Crypto World
UNI cash flow token thesis
On July 12, Uniswap founder Hayden Adams posted a number that would have sounded like satire during the governance-token winter: the protocol is generating 5.2 million dollars in daily fees, more than any protocol in crypto other than the two giant stablecoins, and far more than the perpetuals and memecoin venues that dominated the fee leaderboard for the past two years.
Summary
- Uniswap is generating more than 5 million dollars in daily fees, driven largely by Robinhood Chain activity.
- Robinhood Chain recorded 500 million dollars in daily Uniswap volume within eight days of launch.
- The UNIfication program burns UNI against protocol fees, turning fee capture into supply reduction.
- The key question is whether Robinhood Chain volume remains durable after gas subsidies expire.
- UNI’s repricing depends on fee-switch votes passing, sustained volume, visible burns, and regulatory stability around tokenized equities.
DefiLlama’s independent count for the same 24 hours, 5.16 million dollars, backs him up. The source of the surge is the least crypto-native venue imaginable: Robinhood Chain, the brokerage’s new Ethereum layer 2, supplied roughly 4.38 million dollars of that daily total, dwarfing Ethereum mainnet at 296,000 dollars and Base at 288,000.
The volume statistics behind those fees arrived at a pace no layer 2 debut has matched. Within eight days of the July 1 launch, Robinhood Chain recorded 500 million dollars in daily Uniswap trading volume, a tenfold jump from the day before, making it the second largest network for Uniswap activity after Ethereum mainnet. Cumulative swap volume crossed 1 billion dollars by July 10. Across the first seven days, the chain generated 10.98 million of Uniswap’s 20.1 million dollars in total weekly fees. Daily active Uniswap traders surged to roughly 220,000, more than ten times the prior week. Adams described the network as the most active blockchain layer outside Ethereum mainnet itself.
And this is the part that turns a volume story into an investment thesis: for the first time in the protocol’s history, that fee firehose is being plumbed directly into the token. The UNIfication program, passed by the DAO in December 2025 with 125.34 million UNI in favor and a rounding error against, burns UNI against protocol fees on 11 chains. A snapshot vote that ran from July 7 to July 12 asked holders to extend the mechanism to v4 pools, with binding on-chain votes following the week of July 13. A parallel temperature check, running July 10 through 15, proposes switching on protocol fees for the Robinhood Chain deployment itself. If both pass, the loudest new fee source in DeFi connects to a supply-destruction machine, and UNI completes a conversion that the entire sector is attempting: from governance token to cash flow asset.
This feature examines the machine, the money, and the two serious objections, that the volume is subsidized and that the fee switch drives away the liquidity it taxes.
From governance token to burn machine: how UNIfication works
For five years, UNI was the emblem of a category problem. The token governed a protocol that processed trillions in cumulative volume and captured none of it; every basis point of swap fees flowed to liquidity providers, and UNI’s value proposition reduced to voting rights over a treasury and the perpetual promise of a fee switch that governance never dared flip. The token traded at 3.23 dollars on July 7 against a 2021 peak of 44.97, a 93 percent drawdown that priced the promise at roughly nothing.
UNIfication changed the architecture. Under the system live since December, protocol fees collected on each chain flow into contracts called TokenJar. Anyone who wants to claim the accumulated assets, in practice arbitrage searchers, must first burn an equivalent value of UNI. The burned tokens are bridged back to Ethereum and sent to the dead address, permanently removing them from supply. The design is deliberately mechanical: no dividends, no staking claims, no legal distribution to holders that might attract securities analysis, just a standing market operation that converts fee revenue into supply reduction at whatever pace trading activity dictates. The program already runs on 11 networks: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Celo, OP Mainnet, Soneium, X Layer, Worldchain, Zora, BNB Chain, and Polygon.
The July votes address the two gaps in coverage, and the v4 gap is the technically interesting one. Uniswap v2 and v3 pools carry fixed fee tiers, so collecting a protocol share is a matter of setting one rate per pool. v4 is built around hooks, smart contract plugins that let developers customize pool behavior, including fees that can change block by block. Taxing something that mutable required new machinery: the proposal introduces a V4FeePolicy contract that determines the protocol fee for any pool and a V4FeeAdapter that collects and routes it into the burn pipeline. More than 1,500 builders are working with v4 hooks, and institutional-scale flow has already arrived, with Spark, the liquidity arm of Sky, pushing 1.5 billion dollars in stablecoin volume through v4 in the past month. The Robinhood Chain temperature check would extend fees across the v2, v3, and v4 deployments there, using the expedited governance track that UNIfication authorized for fee-parameter updates.
The market has started doing the arithmetic. UNI rallied about 21 percent from its July 1 low of 2.70 dollars to 3.30 by July 8, touched moves of 14 percent on the volume headlines, and trades near 3.63 with resistance mapped at 3.73. A 2 billion dollar market capitalization against a protocol annualizing north of 1.8 billion dollars in gross fees, if the July run rate held, is the kind of ratio that makes traditional investors reach for spreadsheets, with the enormous caveat that only the protocol’s share of fees, not the LP share, feeds the burn: in the measured 24 hours, protocol earnings were about 73,454 dollars against the 5.2 million gross, because the switch is not yet flipped on the newest and largest sources.
The distribution deal of the cycle
The reason the fee conversation suddenly matters is distribution, and the scale of what Robinhood connected deserves to be stated plainly.
