outflowstopping roughly $1.3 billion. This marked the heaviest weekly withdrawal from BTC-focused ETPs so far in 2026, emphasizing an ongoing risk-off posture among investors who continue to reassess the safest way to express exposure to the largest digital asset.

Elsewhere in the sector, Ether-based funds lost about $223 million, underscoring a more conservative stance toward the second-largest crypto asset within the ETP universe. CoinShares quantified the broader picture, noting that total crypto ETP assets stood at around $148.7 billion by week’s end, and that Bitcoin vehicles continued to dominate the landscape with an 80% share of assets under management.

Analysts linked the selling pressure to a broader risk-off tilt, including renewed attention to geopolitical tensions and macro risks. However, within that environment, the market’s tone wasn’t uniformly negative: a portion of capital flowed into non-BTC exposures, signaling selective appetite for growth-oriented or diversified strategies rather than broad-based BTC accumulation.

Altcoins attract pockets of fresh interest

Despite the overarching downturn, several altcoin ETPs registered inflows above notable thresholds. XRP (XRP) led among altcoins with roughly $31.8 million of inflows, while Solana (SOL) drew about $7.7 million. The data illustrate a bifurcated market: while BTC pricing remains the focal point of risk assessment, traders continue to seek exposure to alternative narratives and ecosystems within the crypto space.

In another sign of thematic activity, SoSoValue’s data highlighted that Hyperliquid (HYPE) ETFs drew in about $72.3 million, reflecting investor interest in innovative liquidity and strategy profiles within the sector.

Smaller inflows appeared for Sui (SUI) and Chainlink (LINK), at around $0.6 million and $0.4 million respectively, suggesting a measured appetite for newer layer-one ecosystems and on-chain data/aggregation primitives within regulated vehicles. On the flip side, short Bitcoin products added approximately $10.2 million, a pattern consistent with broader risk-off positioning in paring downside risk on BTC exposure.

These dynamics align with the broader narrative: while BTC remains the dominant anchor, capital continues to search for selective opportunities within the crypto universe, even amid a tougher macro backdrop.

Global distribution underscores a mixed risk appetite

The week’s regional data painted a nuanced picture. The United States led outflows, with about $1.43 billion exiting crypto ETPs, including $1.26 billion from US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs, according to SoSoValue’s assessment of the flows. While the US contributed the largest absolute hits, other major markets also posted withdrawals: Switzerland saw $16.2 million in outflows, Canada about $12.5 million, Hong Kong roughly $12.2 million, and Germany about $4.4 million.

On the other hand, the Netherlands stood out as an inflow bright spot, drawing in about $6.6 million, with Australia notching a smaller inflow of around $0.7 million. The geographic divergence signals that risk sentiment and regulatory catalysts continue to drive distinct regional behavior, even as cross-border liquidity remains important for asset-allocators across the crypto ETF space.

Analysts noted that the period’s macro and regulatory backdrop shapes positioning. While the CLARITY Act is seen by many in the industry as a potential boon for domestic innovation and exchange-traded products related to crypto, its precise impact remains a matter of interpretation until more concrete steps emerge from policymakers and market participants alike.

For context, CoinShares’ data is commonly cross-referenced with other trackers to gauge the health and direction of crypto ETP flows. The broader takeaway remains: while broad selloffs compress BTC exposure, selective inflows in altcoins and thematic funds reveal a market seeking differentiated bet structures and a more nuanced risk posture.

Industry observers have previously treated outflows in leading BTC products as potential contrarian signals, a thread sometimes highlighted by market analytics teams such as Santiment. The takeaway for investors is that market liquidity and regulatory clarity will continue to shape whether the recent flow patterns signal fatigue, opportunity, or a mix of both as 2026 unfolds.

What’s next for crypto ETPs?

Looking ahead, observers expect a continued tug-of-war between risk-off dynamics and selective demand for non-BTC exposures. The CLARITY Act and other regulatory developments could influence the appetite for crypto ETPs by providing greater clarity for market participants and product issuers. Traders will also want to monitor whether alternative narratives within DeFi, layer-1 ecosystems, or cross-chain data infrastructure begin to gain traction in structured products as the year progresses.

As the week closes, investors will be watching whether US-outflows moderate in response to potential regulatory milestones or whether new macro surprises reignite risk-off pressure across traditional equities and digital assets alike. With a $148.7 billion AUM footprint in crypto ETPs and a BTC-heavy distribution, even modest shifts in perception could have outsized implications for fund flows and product design in the months ahead.

