President Donald Trump’s renewed aggressive posturing toward Iran has pushed bitcoin lower by roughly 2% over the past 24 hours to $67,000. While this price action is consistent with routine volatility, beneath the surface, market structure looks fragile.

This is mainly due to flows in the Deribit-listed options market, specifically, a build-up of defensive positioning just below current prices that could result in a slide all the way down to $50,000.

A fragile setup below $68,000

In recent weeks, traders have been loading up on put options offering downside protection. These defensive flows have been concentrated in put options at strike levels $68,000 and lower, all the way down to mid-$55,000s. This is understandable, given the macroeconomic risks from the Iran war, quantum threats and the brutal bear market that began late last year.

However, when this kind of positioning builds, it creates what savvy traders call a “negative gamma” zone – a setup where market makers or dealers who add liquidity to an exchange’s order book are forced to react to price moves in ways that end up accelerating the prevailing trend, which is bearish in this case.

These kinds of dynamics have amplified both bullish and bearish trends in the past.

The Glassnode chart shows that dealer gamma exposure is mostly negative from $68,000 to $50,000. This is the result of being on the opposite end of traders’ long put positions.

In other words, dealers are holding short put positions. So, as the market drops below $68,000, they face losses and are likely to short BTC to hedge their exposure.

This hedging can push prices even lower, creating a feedback loop, which can accelerate quickly.

That’s why the latest drop below the $68,000 level becomes critical. The break below that threshold doesn’t just signal technical weakness — it opens the door to a zone where forced selling could intensify.

“Negative gamma is now building just below current price levels, from $68K all the way down to the high 50s,” Glassnode said in its weekly report.

“A move into this zone could trigger accelerated selling as hedging flows reinforce downside momentum, turning what would otherwise be a gradual move into a sharper repricing, with a potential revisit of the $60k level, the bottom of the February 5 selloff,” the firm added.

With liquidity still relatively thin following the March 27 options expiry, and likely to remain thin over the Easter holidays, there may not be enough buyers to absorb that pressure.

So, if the feedback loop fully kicks in, the decline could extend well below $60,000.

This setup shows that while bitcoin is currently reacting to war headlines, the market’s inner workings can also shape its trajectory.

If prices hold above $68,000, the current setup may unwind without much damage. But a sustained break below that level could flip the market into a regime where selling feeds on itself, turning a routine dip into a much deeper move.

According to real-time data from analytics platform Coinglass, large traders on perpetual DEX Hyperliquid currently hold a combined $3.4 billion in notional positions across the venue. Of that, $1.737 billion is in long positions, accounting for 51.08% of whale exposure, while $1.663 billion is in shorts, or 48.92%, leaving the long–short ratio effectively balanced at 1.04.

Despite the slight tilt toward longs, whales are in the red on bullish bets and green on bearish ones. Coinglass snapshots cited by market outlets show unrealized P&L on long positions at roughly -$153 million, while shorts are ahead by about $161 million, suggesting recent price action has punished leveraged dip‑buyers more than it has squeezed short sellers.

Within the aggregate figures, one address — 0xa5b0..41 — stands out for its aggressive positioning on Ether. Data from Hyperliquid whale trackers show the address holding a 15x leveraged long on ETH opened around $2,148.7, effectively a full‑size bet at that entry level.

As of the latest reading, that ETH position is running an unrealized loss of roughly $8.5965 million, reflecting how even a modest spot move against a 15x leveraged trade can translate into multi‑million‑dollar drawdowns for whales. Prior Coinglass‑based reports have flagged the same address multiple times as it shifted from being in profit to deeply negative as ETH whipsawed around the low‑$2,000s.

The current $3.4 billion whale footprint comes after weeks of scrutiny on perpetual DEX data quality, with Coinglass previously comparing volume, open interest and liquidations across Hyperliquid, Aster and Lighter. In that analysis, Hyperliquid showed higher liquidations relative to volume, indicating more genuine leverage and risk transfer versus pure incentive‑driven wash activity, though critics argued one‑day snapshots can be misleading.

