Crypto World
XRPL is quietly building institutional DeFi
While the market argues about XRP price levels, the ledger underneath it is assembling something more ambitious: a full stack of compliance-native DeFi rails aimed at banks, funds, and treasury desks. Here is what is already live, what is in validator voting right now, and why the whole bet could still fail.
Summary
- XRP Ledger is expanding its institutional DeFi infrastructure with compliance focused features including a permissioned DEX, native lending, and tokenized asset support.
- XRPL contributors are advancing XLS 65 and XLS 66 through validator voting to introduce fixed term lending designed for regulated financial institutions.
- Ripple’s RLUSD and more than $3 billion in tokenized real world assets are strengthening XRPL’s push to become a compliance ready blockchain for institutional finance.
The XRP Ledger has spent most of its fourteen-year life being described as a payments chain. Fast, cheap, boring. The description was accurate for a long time, and it also missed what has been happening on the ledger over the past eighteen months. Piece by piece, amendment by amendment, XRPL contributors and Ripple have been laying down infrastructure for something the rest of the industry mostly talks about in conference keynotes: DeFi that regulated institutions can actually use.
The phrase itself, institutional DeFi, tends to produce eye rolls among crypto natives. It sounds like a contradiction, a way of saying decentralized finance with the decentralization filed off. But the buildout on XRPL is concrete enough, and far enough along, that it deserves a serious look. As of this week, the two amendments that would bring native fixed-term lending to the ledger, XLS-65 and XLS-66, are in active validator voting following the Rippled v3.1.0 release in late January. Tokenized real-world assets on XRPL have passed $3 billion. Ripple’s stablecoin RLUSD crossed $1 billion in supply and ranks among the fastest-growing stablecoins in the market. A permissioned exchange layer with protocol-level compliance controls has gone live. None of this made much noise. That is partly the point.
The core bet: compliance at the protocol layer
Every major smart contract chain has tried to court institutions, and almost all of them have run into the same wall. Banks and asset managers cannot deploy client capital into open pools where the counterparty might be a sanctioned entity, a mixer, or a teenager with a hardware wallet. The standard industry answer has been to bolt compliance on afterward: whitelisted front ends, wrapped permissioned versions of open protocols, off-chain legal agreements draped over on-chain positions.
XRPL made the opposite bet. Instead of adding compliance on top, its contributors embedded identity and access controls into the protocol itself. Three primitives do most of the work.
Credentials, linked to decentralized identifiers, let trusted issuers attest on-chain that a wallet belongs to a KYC-verified entity, an accredited investor, or a firm with a specific regulatory permission. The attestation lives on the ledger. The underlying documents do not.
Permissioned Domains, which went live under the XLS-80 amendment with 91% validator support, use those credentials to gate access to specific markets. A domain can require that every participant holds a valid credential from an approved issuer. Anyone outside the domain simply cannot trade inside it.
The Permissioned DEX extends the ledger’s native order book exchange, which has existed since 2012, into these controlled environments. Regulated firms can run foreign exchange or tokenized asset markets with full AML and KYC enforcement while settlement still happens on a public blockchain. Activation followed within weeks of validator consensus earlier this year.
Alongside those three sit the supporting pieces: Multi-Purpose Tokens, a standard that embeds metadata and transfer rules at the asset layer so structured financial instruments do not need custom smart contracts; Batch Transactions for atomic delivery-versus-payment, the settlement pattern institutions use for cross-asset swaps; and Token Escrow support extended to IOUs and MPTs.
The design philosophy separates XRPL from nearly everything else in the market. On Ethereum or Solana, an institution wanting a compliant venue has to build one out of general-purpose parts and hope the auditors sign off. On XRPL, the compliance tooling is the venue.
The lending protocol is the real test
Infrastructure is necessary but not sufficient. The feature that will decide whether institutional DeFi on XRPL is a real business or a well-documented ghost town is the lending protocol, defined in the XLS-65 and XLS-66 specifications.
The two amendments work as a pair. XLS-65 introduces Single Asset Vaults, which aggregate liquidity from depositors and issue vault shares that can be transferable or locked depending on configuration. XLS-66 builds the actual credit machinery on top: fixed-term, fixed-rate loans with preset amortization schedules, issued through on-ledger contracts between lenders and borrowers.
The design choices are telling. Where open DeFi lending runs on overcollateralization and instant liquidations, the XRPL protocol supports uncollateralized loans with off-chain underwriting. Borrower evaluation, credit scoring, and risk management stay where institutions already have mature models, while issuance, repayment, and default records live on the ledger. First-loss capital structures add a protection layer familiar to anyone who has looked at securitization. Vault operators can restrict participation to KYC and AML compliant entities at the protocol level, which is precisely the feature that separates this from open DeFi.
Doppler Finance, a tokenized capital markets infrastructure firm, put the honest caveat on record this week: a protocol can define how lending activity is recorded and executed on-chain, but it cannot, by itself, create an institutional credit market. Underwriting, treasury management, portfolio monitoring, and regulatory oversight all need operational layers that no amendment can ship. XLS-66 provides the rails. Someone still has to run trains on them.
There is at least one committed passenger. Evernorth, one of the largest XRP treasury firms, has said it will make the lending protocol a core pillar of its digital asset strategy, describing it as a potential fundamental shift in how institutional liquidity moves on-chain and pointing to what it called a multi-billion-dollar annual yield opportunity for the XRP community. Treasury firms holding large XRP positions have an obvious incentive here: idle tokens earn nothing, and a native, compliance-gated lending market is the most direct way to change that.
The amendments are testable on devnet now, and developers can integrate against the lending stack ahead of mainnet activation. The open question is the validator vote. XRPL amendments require sustained support above the 80% threshold for two weeks before activation, and that process can stretch for months with no guarantee of passage. The framework is credible. The activation path is not automatic.
How amendments actually pass, and why it takes forever
Because so much of the XRPL story now hangs on validator votes, it is worth understanding the machinery, which differs from every other major chain’s governance.
XRPL has no token voting and no foundation decree. Protocol changes ship as amendments inside validator software releases, and each amendment activates only after more than 80% of trusted validators signal support continuously for two full weeks. Dip below the threshold for an hour and the clock resets. The validator set doing the voting is defined by Unique Node Lists, the curated rosters of validators that operators choose to trust, populated by exchanges, universities, infrastructure firms, and long-time community operators across jurisdictions.
The design makes XRPL upgrades slow, conservative, and hard to capture, three adjectives that read as insults on crypto Twitter and as compliments in a bank’s vendor-risk review. It also means every roadmap date in this article carries an implicit asterisk. Permissioned Domains cleared activation with 91% support, a comfortable margin. The lending amendments face a more complicated vote because they change the ledger’s risk surface in ways some conservative operators have historically resisted; earlier programmability proposals spent long stretches stuck below threshold while operators debated attack surface. The voting is live now following the v3.1.0 release, testable code is on devnet, and the realistic activation window stretches from weeks to quarters depending on how fast the holdouts move.
For traders, this creates a strange information asymmetry. Amendment support percentages are public, on-chain, and updated continuously, yet almost nobody prices them. Watching XLS-66 support climb toward 80% is about as close to a scheduled, verifiable catalyst as this market offers, and it sits in plain sight.