Robinhood operates between 24 and 28 million funded accounts and posted record first-quarter revenue of 1.07 billion dollars. Its chain, built on Arbitrum’s stack with 100-millisecond blocks and full EVM compatibility, shipped with Uniswap v2, v3, v4, and UniswapX deployed from day one as the default liquidity layer. The flagship product is Stock Tokens: tokenized versions of more than 90 US equities and ETFs, tradable around the clock by eligible retail users in more than 120 countries, with Chainlink as the oracle layer, 1inch for routing, BitGo for custody, and Morpho powering a yield product on the USDG stablecoin. A trader in Manila can buy tokenized Nvidia exposure at 2 a.m. through Uniswap liquidity and settle instantly, no T+1, no market hours. Developers deployed more than 13,900 smart contracts in the first week. Ethena moved 50 million dollars into a Morpho vault in a single transaction, driving total value locked above 106 million dollars, up 159 percent in a day. Even the memecoin economy arrived on schedule, with Pump.fun integration and chain-native tokens amplifying volume, as crypto.news reported when the network crossed the 500 million dollar mark.
Standard Chartered’s head of digital asset research, Geoff Kendrick, argued the market was underpricing the partnership, calling it a real strategic alliance rather than a listing announcement. The structural point underneath his claim: DeFi protocols have spent years competing for the same recycled on-chain capital, and Robinhood represents something the sector has never had, a mainstream brokerage routing its retail flow through a decentralized venue by default. For Uniswap specifically, it means the protocol’s addressable market expanded overnight from crypto natives to anyone with a Robinhood account and a tokenized equity order, and the fee data shows the expansion is not theoretical. One venue, eleven days old, is out-earning Ethereum mainnet fifteenfold.
The rotation context makes the timing sharper. In a market where everything outside Bitcoin and Ethereum lost roughly 23 percent in six months, capital has crowded toward the handful of assets with verifiable revenue: perpetuals venues, stablecoin issuers, and now, abruptly, the largest DEX. The same repricing logic runs through the stablecoin wars, where volume quality has become the scoreboard, a shift crypto.news examined in the USDC-Tether flippening, and through Ethereum itself, which is rebuilding its entire execution roadmap around being credible settlement infrastructure for exactly this kind of institutional flow, the project crypto.news detailed in the Lean rebuild. UNI’s real revenue moment is one instance of a sector-wide migration from narrative to cash flow.
The comparables: what a fee-earning DEX token is worth
The rotation to cash flow gives UNI a peer group for the first time, and the comparisons cut in both directions.
The flattering comparison is to the fee leaders UNI just passed. Hyperliquid, Pump.fun, and the perpetuals venues built the template of the past two years: tokens with direct revenue linkage, aggressive buyback or burn mechanics, and valuations that survived the altcoin drawdown better than the governance-token cohort precisely because holders could point at income. Adams’ framing, more daily fees than anything except USDC and USDT, deliberately places Uniswap atop that leaderboard. On raw multiples, a 2 billion dollar capitalization against 20.1 million dollars in weekly gross fees puts the protocol at roughly two times annualized gross fees, a figure that looks absurd against any traditional exchange until the LP share is subtracted, at which point the multiple on actual protocol take becomes very large and entirely dependent on the pending votes. The valuation case is therefore not that UNI is cheap on current protocol revenue. It is that governance controls a dial connected to a gross fee stream of unprecedented size, and the July votes are the market’s first chance to watch the dial turn on the newest and largest sources.
The unflattering comparison is to the treasury-heavy tokens whose burns never outran their supply overhangs. UNI carries a circulating supply near 630 million against a total of 1 billion, with treasury and team allocations that dwarf any plausible near-term burn rate. At the current protocol take, the burn is symbolic; even at meaningfully higher fee capture, supply destruction measured in tens of millions of dollars annually meets a token with hundreds of millions of units yet to circulate. The burn thesis is a direction, not a floor, and direction gets repriced quickly when the underlying volume proves cyclical. The December UNIfication rally faded within weeks for exactly that reason: mechanics without volume are a press release. What is different now is that the volume arrived, from a source nobody’s model included, which is why the token’s 21 percent July move happened on the news of usage, not the news of tokenomics.
There is one more comparable worth naming because it frames the strategic stakes: the launch chain itself. Robinhood Chain’s opening fortnight has minted its own equity narrative, with HOOD shares up more than 40 percent in a month and insiders selling into the enthusiasm, and the network’s headline metrics, hundreds of millions in early volume against liquidity measured in the low tens of millions, drew immediate scrutiny about depth and durability. The tokenization trade rewards networks that convert launch attention into recurring activity, the pattern that has kept capital concentrated in venues with verifiable usage, as crypto.news observed when tokenized assets drove a rival network to record throughput. Uniswap is the venue where those questions get answered in public, block by hundred-millisecond block, because it is where the trades actually clear.
Objection one: subsidized volume is not revenue
The skeptics’ first argument is about the quality of the 500 million dollars, and it is not hand-waving.
Robinhood is waiving gas fees on the chain for the first 90 days. Zero gas removes the single largest natural brake on wash trading, incentive farming, and volume inflation; when round trips cost nothing, volume statistics measure enthusiasm for free transactions as much as demand for the assets traded. Analysts made exactly this objection in the launch week, noting that enormous AMM volume does not automatically create value for UNI without activated fee capture, and that if a meaningful share of the headline number reflects farming, the late-September expiry of the gas subsidy becomes the first genuine stress test of the entire thesis. The launch-week TVL data reinforces the concentration worry: a single Ethena deposit produced most of the day’s growth, and liquidity that arrives in one transaction can leave in one.
The honest response is that swap fees, unlike gas, were never waived. Every dollar of the 4.38 million in daily Robinhood Chain fees was paid by traders to liquidity providers at market rates, which makes the fee number a harder signal than raw volume. Wash trading a pool with a 30 basis point fee costs 60 basis points per round trip; nobody launders volume at that price for long. But the composition question survives the rebuttal: how much of the activity is durable tokenized-equity demand from Robinhood’s international base, and how much is launch-window speculation in memecoins and farmed incentives? The September subsidy cliff will answer it empirically. Until then, annualizing an eleven-day-old fee run rate is exactly the kind of extrapolation that DeFi cycles exist to punish.