For now, the slightly long‑biased but loss‑making whale book on Hyperliquid suggests big accounts are still willing to lean long across assets, but have mistimed entries into recent volatility. With shorts currently in aggregate profit, funding, liquidation maps and open interest shifts in coming sessions will show whether these whales add to risk, cut exposure, or flip more decisively to the short side.

Wallet in Telegram has launched perpetual futures trading through a new integration with Lighter, the Ethereum-based decentralized exchange (DEX), the teams announced Thursday.

The feature enables users to open long and short positions on more than 50 assets — spanning crypto, metals, equities, oil, and ETFs — with up to 50x leverage and a minimum position size of $1, all without leaving the Telegram app.

The Open Platform (TOP), the entity that develops Wallet in Telegram, told Forbes that it evaluated multiple decentralized perpetual exchanges before selecting Lighter, with the decision driven by cost structure, incentive design, and alignment with a retail-heavy audience. Lighter’s zero-fee model for standard accounts was a key factor.

Rather than competing for power users on standalone exchanges, Wallet is targeting a broader audience that may not have previously used derivatives platforms. The wallet has more than 150 million registered users, many of whom were onboarded through earlier gamified mini-app features on Telegram.

Users in the United States and the United Kingdom are excluded from the rollout. The initial focus is on emerging markets where traditional brokerage infrastructure is more limited.

Lighter Struggles Post-TGE

The deal represents a significant distribution channel for Lighter, which has become one of the top perp DEXs by volume since launching its public mainnet in late 2025.

Lighter processed $59 billion in perpetual volume in March 2026, ranking fourth among perp DEXs, according to DefiLlama. That’s down nearly 80% from its peak of $292 billion in November.

The platform runs on a custom zero-knowledge rollup on Ethereum, where every order match and liquidation is cryptographically verified onchain. It raised $68 million in November 2025 from Founders Fund, Ribbit Capital, Haun Ventures, and Robinhood. Since then, Lighter has expanded into spot trading, launched its LIT token, and introduced equity perpetuals.

Still, the exchange trails category leader Hyperliquid, which processed nearly $210 billion in March, by a wide margin.

The platform’s LIT token rallied 5% on the news, but has struggled since its December launch, losing more than two-thirds of its value since January 1.

Lighter also announced that its Partner Attribution program is now open, allowing developers to integrate the exchange’s perpetuals and spot infrastructure into their own applications.

TLDR

• Arthur Hayes questioned whether native multisig wallets on Solana could have prevented the Drift Protocol hack.
• Early investigations showed that attackers compromised administrative access rather than exploiting smart contract code.
• Solana leaders stated that human weaknesses and operational security gaps enabled the breach.
• Drift Protocol froze all functions and removed the compromised wallet from its multisig setup.
• The DRIFT token fell to $0.038 before recovering to around $0.052 within 24 hours.

A $280 million exploit at Drift Protocol triggered debate across the crypto sector and pressured token prices. Arthur Hayes questioned wallet infrastructure, while Solana leaders blamed operational failures. Early findings indicate attackers compromised administrative access rather than smart contracts.

Arthur Hayes Raises Wallet Security Concerns After DRIFT Exploit

Arthur Hayes challenged crypto wallet design after hackers drained about $280 million from Drift Protocol. He asked on X, “If Solana had native multi sig addresses, would the Drift hack even have been possible?” His remarks focused attention on wallet controls and multisignature structures.

Meanwhile, executives across the Solana ecosystem addressed the breach and clarified its scope. They said the attack did not stem from faulty smart contracts. Instead, they pointed to compromised administrative permissions and weak operational security.

Jacob Creech, Solana’s vice president of technology, urged protocols to review their configurations. He wrote, “Every protocol should evaluate their setup and understand if it fits your security requirements.”

He added that stronger multisig thresholds and timelocks can restrict unauthorized actions.

Drift Protocol responded by freezing all protocol functions after detecting the exploit. The team removed the compromised wallet from its multisig setup. It also said it is working with exchanges, bridges, and law enforcement to trace funds.

The DRIFT token fell sharply after news of the breach spread. It dropped to a record low of $0.038 before recovering part of the losses. At the time of reporting, DRIFT traded near $0.052, down 27% in 24 hours.