The competition is building the same thing with different parts
XRPL is not the only chain that noticed institutions want compliant rails, and an honest assessment has to place the ledger against the two ecosystems actually holding the money.
Ethereum remains the default venue for tokenized institutional product, full stop. BlackRock’s tokenized fund complex, Franklin Templeton’s on-chain money market operation, and the JPMorgan digital asset stack all touched Ethereum first, and the chain holds roughly 68% of global DeFi deposits along with about 70% of stablecoin supply. Its institutional DeFi answer is assembled from general-purpose parts: permissioned pool deployments of Aave, KYC-gated hooks on Uniswap V4, wrapper tokens with transfer restrictions, and off-chain agreements binding it together. The approach works, and its weakness is exactly what XRPL is betting on: every assembled solution is bespoke, every audit is novel, and the compliance burden lands on the builder instead of the protocol.
Solana has moved fastest recently. Token-2022 extensions gave issuers protocol-adjacent controls, transfer hooks, confidential amounts, and interest-bearing logic, and the Solana Developer Platform launched in March with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union attached. Solana’s pitch is throughput plus tooling; its gap is that compliance remains a token-level option instead of a market-level guarantee, and its validator economics and outage history still appear in institutional risk memos even after the Firedancer-era reliability turnaround.
XRPL’s differentiation survives the comparison in one specific sense: it is the only major venue where identity, market access, and settlement controls are native ledger objects that no application can misconfigure. The cost of that purity is a smaller developer surface, a shallower liquidity base, and no general-purpose composability on mainnet. Institutions choosing between the three are effectively choosing which risk they prefer: Ethereum’s complexity, Solana’s history, or XRPL’s emptiness.
Three billion dollars of quiet traction
Skeptics can reasonably ask whether any of this is being used. The answer, increasingly, is yes, though the numbers remain small next to the giants.
Over $3 billion in tokenized real-world assets currently sit on XRPL, which places the ledger inside the top ten chains for RWA value. The most striking single data point came from a pilot earlier this year in which Ripple and JPMorgan processed a tokenized U.S. Treasury redemption in under five seconds, settling on XRPL what normally crawls through legacy market plumbing. The ledger also recorded its first month with more than $1 billion in stablecoin volume, and RLUSD passed the $1 billion supply mark while expanding into consortium settlement arrangements.
On the payments and FX side, XRP itself does structural work that most native assets do not. The ledger routes trades through XRP automatically whenever doing so improves pricing, a mechanism called autobridging. If there is no direct liquidity between two stablecoins or two tokenized currencies, the trade hops through XRP. The mechanism works inside the new permissioned environments as well as on the public DEX, though trades cannot bridge between the two. Every account reserve, every transaction fee, and a growing share of FX routing runs through the native asset, which ties institutional adoption of the ledger back to demand for the token in a way that is mechanical instead of narrative.
That linkage matters for anyone holding XRP, which trades near $1.08 at the time of writing after spending weeks pinned around the psychologically loaded $1.00 level. The token is still down more than 50% over twelve months, and the gap between infrastructure progress and price performance has become one of the more uncomfortable facts in the ecosystem. Readers who want the market-structure side of that story can find it in our coverage of why the broader market has been trading risk-off since the spring.
The gap XRPL still has to close
For all the compliance tooling, XRPL remains a shallow DeFi venue by the numbers that crypto natives actually check. Chain TVL sits far below rivals: Solana holds roughly $9 billion in DeFi deposits and BNB Chain about $6.5 billion, while XRPL’s locked value is a fraction of either. Deep liquidity attracts deep liquidity, and the ledger has not had it.
Part of the problem is technical, and it is being addressed with unusual candor. XRPL’s native automated market maker, live since 2024, launched with only a constant product curve at a time when roughly 60% of AMM volume across major ecosystems runs through concentrated liquidity designs. In late May, a draft amendment titled AMM Swappable Curves was filed on the XRPL standards repository, proposing three pluggable curve types: constant product, concentrated liquidity, and StableSwap, with a fully programmable Smart AMM reserved for a follow-up specification. Existing pools would stay untouched. If it passes, the ledger’s biggest capital-efficiency gap starts to close. If it stalls in the amendment process, XRPL keeps asking institutions to trade on 2024 infrastructure.
The other gap is programmability. XRPL mainnet deliberately avoids general-purpose smart contracts, which keeps the attack surface small and the behavior predictable, qualities institutions like, but it also means builders who need full flexibility have to go elsewhere. The ecosystem’s answer is a dual track: measured programmability on mainnet through Smart Escrows, which let developers write custom release conditions into the existing escrow primitive, and a live EVM sidechain bridged via Axelar for teams that want Solidity and full composability. Whether liquidity follows that split or gets fragmented by it remains an open question.
Privacy is the next frontier, and the strangest one
The roadmap item that best captures XRPL’s institutional positioning is also the one that sounds least like crypto: confidential transfers. Multi-Purpose Tokens are getting zero-knowledge-proof-based encryption of transaction amounts and balances, letting institutions move tokenized assets and manage positions without broadcasting their book to every competitor running a block explorer, while preserving selective disclosure for regulators and auditors.
Full transparency, it turns out, is a bug for professional money, not a feature. No trading desk wants its inventory legible in real time. The XRPL community has moved past exploration into prototyping ZKP integrations with research and compliance teams, with confidential MPT transfers slated as the first milestone. Privacy with accountability is the stated frame: encrypted by default, provable on demand.
Put the pieces in sequence and the shape of the strategy becomes clear. Identity first, through credentials. Access control second, through domains and the permissioned DEX. Assets third, through MPTs and tokenization. Credit fourth, through the lending protocol. Confidentiality fifth, through ZKPs. It reads less like a crypto roadmap and more like someone rebuilding the back office of a mid-sized bank, one amendment at a time.
The sidechain wildcard
One more piece complicates the tidy mainnet story: the XRPL EVM sidechain, live and bridged through Axelar, running on eXRP as gas. Its job is to catch the builders mainnet’s minimalism turns away, Solidity teams who want full composability with a route into XRPL liquidity and identity features. The dual-track design is defensible, mainnet stays lean while experimentation happens next door, but it imports the exact problem Ethereum has spent years managing: liquidity and users split across environments with a bridge in between, and bridges remain the industry’s most reliably exploited component. If institutional flows land on mainnet while DeFi innovation concentrates on the sidechain, XRPL ends up running two half-ecosystems instead of one whole one. The optimists’ version is that the sidechain functions as a proving ground, with successful patterns graduating into mainnet amendments the way ZKP research moved from prototype toward the confidential transfer roadmap alongside partners such as Hidden Road, the prime broker Ripple acquired to give institutional clients a familiar front door. Which version plays out is a 2027 question; the split exists today.
RLUSD is the demand engine hiding in plain sight
If the lending protocol is the supply side of XRPL’s institutional buildout, the stablecoin is the demand side, and it deserves more attention than it usually gets.
RLUSD launched under a New York trust charter, which put it in the small club of stablecoins that compliance departments can approve without a fight, and its growth since has outpaced nearly every peer on a percentage basis: past $1 billion in supply, expanding into multi-issuer consortium arrangements, and increasingly the settlement leg in XRPL’s FX corridors. The strategic logic is circular by design. Stablecoin corridors generate ledger volume, ledger volume generates XRP fee burn and autobridge demand, and a trusted on-ledger dollar makes every other institutional product viable, because tokenized Treasuries need something to trade against and vaults need a funding currency.