Readers should keep an eye on evolving data from CoinShares and SoSoValue for any real-time shifts in sentiment, especially around US-listed BTC ETFs and the performance of altcoin baskets that have shown resilience within this period of flux.

A round of purchases from smaller Bitcoin treasury holders suggests continued demand for the asset even as the largest corporate buyers pressed pause. In total, 602.6 BTC — worth about $46 million at recent prices — moved into treasuries last week. The buys included Strive’s 381.6 BTC acquisition, a 200 BTC purchase by DDC Enterprise Limited, 19 BTC acquired by The Smarter Web Company (SWC), and 2 BTC bought by Hyperscale Data, according to filings and announcements cited in coverage.

The pattern points to a shift in the buyer base rather than a wholesale retreat from corporate Bitcoin accumulation. While Strategy, the largest known treasury holder, reportedly paused its weekly buying cadence, smaller treasury firms stepped in to accumulate on a dip below $80,000 per BTC.

Key takeaways

• Smaller corporate treasuries added 602.6 BTC last week, signaling persistent demand even as larger holders paused.
• Purchases included 381.6 BTC by Strive (SEC Form 8-K), 200 BTC by DDC Enterprise Limited, 19 BTC by SWC, and 2 BTC by Hyperscale Data.
• Around-the-market context shows Bitcoin dipping under $80,000 at the time of several buys, with specific average entry prices reported by the buyers.
• Bitcointreasuries.net tallies show roughly 198 public Bitcoin treasury companies holding about 1.24 million BTC, or ~5.9% of supply.
• ETF outflows during the week raised questions about investor sentiment, though market-watchers cautioned the signal may reflect retail-driven positioning rather than smart-money flows.

Bitcoin treasuries: a dip-driven deployment by smaller buyers

The purchases came as Bitcoin traded in a choppy range, with the dip below the $80,000 mark providing what proponents described as a ‘neutral-to-bullish’ entry point for treasury buyers. Strive’s latest acquisition was completed at an average price of $79,348 per BTC, while DDC Enterprise Limited reported an average entry of $79,496 per BTC for its 200-BTC buy. SWC’s 19 BTC purchase carried an average price of $77,687 per BTC. Hyperscale Data disclosed a 2 BTC open-market purchase, with the Sunday price close cited at $76,981.

These entries matter because the average purchasing price hints at the current unrealized position of these treasuries. In Strive’s case, the 381.6 BTC at roughly $79k implies a modest current unrealized gain if BTC sustains recent price levels; for SWC and DDC, similar dynamics apply. Hyperscale did not disclose an average price, but its timing aligns with a broader rotation among smaller treasury holders as prices traced a downshift through the weekend.

Strategy’s pause and the evolving buyer landscape

Earlier this month, Strategy announced a media- and market-disrupting move: a substantial accumulation of 24,869 BTC for about $2.01 billion, executed between May 11 and May 17 at an average price of roughly $80,985 per BTC. That deployment stood out as one of the year’s largest single-batch purchases and underscored the depth of corporate conviction in Bitcoin as a treasury asset. The latest turn — with Strategy pausing its weekly buys — suggests a temporary rebalancing rather than a retreat from long-term exposure.

Alongside this, the broader environment shows a mixed signal from ETF-related flows. Farside Investors’ data indicate combined net outflows of about $1.54 billion across spot Bitcoin ETFs in the six trading days leading up to Friday. Some observers, however, argue the data reflects retail sentiment more than smart-money positioning, a perspective echoed by crypto sentiment analytics firm Santiment, which described ETF outflows as a counter-indicator rather than a straightforward market negative.

The treasuries landscape: breadth, concentration, and what’s next

Bitcointreasuries.net provides a snapshot of the ecosystem: nearly 198 public Bitcoin treasury holders oversee about 1.24 million BTC, representing roughly 5.9% of the total supply. The ongoing participation of a wide range of corporate buyers — from specialized treasury vehicles to consumer brands and AI-focused infrastructure operators — indicates a broadening base of actors deploying BTC as a balance-sheet asset rather than a niche investment.