There is also a counterparty concentration risk that has no precedent in Uniswap’s history: the protocol’s second largest venue is controlled by a publicly traded brokerage with its own regulatory exposure, its own commercial incentives, and, eventually, its own ability to route order flow elsewhere or deploy a competing AMM. Uniswap earned its position on Robinhood Chain by being the best liquidity software available on day one. Nothing guarantees the position is permanent, and the SEC’s January guidance flagging tokenized equity products for scrutiny means the flagship use case operates under a regulatory question mark of its own.
Objection two: the fee switch taxes the people who make the venue work
The second objection comes from inside the machine, and it is the oldest tension in the protocol’s design. Every dollar routed to the burn is a dollar that no longer goes to liquidity providers, the capital that actually fills the pools traders swap against.
Panoptic founder Guillaume Lambert put the LP case bluntly during the v4 vote, warning that applying the fee switch to v4 leaves providers with nowhere to migrate except competing AMMs or Uniswap forks, and that the proposal risks killing the protocol by favoring token holders over the capital that makes it function. The v4 version of the proposal sharpens his point, since reports around the vote indicated LP economics on affected pools could be reduced by as much as a third relative to the status quo. Liquidity is the most mercenary capital in crypto; it moved for 50 basis points of incentives throughout DeFi summer, and a protocol that taxes it while competitors do not is running a live experiment in how much brand and routing dominance are worth.
The bull rebuttal rests on what LPs actually get in exchange. Uniswap’s aggregated depth, its integration surface, the API now embedded in MetaMask, Zerion, and OKX routing across 18 plus chains with more than 3,000 developer keys issued, and now the Robinhood flow itself all mean an LP on Uniswap sees order flow that no fork can replicate. A fork with zero protocol fee but a fraction of the volume pays LPs less in absolute terms than Uniswap does after the tax. That was the empirical result of the vampire-attack era, and the UNIfication rollout across 11 chains has so far produced no measurable LP exodus. But v4 raises the stakes because hooks make pools programmable, and programmable pools are easier to replicate elsewhere; the fee controller architecture being voted on will tax precisely the segment of liquidity most capable of leaving. The vote closing July 12 and the on-chain sequence in the following week are, in effect, governance pricing that migration risk in real time.
The third mechanism: fee discount auctions
Alongside the burn expansion, Uniswap quietly shipped a second monetization primitive in the same week, and it deserves attention because it answers the LP objection from an unexpected angle.
Protocol Fee Discount Auctions, rolled out for the first time in early July, let sophisticated participants bid for reduced protocol fees on specific flow. The design logic runs like this: the largest source of LP pain in an AMM is not the protocol fee but adverse selection, the losses providers take when arbitrageurs pick off stale prices faster than pools can update. Auctioning fee discounts to the searchers and market makers who generate that flow converts a pure extraction into a priced privilege, captures for the protocol some of the value that MEV bots previously kept entirely, and gives high-volume participants a reason to route through Uniswap even after the fee switch activates. It is, in effect, a mechanism for taxing the taxers.
The auctions matter to the cash flow thesis for two reasons. First, they diversify protocol revenue beyond the flat fee share, adding a component that scales with the competitiveness of order flow, not raw volume, which is more durable through volume downturns. Second, they are a structural answer to Lambert’s migration warning: if the auction design succeeds in reducing the toxic share of flow that LPs absorb, providers could end up better off under the taxed regime than the untaxed one, because their gross fee cut shrinks while their adverse selection losses shrink faster. That claim is unproven and the mechanism is days old, but it reframes the fee switch debate from a zero-sum split between holders and LPs into an engineering question about who pays for price discovery. The December governance package, the v4 fee architecture, and the auctions together read as a coherent program: convert every form of value the protocol creates, swap fees, flow priority, and MEV, into revenue, then convert revenue into supply reduction.
The program’s ambition invites one more skeptical note. Every additional mechanism is additional surface area for governance capture, parameter mistakes, and the slow bureaucratization that has damaged other DAOs. A protocol that once had a single immutable design now has fee policies, adapters, controllers, auctions, and an expedited voting track, each a dial someone can turn. The bet is that Uniswap Labs and the delegate ecosystem can operate a genuinely complicated fiscal machine better than competitors can copy a simple one. The early revenue data supports the bet. The history of DeFi governance urges keeping the champagne corked.
What the UNI repricing actually requires
Assembling the pieces, the cash flow thesis for UNI needs four things to stay true simultaneously, and each has a visible checkpoint.
The votes must pass. The snapshot for v4 fees closed July 12; on-chain votes run the week of July 13; the Robinhood Chain temperature check closes July 15. The December UNIfication vote passed with near-unanimity, so the base case is passage, but the LP backlash around v4 is the loudest internal opposition the program has faced, and a diluted compromise on fee rates would proportionally dilute the burn.
The volume must survive September. The gas subsidy expires roughly 90 days after the July 1 launch. Fee revenue that persists through the cliff is real demand for tokenized equities and on-chain trading; fee revenue that evaporates was a marketing expense on Robinhood’s income statement. This is the single most informative scheduled event in the entire thesis.
The burn must be visible at scale. TokenJar mechanics mean supply reduction tracks protocol fee accrual with a lag. Watching claimed-and-burned totals over the coming quarter, rather than gross fee headlines, measures the machine’s actual throughput, and the gap between 5.2 million dollars gross and 73,454 dollars of current protocol take is the distance the switch still has to travel.
And the regulatory perimeter must hold. Tokenized equities traded by a global retail base through a brokerage’s chain sit at the intersection of securities law, the pending market structure bill, and the SEC’s tokenization scrutiny. The same institutional wave lifting fee revenue is also pulling DeFi into fights it has historically avoided, including the yield and revenue-sharing battles that banks are waging against crypto’s cash-flowing products, a conflict crypto.news has covered at the stablecoin layer. A token whose value accrues from fee capture is a token whose classification arguments get harder, not easier, which is presumably why the burn was engineered as supply destruction rather than distribution in the first place.
