ImSeann
38 Posts
ImSeann
5 Following
14 Followers
12 Liked
Posts
Portfolio
【Can Bitcoin possibly surge to $1,000,000 by 2030?】
10x Research founder Markus Thielen believes that $BTC aiming to reach $1,000,000 before 2030 is almost impossible based on the size of available capital.
At the current level of about $63,000,000, BTC would still need to rise nearly 16 times. If the circulating supply is close to 21 million coins, the market cap at that time would approach $21 trillion. This would require not only institutions continuing to buy, but also sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, and even large-scale allocations of national-level capital.
“Limited supply” can only explain scarcity; it can’t directly create demand.
In math terms, $1,000,000 isn’t impossible. But before 2030, it’s more like an extreme scenario rather than a reasonable baseline.
Do you think $BTC in 2030 will be closer to $200,000, $500,000, or $1,000,000?
10x Research founder Markus Thielen believes that $BTC aiming to reach $1,000,000 before 2030 is almost impossible based on the size of available capital.
At the current level of about $63,000,000, BTC would still need to rise nearly 16 times. If the circulating supply is close to 21 million coins, the market cap at that time would approach $21 trillion. This would require not only institutions continuing to buy, but also sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, and even large-scale allocations of national-level capital.
“Limited supply” can only explain scarcity; it can’t directly create demand.
In math terms, $1,000,000 isn’t impossible. But before 2030, it’s more like an extreme scenario rather than a reasonable baseline.
Do you think $BTC in 2030 will be closer to $200,000, $500,000, or $1,000,000?
【A New Issue for ADA, Not Cardano】
$ADA The new challenge now facing the U.S. is that employment conditions are cooling, while inflation remains too high.
In July, non-farm payrolls fell by 23,000, and the combined figures for May and June were revised down by another 103,000. The labor force participation rate dropped to 61.4%. On the surface, the unemployment rate is still only 4.1%, but the underlying employment momentum may be weaker than the market originally expected.
Seeing this, many people may jump to the conclusion:
Employment weakens → the Fed cuts rates → capital flows back into the crypto market → ADA rises.
It sounds reasonable, but the market isn’t that simple.
The latest July CPI year-over-year still stands at 3.4%, and core CPI is 2.5%. The PPI year-over-year is even higher at 4.7%, still above the Fed’s 2% inflation target. This means employment is pressuring the Fed to ease policy, yet inflation constrains how much it can do.
Cut rates too quickly and inflation could flare up again. Keep high rates for too long, and it could cool employment further, pushing it into a real recession.
And ADA is sitting in the middle of these two forces.
What ADA needs most is not a collapse in the U.S. economy, but a “controlled slowdown”: inflation continues to fall, employment softens moderately, and the economy remains resilient enough that the Fed can make preventive rate cuts.
If inflation reaccelerates while employment keeps deteriorating, the Fed could find itself truly stuck in a dilemma. Altcoins that sit on the periphery of the risk curve may also face even greater pressure than $BTC .
$ADA The new challenge now facing the U.S. is that employment conditions are cooling, while inflation remains too high.
In July, non-farm payrolls fell by 23,000, and the combined figures for May and June were revised down by another 103,000. The labor force participation rate dropped to 61.4%. On the surface, the unemployment rate is still only 4.1%, but the underlying employment momentum may be weaker than the market originally expected.
Seeing this, many people may jump to the conclusion:
Employment weakens → the Fed cuts rates → capital flows back into the crypto market → ADA rises.
It sounds reasonable, but the market isn’t that simple.
The latest July CPI year-over-year still stands at 3.4%, and core CPI is 2.5%. The PPI year-over-year is even higher at 4.7%, still above the Fed’s 2% inflation target. This means employment is pressuring the Fed to ease policy, yet inflation constrains how much it can do.
Cut rates too quickly and inflation could flare up again. Keep high rates for too long, and it could cool employment further, pushing it into a real recession.
And ADA is sitting in the middle of these two forces.