The lending protocol makes the loop explicit. The first wave of XLS-66 vaults is widely expected to be RLUSD-funded, with institutional borrowers taking fixed-term dollar credit against off-chain underwriting. If that market reaches even single-digit billions, XRPL hosts a native short-term credit curve denominated in a regulated stablecoin, which is the kind of boring financial primitive that payments desks, market makers, and treasury managers actually budget for. Whether regulated entities deploy capital into RLUSD-funded vaults at scale is, in one sentence, the whole question the next two quarters will answer.
The watchlist for the next two quarters
For readers who want to track the buildout instead of the discourse, the roadmap compresses to a short list of verifiable checkpoints.
• XLS-65 and XLS-66 validator support crossing and holding the 80% threshold, the single highest-signal event on the board.
• Confidential MPT transfers shipping in the stated first-quarter window, XRPL’s first production zero-knowledge feature.
• Permissioned DEX volume and domain creation after activation, the difference between compliance theater and used infrastructure.
• MPT integration with the native DEX, scheduled alongside Smart Escrows, which lets tokenized instruments trade against XRP and IOUs directly.
• The AMM Swappable Curves amendment advancing from draft to vote, closing the concentrated liquidity gap.
• Follow-through from Evernorth and any second public institutional commitment to the lending protocol, because one anchor tenant is a pilot and two is a market.
Each item is public, dated, and falsifiable, which is more than can be said for most crypto roadmaps.
What could still go wrong
The bear case does not require much imagination, because pieces of it are already visible.
• Validator activation risk is real and immediate. XLS-65 and XLS-66 need sustained supermajority support, and amendment votes have stalled before. Every month of delay is a month rival chains spend courting the same institutions.
• Infrastructure is not demand. XRPL has built the rails ahead of proven appetite, and outside Evernorth’s stated intent, no regulated lender has committed capital publicly. The chain could end up with the best-documented empty credit market in crypto.
• The competition is not standing still. Ethereum remains the default for tokenized funds from BlackRock and Franklin Templeton, and Solana launched a developer platform this spring with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union as early adopters. XRPL’s compliance-native design is a differentiator, not a moat.
• Regulatory frameworks cut both ways. The same clarity that lets institutions touch permissioned DeFi also lets them demand terms, and there is no assurance the economics of on-ledger credit will beat what prime brokers already offer off-chain.
There is also a subtler risk: that permissioned DeFi succeeds and simply fails to matter for XRP. If activity concentrates in gated domains trading tokenized Treasuries against RLUSD, the native asset’s role could shrink to fees and reserves, a payments-era footprint under an institutional-era ledger. Autobridging and escrow denominated in XRP push against that outcome, but the tension is real and worth watching in the data rather than the marketing.
A ledger playing a long game
Step back far enough and the XRPL story inverts the usual crypto sequence. Most chains launch permissionless, attract speculation, and then spend years retrofitting the controls institutions require. XRPL is running the film backward: build the controls first, accept years of looking sleepy next to memecoin casinos, and wait for the moment when regulated capital decides it finally wants on-chain settlement, credit, and FX.
That moment may be closer than the price chart suggests. Tokenization has become the fastest-growing corner of the industry, stablecoin legislation has unlocked bank participation across several jurisdictions, and the first generation of tokenized funds is now large enough to need somewhere to borrow, lend, and hedge. The chains that win that flow will be the ones where a compliance officer can sign off without a novel-length risk memo.
Whether XRPL becomes one of them comes down to two things it does not fully control: an 80% validator threshold, and the willingness of institutions to move from pilots to production. The infrastructure argument has been made, and made well. The adoption argument is still being written, one vault and one loan at a time. For a network that has been declared irrelevant more times than any other top-ten asset, quietly shipping the plumbing while nobody watches might be the most on-brand strategy available.
For readers newer to the mechanics referenced here, our explainers on Ripple Prime and institutional brokerage, consortium stablecoins, and the earlier lending and escrow roadmap cover the building blocks in more depth.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.
Crypto World
BIP-110 Activation Frozen After Coldcard Exploit: Is the Soft Fork Dead?
The developers pushing Bitcoin’s BIP-110 rule change have called off its launch. They blamed the industry response to a Coldcard wallet flaw that left user funds easier to steal.
Udi Wertheimer announced the delay, urging anyone running BIP-110 software to switch back to a normal Bitcoin (BTC) node. He gave no new date.
Why BIP-110 Activation Was Paused
BIP-110 is a temporary rule change, known as a soft fork. It would limit how much data people can pack into Bitcoin transactions.
Supporters say that data crowds out ordinary payments. Critics say Bitcoin should not police what users store.
The limits would last one year. Developer Dathon Ohm wrote the rules, and Bitcoin Knots software ships them.
Miners started voting on December 1, 2025. The Bitcoin blockspace spam debate had already split the community.
Then a separate problem landed.
Coinkite disclosed the bug on July 30. Its COLDCARD wallets built seed phrases, the master key behind a wallet, using far less randomness than promised. Roughly 72 bits instead of 128.
That gap makes a seed vastly easier to guess. Wallets running firmware released since March 2021 were hit hardest.
Updating the device does not fix a seed it already made. Coinkite is telling owners to move their money.
Thieves had already drained wallets tied to the flaw. The company has not said how much was lost.
Wertheimer called the delay a matter of timing, not doubt.
“…due to the coldcard incident, BIP-110 community leaders have decided to DELAY ACTIVATION. a new activation date will be announced at a later time,” he wrote.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
The Math Was Already Settled
Miners back a rule change by flagging their blocks. BIP-110 needed 55% of blocks in a two-week stretch. That means 1,109 blocks. The live monitor counted 30.
That is 2.63% of 1,068 blocks mined this period. It is the best BIP-110 has ever managed. It is still more than 20 times short.
Every earlier two-week stretch since December finished below 1.3%. Only 948 blocks are left. Even if every one voted yes, the total would reach about 48%. It could not pass this round.
That was already true days before anyone announced a delay.
Michael Saylor has warned about Bitcoin neutrality for weeks. He says almost every yes vote comes from one mining pool. Blockstream chief executive Adam Back has flagged chain split risk, calling the 55% bar too low to be safe.
A second phase was due at block 961,632, about six days away. It would reject any block that did not vote yes.
Nodes still running BIP-110 would enforce that on their own. That is why the warning to switch back matters.
No one owns Bitcoin’s rules. Nobody can flip a switch to start or stop a soft fork. This was a request, not a command.
Whether operators listen will say more about BIP-110’s support than any vote counter has.
The post BIP-110 Activation Frozen After Coldcard Exploit: Is the Soft Fork Dead? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
Counting down the days: State of Crypto
Senators Ruben Gallego and Thom Tillis sent a proposed revised ethics provision to the White House on Thursday, after drafting the compromise the day before, an industry source familiar with the talks told CoinDesk. As of midafternoon on Friday, the White House had not officially responded to the proposal.
Ethics remains the biggest outstanding issue to be resolved before the Clarity Act can advance. There are ongoing negotiations around other issues, including stablecoin reserves and yield, law enforcement authorities and some of the Agriculture Committee provisions addressing the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s total remit, but these are relatively uncomplicated compared to ethics, two industry sources said. One added that they expected those other issues to be resolved relatively quickly should negotiators come to a deal on ethics.