There is also a status-check element in the current environment. The divergence between the aggressive, large-buyer activity reported earlier in May and the more cautious cadence observed during the past week underscores a potential readjustment in risk appetite among “big pockets” while niche buyers maintain a steady drumbeat of purchases. That contrast could influence price action in the near term, especially if large holders resume buys or if ETF inflows turn decisively into outflows in the other direction.

As markets digest these cross-currents, investors and treasury teams will be watching for a few signals: whether Strategy resumes regular acquisitions alongside other big holders, whether smaller treasuries maintain a steady cadence, and how ETF flows respond to macro and crypto-specific catalysts. The evolving mix of buyers could impact the perceived cost basis of corporate BTC holdings and influence long-term capital allocation decisions across the sector.

Top Bitcoin treasury companies by holdings. Source: Bitcointreasuries.net

The broader narrative remains: corporate BTC ownership is not monolithic in intent or timing. While some of the largest buyers may scale back temporarily, the sustained activity from smaller treasury firms indicates an ongoing, underlying demand that could help anchor prices during volatility and support confidence in Bitcoin as a treasury asset over time.

What remains uncertain is the tempo of large-holder activity once the market absorbs the latest price dynamics and macro cues. Next developments to watch include any renewed tranche by Strategy or other major treasuries, shifts in ETF flow patterns, and how the evolving incentive landscape (mining economics, on-chain activity, and regulatory dynamics) interacts with corporate treasury behavior in the weeks ahead.

The United Kingdom has added HTX, the exchange formerly known as Huobi Global, to its sanctions list over alleged support for Russia. The designation follows a UK government assessment that there are reasonable grounds to suspect HTX has facilitated activities benefiting Moscow’s government through linked entities such as A7 Limited Liability Company and Garantex, both previously sanctioned. HTX is registered in Panama and has been singled out as part of a broader crackdown on entities the UK believes Russia relies on to bypass sanctions.

In announcing the designation, UK authorities underscored that the move targets efforts to shield Russia from Western penalties. “If the Kremlin thinks it can evade our sanctions by hiding behind crypto networks and shadow financial systems, it is gravely mistaken,” stated Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, emphasizing the government’s resolve to tighten controls over crypto-enabled evasion. The designation positions HTX alongside other sanctions-listed entities that the UK says have supported Russia’s government or its military actions through financial services and digital assets.

“Regulatory compliance remains our absolute top priority at HTX. We proactively monitor and strictly adhere to regulatory frameworks in all jurisdictions where we operate globally, including the UK.”

HTX’s official response to the designation, provided to Cointelegraph, centers on compliance. The exchange asserted that it maintains rigorous oversight and adheres to regulatory frameworks across its operating footprint, including the UK. The public statement reflects the ongoing push-pull between sanctions enforcement and the crypto industry’s efforts to reassure users and regulators that it can operate within strict rules.

The UK designation comes amid a wider, high-stakes regulatory moment for crypto in Europe and beyond. In April, the European Commission announced a package of crypto-related sanctions targeting stablecoins and other digital asset entities associated with Russia and Belarus. The move signals a broader intent to curb crypto channels that could be exploited to circumvent traditional financial restrictions. Regulators abroad are watching closely how sanctions regimes intersect with rapidly evolving crypto markets, particularly as exchanges and custodians expand cross-border services.

The reality of Russia’s evolving regulatory landscape also looms large. In April, Russian lawmakers advanced measures designed to curb unlicensed digital asset services, potentially imposing criminal penalties for breaches and mandating registration with the country’s central bank. The proposals sit alongside bills that would limit crypto use by retail investors and reinforce prohibitions on digital asset payments. These developments highlight a dual track: tightening controls within Russia while increasing international scrutiny on entities that may facilitate Russian access to global markets.

Key takeaways

• HTX (formerly Huobi Global) has been added to the UK sanctions list for alleged support to Russia via sanctioned entities A7 LLC and Garantex, with HTX registered in Panama.
• The designation is framed as part of a broader UK crackdown on entities the government says Russia uses to evade sanctions, underscoring the UK’s intent to police crypto-enabled flows that could bypass traditional controls.
• HTX disputes the allegations via a statement to Cointelegraph, asserting strict regulatory compliance and proactive monitoring across jurisdictions including the UK.
• Europe’s regulatory stance toward crypto-related sanctions has sharpened, with the European Commission issuing a new package targeting stablecoins and crypto actors tied to Russia and Belarus.
• Russia’s own crypto regulation is intensifying, with proposals to criminalize unregistered digital asset services and to impose stricter limits on crypto usage by retail investors and as a form of payment.