The remarkable thing about the past two weeks is not the volume record or even the fee record. It is that the oldest criticism of the largest DEX, that the token captures nothing, is being retired by governance vote in the same fortnight that the largest new fee source in DeFi history came online. Whether UNI at 3.63 dollars is cheap depends on September’s subsidy cliff, next week’s on-chain votes, and how much of a brokerage’s retail flow proves durable. Whether UNI is finally a claim on something is, for the first time since 2020, no longer the question.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
SpaceX stock is attempting to stabilize near $110 ahead of its first post-IPO earnings report, but a $100 billion share unlock could limit any recovery.
Summary
- SPCX has fallen 52% from its June intraday peak of $225.64.
- Analysts expect $6.88 billion in revenue and a loss of $0.23 per share.
- The 4-hour chart shows improving momentum after SPCX exited a descending channel.
- Up to 911.5 million shares become eligible for sale on Aug. 6.
- A recovery requires SPCX to reclaim $120, followed by the $130 resistance area.
SpaceX will report its second-quarter results after the US market closes on Aug. 4, giving investors their first detailed look at the company since its June initial public offering.
The report arrives at a difficult point for SPCX stock. Shares recently traded at $110.41, down about 18% from their $135 IPO price and roughly 52% below the June intraday high of $225.64.
That decline has reduced some of the valuation premium created by the IPO’s limited float. However, the company is still valued at roughly 35 to 37 times projected 2026 revenue, leaving little room for weak results or cautious guidance.
SpaceX earnings face unusually high expectations
Wall Street expects SpaceX to report approximately $6.88 billion in second-quarter revenue, according to FactSet data. Analysts forecast a loss of $0.23 per share and adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization of about $2.1 billion.
Full-year expectations stand near $39 billion in revenue and $17.3 billion in EBITDA.
These estimates place considerable pressure on SpaceX’s three main businesses: Starlink, rocket launches and artificial intelligence. Investors will assess whether revenue growth from Starlink and launch contracts can support the company’s spending on Starship, satellites and AI infrastructure.
Cantor Fitzgerald analyst Colin Canfield has warned that the first report could contain an “extreme expectation bias,” reflecting the potential gap between Wall Street forecasts and SpaceX’s actual performance.
Starlink is likely to receive the most attention because its recurring subscription revenue could help offset the more volatile economics of rocket development. Analysts expect the connectivity segment to remain SpaceX’s largest revenue source, supported by more than 10 million users.
The launch business also enters earnings with a substantial order pipeline. SpaceX recently secured a $1.6 billion US Space Force contract covering 18 Falcon 9 launches through 2027, adding visibility to its government-related revenue.
AI presents a less certain outlook. Investors will want details on spending, revenue and expected returns following SpaceX’s expansion into AI infrastructure. High capital expenditure without a clear path to positive free cash flow could renew concerns about the company’s valuation.
SPCX stock shows early signs of stabilization
The 4-hour chart shows SPCX stock moving out of a descending channel that guided prices lower throughout July. Shares recently rebounded from an intraday low of $104.85 and reached $112.70 before settling near $110.41.
That breakout suggests the decline may be losing momentum. However, it does not yet confirm a wider trend reversal because the stock remains close to its record low and well below several former support levels.
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator has produced an early bullish crossover. The MACD line stood at minus 6.99, above its signal line at minus 7.80, while the histogram turned positive at 0.81.
Because both lines remain below zero, the signal points to improving short-term momentum rather than an established bullish trend.
The Average Directional Index stood at 32.82. An ADX reading above 25 normally indicates a relatively strong trend, but the indicator does not determine its direction. In this case, it primarily confirms the strength of the decline that preceded the latest stabilization attempt.
A strong earnings report could provide the catalyst needed to validate the channel breakout. Weak results, however, could turn the move into a temporary pause within the larger downtrend.
SPCX needs to reclaim $120 to extend its recovery
Immediate resistance sits between $112.70 and $115, an area that has repeatedly limited rebounds since late July. A 4-hour close above that zone could allow SPCX to test $120.
The $120 level previously acted as short-term support before the latest breakdown. Reclaiming it would improve the technical structure and could expose the stock to resistance between $127 and $130, near the upper boundary of the former descending channel.
A move above $130 would offer stronger evidence that SPCX has formed a short-term bottom. The next major resistance area would then sit between $140 and $150, where sellers controlled several July rebounds.
On the downside, $104.85 is the first support level. A break below that intraday low would place the psychological $100 mark at risk.
Falling below $100 after earnings would invalidate the latest channel breakout and leave SPCX without a clear historical support level because the stock has traded publicly for less than two months. That lack of price history could increase volatility as investors search for a new valuation floor.
The Aug. 6 unlock could limit an earnings rally
Even an earnings beat may not remove the stock’s most immediate supply risk.
Up to 911.5 million shares held by employees and some early investors become eligible for sale on Aug. 6, the second trading day after the earnings release. At $110.41 per share, the tranche is worth about $100.6 billion.
The release exceeds the approximately 639 million shares initially available for public trading. If every eligible share entered the market, the tradable supply would rise to roughly 1.55 billion shares. Eligibility does not mean holders must sell, but the size of the tranche creates the potential for considerable selling pressure.
A second tranche of 455.8 million shares could have qualified for early release if SPCX closed at or above $175.50 on at least five of the 10 trading days through earnings. The stock’s decline means that condition will not be met.
SpaceX’s staggered lock-up structure will release additional shares over the coming months. By Dec. 8, the number of potentially tradable shares could reach approximately 5.33 billion, compared with fewer than 640 million following the IPO. Elon Musk’s holdings remain subject to a longer restriction extending into mid-2027.
Can SpaceX earnings revive SPCX stock?