If the White House signs off on the counter-proposal from Tillis and Gallego, that could speed the way to at least the first part of the cloture process, the other source told CoinDesk. The Senate would still need to follow the cloture process laid out in last week’s edition of this newsletter, but the timelines involved mean that it would be difficult to get the bill all the way through by the end of the week. Still, getting through that first procedural vote would be a visible win for the crypto industry, should it happen.
Crypto World
Strategy keeps STRC dividend at 12% below $90
Strategy Inc. kept the annual dividend rate on its STRC preferred stock at 12% for August 2026, even though the Nasdaq-listed security ended July more than 10% below its $100 stated amount.
Summary
- 12% annualized dividend remains unchanged for August despite STRC closing July at $89.46 per share.
- $3.75 billion reserve covers roughly 2.1 years of preferred dividends and debt interest payments currently.
- Strategy repurchased 288,930 STRC shares below par while retaining $975 million in remaining authorization capacity.
The company’s official STRC information page confirms that the variable annualized rate for record dates beginning in August remains 12%. Executive Chairman Michael Saylor promoted the product on Aug. 1 as a way to “stretch your income,” emphasizing its twice-monthly payment schedule.
STRC closed at $89.46 on July 31, down $0.25 during the session. At that price, the $12 annualized payout based on the security’s $100 stated amount produces an effective yield of about 13.41%. Because Saylor announced the unchanged rate during the weekend, no post-announcement market reaction will be available until Nasdaq trading resumes.
Strategy’s STRC dividend no longer rises automatically
Strategy raised STRC’s annual dividend from 11.5% to 12% for record dates beginning in July. The increase followed a sharp June decline that took the shares as low as $71.25 and moved them far below the $100 level the company wants to maintain.
However, the company changed its rate-setting policy on June 29. Under the revised framework, management considers STRC’s market price, credit spreads, competing yields, Bitcoin volatility, cash-reserve coverage and the wider capital structure. The filing specifically states that Strategy will not necessarily raise the dividend solely because STRC trades below its stated amount.
That policy explains why July’s discount did not produce another 50-basis-point increase. Strategy instead said during its second-quarter results that it would maintain the 12% rate until STRC shows “sustained, healthy trading” near $100. The language describes management’s objective and does not guarantee that the shares will return to par.
The decision also prevents Strategy’s cash obligations from rising further while the company attempts to repair demand through other measures. Every additional 50 basis points would increase the annual cash cost across more than $10.46 billion in outstanding STRC stated value.
Buybacks now carry more of the price-support burden
Strategy has shifted part of its response from dividend increases to preferred-share repurchases. Between July 20 and July 26, the company bought back 288,930 STRC shares for approximately $25 million, paying an average of $86.53 per share. The purchase represented a 13.47% discount to the shares’ stated amount.
About $975 million remains under Strategy’s $1 billion preferred-securities repurchase authorization. Management said it intends to purchase more STRC at deeper discounts and reduce its activity as the security approaches $100. The authorization does not require Strategy to spend the remaining amount and has no fixed expiry date.
Repurchasing shares below par reduces the number of preferred shares requiring future cash distributions. It also lets Strategy retire $100 of stated value for less than $100. However, buybacks use capital that could otherwise remain available for dividends, debt interest or Bitcoin purchases.
As previously reported, Strategy funded its first $25 million STRC repurchase while increasing its U.S. dollar reserve and keeping Bitcoin purchases paused. The company raised much of that liquidity through sales of MSTR common stock rather than new STRC issuance.
The $3.75 billion reserve supports the 12% payout
Strategy reported a $3.75 billion U.S. dollar reserve as of July 26. The company said that amount covers approximately 2.1 years of expected preferred-stock dividends and interest on outstanding debt. The reserve can only be used for those obligations unless the board approves another purpose.
The cash cushion has become more important because Strategy’s preferred-stock commitments have expanded. The company recorded $400.7 million in preferred dividends during the second quarter, compared with $49.1 million one year earlier. It has paid or declared more than $1 billion in cumulative preferred distributions.
Strategy also reported an $8.22 billion second-quarter net loss, driven mainly by an $8.32 billion unrealized loss on its Bitcoin holdings. The accounting loss did not represent an equivalent cash outflow, but the preferred dividends must be paid in U.S. dollars.
The company has therefore authorized Bitcoin sales to refill the reserve, cover dividends and interest, or finance approved security repurchases. Strategy had sold approximately $218.4 million of Bitcoin during 2026 through July 26 to fund part of its preferred obligations.
As crypto.news reported, Strategy held 843,775 BTC at an average acquisition cost of about $75,476 as of July 26. The company valued that position at $54.77 billion using Bitcoin’s July 27 market price, compared with its $63.69 billion original cost.
STRC holders receive two payments each month
STRC moved from monthly to semi-monthly distributions after shareholders approved the change in June. Record dates now fall on the 15th and final day of each month, with payments generally following around 15 days later.
Strategy has already declared a payment of $0.50 per share for Aug. 15 to investors recorded as shareholders on July 31. The company’s website lists the 12% rate for August record dates, but future cash distributions still require board or committee approval and are not guaranteed.
For U.S. federal tax purposes, Strategy expects the current payments to be treated as returns of capital to the extent of an investor’s tax basis. That is the company’s expectation rather than a guarantee of each shareholder’s treatment, and Strategy advises investors to seek tax guidance based on their own circumstances.
STRC is also unsecured. Strategy states that its preferred securities are not collateralized by its Bitcoin holdings and only hold a preferred claim on the company’s residual assets. The company further warns that STRC is not a bank deposit, is not FDIC-insured and does not carry the same protections as Treasury securities or money-market funds.
What happens next for STRC and Strategy
Chief Executive Phong Le said management’s objective is for STRC to trade between $99 and $100 “over time.” Strategy has not provided a deadline for reaching that range, and the shares’ $89.46 closing price shows that the market continues to demand a yield above the stated 12% rate.
The next confirmed event is the Aug. 15 distribution. Investors will then watch Strategy’s next monthly rate decision, further STRC repurchases and weekly SEC disclosures covering common-stock sales, Bitcoin transactions and changes to the dollar reserve.
Saylor separately posted “Bitcoin Drive engaged” on Aug. 2 alongside the company’s treasury chart. The message may fuel expectations of a new purchase disclosure, but the post does not confirm that Strategy bought Bitcoin or reversed its recent pause. An SEC filing or company announcement would be needed to verify any transaction.
As of then, Strategy is relying on its existing 12% rate, twice-monthly payments, cash reserves and discounted repurchases rather than offering STRC investors another dividend increase.
Crypto World
Ripple (XRP) ETF Monthly Recap: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly
The spot exchange-traded funds tracking Ripple’s cross-border token continue with their impressive performance in times of market uncertainty, and saw only one day of no reportable action in the past week, unlike the previous ones.
July also ended in the green for the funds, meaning that only one out of the nine months they have been active was in the red.
The Good Weekly and Monthly
Data from SoSoValue shows that Monday and Wednesday were quite modest in terms of net inflows. On both days, the ETFs attracted just under $600,000. However, the green streak continued and accelerated at the end of the business week, with $6 million in net inflows on Thursday and another $7.7 million on Friday.
