yyy

Trump has only done a little something on top of the existing situation rather than helping in a time of need.

To bring Hyperliquid into the US market.

iykyk.

#Hyperliquid $HYPE

As of now, Pons has gone 4 consecutive days without allocating funds back into the buyback dispenser.

The unclaimed funds in the custody account amount to $1.26 million, of which 80% (i.e., $1.008 million) will be used to repurchase $PONS .

The current ammunition available for repurchasing PONS is $2.098 million.

#pons $PONS

It’s lit up. After nearly $300 million was stolen from the Drift protocol six months ago, today has finally arrived—the moment of a historic compensation.

Let me translate it:
1 USDC loss = 1 DFX received
1 DFX = 0.0104 USDT
So, 1 USDC loss = 0.0104 USDT

Great—no need for more words.

#DRIFT $DRIFT

From identifying a suspected theft to announcing full reimbursement, Near Intents took about less than 4 hours to handle the incident.

Questions for everyone:
In the history of all crypto hacking incidents, isn’t it true that no on-chain protocol has had a faster response time than this Near event?

#Near $NEAR

After more than two and a half months, Hyperliquid killer @Ostium has finally announced a compensation plan for the $23.75 million stolen from the protocol.

TLDR:
Sacrifice whales to fully compensate small holders. Yes—Ostium does not compensate is the whales and super-whales.

As of now, Ostium has only recovered about $650,000 worth of the stolen funds, which is far from the total $23.75 million stolen.

Smart Ostium decided to fully reimburse wallet addresses with losses not exceeding 1,000 USDC. For whales with losses exceeding 1,000 USDC, they can either immediately get back 1,000 USDC and give up their claim to the remaining assets, or wait for the second-stage payout—everyone knows how it goes.

Interestingly, Ostium has already raked in more than $20 million in protocol revenue, yet it says nothing about using protocol revenue to compensate the whales.

You can see the mindset clearly.

#Hacked #Ostium

It’s been a full half year since Drift was stolen for $285 million. Now, here’s the status of Drift’s post-disaster reconstruction:

1/ Brand upgrade: X account renamed to @VelocityDEX
2/ New logo
3/ Website, GitHub, and official documentation have all been updated to the new brand Velocity
4/ New major partner: deep integration partner changed from Circle to Tether
5/ Cindy, the veteran founding member responsible for external communications, has voluntarily resigned

The progress is good—basically fully severed ties with Drift.

#DRIFT

HOOD Conference boldly promotes Pons; it is a short-term positive and potential upside.

The Pons team hard-controls $PONS ’s burn schedule is a short-term negative and potential upside.

Next, PONS-USDG LP players will go through a very comfortable period.

#pons $PONS

The 龙头33 DEX on Base—Aerodrome—is trying to grab Robinhood Chain’s market share, which is, one could say, a hellish level of difficulty.

Last night, the official Robinhood Crypto account, @RobinhoodCrypto, retweeted a post by @uponrh. “up” is the native 33 DEX on RH Chain. Even a powerhouse like Uniswap hasn’t received treatment like that.

The @RobinhoodCrypto account is more inclined to repost ecosystem protocols that are more deeply tied to its own chain and have relatively impressive data—up falls into that category.

If nothing unexpected happens, @fablesfi will be “picked next” very soon.

#robinhoodchain

Robinhood HOOD ahead of the rally, the RH Chain on-chain is starting to show signs of recovery.

Yesterday, DEX trading volume returned to $1.5 billion in a single day, the highest level in the past week.

Network actual load has once again surpassed @base, with an average of 18.1 million gas/s per day, returning to the most active Ethereum L2 chain on-chain.

#Robinhood

The hackers who stole Bitget’s funds and moved the stolen proceeds also used Thorchain.

From Bybit to KelpDAO to Balancer and most recently Bitget, it seems the hackers have reached a consensus to route the stolen funds transfer via @THORChain, and they all have a particular fondness for Thorchain.

As of now, the stolen funds transferred by hackers via the Thorchain DEX have reached $100 million. Yesterday, the Thorchain DEX generated its largest daily revenue so far this year—only $257,000—which, compared with other protocols, isn’t that much.

What’s interesting is that the attack address in the Bitget hack has already been publicly flagged, yet Thorchain still chose to provide large-scale swap channels. Thorchain’s response is that it is decentralized infrastructure, so it cannot and will not choose a centralized method to freeze funds.

A soul-searching question: Is this kind of decentralization truly worth praising?

#THORChain $RUNE

Up to now, PONS has accumulated $1.24 million in share buyback funds, and 80% of the funds in the escrow account will be used to repurchase $PONS

#pons

Uniswap’s biggest competitor on Base @aeroxyz has announced that they’re bringing their talent to the Robinhood Chain.

Aerodrome is the leading ve(3,3) DEX on the Base chain. Its playstyle is quite different from Uniswap, and it has used the 33 mechanism to steal large amounts of liquidity for key trading pairs from Uniswap.

With this move to the RH Chain, it may be hard to recreate the miracles it achieved on Base. Because on the RH Chain, the ve(3,3) DEX niche already has strong competitors such as @uponrh and @fablesfi.

What’s driving the Aero team to come to the RH Chain at this timing, given that they focus mainly on Base and rarely deploy across multiple chains?

#Base $AERO

Hot Knowledge:
Robinhood Chain’s all-chain TVL has quietly flipped Monad.

Currently, RH Chain’s all-chain DeFi TVL reaches $1.018 billion, ranking as the 9th-largest TVL public blockchain.