The bullish scenario requires SpaceX to beat revenue expectations, demonstrate strong Starlink margins and give investors a credible plan for funding AI and Starship investments. Those results could push SPCX through $115 and toward $120 or $130.
The bearish case centers on continued losses, elevated capital spending and weak guidance. Those concerns would become more damaging when combined with the Aug. 6 unlock, particularly if employees and early investors use the earnings window to sell.
SPCX’s improving MACD and channel breakout provide an early technical basis for a rebound. Still, the stock must reclaim $120 before the move can be treated as more than a relief rally.
Earnings could revive SPCX in the short term, but holding those gains may prove harder. The company must satisfy high operating expectations just two days before its available share supply begins to expand.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
The odds of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act’s (CLARITY) passage are dwindling as the US Senate is scheduled to begin summer recess at the end of this week, threatening another leg down for cryptocurrency valuations, according to wealth manager Bernstein.
Bernstein said that the Senate’s failure to pass the legislation could trigger an immediate negative “industry knee-jerk reaction,” which may result in another leg down for Bitcoin and the broader crypto market.
“From a tactical standpoint, we expect the crypto market to bottom and start showing momentum towards late Q3 and early Q4 prior to the mid-terms,” Bernstein analysts wrote in a Monday report shared with Cointelegraph.
At the same time, however, the analysts said that Senate failure to pass the legislation may bring more proactive policy support from regulators, including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which may accelerate rulemaking initiatives under Project Crypto.
Project Crypto is a regulatory initiative first announced by SEC Chairman Paul Atkins in July 2025, which was later expanded into a joint staff initiative between the SEC and CFTC in September 2025. The initiative aims to create a workable regulatory framework for digital assets using existing agency authority while Congress finalizes crypto market legislation under the CLARITY Act.
Bernstein said that the two agencies could provide more interpretive releases tied to the taxonomy of tokens, clear rules around decentralized finance (DeFi) and accelerate the innovation exemption for issuing tokens that would be exempted from securities status during a finite period.
CLARITY Act odds decline to 31%
Bernstein’s skepticism is supported by prediction market traders who are betting against the passage of the CLARITY Act before the end of 2026.
Odds of the legislation’s passage before the end of the year are now at 31%, down 7% in the past week and down 9% in the past month, according to Polymarket, which shows about $3.7 million has been wagered on that prediction.
Prediction market odds of the CLARITY Act being signed into law by the end of 2026. Source: Polymarket
Meanwhile, White House officials are reportedly weighing a bipartisan ethics counterproposal received on Thursday, following weeks of negotiations between Republican Senator Thom Tillis and Arizona Democrat Ruben Gallego.
The proposal would enable state attorneys general to sue the Department of Justice if it fails to enforce ethics laws against federal officials, three sources familiar with the matter told crypto journalist Eleanor Terrett.
Related: ABA, state banking groups push back on CLARITY Act stablecoin yield provisions
The CLARITY Act aims to establish the first regulatory framework for digital assets in the US, but it has been met with pushback from the banking industry, which argued that the current draft would allow crypto firms to offer yields on stablecoins without facing the same requirements as traditional financial institutions.
On June 26, Galaxy Digital cut its odds of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026 to 50%, warning that the US Senate is running out of time to move the crypto market structure bill before its August recess.
Magazine: How the EU’s crypto tax rules are expected to work for users and platforms
BlackRock has launched two tokenized money market products as the world’s largest asset manager expands its blockchain-based cash management and real-world asset strategy.
Summary
- BSTBL will issue tokenized shares on Ethereum that approved investors can transfer between compliant wallets.
- BRSRV will support multiple blockchains and automatically reinvest dividends each day.
- Both products will hold cash, short-term U.S. Treasuries and Treasury-backed overnight repurchase agreements.
- BlackRock’s cash management group oversees nearly $1.1 trillion across its broader liquidity strategies.
BlackRock launches BSTBL shares on Ethereum
The BlackRock Select Treasury Based Liquidity Fund, or BSTBL, will introduce tokenized shares of an existing money market fund on Ethereum.
Institutional investors will be able to move the shares between approved wallets, subject to regulatory and compliance requirements. This structure brings transferability onto a public blockchain while retaining controls commonly applied to regulated financial products.
BNY Mellon will serve as BSTBL’s transfer agent and tokenization service provider. Its role will connect the fund’s shareholder records and transaction processes with the infrastructure used to issue and transfer the on-chain shares.
BSTBL will invest in cash, short-term U.S. Treasury securities, and overnight repurchase agreements backed by Treasuries. The portfolio aims to preserve principal and liquidity while generating returns from short-duration government debt.
The model differs from a stablecoin because investors hold fund shares rather than tokens designed to maintain a fixed redemption value. Returns will depend on the income generated by the underlying portfolio.
BRSRV targets stablecoin reserve management
BlackRock’s second product, the BlackRock Daily Reinvestment Stablecoin Reserve Vehicle, or BRSRV, is designed for digitally native institutional investors.
Unlike BSTBL’s initial Ethereum-based structure, BRSRV will support access across multiple blockchains. The fund will also reinvest dividends daily, allowing income generated by its assets to remain within the product.
BlackRock said BRSRV could be used in several digital-asset settings, including stablecoin reserve management. Stablecoin issuers typically need liquid, low-risk assets to support redemptions, making Treasury bills and Treasury-backed repurchase agreements common reserve instruments.
Securitize will act as the fund’s transfer agent and tokenization service provider. The company already supplies infrastructure for tokenized securities and previously worked with BlackRock on its blockchain-based investment products.
BRSRV will use the same core asset categories as BSTBL: cash, short-term U.S. government debt and overnight repurchase agreements collateralized by Treasuries.
BlackRock expands its role in tokenized U.S. markets
The two launches extend BlackRock’s involvement in real-world asset tokenization beyond individual blockchain products.
crypto.news reported in July that BlackRock joined a Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation pilot testing tokenized stocks and U.S. Treasuries. The initiative involves securities already held within DTCC’s custody framework, which safeguards about $114 trillion in assets.
JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Vanguard, the New York Stock Exchange and nearly 40 other financial firms are also participating. The pilot lets institutions test blockchain-based representations of traditional securities without moving the underlying assets outside established market infrastructure.
For U.S. institutions, that model may reduce the operational gap between conventional securities and on-chain markets. However, wallet transfers, investor eligibility and access will remain subject to regulatory requirements rather than operating as permissionless crypto transactions.
BlackRock’s cash management group now oversees close to $1.1 trillion for corporations, banks, insurers, foundations and public institutions. Its scale could help introduce tokenized fund shares to investors already using its traditional liquidity products.
BlackRock builds across crypto and traditional finance
BlackRock has also expanded its position in regulated cryptocurrency markets through the iShares Bitcoin Trust, its U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund.
As previously reported by crypto.news, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved an increase in the position limit for options tied to the fund. The limit rose fourfold from 250,000 to 1 million contracts, giving eligible traders room to hold larger options positions linked to IBIT.
The tokenized fund launches represent a separate part of BlackRock’s digital-asset strategy. Rather than providing Bitcoin exposure, BSTBL and BRSRV place traditional cash-management assets on blockchain infrastructure.
Their adoption will depend on institutional demand, regulatory access, and whether on-chain transfers provide meaningful operational advantages over existing money market fund systems.
In less than six weeks, Amazon has gained almost as much market capitalization as SpaceX has lost. Since June 26, both companies have swapped precisely $560 billion in market cap.
Believe it or not, as recently as June 16, both companies had the same valuation, each being a $2.65 trillion company.
Since then, however, their valuations have trended in opposite directions.
Shares of Amazon climbed above $284 today, carrying the online retailer’s market value past $3 trillion for the first time. Only four publicly traded companies had ever reached that mark before.
Elon Musk’s rocket, internet, and AI conglomerate SpaceX had a great start after its IPO, running above $2.9 trillion within three days and briefly eclipsing the value of Amazon for one glorious week.
Stock in SpaceX then crashed, crashed, and crashed some more. Over the past month, the stock has lost 32% of its value.
Today, Amazon’s $3.06 trillion market cap is more than twice as valuable as SpaceX’s $1.44 trillion.
A good earnings report from Amazon
Last week, Amazon reported second quarter net sales of $200 billion and operating income up an impressive 43%, largely due to tariff refund checks and an increase in its Anthropic investment.
Its Amazon Web Services division grew at its fastest rate in 18 quarters.
The company posted adjusted earnings of $1.97 per share that beat Wall Street’s $1.82 estimate, on impressive revenue of $200 billion versus an expected $196 billion.
Accelerating cloud-computing growth eased investors’ concerns about Amazon’s heavy AI spending, with analysts framing its AI expenditures as bets that were starting to pay off.
The stock surged 15% the day after the report and was up about 5% again on Monday, marking another record high.
CEO Andy Jassy said, “There’s a lot to be excited about, and we have much more coming for customers in the second half of the year and beyond.”
Some of that excitement came from outside the business. Roughly $53 billion of the quarter’s $62.6 billion net income arrived as non-operating gains, largely on Amazon’s stake in Anthropic.
Amazon even nudged capital spending guidance toward $220 billion, and investors were happy to oblige — bidding up its stock 22% over the past week despite its plans to spend more cash on AI.
Wall Street raised its Amazon price targets. Analysts at JPMorgan raised their price target to $365 from $330, Wells Fargo reiterated its overweight recommendation and $328 price target, and TD Cowen said buy up to $350.
Read more: Some SpaceX bonds have already sunk to junk-like territory
SpaceX reports Tuesday, more stock unlocks Thursday
All of that good news for Amazon contrasts starkly with a terrible few weeks for SpaceX, which priced shares of the largest IPO in history at $135 apiece in June.
Within three trading sessions, it touched an intraday peak near $2.95 trillion — a level it would never regain. In fact, its value has halved since that high.
By this morning, SpaceX traded down to a fresh all-time low near $105. The stock sits well below the price its own underwriters set less than two months ago.
The calendar offers no relief.
SpaceX posts its first quarterly results as a public company after the close of regular trading tomorrow. Investors are obviously not optimistic, given the poor stock performance.
Two days after earnings, a share unlock will free 911 million additional shares for sale. That will more than double the tradable float, adding sell pressure on shares already under steady pressure over the past month.
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.
The asset manager introduced two blockchain-based money market funds designed to qualify as stablecoin reserve assets under the US GENIUS Act.
Kenya has anchored more than 15 million academic records to the Avalanche C-Chain as it replaces slow, paper-based certificate checks with a national electronic verification system.
Summary
- Kenya has anchored over 15 million records dating to 1989 on Avalanche.
- Nearly 1 million 2025 KCSE certificates are available exclusively through the electronic platform.
- KNEC expects the system to eventually cover about 35 million verifiable records.
- The platform cuts some certificate checks from months to seconds, according to Ava Labs.
Kenya moves academic verification onto Avalanche
The Kenya National Examinations Council launched the system through a local technology provider, according to an Ava Labs announcement published on Aug. 3.
The initial rollout covers more than 15 million historical examination records dating back to 1989. It also includes certificates for nearly 1 million candidates who took the Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education examination in 2025.
Those certificates are now issued exclusively through KNEC’s electronic certificate platform. Students can access and download their credentials, while employers, universities and other institutions can verify them online.
“Candidates no longer have to rely solely on physical certificates. Instead, they can securely access, download and verify their KCSE certificates online, providing a faster, more reliable and more convenient way of managing academic credentials in the digital age,” KNEC CEO David Njengere said.
KNEC plans to expand the system to about 35 million records. Its expected scope includes primary and secondary qualifications, advanced diplomas and government teacher-training certifications.