Retail sentiment on Stocktwits shifted during the volatility. Sentiment moved to “bullish” from “neutral” within a day. Chatter levels increased to “extremely high” from “high,” reflecting intense discussion.

Solana Leaders Say Human Weaknesses, Not Code, Enabled Attack

Solana leaders stated that the breach exposed weaknesses in permission management practices. Lily Liu, president of the Solana Foundation, said the incident “hits hard” for the ecosystem. She added that the smart contracts themselves remained intact.

Liu wrote on X, “The real targets now are humans: social engineering and opsec weaknesses more than code exploits.”

She emphasized the need to improve operational safeguards. She said the ecosystem must strengthen processes around access controls.

Creech echoed that view and encouraged internal reviews across protocols. He highlighted the importance of aligning security setups with risk exposure. He said better controls can limit damage when credentials become compromised.

TLDR

• The IMF states that tokenization replaces core financial architecture rather than improving existing systems.
• The report identifies stablecoins as the weakest link within the tokenized financial structure.
• Stablecoin transaction volume reached $1.8 trillion per month by early 2026.
• The IMF says 97% of stablecoins are denominated in U.S. dollars.
• The report warns that stablecoins can lose their peg during periods of market stress.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) released a policy paper in April 2026 on tokenized finance. Tobias Adrian authored the report in his role as Financial Counsellor. The document argues that tokenization replaces core financial architecture rather than improving existing systems.

IMF Flags Stablecoins and Tokenization Settlement Risks

The IMF states that tokenization shifts trust, settlement, and risk management into shared digital infrastructure. It explains that programmable tokens embed ownership and compliance directly on ledgers. As a result, risk moves from institutions to code and system design.

The report separates tokenized money into deposits, regulated stablecoins, and wholesale CBDCs. It states that each form allocates risk differently within the system. However, it identifies stablecoins as the weakest structural point in tokenization.

The Fund reports that stablecoin transaction volume reached $1.8 trillion per month by early 2026. It notes that volumes were minimal in 2018 and rose sharply through 2024 and 2025. The paper describes this growth as rapid settlement expansion within crypto markets.

The report states that 97% of stablecoins are denominated in U.S. dollars. It adds that these tokens now influence money markets and payment systems. As a result, dollar-based stablecoins extend dollar usage into tokenized markets.

Adrian writes that stablecoins resemble money market funds more than central bank money. He states that a fully backed stablecoin can still lose its peg. He links that risk to liquidity stress during redemption surges.

Rapid Settlement and Sovereignty Risks Highlighted

The IMF explains that traditional finance uses settlement lags to manage stress. It states that two-day settlement windows allow regulators to intervene. However, tokenization enables atomic settlement that removes that delay.

The report warns that automated liquidations can trigger rapid asset sales. It states that coding errors or faulty price feeds can spread losses quickly. As a result, stress events unfold faster than in traditional markets.

The paper adds that central bank backstops operate on business-day cycles. It explains that tokenized systems function continuously, including weekends and holidays. Therefore, stablecoins operating as settlement layers face immediate testing during stress.

The IMF states that stablecoins connect every component of tokenized markets. It explains that smart contracts, collateral positions, and liquidity pools settle in them. Consequently, a broken peg would affect all linked transactions simultaneously.

The report also highlights cross-border risks for emerging economies. It states that dollar stablecoins can move capital outside banking channels. As a result, central banks may lose response time during currency pressure.

The IMF notes fragmentation across multiple token platforms. It states that liquidity splits across separate ledgers and bridges. The report concludes that fragmentation can increase systemic strain within tokenized finance.

Murad Mahmudov, the crypto trader widely known online as the “Memecoin Messiah,” has endured a brutal nine-month stretch, wiping almost $60 million from his bets. Yet he remains bullish on SPX6900, a memecoin that aspires to outpace the S&P 500 and redefine memecoin economics.