What ADA needs most is not a collapse in the U.S. economy, but a “controlled slowdown”: inflation continues to fall, employment softens moderately, and the economy remains resilient enough that the Fed can make preventive rate cuts.
If inflation reaccelerates while employment keeps deteriorating, the Fed could find itself truly stuck in a dilemma. Altcoins that sit on the periphery of the risk curve may also face even greater pressure than $BTC .
【Which has the deepest positions among ADA, SOL, and XRP?】
Based on the current estimates of the main players’ average cost:
$SOL : About $105, with an unrealized loss of about 26%
$XRP : About $1.82, with an unrealized loss of about 42%
$ADA : About $0.57, with an unrealized loss of about 68%
Compared with the other two, ADA’s main positions currently carry the deepest paper loss, while SOL’s position situation is relatively stable. However, a deeper unrealized loss does not necessarily mean there is always more upside in the future. What really needs attention is that these main players’ costs may become key pressure zones during any subsequent rebound.
When the price returns to around $0.57 for ADA, $105 for SOL, and $1.82 for XRP, the capital that got trapped earlier may choose to cut losses and exit, which could create concentrated selling pressure. If the market is only experiencing a typical rebound, the price may not be able to break through in one shot. Only when the altcoin season returns, with capital and trading volume clearly increasing, will the market have a chance to fully absorb those positions.
Therefore, main players’ cost is not only for observing who is losing the most—it can also be used to help judge where resistance may appear in the future.
Which one do you think will break through the main players’ cost first?
Based on the current estimates of the main players’ average cost:
$SOL : About $105, with an unrealized loss of about 26%
$XRP : About $1.82, with an unrealized loss of about 42%
$ADA : About $0.57, with an unrealized loss of about 68%
Compared with the other two, ADA’s main positions currently carry the deepest paper loss, while SOL’s position situation is relatively stable. However, a deeper unrealized loss does not necessarily mean there is always more upside in the future. What really needs attention is that these main players’ costs may become key pressure zones during any subsequent rebound.
When the price returns to around $0.57 for ADA, $105 for SOL, and $1.82 for XRP, the capital that got trapped earlier may choose to cut losses and exit, which could create concentrated selling pressure. If the market is only experiencing a typical rebound, the price may not be able to break through in one shot. Only when the altcoin season returns, with capital and trading volume clearly increasing, will the market have a chance to fully absorb those positions.
Therefore, main players’ cost is not only for observing who is losing the most—it can also be used to help judge where resistance may appear in the future.
Which one do you think will break through the main players’ cost first?
【Metaplanet Denies Selling Bitcoin】
Today many people are spreading FUD about Metaplanet because on-chain data shows that within the past 24 hours, they transferred out 5,014 units of $BTC , worth about $322 million.
After the news went viral on social media, CEO Simon Gerovich stepped out to clarify directly:
“This is just a routine custody operation—no Bitcoin has been sold. Our current holdings still total 43,000 BTC.”
Moreover, for Bitcoin transfers exceeding $300 million, the transaction fees were only about $8—once again demonstrating the efficiency of moving large assets across borders with Bitcoin, which is in no way comparable to traditional banks.
However, what’s truly worth关注 is that Metaplanet originally planned to hold 100,000 BTC by the end of 2026, but it currently has only 43,000 BTC, and there hasn’t been any continued accumulation recently.
If they can’t stockpile a large amount even at this relatively low level, then achieving the 100,000 BTC goal by year-end once the BTC price rises will likely be even harder.
Do you think Metaplanet still has a chance to complete its target this year?
Today many people are spreading FUD about Metaplanet because on-chain data shows that within the past 24 hours, they transferred out 5,014 units of $BTC , worth about $322 million.
After the news went viral on social media, CEO Simon Gerovich stepped out to clarify directly:
“This is just a routine custody operation—no Bitcoin has been sold. Our current holdings still total 43,000 BTC.”
Moreover, for Bitcoin transfers exceeding $300 million, the transaction fees were only about $8—once again demonstrating the efficiency of moving large assets across borders with Bitcoin, which is in no way comparable to traditional banks.