Thus, the week ended with $14.86 million in the green, making it the best since the one that ended on July 2, when the funds attracted $17.19 million. On a monthly scale, investors poured in $27.29 million into the spot XRP ETFs.
What’s even better is that the funds have reached another all-time high in terms of cumulative total net inflows, at over $1.5 billion as of Friday’s close. Bitwise’s XRP has extended its lead over Canary Capital’s XRPC, with $511 million in net inflows compared to $467 million for the latter.
The Bad
Although July indeed ended in the green, the actual net inflows were not all that impressive. The $27.29 million places July as just the second-worst month, beating only January when investors inserted $15.59 million into the funds.
In contrast, June was a lot more positive, with the net inflows standing close to $60 million. May was even better, with almost $132 million. The all-time high from November at $666.61 million remains untouchable.
The Ugly
Although this improved at the end of the month, July saw the most days with no reportable action in terms of net flows. Precisely half of the trading days (11 out of the 22) saw no flows, according to SoSoValue, which, aligned with the more modest $27.29 million in net inflows, suggests dwindling interest in the funds.
Separately, the underlying asset’s price performance continues to disappoint despite the numerous positive developments in the broader Ripple ecosystem. Although it managed to defend the $1.05 support during the weekend, XRP is still below $1.10, and it’s down by more than 3% on a monthly scale. What’s even more worrisome is the fact that August has been a particularly painful month for the asset historically.
The post Ripple (XRP) ETF Monthly Recap: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Crypto World
Strategy Maintains 12% STRC Preferred Dividend Despite Below-Par Price
Strategy’s preferred stock tracker, STRC, ended July trading well below its $100 par value, but management signaled that the company’s next preferred dividend rate will not rise. Executive chairman Michael Saylor said the August dividend will remain at 12%, continuing a payout level that was set after a June performance dip.
In a Saturday post on X, Saylor confirmed the dividend will hold at 12% for August. He also noted the company will keep its semi-monthly payment cadence for the second straight month after shareholders approved that change in June, following the earlier decision to increase the dividend by 50 basis points to 12%.
Key takeaways
- Strategy’s executive chairman said the August STRC dividend will remain at a 12% rate, not increase.
- STRC has continued to trade below its $100 par value throughout July, despite a monthly price rebound that began after the June dividend hike.
- Management reiterated a longer-term objective for STRC to trade near $99–$100, without specifying a timeline.
- Strategy reported building a large cash reserve—cited as $3.75 billion—to support preferred stock payouts and related obligations.
Dividend holds at 12% as preferred shares stay below par
Although STRC shares did not reach par in July, the stock did gain momentum over the month. The shares closed at $89.46 on Friday, up 5.42% for the month that started with the dividend adjustment.
Earlier, management had lifted the dividend rate in response to weak performance in June—raising it by 50 basis points to 12%. After that change, Strategy’s preferred payout strategy moved toward semi-monthly distributions, a structure that takes effect for the second month in August after the June shareholder vote.
Trading activity on Friday was also notably lighter than typical: volume was about two-thirds of the Nasdaq-listed shares’ daily average, according to the figures referenced in the report. That detail matters because it suggests the month’s rebound did not coincide with a surge in participation, even as investors processed the dividend update.
Management’s $99–$100 target meets a lower-than-par reality
Even as the next dividend stays flat, Strategy’s leadership continues to frame STRC around a valuation target. On Friday, CEO Phong Le reiterated that management’s “corporate objective” is for STRC to trade at $99–$100 over time, without adding specifics on when that goal might be reached.
That position is important to read in context: shareholders were told the dividend rate would not increase in August, even after the company adjusted payouts earlier in the quarter. Investors looking for signals that STRC might close the gap toward par have therefore had to balance two competing inputs—management’s longer-term pricing objective and the near-term decision to keep the dividend at the same level.
Cash reserve and buybacks aimed at supporting payouts
While the dividend rate message was unchanged, Saylor’s social-media activity pointed to continued capital management efforts tied to Strategy’s Bitcoin treasury strategy. On Sunday, he posted “Bitcoin Drive engaged,” accompanied by a familiar chart of Strategy’s BTC buying activity as tracked by Saylortracker.com.
The emphasis on liquidity and coverage aligns with what Strategy disclosed in its latest reporting. The company recently reported an $8.22 billion second-quarter net loss, driven primarily by an $8.32 billion unrealized loss on its Bitcoin holdings as the cryptocurrency’s price declined during the quarter.
Against that backdrop, Strategy said it has built a $3.75 billion cash reserve intended to support preferred stock payouts following the launch of its BTC monetization program. In the same vein, the company described a $3.75 billion U.S. dollar reserve sufficient to cover more than two years of preferred dividend payments and related interest obligations.
Strategy also disclosed that it repurchased $25 million of its STRC preferred shares at a discount to par and said it intends to keep buying the securities while they trade below $100. For investors, the practical takeaway is straightforward: management is pairing a coverage plan with an active buyback strategy, presumably to reduce pressure on valuation while the preferred shares trade under par.
However, the gap between par value and the prevailing market price remains the key issue. Management’s stated intent to buy more when the shares trade below $100 suggests the company believes the market offers an entry point—but without a near-term dividend increase, investors will likely focus on whether buybacks and reserve policy can translate into sustained movement toward the $99–$100 trading range.
What to watch next for STRC holders
With the August dividend rate confirmed at 12% and STRC still trading below $100 par, the next signal for holders will likely come from any further updates on Strategy’s Bitcoin treasury actions and whether cash-reserve coverage and buybacks continue at a pace that supports improving market pricing. Investors should also watch whether management provides clearer timing around its $99–$100 objective, since it currently remains framed as a long-term goal rather than a defined schedule.
Crypto World
Trump Media launches Truth API amid SEC scrutiny
Trump Media & Technology Group’s Truth API became available to institutional customers on Aug. 1, giving trading firms rapid, machine-readable access to posts from influential Truth Social accounts, including U.S. President Donald Trump’s account.
Summary
- August 1 launch gives institutions millisecond access to influential Truth Social posts with continuous coverage.
- Schiff and Warren asked the SEC to investigate whether the paid feed violates securities laws.
- Trump’s trust holds 41% of Trump Media, linking the product’s revenue directly to his wealth.
The launch followed a July 16 Form 8-K in which Trump Media said it had already signed customers and was onboarding additional partners. The company has not publicly identified those customers or disclosed how many subscriptions it has sold.
Truth API sells faster delivery of public posts
Trump Media describes Truth API as its first data-licensing product. The feed provides posts through a low-latency connection designed for high-frequency and algorithmic trading firms. It offers continuous coverage, delivery within milliseconds and a searchable archive dating to 2022.
Interim CEO Kevin McGurn said the service provides direct access to the platform’s “most market-moving Truths.” He also said Trump Media expects the product to become an ongoing, high-margin revenue source. Those revenue expectations remain forward-looking company claims rather than reported financial results.
The company has not published an official price list. Senators Adam Schiff and Elizabeth Warren cited reports placing subscriptions between $60,000 and $100,000 per month. Therefore, the widely repeated $100,000 price should be treated as a reported upper estimate, not a company-confirmed standard fee.