Key takeaways:

• Mahmudov argues SPX6900 could grow the market cap of the token to $1 trillion—from roughly $250 million today—an extraordinary, 400,000% rise.
• On the technical front, SPX6900’s three-day chart points to a potential further decline of about 20% in the coming weeks.
• Public portfolio data shows a heavy concentration in SPX6900, with the Muststopmurad wallet holding about 29.964 million SPX (roughly $7.8 million), about 96% of the publicly tracked portfolio value.
• Despite steep losses, there have been no meaningful sales of SPX6900 or other major positions, according to DropsTab, suggesting the trader has not yet realized losses beyond the unrealized figure.
• The broader memecoin sector remains battered, with a large share of projects inactive and exit liquidity in some names showing limited real trading activity.

SPX6900 on a bold trajectory, or a fragile setup?

In a post circulated on X, Mahmudov asserted that SPX6900, a memecoin’s bid to overtake the S&P 500 in market presence, could surge to a $1 trillion market capitalization from its current roughly $250 million valuation—a jump of about 400,000%. The claim frames SPX6900 as a long-term bet on a narrative shift within the memecoin space, one that hinges on mass adoption and liquidity enhancements to propel a token past a traditional stock index in perceived value.

By contrast, the marketplace for memecoins has faced a brutal environment. SPX and other memecoins have tracked a broader retreat in the sector, with prices and on-chain liquidity deteriorating as traders reassess risk capital. Bitcoin remains the sole cryptocurrency to have reached a $1 trillion market cap in historical precedent, underscoring how extraordinary such a SPX6900 thesis would be in ordinary market conditions.

Concentration risk and unrealized losses

Public wallet analytics place Mahmudov’s SPX6900 exposure at the core of his tracked holdings. Arkham Intelligence flags the trader’s wallets under the entity “Muststopmurad,” and current data show approximately 29.964 million SPX held—valued at about $7.79 million. This single line item accounts for roughly 96% of the total tracked portfolio, estimated near $8.1 million.

The magnitude of the drawdown is stark. At a peak in July of the previous year, the same holdings carried an implied value of around $67 million. The ensuing correction has produced an unrealized loss near $60 million as the memecoin sector retraced more than 80% from its highs. The heavy tilt toward SPX6900 illustrates a classic high-conviction, high-risk position where outsized gains are possible but gains can evaporate rapidly in a sentiment-driven market.

Despite the paper losses, Mahmudov’s on-chain footprint shows no clear exit from these bets. DropsTab, a portfolio-tracking service that aggregates public wallets, indicates no material sales of SPX6900 or his other major positions. The platform records realized profits and losses on the tracked holdings as zero, suggesting the decline has come largely from price moves rather than realized dispositions. The portfolio, by this accounting, still shows more than $6.22 million in unrealized gains across its positions, indicating a complex mix of upside exposure that the trader has not yet cashed in—or chosen not to crystallize.

Exit liquidity and the broader memecoin backdrop

The memory-heavy, supply-sensitive dynamics of memecoins are also reflected in on-chain liquidity metrics. Market data show that several memecoin names—such as RETARDMAXX, HONK, and CHAD—struggle to attract meaningful liquidity. On Solana-based pairs, RETARDMAXX displayed around $44,000 in liquidity with only six transactions and modest daily volume, while CHAD showed roughly $842 in liquidity with no trades or new makers recorded in the same window. HONK’s pair registered just $1 in liquidity and no activity, underscoring the fragility of exit liquidity for some of these tokens in stressed markets.

Such liquidity gaps matter for holders who may wish to monetize losses or trim risk, particularly when a narrative previously supported by hype but now confronted with waning enthusiasm. In a market where a majority of new tokens fail to find steady demand, the ability to realize gains—or even limit losses—depends on the existence of durable liquidity pools and active buyers. CoinGecko’s January tracking highlighted the fragility of the broader memecoin set, reporting that 53.2% of all cryptocurrencies tracked since 2021 were inactive, with 11.6 million token failures recorded in 2025 alone that disproportionately affected memecoins. This backdrop helps explain why even sizable unrealized gains on a single position may struggle to translate into liquidity if the market lacks buyers willing to step in at meaningful levels.