However, what’s truly worth关注 is that Metaplanet originally planned to hold 100,000 BTC by the end of 2026, but it currently has only 43,000 BTC, and there hasn’t been any continued accumulation recently.
If they can’t stockpile a large amount even at this relatively low level, then achieving the 100,000 BTC goal by year-end once the BTC price rises will likely be even harder.
Do you think Metaplanet still has a chance to complete its target this year?
【In the late stage of a bear market, the biggest risk may not be buying too early—it may be not buying at all】
$BTC was rejected at $65,500 last week and still hasn’t reclaimed $64,000. Ongoing low liquidity and low volatility continue to compress conditions, and the short-term structure remains weak.
What you should be especially careful about next is the first breakout—because it could be a fake move. Whether it breaks up or down, you should first observe whether price can hold, rather than placing a directional bet in advance.
But if the market is already nearing the four-year bear market’s late stage, the key focus of strategy isn’t guessing the exact bottom—it’s planning a staged entry in advance.
Hoping for 50K is fine; the problem is that as BTC drops further, you keep moving your ideal buy price lower. By the time it finally bottoms, you may still have zero allocation in hand.
As for $ETH , it has already entered staking with more than 34% of the supply, and the queue for entry is far higher than the queue for exit—suggesting that long- and medium-term holding interest is strengthening. However, historically at the start of a bull market, BTC usually runs first, and ETH/BTC may still continue to weaken.
Therefore, at this stage I would split the strategy:
First, build positions in BTC in stages, then wait for ETH/BTC to offer a better relative price—or add ETH after BTC confirms the bear market’s late stage.
If you could only choose one kind of risk, would you accept “buying early and getting trapped short-term,” or “waiting for the lowest point but missing the entry entirely”?
$BTC was rejected at $65,500 last week and still hasn’t reclaimed $64,000. Ongoing low liquidity and low volatility continue to compress conditions, and the short-term structure remains weak.
What you should be especially careful about next is the first breakout—because it could be a fake move. Whether it breaks up or down, you should first observe whether price can hold, rather than placing a directional bet in advance.
But if the market is already nearing the four-year bear market’s late stage, the key focus of strategy isn’t guessing the exact bottom—it’s planning a staged entry in advance.
Hoping for 50K is fine; the problem is that as BTC drops further, you keep moving your ideal buy price lower. By the time it finally bottoms, you may still have zero allocation in hand.
As for $ETH , it has already entered staking with more than 34% of the supply, and the queue for entry is far higher than the queue for exit—suggesting that long- and medium-term holding interest is strengthening. However, historically at the start of a bull market, BTC usually runs first, and ETH/BTC may still continue to weaken.
Therefore, at this stage I would split the strategy:
First, build positions in BTC in stages, then wait for ETH/BTC to offer a better relative price—or add ETH after BTC confirms the bear market’s late stage.
If you could only choose one kind of risk, would you accept “buying early and getting trapped short-term,” or “waiting for the lowest point but missing the entry entirely”?
[Dusk: The mechanism does not want anonymity, but controllable privacy]
Most public chains see transparency as a virtue, but for financial institutions, having all holdings, counterparties, and business strategies fully disclosed is actually the main reason it cannot be put on-chain.
Dusk aims to resolve this contradiction:
Using zero-knowledge proofs to keep transaction and asset information confidential by default; when facing regulatory, auditing, or compliance needs, it can still selectively disclose only the necessary data.
Paired with identity and access control, deterministic finality, and atomic settlement, Dusk is targeting not ordinary payments, but institutional-grade financial scenarios such as securities issuance, RWA, and regulated trading markets.
$DUSK is responsible for Gas and staking; only if on-chain asset issuance and settlement demand grow will there be a real chance to capture the value of network usage.
I think the most worth watching part of Dusk isn’t the “privacy coin” narrative, but whether it can become the privacy-and-compliance foundation infrastructure for traditional finance when moving on-chain.
Do you think institutional finance will ultimately choose a fully transparent public chain, or a privacy chain that supports selective disclosure?