Trump Media says the underlying posts remain publicly available. However, automated customers can receive and process them faster than users who refresh the platform, rely on notifications or manually monitor accounts. That speed difference matters when algorithms can react to policy announcements within milliseconds.
Insider trading claims face an uncertain legal test
Writer James Surowiecki argued that the arrangement may involve government information being monetized for private benefit. Former SEC regional director Marc Fagel offered a more cautious assessment, calling insider-trading liability a “defensible argument” but “not slam-dunk.” Both comments are legal opinions, not findings by a regulator or court.
Federal insider-trading cases generally require more than an information advantage. Under the misappropriation theory recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court, prosecutors ordinarily must show that confidential information was taken for securities trading in breach of a duty owed to its source. SEC rules also focus on trading while aware of material nonpublic information.
That creates a key unresolved question. If a presidential post becomes publicly visible at the same time the API distributes it, Trump Media may argue that subscribers are paying for speed and formatting rather than nonpublic information. Many financial-data companies sell faster access to information that is technically public.
However, critics could examine whether paying customers ever receive a post before ordinary users can access it, whether unpublished policy information enters the feed or whether any subscriber knows information was obtained through a breach of duty. Purchasing a data subscription alone would not automatically establish insider trading.
Trump Media rejected the senators’ argument, saying they had created a new insider-trading theory based on publicly available information. That response states the company’s legal position. It does not prevent the SEC from reviewing the product’s design, timing records or customer communications.
Trump’s 41% stake sharpens the U.S. ethics dispute
Trump Media’s latest ownership disclosure says the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust holds 114.75 million shares, equal to about 41% of the company. Donald Trump Jr. serves as sole trustee, while President Trump is the trust’s settlor and sole beneficiary.
The ownership structure means successful Truth API revenue could benefit the company and, indirectly, the value of the trust’s stake. It does not mean subscription payments go directly to the president. Share prices, operating costs, corporate decisions and other business results determine how product revenue affects shareholder wealth.
Schiff and Warren asked SEC Chair Paul Atkins to investigate whether the feed violates federal securities law or weakens market fairness. They argued that presidential posts may contain policy information capable of moving stocks, currencies and commodities while Trump retains a large financial interest in the platform distributing them.
The senators’ request also adds another political dispute to Trump Media’s expansion into financial and crypto-related services. As previously reported, the company posted a $405.9 million first-quarter loss after large unrealized markdowns on Bitcoin, Cronos and securities. Revenue for the quarter reached $871,200.
Meanwhile, Trump Media-linked wallets moved 2,650 BTC to Crypto.com in May. The company is also exploring wider financial products and a possible Truth Social corporate separation connected to its planned TAE Technologies transaction.
The SEC has not announced an investigation
The SEC acknowledged receiving the senators’ letter but had not publicly announced an investigation, subpoena, enforcement case or formal conclusion as of Aug. 2. SEC investigations are often confidential, meaning the absence of a public notice does not establish whether staff members are privately reviewing the matter.
The next verifiable developments could include an SEC response to Congress, a Trump Media filing describing customer numbers or revenue, or disclosures explaining whether API recipients receive posts simultaneously with ordinary Truth Social users.
Trump Media shares closed at $9.86 on July 31, down $0.52 from the previous close. That session occurred before the Saturday launch, so the move cannot be attributed to Truth API becoming available. U.S. markets were closed during the weekend criticism, leaving no verified post-launch stock reaction.
For now, the central dispute remains unresolved. Trump Media presents Truth API as a conventional paid data service that distributes public information more efficiently. Critics argue that the president’s ownership, government role and ability to move markets make the arrangement unlike an ordinary social-media feed.
Crypto World
Coldcard users face urgent seed migration warning
Dogecoin community contributor Mishaboar urged Coldcard users on Aug. 1 to move their Bitcoin to wallets controlled by newly generated seed phrases.
Summary
- 1,367.05 BTC worth $88.6 million was drained from 4,585 addresses across three suspected attack waves.
- Coinkite says firmware updates protect new seeds but cannot repair seed phrases from vulnerable versions.
- Mishaboar advised users never to reuse affected seeds or enter recovery phrases into computers online.
The warning followed Galaxy Research’s estimate that three suspected attack waves drained 1,367.05 BTC, worth about $88.6 million, from 4,585 addresses.
Mishaboar wrote, “If you have ever used a COLDCARD device of any kind, migrate your funds to a new wallet immediately.” He also warned users not to reuse their existing Coldcard seed phrase or enter recovery words into an internet-connected computer. However, his reference to every Coldcard device is broader than Coinkite’s official security advisory, which identifies specific firmware versions and several exceptions.
Coldcard losses rise as attackers target smaller wallets
Galaxy Research’s latest on-chain estimate identified 1,367.05 BTC across three suspected attack waves. The research firm described $88.6 million as its “estimated observed size,” meaning the total has not been confirmed by Coinkite, law enforcement or every affected user.
The first wave removed 1,082.65 BTC from 1,196 addresses in about 41 minutes on July 30. A later third wave drained roughly 208 BTC from 1,912 addresses, with the average balance falling to slightly more than 0.1 BTC per address. The changing pattern suggests attackers moved from larger holdings toward smaller wallets.
Galaxy said each wave appeared internally consistent with one operator. However, it could not determine whether one attacker controlled all three waves. The third group used separate destination addresses, batched several victims into individual transactions and checked only the default derivation path, making it different from the earlier sweeps.
The research firm also warned that its known transaction patterns cannot identify every theft. A different attacker could generate valid transactions without repeating the fees, destination formats or collection methods seen in the first three waves.
Official Coldcard warning covers specific firmware
Coinkite said the problem affects seeds generated on Mk2 and Mk3 devices running firmware versions 4.0.1 through 4.1.9. Seeds created on Mk4 and Mk5 devices before standard version 5.6.0 or Edge version 6.6.0X are also covered. For Coldcard Q, the fixed releases are standard version 1.5.0Q and Edge version 6.6.0QX.
Coldcard Mk1 devices are outside the firmware regression identified by Block’s researchers. Coinkite also said TAPSIGNER, OPENDIME and SATSCARD are unaffected because they use different codebases. Therefore, the available technical evidence does not establish that every product ever made by Coinkite is vulnerable.
Block’s Bitcoin engineering and security team traced the flaw to a firmware integration error. The affected software used a deterministic MicroPython fallback instead of the intended STM32 hardware random-number generator when creating wallet secrets. On Mk2 and Mk3 v4 firmware, the affected path added no cryptographic entropy. Later models received a limited secure-element reseed.
Block cautioned that its analysis represented its current technical view and did not include complete empirical testing of every device. Coinkite has also said its investigation remains open and promised a formal technical report.
Firmware updates cannot repair existing seeds
Coinkite has released fixed firmware for every affected model and release track. The patches correct the seed-generation process for new wallets, but they cannot add randomness to a seed phrase created earlier. Moving the same vulnerable phrase into another hardware or software wallet also carries the weakness into the new device.
Affected users should install the correct fixed firmware before generating a replacement seed. Coinkite advises recording and verifying the new backup, checking a receiving address on the device screen and sending a small test transaction. Users should move the remaining balance only after confirming that the test funds reached the new wallet.