Sanctions, compliance, and the crypto ecosystem

The UK’s designation of HTX illustrates a broader trend in which authorities are increasingly treating certain crypto firms as extensions of state-centered risk. By tying enforcement to entities that facilitate cross-border finance in support of sanctioned regimes, regulators aim to close channels that might otherwise appear legitimate due to the anonymity or speed offered by digital assets. For investors and users, the move reinforces a clear expectation: crypto firms must demonstrate transparent compliance programs, robust know-your-customer and anti-money-laundering tools, and a willingness to cooperate with sanctions regimes across multiple jurisdictions.

From a market perspective, sanctions actions against exchanges can introduce volatility in the short term as counterparties reassess exposure to sanctioned entities or restricted jurisdictions. They also raise operational questions for exchanges that operate globally: how to implement and enforce sanctions lists in real time across diverse regulatory landscapes; how to handle custodial and trading flows that may be routed through complex networks; and how to communicate these controls to customers without compromising user experience. The HTX case adds to a growing list of examples where sanctions obligations intersect with the operational realities of international crypto platforms.

Critically, the EU’s sanctions move in April signals a parallel tightening across a key regional bloc. By signaling penalties and restrictions around stablecoins and other crypto instruments tied to sanctioned entities, Brussels is shaping a framework that could influence global standards. For market participants, this may translate into heightened vigilance around counterparties, quicker updates to screening and compliance workflows, and clearer mapping of sanctioned relationships in cross-border operations.

On the regulatory front inside Russia, the proposed measures would elevate penalties for unlicensed digital asset services and potentially enforce centralized oversight through the central bank. While these proposals could slow the pace of retail adoption in the near term, they reflect a longer-term trajectory toward formalizing a state-led regulatory environment for crypto activity. For international exchanges and service providers, the implications are twofold: ensuring alignment with Russian requirements if they operate there, and preparing to navigate a more complex, possibly fragmented, global compliance landscape as different jurisdictions diverge in their approach to crypto assets.

HTX’s situation also revisits the topic of past regulatory actions in the UK. The UK Financial Conduct Authority previously pursued enforcement against HTX in 2025 over alleged illegal crypto promotions conducted across social media platforms, including TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. That episode underscores a longstanding tension between aggressive marketing tactics common in the sector and the regulatory emphasis on investor protections and compliant communications. The current sanctions designation adds a new layer to the regulatory narrative surrounding HTX and similar platforms.

For market observers, the balance of power in crypto regulation remains a central question. On one hand, authorities seek to prevent evasion of sanctions and curtail Russia-linked financial channels. On the other, the industry argues that legitimate, regulated crypto activity can enhance financial integrity and transparency if properly supervised. The HTX designation contributes to that ongoing dialogue, illustrating how geopolitics, sanctions policy, and crypto compliance intersect in real time.

As policymakers, regulators, and industry participants closely monitor developments, several questions will shape the near-term landscape: Which other crypto services may be scrutinized next under sanctions regimes? How quickly will exchanges scale their compliance programs to meet evolving rules across regions? And how will customers adapt as more jurisdictions require rigorous verification, traceability, and restrictions on certain asset flows?

In the coming weeks, market players will be watching for further clarity on the UK’s designation criteria, any additional entities brought into the sanctions fold, and the practical impact on cross-border trading, liquidity, and customer onboarding. The HTX case may serve as a bellwether for how aggressively governments intend to police crypto-enabled pathways that could bypass conventional financial controls.

What remains uncertain is how closely other jurisdictions will mirror the UK’s approach and whether parallel sanctions measures will emerge in new forms, such as tighter enforcement of stablecoins or expanded restrictions on digital asset services linked to state actors. For now, investors and builders should prepare for a more integrated regulatory regime where sanctions risk and compliance costs are increasingly embedded into the operational fabric of crypto platforms.

Readers should continue to monitor official government designations and regulator statements, as well as updates from major exchanges about their sanctions screening capabilities and regional compliance rollouts. The HTX designation is a reminder that crypto firms operate in a high-stakes regulatory environment where geopolitical tensions can rapidly reshape the risk landscape and, with it, market opportunities and challenges alike.