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Most public chains see transparency as a virtue, but for financial institutions, having all holdings, counterparties, and business strategies fully disclosed is actually the main reason it cannot be put on-chain.
Dusk aims to resolve this contradiction:
Using zero-knowledge proofs to keep transaction and asset information confidential by default; when facing regulatory, auditing, or compliance needs, it can still selectively disclose only the necessary data.
Paired with identity and access control, deterministic finality, and atomic settlement, Dusk is targeting not ordinary payments, but institutional-grade financial scenarios such as securities issuance, RWA, and regulated trading markets.
$DUSK is responsible for Gas and staking; only if on-chain asset issuance and settlement demand grow will there be a real chance to capture the value of network usage.
I think the most worth watching part of Dusk isn’t the “privacy coin” narrative, but whether it can become the privacy-and-compliance foundation infrastructure for traditional finance when moving on-chain.
Do you think institutional finance will ultimately choose a fully transparent public chain, or a privacy chain that supports selective disclosure?
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
[“‘Cryptocurrency is dead’ gets recycled again”]
The top of a bull market is full of dreams, while the bottom of a bear market is full of death sentences.
Santiment found that pessimistic terms such as “dead,” “dying,” “over,” and “finished” have been rapidly increasing in recent discussions, suggesting that retail investors’ patience is nearing its limit.
And I believe that when more people start believing “cryptocurrency is dead,” the market is usually a little closer to the emotional bear-market bottom.
Because when the market is left with nothing but disappointment, ridicule, and exit voices, it means some weaker hands may be leaving; as long as selling pressure gradually eases, even a small amount of returning capital could trigger a rebound larger than expected.
But nearing the bear bottom doesn’t mean today is the absolute low.
Right now, <b>$BTC </b> is still trading around $63,000, with spot ETF fund flows alternating between inflows and outflows, and no clear institutional buying trend yet. Even if BTC begins to build a base, <b>$ETH </b> and altcoins may not immediately follow with a surge.
So this is not a reason to go all-in on a dip-buy or add leverage; it’s a reminder to long-term investors that the market may have entered a zone worth watching and scaling into.
Do you think this is an area suitable for scaling in, or another fake bottom during the bear market?
<b></b>
The top of a bull market is full of dreams, while the bottom of a bear market is full of death sentences.
Santiment found that pessimistic terms such as “dead,” “dying,” “over,” and “finished” have been rapidly increasing in recent discussions, suggesting that retail investors’ patience is nearing its limit.
And I believe that when more people start believing “cryptocurrency is dead,” the market is usually a little closer to the emotional bear-market bottom.
Because when the market is left with nothing but disappointment, ridicule, and exit voices, it means some weaker hands may be leaving; as long as selling pressure gradually eases, even a small amount of returning capital could trigger a rebound larger than expected.
But nearing the bear bottom doesn’t mean today is the absolute low.
Right now, <b>$BTC </b> is still trading around $63,000, with spot ETF fund flows alternating between inflows and outflows, and no clear institutional buying trend yet. Even if BTC begins to build a base, <b>$ETH </b> and altcoins may not immediately follow with a surge.
So this is not a reason to go all-in on a dip-buy or add leverage; it’s a reminder to long-term investors that the market may have entered a zone worth watching and scaling into.
Do you think this is an area suitable for scaling in, or another fake bottom during the bear market?
<b></b>
【If this bull market’s last remaining thing that can go up is “coins with income,” can your coins hold up?】
Lately, I’ve been feeling more and more that this cycle’s market is showing a very clear shift:
In the past, everyone was trading “narratives.”
Now the market is starting to ask:
Is this protocol actually being used?
Is there income?
Does the income ultimately flow back to the Token?
Take DeFi, for example—its renewed attention isn’t only because TVL has risen. It’s because the market is starting to re-evaluate the idea of “protocol revenue.”
That’s also why I currently lean more toward ecosystem assets like $ETH and $HYPE , and even $LDO —things that genuinely have usage demand.
But there’s also a harsh question here:
If, in the future, the market really shifts from “trading narratives” to “looking at fundamentals,”
then many coins that only have community, stories, and a roadmap—but no real usage—may find it increasingly hard to attract capital.