The company advises users to keep the old backup until the entire migration is confirmed. Mishaboar separately warned users never to type a seed phrase into a computer and recommended keeping offline copies in separate secure locations. That advice can reduce exposure to phishing, malware and cloud synchronization during a rushed migration.
Coinkite identified a limited exception for users who added at least 50 fair, independent and private dice rolls before the final seed words were produced. The company said those rolls contributed at least 128 bits of independent entropy. Users who entered fewer than 50 rolls, cannot remember the number or exposed the roll sequence should migrate.
A strong, unique BIP-39 passphrase creates an additional barrier, but Coinkite said it does not repair an affected seed. Short, reused or predictable passphrases may be guessable. Even users with strong passphrases are advised to replace the underlying seed as soon as practical.
Coldcard incident renews the self-custody debate
Bitcoin investor Anthony Pompliano said the losses showed how technically demanding self-custody can be, even though individuals retain the right to control their assets directly. He also stressed that Bitcoin itself was not hacked because the failure occurred in third-party wallet firmware rather than the Bitcoin protocol.
That distinction matters because an attacker reportedly reproduced weak wallet keys offline. The incident did not require changing Bitcoin transactions, breaking its cryptography or compromising the network’s consensus rules. Once an attacker obtains a valid private key, the resulting transaction appears on-chain like one authorized by the legitimate owner.
As previously reported, the observed loss estimate rose from an early 594.48 BTC calculation to 1,367.05 BTC as researchers found additional address groups. In related coverage, crypto.news examined how the firmware build error weakened seed generation for more than five years.
The case has also entered the U.S. institutional-custody debate.As crypto.news reported, Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas argued that the losses strengthen the case for spot Bitcoin ETFs among investors seeking price exposure without managing private keys. ETFs remove personal seed-management duties, although they replace those risks with institutional custody and counterparty exposure.
Coinkite’s promised technical review and further Galaxy address analysis are the next expected updates. Until then, $88.6 million remains the latest public on-chain estimate rather than a final confirmed loss. Users covered by the official advisory face the more immediate task of installing fixed firmware and moving funds to a completely new seed.
Crypto World
A massive stablecoin fragmentation war is brewing between tech giants and a startup is aiming to capitalize on it
The stablecoin market is fragmenting, and onchain capital allocator Spark is betting it can capitalize on the split.
Fintechs, exchanges and banking groups are increasingly launching their own dollar-linked tokens. Each issuer wants to keep users, reserves and transaction activity inside its own network as competition ramps up.
The stablecoin landscape “is about to fragment more and more,” Sam MacPherson, CEO of Phoenix Labs, said in an interview with CoinDesk.
PayPal has PYUSD, Circle has USDC, and Tether has USDT. Robinhood has joined the Global Dollar (USDG) consortium and is building its own chain, while OpenUSD (OUSD) is another large consortium that includes Stripe and Coinbase.
Beyond these giants, there are hundreds of other stablecoins, including Ethena’s USDe, World Liberty Financial’s USD1 and Sky’s USDS.
The result is liquidity scattered across an expanding number of tokens and networks.
Spark is betting those networks will still need to connect. Its aim is to be the layer that moves money between them.
Spark is an affiliated lending and liquidity unit of Sky, the DeFi ecosystem formerly known as MakerDAO and the issuer of the USDS stablecoin. It is developed by Phoenix Labs and supported through Sky’s governance and capital.
Crypto World
Strategy Maintains 12% Preferred STRC Dividend Despite Discount
Strategy CEO Michael Saylor told investors that the preferred dividend tied to Strategy’s STRC shares will stay at 12% for August, despite STRC trading well below its $100 par value through July.
In a Saturday post on X, Saylor framed STRC as an income-oriented vehicle that he says can help investors “stretch your income,” while indicating that the semi-monthly dividend schedule approved earlier this year will continue. Strategy’s chief then reiterated a longer-term target price range for the preferred shares, even as market pricing suggests investors are still demanding a discount.
Key takeaways
- Strategy’s STRC preferred dividend will remain at 12% for August, according to Michael Saylor.
- August will mark the second month in a row that STRC dividends are paid semi-monthly, following a June shareholder vote.
- STRC shares closed at $89.46 on Friday, trading below $100 par value throughout July.
- Management has continued to state a corporate objective for STRC to reach and hold around $99–$100 over time.
- Strategy says it has built a sizable cash reserve to fund preferred payouts as it monetizes Bitcoin.
Dividend guidance holds steady even as STRC trades at a discount
While Strategy’s STRC preferred shares ended July below their stated $100 par value, shareholders were told that the August dividend will not increase. Michael Saylor made that point in a Saturday X post, continuing the company’s pitch that STRC is designed to provide a steady income stream for investors.
The 12% dividend rate is not a one-off adjustment: it follows a dividend change earlier in the cycle. In June, Strategy shareholders approved changes that moved STRC to a semi-monthly payment cadence. As a result, August will be the second month that the dividend is paid on that more frequent schedule.
On the market side, STRC ended Friday at $89.46, up 5.42% for the month that began with a dividend increase. According to the article, the daily trading volume on Friday was about two-thirds of STRC’s usual daily average—suggesting participation was fairly active, but not at peak levels.
Management’s messaging has also stayed consistent with its longer-term plan. On Friday, Strategy CEO Phong Le reiterated that the company’s “corporate objective is for STRC to trade at $99-$100 over time,” without offering a specific timeline for when that target could be met.
Cash reserve strategy tied to Bitcoin treasury and preferred obligations
Beyond dividend arithmetic, the company’s stability message appears to be supported by its Bitcoin treasury and liquidity planning. Saylor posted on Sunday that “Bitcoin Drive engaged,” a phrase he used alongside a chart of Strategy’s BTC purchases from Saylortracker.com, signaling the company’s ongoing buying activity.
That matters because Strategy’s preferred dividend economics are linked to how it finances obligations while its Bitcoin holdings remain exposed to market volatility. Last week, Strategy reported an $8.22 billion second-quarter net loss, which the report attributed largely to an $8.32 billion unrealized loss tied to movements in the price of its Bitcoin holdings during the quarter.
Even with that drawdown, Strategy said it has built a cash reserve intended to help cover preferred stock payouts after the launch of its BTC monetization program. The figures cited in the article include a $3.75 billion U.S. dollar reserve. Strategy also stated that the reserve is enough to cover more than two years of preferred dividend payments and interest obligations.
In practical terms, that guidance is meant to reduce concerns that near-term Bitcoin price fluctuations could immediately disrupt the dividend. Traders may still price STRC based on expected returns and relative risk, but a defined liquidity buffer can influence how investors interpret the sustainability of the payout.
Discount-to-par repurchases and the $99–$100 over-time goal
Another point investors are watching is how Strategy manages the preferred share discount. The article says Strategy recently repurchased $25 million of its STRC preferred shares at a discount to par and intends to continue buying the securities while they trade below $100.
This approach aligns with management’s public objective for STRC to trade closer to par over time. However, the market continues to price the shares significantly lower: with Friday’s close at $89.46, the gap to $100 remains substantial. That spread reflects uncertainty about timing—how quickly any pathway to par could play out, and whether dividends alone are enough to close the valuation gap.
Le’s repeated comment that the objective is $99–$100 over time, without specifying when, highlights the central tension: Strategy is emphasizing financial buffers and ongoing BTC-driven support, while the preferred market is still setting prices around a discount that persists through July.