Avalanche system targets certificate fraud
Academic verification in Kenya previously depended on manual requests, physical files and centralized databases. Ava Labs said individual checks could take a month, while large verification requests from recruiters could take up to six months.
The new platform is designed to reduce that process to seconds. Anchoring certification data on Avalanche creates a tamper-resistant reference that authorized users can check against records presented by candidates.
KNEC also aims to reduce certificate forgery and the use of fraudulent verification websites. However, the announcement did not provide detailed information about which data fields are stored directly on-chain, how personal information is protected, or the cost of operating the platform.
The rollout extends Avalanche’s use in government record systems. In the United States, California’s Department of Motor Vehicles has digitized 42 million vehicle titles using Avalanche, while Bergen County, New Jersey, is using the network in a project covering 370,000 property deeds valued at about $240 billion, according to Ava Labs.
AVAX sees no clear boost from Kenya rollout
The announcement did not produce a clear breakout in AVAX, Avalanche’s native token. crypto.news data showed the token trading near $6.54, with a market capitalization of roughly $2.82 billion.
Its 24-hour trading volume stood near $170 million, down about 35% from the previous day. That suggests the Kenya announcement had not yet generated a sustained increase in market activity.
KNEC’s platform nevertheless adds a nationwide public-sector use case to the Avalanche C-Chain. Its long-term effect will depend on whether the system reaches the planned 35 million records and continues processing new certifications at scale.
Kenya expands blockchain use amid cyber risks
The academic project arrives as Kenya develops broader oversight of digital assets. As crypto.news previously reported, the Capital Markets Authority moved in July to procure surveillance software capable of monitoring Bitcoin, Ethereum and more than 20 other blockchain networks.
The regulator wants the system to trace funds, flag suspicious wallets and identify offshore crypto platforms serving Kenyan users without authorization.
Kenya’s digital expansion also faces cybersecurity risks. Hackers temporarily defaced President William Ruto’s official website on July 18 and demanded five Bitcoin as ransom. Authorities opened an investigation, but the incident was separate from KNEC’s Avalanche deployment.
The next test will be whether KNEC can expand the certification platform while protecting student data, maintaining access and preventing the digital system from creating new points of failure.
Once a goldmine for carry traders, bitcoin futures have flipped, consistently underperforming plain‑vanilla U.S. Treasuries every month since February.
Carry trades consistently yielded 20% or more across regulated and unregulated crypto exchanges during the 2021 bull market. The strategy involved shorting bitcoin futures while simultaneously buying a spot exchange-traded fund (ETF). Now they return just 3% compared with an average 3.8% yield on two-year Treasuries.
Traders have long used futures, agreements to buy or sell an asset at a set price on a specific date, to set up trades that profited from the gap between futures and spot prices, known as basis. That basis, in annualized terms, has been lower than the two‑year Treasury note continuously for more than five months, according to data source Glassnode.
“Three-month futures basis has paid less than a two-year Treasury since February. Only one other stretch on record has run this long: August 2022 into January 2023. It ended at the cycle low,” Glassnode said in a post on Telegram.
The three-month basis has been yielding less than the two-year Treasury note for 157 days, according to Glassnode’s Sunday chart.
Bitcoin analysts are pointing to August as a potential inflection point, hinging on whether the asset can secure a key monthly close that would confirm a technical bear-market bottom signal. Separately, Grayscale research suggests the bottom could have occurred earlier than the typical four-year cycle implies, pushing the focus to macro conditions rather than the calendar.
According to a Monday report shared with Cointelegraph by 10x Research founder Markus Thielen, Bitcoin’s July performance did not meet the threshold needed to validate a technical bottom. However, the firm argues that a monthly close near $63,000 in August could flip several of its cycle indicators to a bullish configuration.
Key takeaways
- 10x Research says a July monthly close failed to confirm its technical bottom signal, but an August monthly close near $63,000 could trigger a reversal indication.
- 10x Research continues to favor long positions, but would turn more neutral if Bitcoin breaks key support levels and moving averages.
- Grayscale’s Zach Pandl told investors in a July 22 report that Bitcoin may have bottomed earlier than the four-year cycle would suggest, potentially placing the cycle low in September or October.
- Macro variables—especially Fed policy and changes in the 10-year Treasury yield—remain central to timing both analysts’ outlooks.
- Other market participants highlight supply-side stress indicators, including the share of Bitcoin held at a loss.
What needs to happen for a 10x Research bottom signal
10x Research’s technical framework centers on cycle indicators tied to Bitcoin’s monthly price behavior. Thielen said in the Monday report that Bitcoin closed July below the level required to confirm the firm’s bear-market bottom setup.
When the analysis was prepared, Bitcoin was trading at $63,140. That matters because 10x Research argues the distance from the July closing level to the next confirmation threshold may be small. In its view, if Bitcoin prints an August monthly close around $63,000, the change could be sufficient to turn multiple cycle indicators bullish.
Importantly, 10x Research is not treating the signal as unconditional. The firm said it continued to favor long positioning, but would shift to a neutral stance if Bitcoin breaks key support levels and moving averages—an acknowledgement that technical confirmation can fail if price action deteriorates before the month ends.
Macro risks remain the timing driver
While the chart-based trigger is specific, 10x Research frames macro policy as the overriding variable. Its base case assumes the Federal Reserve holds interest rates steady. But the firm also flagged two key uncertainties: further increases in the 10-year Treasury yield could raise the probability of a September rate hike, and the Iran conflict adds geopolitical risk that could disrupt risk assets more broadly.
That emphasis on the macro backdrop is also echoed by Grayscale. In a July 22 report, Grayscale head of research Zach Pandl argued that Bitcoin’s timing might not match the traditional four-year cycle pattern, but that macroeconomic conditions—including Fed policy—still represent the primary mechanism shaping Bitcoin’s price.