So I’m curious about everyone’s choices right now:
If you could only pick one, which one would you buy?
A. Has income and cash flow, but tends to grow more slowly
B. Not much income, but the narrative is strong and it has high explosive potential
C. I don’t care about fundamentals—only price and cycles
D. Other—discuss in the comments below
As for me, I currently lean more toward A, plus a small portion of B.
Lately, I’ve been feeling more and more that this cycle’s market is showing a very clear shift:
In the past, everyone was trading “narratives.”
Now the market is starting to ask:
Is this protocol actually being used?
Is there income?
Does the income ultimately flow back to the Token?
Take DeFi, for example—its renewed attention isn’t only because TVL has risen. It’s because the market is starting to re-evaluate the idea of “protocol revenue.”
That’s also why I currently lean more toward ecosystem assets like $ETH and $HYPE , and even $LDO —things that genuinely have usage demand.
But there’s also a harsh question here:
If, in the future, the market really shifts from “trading narratives” to “looking at fundamentals,”
then many coins that only have community, stories, and a roadmap—but no real usage—may find it increasingly hard to attract capital.
So I’m curious about everyone’s choices right now:
If you could only pick one, which one would you buy?
A. Has income and cash flow, but tends to grow more slowly
B. Not much income, but the narrative is strong and it has high explosive potential
C. I don’t care about fundamentals—only price and cycles
D. Other—discuss in the comments below
As for me, I currently lean more toward A, plus a small portion of B.
【SharpLink hands $200 million, $ETH , to Lido for staking; LDO sees a boost with institutional adoption】
Ethereum treasury company SharpLink announced that it will stake existing ETH worth $200 million through Lido, obtaining wstETH. The assets are held in custody by U.S. federally chartered crypto bank Anchorage Digital.
SharpLink can not only continue accumulating ETH, but in the future can also sell, redeem, or use wstETH as collateral for DeFi—improving capital efficiency while maintaining liquidity.
For ETH, this means publicly listed companies are beginning to treat staking as a standard treasury strategy. If more firms follow suit, it could increase the proportion of ETH staked, reduce the market’s immediately sellable supply, and strengthen Ethereum’s positioning as an income-generating asset.
By choosing Lido, SharpLink effectively provides large-enterprise case support for its liquidity, security, and institutional suitability. Lido charges a 10% fee on the staking rewards, with part allocated to node operators and part going into the DAO treasury.
Additionally, $LDO is currently mainly used for governance. Whether protocol revenue can be effectively reflected in the token price remains to be seen—particularly whether the DAO will roll out profit sharing, buybacks, token burns, or other value-capture mechanisms.
Ethereum treasury company SharpLink announced that it will stake existing ETH worth $200 million through Lido, obtaining wstETH. The assets are held in custody by U.S. federally chartered crypto bank Anchorage Digital.
SharpLink can not only continue accumulating ETH, but in the future can also sell, redeem, or use wstETH as collateral for DeFi—improving capital efficiency while maintaining liquidity.
For ETH, this means publicly listed companies are beginning to treat staking as a standard treasury strategy. If more firms follow suit, it could increase the proportion of ETH staked, reduce the market’s immediately sellable supply, and strengthen Ethereum’s positioning as an income-generating asset.
By choosing Lido, SharpLink effectively provides large-enterprise case support for its liquidity, security, and institutional suitability. Lido charges a 10% fee on the staking rewards, with part allocated to node operators and part going into the DAO treasury.
Additionally, $LDO is currently mainly used for governance. Whether protocol revenue can be effectively reflected in the token price remains to be seen—particularly whether the DAO will roll out profit sharing, buybacks, token burns, or other value-capture mechanisms.