Technical setup: a potential continuation of downside in SPX6900

From a chart perspective, the SPX6900 price action on a three-day horizon appears to be breaking down from a rising wedge pattern. A breakdown beneath support near the $0.26 level has already been triggered, with the price trading below the 20-, 50-, and 100-period exponential moving averages, a configuration that often signals a continuation of the downtrend in the near term. If the pattern plays out as the setup suggests, a measured move could take SPX6900 toward the $0.205 area—roughly 20% below current levels. Such a move would have implications for Mahmudov’s portfolio, potentially shaving another $1.5 million or more from the SPX stake, depending on the token’s price action and any accompanying shifts in liquidity.

Beyond the mechanics of the chart, the risk for concentrated memecoin bets remains structural. The memecoin sector’s volatility has historically outpaced broader crypto markets, with narrative-coupled demand driving extreme swings in both directions. For Mahmudov, the question is whether the SPX6900 thesis can withstand a test of time and liquidity, or if the current trend portends further writedowns before a credible inflection—if one ever arrives—materializes.

As of now, Mahmudov’s public posture suggests a patience-based stance rather than a willingness to harvest losses. The combination of a grandiose market-cap target, a highly concentrated position, and a market environment that has punished many memecoins for thin liquidity presents a case study in risk management rather than conventional investing wisdom. For observers, the ongoing question is whether SPX6900 can deliver on its promised scale or if the token’s path will remain a cautionary tale about the limits of meme-driven valuation in a crowded, unforgiving market.

What to watch next: productizing a memecoin’s ascent into mainstream liquidity remains the central hurdle. If SPX6900 can attract meaningful exchange listings, deeper liquidity, and broader investor interest, the thesis could gain traction. If not, the focus will shift to risk controls around highly concentrated portfolios and the practicalities of exiting positions in a market where exit liquidity is uneven at best.

Digital banking platform SoFi Technologies has launched Big Business Banking, a platform that allows companies to manage fiat and crypto transactions within a single regulated system.

According to Thursday’s announcement, the offering enables companies to hold deposits, move funds and settle transactions around the clock using either traditional currencies or digital assets, consolidating functions that have typically been split across banks, custodians and crypto service providers.

It also introduces support for issuing and redeeming the company’s stablecoin, SoFiUSD, allowing businesses to convert between fiat and onchain assets while keeping reserves within a regulated banking environment.

The rollout includes participation from companies such as Cumberland, BitGo, Bullish, B2C2, Fireblocks, Wintermute, Jupiter, Galaxy, Mesh Payments and Mastercard, reflecting early demand from trading, payments and infrastructure providers.

SoFi said the system is expected to connect with blockchain networks, including Solana, to support onchain settlement.

The move comes as the bank has been pushing deeper into digital assets. In June, SoFi resumed crypto trading, enabling users to buy, sell and hold digital assets, and expanded blockchain-based remittance services to more than 30 countries. 

In December, it launched SoFiUSD, a fully reserved dollar-backed stablecoin issued by its banking subsidiary, redeemable on demand and initially deployed on Ethereum.

Related: Standard Chartered says faster stablecoin turnover could curb demand

Crypto companies build digital asset infrastructure for institutions

While SoFi is expanding from the banking side, crypto-native companies are building similar infrastructure to integrate digital assets into institutional systems.

In March, crypto infrastructure platform BitGo launched a financing platform that enables institutions to borrow and lend against liquid, staked and locked assets within a single custody account.

In January, Fireblocks acquired crypto accounting platform TRES for $130 million, adding tax and compliance capabilities as institutions seek audit-ready reporting for digital asset operations.

This week, Ripple added digital asset capabilities to its treasury platform, enabling companies to manage crypto and fiat balances in one system.

Beyond expanding services for institutional clients, several platforms are also pursuing US banking licenses. On Wednesday, crypto exchange EDX Markets applied to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to establish a national trust bank, aiming to separate custody and settlement from trading through a non-depository entity called EDX Trust.

Earlier this month, Zerohash applied for a national trust bank charter to expand its stablecoin and custody services, joining applicants including Coinbase, Laser Digital and Payoneer as companies seek regulatory approval to offer integrated crypto financial services.

Magazine: AI agents will kill the web as we know it: Animoca’s Yat Siu