Investors therefore have two parallel items to track. First is the dividend rate itself—now confirmed to stay at 12% for August. Second is whether Strategy’s buybacks and any treasury policy changes translate into steady demand for STRC preferred shares that could narrow the discount.
What to watch next for STRC holders
Going forward, STRC investors should monitor the next dividend payment cycle for August and pay close attention to whether Strategy follows through on continued preferred repurchases while the shares remain below par. At the same time, any updates related to “BTC monetization” and treasury allocation could influence how markets assess the company’s ability to fund preferred obligations during periods of Bitcoin volatility.
Crypto World
XRP Ledger urges node upgrade after manifest flood
Ripple Director of Engineering Vijay Khanna urged XRP Ledger node operators on Aug. 2 to install xrpld version 3.2.1 after developers observed a validator manifest flood on July 31.
Summary
- July 31 manifest flooding prompted xrpld 3.2.1 while XRP Ledger continued closing ledgers normally throughout.
- Four safeguards now cap manifest size, message batches, outbound sharing and unknown-key cache growth network-wide.
- Operators should upgrade, verify xrpld is running, then restart again to clear persisted manifests safely.
The hotfix limits how nodes process, store and share data received from unknown validator identities.
The XRP Ledger continued closing ledgers normally during the event, according to XRP Ledger Operations. The available evidence therefore points to pressure on node resources and peer-to-peer communications rather than a confirmed loss of funds, altered transactions or failure of ledger consensus. Developers have not published a CVE identifier or financial-loss estimate connected to the incident.
XRPL 3.2.1 limits the manifest flood route
Validator manifests are cryptographically signed records that connect a validator’s stable master identity to the temporary key it uses for daily validation messages. When operators rotate those temporary keys, they publish a new manifest signed by the master key so other nodes can verify the change.
Before the hotfix, nodes could accept, cache and rebroadcast validly structured manifests associated with validator keys they did not recognize. An attacker could exploit that behavior by producing many unknown identities and forcing peers to spend memory, storage, bandwidth and processing capacity handling the data. The public code record describes the flaw as a problem with manifest propagation.
The official xrpld 3.2.1 release is dated July 31 and was published as the latest signed release early on Aug. 1. It contains six commits across 13 changed files, including four commits that directly restrict untrusted manifest handling.
Four safeguards reduce resource-exhaustion risk
The first safeguard rejects an oversized validator manifest before the node fully decodes it. That reduces the processing work an attacker can trigger by sending individual objects larger than the software expects.
The second limits the number of untrusted manifests carried in one network message. The cap applies when nodes receive the data and when they prepare manifest messages for peers. Oversized batches are dropped without automatically disconnecting an unpatched peer, which helps upgraded and older nodes remain connected during the rollout.
A third change limits the number of unknown validator identities held in a node’s manifest cache. The final code sets the maximum at 100. Once that capacity is reached, the software rejects manifests tied to new unlisted keys while continuing to process trusted or previously recognized validators.
The patch also changes how untrusted manifest information is retained and propagated. Trusted validator data remains available because the restrictions target unlisted peer gossip rather than manifests from configured or approved validators. This distinction allows normal validator key rotation to continue while blocking unchecked cache growth.
Node operators must complete a second restart
Khanna advised validators and other infrastructure operators to upgrade to version 3.2.1 “as soon as possible.” His instructions call for a normal software update, followed by a wait of one to two minutes and a check that xrpld is running. Operators should then restart the service again.
The second restart is important for nodes that may have retained unknown manifests before installing the fix. Updating changes future handling, while restarting the corrected server helps ensure old in-memory or previously retained data does not continue affecting operations.
Operators may also need to confirm that their systems trust Ripple’s current package-signing key. The release notes state that Ripple rotated the GPG key used to sign xrpld packages on Feb. 18. Existing installations that have not trusted the replacement key may not receive automatic upgrades successfully.
The update applies to infrastructure providers rather than ordinary XRP holders. Users do not need to move XRP, change wallet keys or create new accounts because of the manifest issue. Exchanges, custodians, wallet back ends, data providers and businesses that run their own XRPL servers should instead confirm their node versions and restart status.
The post-mortem will determine the incident’s scope
XRP Ledger Operations said a technical “post-mortem will follow soon.” As of Aug. 2, the project had not published that report, so the identity of the sender, the volume of manifests transmitted and the exact resource use across affected nodes remain undisclosed.
The report should also clarify when developers first detected the activity, whether any nodes became unavailable and how quickly operators adopted version 3.2.1. Although ledgers continued closing, slow patch adoption could leave individual servers exposed to renewed flooding even when the shared ledger remains operational.
The hotfix arrives shortly after XRPL’s larger version 3.2.0 rollout. That release, issued on June 15, renamed the reference server from rippled to xrpld and introduced infrastructure changes that required operators to update software and service configurations.
As previously reported, version 3.2.0 initially spread faster among validators than across the broader node network. The manifest flood adds a new reason for remaining operators to move beyond that release and install the hotfix.
Meanwhile, in related coverage, David Schwartz moved his XRPL infrastructure to version 3.2.0 as developers prepared the network for the new server naming and protocol features. Earlier, as crypto.news reported, node operators also faced a version 3.1.3 deadline tied to an amendment activation.
The next verified updates will be the promised post-mortem and fresh software-adoption data. Until then, the confirmed response remains limited to the 3.2.1 release, its four manifest controls and the request for operators to complete the upgrade and restart process.
-
Sports7 days agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
Business4 days agoWhy Trees Belong on the Risk Register
-
Fashion2 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Wit & Wisdom
-
Tech7 days agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Politics2 days agoMeta enters AI-training agreement with far-right ‘propaganda rag’ Newsmax
-
Politics6 days agoLuke Littler dismantles Gerwyn Price to retain title in Blackpool
-
Crypto World1 day agoMicroStrategy Post-Earnings CLARITY Act Push Could Add New Catalyst for Its Stock
-
Politics5 days agoThe Part of the Electric Transition Nobody Wants to Discuss
-
Entertainment5 days ago‘Stargate’ Creator’s New Sci-Fi Series Returns for Season 3 Tomorrow
-
News Videos7 days agoBITCOIN JUST ENTERED THIS CRITICAL ZONE…
-
Business5 days agoMajor shareholder moves on Canyon
-
News Videos3 days agoBitcoin Enters the 3rd Stage of the Bear Market
-
Crypto World2 days agoXRP Ledger v3.3.0 brings five institutional features
-
Crypto World5 days agoKraken Enables Retail Access to Jersey Mike’s IPO via Tokenized Shares
-
Tech6 days agoNew macOS Sequoia & Sonoma security updates for older Macs
-
News Videos5 days agoClaude: Build Financial Dashboards in Minutes (2026)
-
Politics3 days agoLuke Littler’s dominance sparks GOAT debate
-
Sports3 days agoSeema Kaliramna Wins Discus Throw Bronze, Takes India’s CWG Medals Tally To 17
-
Business5 days agoJohnson & Johnson agrees to $5.5B settlement over talc cancer claims
-
Crypto World9 hours agoCrypto PAC spending tops $2M in Michigan House race

You must be logged in to post a comment Login