[U.S. PPI cools down, initial jobless claims higher than expected]
The latest U.S. economic data shows that inflation pressure is further easing, while the labor market also shows signs of weakening:
• PPI year-over-year: 4.7%, below expectations of 4.9%
• Core PPI: 4.2%, in line with expectations of 4.2%
• Initial jobless claims: 209,000, higher than expectations of 202,000
PPI coming in below expectations indicates that inflation pressure on the production side has been alleviated to some extent, and the increase in unemployment benefit applications also suggests that the labor market is cooling. Concerns about the Fed raising rates again are likely to further diminish, and expectations that monetary policy will remain in a more accommodative direction may also strengthen.
For risk assets, the overall outlook is mildly positive, especially for liquidity-sensitive assets such as $BTC and $ETH .
The latest U.S. economic data shows that inflation pressure is further easing, while the labor market also shows signs of weakening:
• PPI year-over-year: 4.7%, below expectations of 4.9%
• Core PPI: 4.2%, in line with expectations of 4.2%
• Initial jobless claims: 209,000, higher than expectations of 202,000
PPI coming in below expectations indicates that inflation pressure on the production side has been alleviated to some extent, and the increase in unemployment benefit applications also suggests that the labor market is cooling. Concerns about the Fed raising rates again are likely to further diminish, and expectations that monetary policy will remain in a more accommodative direction may also strengthen.
For risk assets, the overall outlook is mildly positive, especially for liquidity-sensitive assets such as $BTC and $ETH .
【Securitize’s tokenized asset growth is soaring—why are losses widening instead?】
RWA leader @Securitize released its Q2 2026 financial results. Key points are as follows:
・Average tokenized asset management AUM reached $4.3 billion, up 16% year over year
・On-chain transaction volume grew 147%, reaching $5.3 billion
・Revenue fell 5% year over year, down to $14.4 million
・Net loss widened from $6.15 million in the same period last year to $21.7 million
Some of the losses come from changes in the fair value of options and derivative liabilities—non-cash outflows. Even after excluding these, adjusted EBITDA still turned from profit to loss (-$1.8 million → -$5.5 million), and operating costs increased by 56%. This shows that while RWA adoption and trading growth are happening rapidly, Securitize has not yet managed to convert scale into revenue.
For the crypto industry, this remains an important step toward bringing institutional assets on-chain. BlackRock’s BUIDL has already been integrated into institutional collateral workflows. Securitize has also obtained qualifications related to tokenized securities custody and atomic settlement of stablecoins, which could further connect RWA, stablecoins, and DeFi.
Notable tokens to watch include $ETH , $SOL , and $AVAX , as well as $ENA, which is related to the USDe ecosystem.
Ethereum has a more mature foundation for RWA and DeFi, while Solana and Avalanche continue to support tokenized funds, stocks, and trading infrastructure. However, Securitize itself follows a multi-chain strategy, and networks such as $ARB, $OP, $POL, $APT, $BNB, and $TRX may also distribute related activities.
RWA leader @Securitize released its Q2 2026 financial results. Key points are as follows:
・Average tokenized asset management AUM reached $4.3 billion, up 16% year over year
・On-chain transaction volume grew 147%, reaching $5.3 billion
・Revenue fell 5% year over year, down to $14.4 million
・Net loss widened from $6.15 million in the same period last year to $21.7 million
Some of the losses come from changes in the fair value of options and derivative liabilities—non-cash outflows. Even after excluding these, adjusted EBITDA still turned from profit to loss (-$1.8 million → -$5.5 million), and operating costs increased by 56%. This shows that while RWA adoption and trading growth are happening rapidly, Securitize has not yet managed to convert scale into revenue.
For the crypto industry, this remains an important step toward bringing institutional assets on-chain. BlackRock’s BUIDL has already been integrated into institutional collateral workflows. Securitize has also obtained qualifications related to tokenized securities custody and atomic settlement of stablecoins, which could further connect RWA, stablecoins, and DeFi.
Notable tokens to watch include $ETH , $SOL , and $AVAX , as well as $ENA, which is related to the USDe ecosystem.
Ethereum has a more mature foundation for RWA and DeFi, while Solana and Avalanche continue to support tokenized funds, stocks, and trading infrastructure. However, Securitize itself follows a multi-chain strategy, and networks such as $ARB, $OP, $POL, $APT, $BNB, and $TRX may also distribute related activities.