Grayscale: a bottom may have come early—cycle low could be later
Grayscale’s view diverges from a strict reliance on the four-year cycle. Pandl told investors that Bitcoin may have bottomed earlier than the traditional four-year cycle would suggest. Under that interpretation, the cycle low would still fall in September or October, even if the earliest “bottoming” signals appeared sooner.
For traders and portfolio managers, the practical difference is not just the date—it is what to monitor. If bottoming can occur in phases, then early relief rallies or stabilization periods may not immediately complete the cycle, and investors may need to watch macro catalysts that can either sustain or reverse the improvement.
Supply-side pressure and the loss-held supply signal
In addition to technical and macro narratives, market structure indicators are contributing to the debate about how close Bitcoin may be to a durable bottom.
Earlier in July, crypto brokerage K33 pointed to a supply-side stress measure: more than half of Bitcoin’s supply was held at a loss. K33 described this as another sign that the market could be approaching a bottom, because prior periods with similar loss concentration were followed by strong subsequent returns.
K33 also reported that Bitcoin bottomed within 13 to 31 days of when that threshold was reached in 2017, 2018, and 2022. The key takeaway for investors is that the timeline is not only about price resistance or moving averages—distribution and holder pain can compress into a short window that may precede a broader trend reversal.
Another data point referenced in the broader discussion is long-term holder behavior. In a June interview, Swan Bitcoin CEO Cory Klippsten told Cointelegraph that long-term holders’ record balance of 14.7 million BTC was an indication Bitcoin was nearing a bottom. The idea aligns with a broader pattern often seen during bear markets: if long-term holders absorb supply while not distributing into weakness, downside pressure may eventually fade.
What to watch as the month turns
For now, the near-term question is straightforward: can Bitcoin produce an August monthly close around $63,000 in a way that validates 10x Research’s cycle indicators, while macro conditions do not undermine the setup. Investors should also monitor how supply-side stress measures evolve and whether the market behavior stays consistent with the historical windows flagged by K33—because that combination of technical confirmation and shifting holder dynamics is what will determine whether “bottoming” turns into a sustained trend.
Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.
All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.
Other easily missed breeding spots include a tiny pocket of water beneath the soil in a potted plant, a discarded tire, or a planter saucer. Maintained, chlorinated pools and fountains with moving water generally aren’t the problem. Mosquitoes want still water—and the smaller the pool, the easier it is to miss.
They never walk past a container without glancing inside
Once mosquito experts learn what a breeding spot looks like, they see them everywhere.
In her own yard, a tarp left crumpled over some lumber became a collection of tiny pools after it rained. Buckets and cups forgotten after parties are equally inviting. Then there’s her neighbor’s wheelbarrow, which is full of weeds and refills whenever it rains. “I keep sneaking over there and emptying it out,” Bartholomay says. “The mosquitoes just love it.”
Where you live determines where else you need to look. In parts of Florida, some plants, like ornamental bromeliads, collect water in the cups of their leaves, allowing mosquitoes to breed several feet above the ground. Daniel Markowski, technical advisor with the American Mosquito Control Association, flags children’s toys—dump trucks, sand pails, plastic cups—and buried downspouts that aren’t draining properly. Mosquitoes can breed in the trapped water underground, then fly in and out through the top.
Prison officer claims colleagues ‘broke down’ over ‘nasty bullying’ culture
Douglas Dynamics, Inc. (PLOW) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript
Can SpaceX earnings revive SPCX stock after its 52% plunge?
Renter of Home in Anne Heche Crash Denies Settlement With Son
No Jackpot Winner as $257 Million Prize Rolls Over to $269 Million Monday Draw
Weekend Open Thread: Staud – Corporette.com
NEW XRP RICHLIST MAKES YOU A MILLIONAIRE WITH 1000 XRP **YES IM SERIOUS** THE CLARITY ACT IS A TRAP
All financial advisors HATE this man! @CRED_club #LLAShorts 561
Matt Hougan :”My NEW Prediction For The 2026 Crypto Bull Run” (Prepare Now)
-
Business5 days agoWhy Trees Belong on the Risk Register
-
Fashion3 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Wit & Wisdom
-
Politics3 days agoMeta enters AI-training agreement with far-right ‘propaganda rag’ Newsmax
-
Entertainment6 days ago‘Stargate’ Creator’s New Sci-Fi Series Returns for Season 3 Tomorrow
-
Crypto World2 days agoMicroStrategy Post-Earnings CLARITY Act Push Could Add New Catalyst for Its Stock
-
Politics6 days agoThe Part of the Electric Transition Nobody Wants to Discuss
-
Business6 days agoMajor shareholder moves on Canyon
-
Crypto World3 days agoXRP Ledger v3.3.0 brings five institutional features
-
News Videos4 days agoBitcoin Enters the 3rd Stage of the Bear Market
-
Crypto World6 days agoKraken Enables Retail Access to Jersey Mike’s IPO via Tokenized Shares
-
Tech7 days agoNew macOS Sequoia & Sonoma security updates for older Macs
-
News Videos6 days agoClaude: Build Financial Dashboards in Minutes (2026)
-
Politics4 days agoLuke Littler’s dominance sparks GOAT debate
-
Sports4 days agoSeema Kaliramna Wins Discus Throw Bronze, Takes India’s CWG Medals Tally To 17
-
Business6 days agoJohnson & Johnson agrees to $5.5B settlement over talc cancer claims
-
Crypto World1 day agoCrypto PAC spending tops $2M in Michigan House race
-
Business3 days agoTrump Announces Hamas Disarmament Agreement as Iran Strikes Kuwait Air Base and US Attacks Pause Overnight
-
Crypto World3 days agoNew York sues Kalshi over prediction market gambling
-
Tech5 days agoGemini can now summarize the messiest comment threads in Google Docs
-
Tech2 days agoESET tracks rise in malicious AI skills and adaptable malware
You must be logged in to post a comment Login