Spain’s gambling regulator blocked local users from Polymarket and Kalshi “as a precautionary measure” as authorities there address allegations the prediction markets platforms were in violation of gambling laws. 

On Tuesday, Spain’s Directorate General for the Regulation of Gambling (DGOJ) said the country’s Ministry of Social Rights, Consumption, and Agenda 2030 had opened legal proceedings against the two companies, as they appeared to be operating without necessary licensing. The DGOJ issued an order blocking Spanish users from Kalshi and Polymarket until the proceedings were resolved, expected in three to four months.

“The DGOJ wishes to remind the public that, in Spain — in line with other European jurisdictions — prediction markets are deemed to constitute games of chance when bets are placed on uncertain future outcomes,” according to a Tuesday notice. “Consequently, operating such markets within Spanish territory requires obtaining a specific administrative license.”

Source: Spain’s Ministry of Social Rights, Consumer Affairs, and Agenda 2030

The move by Spanish authorities follows a similar governmental ban in Indonesia, which blocked access to Polymarket on Friday after the platform listed bets on whether President Prabowo Subianto would leave office before the end of his term. Other countries, including Australia, France, Poland, Singapore, Ukraine and Switzerland, have restricted access to Polymarket over gambling concerns, with the platforms also facing US state-level crackdowns and restrictions.

Related: Kalshi valuation doubles to $22B after $1B funding round

A spokesperson for Polymarket told Cointelegraph that the platform was “committed to engaging constructively with relevant authorities in every jurisdiction.” A Kalshi spokesperson declined to comment.

Kalshi and Polymarket are two of the largest prediction markets platforms by trading volume, with combined in weekly notational volume $6.1 billion, according to DeFi Rate.

NYT report shines light on US federal response to prediction markets

On Sunday, the New York Times reported that officials at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) were pushed out of the agency after they voiced concerns about prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket.

The financial regulator, under US President Donald Trump’s hand-picked chair, Michael Selig, has taken the stance that the CFTC has “exclusive authority” over the platforms, filing lawsuits against any state authority that challenged this position.

Prediction Market Volume: Kalshi & Polymarket Aggregated Data. Source: DeFi Rate

Lawmakers on the US House of Representatives’ Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced on Friday that they had initiated a probe into Kalshi and Polymarket over insider trading concerns. Committee Chair James Comer cited reports of “suspiciously timed trades” on the platforms ahead of US military actions against Iran, allowing certain users to potentially profit from insider information.

Magazine: 50K investors fight Korean crypto tax, Singapore cancels Bsquared: Asia Express

The UK government has added cryptocurrency exchange HTX to its list of sanctioned entities over its support of Russia.

On Tuesday, UK authorities said that there were “reasonable grounds to suspect” HTX, formerly Huobi Global, has been supporting Russia’s government through financial services and funds facilitated by the A7 Limited Liability Company and Garantex, other sanctioned entities. The crypto exchange, headquartered in Panama, was the latest to be named as part of a crackdown on entities “exploited by Russia to circumvent UK sanctions.”

“If the Kremlin thinks it can evade our sanctions by hiding behind crypto networks and shadow financial systems, it is gravely mistaken,” said UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper.

An HTX spokesperson told Cointelegraph: 

“Regulatory compliance remains our absolute top priority at HTX. We proactively monitor and strictly adhere to regulatory frameworks in all jurisdictions where we operate globally, including the UK.”

Source: HTX Global

Russia continues to face sanctions by multiple countries in the European Union and globally over its military actions in Ukraine, launched in 2022. In April, the European Commission announced a package of crypto-related sanctions targeting stablecoins like A7A5 and digital asset operators linked to Belarus.

Related: UK politician Nigel Farage bought $1.8M house after $6.7M crypto gift

HTX has previously been a target of the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority, which in 2025 opened legal proceedings against the company for illegal crypto promotions on social media. The UK watchdog said HTX had pushed promotions on TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, in violation of marketing rules.

Russia could criminalize crypto activities with new legislation

In April, Russian lawmakers advanced measures that could allow authorities to impose criminal penalties on unlicensed digital asset services and mandate registration with the country’s central bank. The proposals came alongside bills that passed first reading in the lower house of parliament, imposing limits on crypto for retail investors and reinforcing a prohibition on digital asset payments.

Magazine: 50K investors fight Korean crypto tax, Singapore cancels Bsquared: Asia Express

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.