#robinhoodchain $PONS

About Hyperliquid: a fundamental data point that hardly anyone discusses:

@unitxyz TVL has reclaimed the $1 billion mark. The last time it reached this size dates back to October 10, 2025—there was a full 350-day gap in between.

Unit is Hyperliquid’s asset tokenization layer, essentially a spot bridge. TVL measures the funds users deposit—using native assets from mainstream chains—into Hyperliquid for spot trading that have not yet been withdrawn.

Capital is more willing to stay in Hyperliquid’s spot market. I guess you, smart as you are, already know the reason.

#Hyperliquid $HYPE

Two years ago, at the height of the Bitcoin L2 “literary renaissance,” a frenzy of battles among hundred-chain ecosystems emerged across niche tracks.
Two years later, this batch of BTC L2 institution chains has nearly vanished. After a full cycle, the top leader still at the table is Stacks.

As the oldest-established BTC sidechain/L2, <t-2/>’s mainnet has been running steadily for nearly six years. The ecosystem niche as the leader on the Stacks chain has been dominated for a long time by <t-2/>.

According to Defillama data, Zest’s deposit peak has reached $100M+. Its current protocol TVL is $74.73 million, accounting for as much as 84.7% of Stacks’ total cross-chain TVL.

Zest’s core business is lending, and it has almost monopolized the lending market on the Stacks chain. What’s worth watching is that Zest is repositioning the protocol as a Bitcoin capital layer, beginning to extend its reach into downstream derivative business—creating a BTC collateral vault and turning idle BTC into productive yield-generating assets.

The technical logic behind the interest-bearing collateral vault is very much to the taste of bitcoin OGs: no need for wrapping, no need to deposit into pools, and no custodianship—just a constrained self-custody mechanism.

You can think of it simply like this: users first send BTC into a Taproot UTXO vault on Bitcoin L1, and then, via pre-signing, lock down the spending path. On the target chain (e.g., Ethereum), generate a collateral proof vaultBTC. Use that collateral proof to collateralize and borrow. After the loan is settled, when the time lock expires, the funds can be withdrawn unconditionally.

Recently, Zest has consistently prioritized Bitcoin Collateral Vaults as its top priority. Today it finally went live with a mainnet demo. However, there is currently a deposit limit (a single wallet can deposit at most 0.001 BTC). Once the product is rolled out more broadly, Zest’s TVL should take another step up.

I also checked Zest’s native token market cap: it’s not very high—$26 million in circulating market value. It’s been listed on bn alpha and in contracts. You could add Stacks and Zest to your watchlist for now, and wait for the winds to change in the Bitcoin ecosystem track.

That’s all.

#Stacks $ZEST

Share a conspiracy theory:

The Pons official has significantly lowered the burn rate of $PONS , which may be related to the Robinhood HOOD Summit meeting scheduled for 5 days from now.

At the current burn pace, about 120,000 U equivalent is burned per day, so in 5 days that would be 600,000 U. The existing buyback allocator has 1.25 million U; after 5 days, the buyback allocator will only have 500,000–600,000 U left to use for repurchases. By convention, they would need to top up the buyback funds.

So how much can be topped up for buybacks at this time? Based on Pons’s current protocol revenue level, income is about 400,000 U per day, meaning 2 million U in 5 days. In addition, the escrow account has not yet been claimed of 840,000 U, which means the funds that can be added back to the buyback allocator for PONS repurchases could reach 2.84 million * 80% = 2.272 million U.

At this point, combined with the Robinhood summit being a major positive catalyst that greatly increases the burn rate, it’s yet another perfect market-making move.

#pons $PONS

Interesting facts:
pons’s protocol revenue over the past ~30 days is about 17 times that of Near Intents.

The former’s protocol revenue is used for buyback and burn, while the latter’s protocol revenue is used for buyback and earn.

One is a forced burn; the other is stored in the treasury.

#pons $PONS

Weren’t we supposed to grow the meme-track cake together?

So how did the Solana community’s pump inner circle and the stonk inner circle end up fighting each other first?

While the snipe and the clam fight, the fisherman profits?

$PUMP

Robinhood always seems to stoke the fire at those moments when the hype around the Robinhood Chain slightly dips—it looks like it’s about to stir things up again.

A few hours ago, @RobinhoodCrypto posted: “Stock Tokens are coming out with something new.”

So what is Robinhood planning to do next?

Current known conditions:
1/ The current approximate structure of Robinhood stock tokenization is:
- Issued by the Jersey Island entity RHJ, and exists in the form of ERC-20 on the Robinhood Chain;
- Stock Tokens represent price exposure to U.S. stocks/ETFs (no shareholder rights, and they also can’t be directly redeemed 1:1 for real stocks);
- Can be self-custodied on-chain, and can be used as a DeFi asset.

From what we can tell right now, it’s not ownership in the traditional sense—it’s a tracking instrument for the stock price.

2/ On September 17, the SEC approved a time-limited innovative exemption, opening a channel for tokenizing onshore U.S. stocks.

@vladtenev followed up immediately: “Tokenization is about to land in the U.S.”

The timing of Robinhood’s tease post is pretty subtle. On one side, the rights attached to Stock Tokens still need to be supplemented; on the other, the U.S. regulatory window is open.

You think about it—go on, think it through.

#robinhoodchain $PONS

What’s going on with PONS? How did they start controlling the burn rhythm again for $PONS ?

Yesterday, after the official party topped up the buyback funds into the buyback distributor, they brutally burned for more than 6 hours, burning the equivalent of about 600,000 U in tokens. In the past few hours, it has dropped again to a burn level of around $5,000 per hour.

I just took a look at the ammo left in the buyback distributor—it still has a lot left, with an equivalent value of $1.43 million.

#pons $PONS