【US returns to Iran with “maximum pressure”】
The United States has strengthened its sanctions against Iran. In addition to targeting oil exports and financial networks, it continues to track crypto assets and trading platforms related to Iran.
For the crypto community, the most important thing is not the sanctions themselves, but the subsequent risks from oil prices and inflation. If tensions between the US and Iran worsen again and the situation around the Strait of Hormuz escalates, rising oil prices could lift inflation expectations, thereby suppressing risk assets such as $BTC and $ETH .
In addition, US oversight of on-chain fund flows is becoming increasingly strict. Users should avoid interacting with sanctioned addresses or platforms to reduce the risk of assets being frozen or transactions being restricted.
Next, you can continue to monitor: oil prices, the Strait of Hormuz, and progress in US-Iran negotiations.
The United States has strengthened its sanctions against Iran. In addition to targeting oil exports and financial networks, it continues to track crypto assets and trading platforms related to Iran.
For the crypto community, the most important thing is not the sanctions themselves, but the subsequent risks from oil prices and inflation. If tensions between the US and Iran worsen again and the situation around the Strait of Hormuz escalates, rising oil prices could lift inflation expectations, thereby suppressing risk assets such as $BTC and $ETH .
In addition, US oversight of on-chain fund flows is becoming increasingly strict. Users should avoid interacting with sanctioned addresses or platforms to reduce the risk of assets being frozen or transactions being restricted.
Next, you can continue to monitor: oil prices, the Strait of Hormuz, and progress in US-Iran negotiations.
【Bitwise: DeFi is shifting from narrative to “protocol revenue and token value capture”】
Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan believes the crypto market is moving away from narratives such as users, TVL, and vision, and toward testing whether protocols can generate revenue—and whether that revenue flows back to tokens via buybacks, burns, or profit sharing.
Protocols that have been developing more prominently include:
$HYPE Hyperliquid: TVL of about $6 billion, annualized protocol revenue of about $750 million, and most of the income is used to buy back HYPE.
$AAVE : TVL of about $14.7 billion, active borrowing of about $11.4 billion, and annualized protocol revenue of about $112 million.
$UNI : TVL of about $3 billion, trading volume over the past 30 days of about $48.6 billion, annualized protocol revenue of about $50 million, and it has already launched a mechanism to use protocol fees for UNI buybacks and burns.
I believe this trend is positive for both ETH and HYPE, but the way they benefit differs. HYPE can directly benefit from Hyperliquid’s revenue and buyback mechanism—the more active the protocol transactions are, the more funds (in principle) can be allocated to buybacks.
ETH, on the other hand, is an indirect beneficiary at the ecosystem level—growth in DeFi activity can increase demand for Gas, collateral, asset settlement, and network security.
Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan believes the crypto market is moving away from narratives such as users, TVL, and vision, and toward testing whether protocols can generate revenue—and whether that revenue flows back to tokens via buybacks, burns, or profit sharing.
Protocols that have been developing more prominently include:
$HYPE Hyperliquid: TVL of about $6 billion, annualized protocol revenue of about $750 million, and most of the income is used to buy back HYPE.
$AAVE : TVL of about $14.7 billion, active borrowing of about $11.4 billion, and annualized protocol revenue of about $112 million.
$UNI : TVL of about $3 billion, trading volume over the past 30 days of about $48.6 billion, annualized protocol revenue of about $50 million, and it has already launched a mechanism to use protocol fees for UNI buybacks and burns.
I believe this trend is positive for both ETH and HYPE, but the way they benefit differs. HYPE can directly benefit from Hyperliquid’s revenue and buyback mechanism—the more active the protocol transactions are, the more funds (in principle) can be allocated to buybacks.
ETH, on the other hand, is an indirect beneficiary at the ecosystem level—growth in DeFi activity can increase demand for Gas, collateral, asset settlement, and network security.
【Polygon participates in the Bank of England's digital pound experiment】
The Bank of England is moving forward with Phase 2 of the Digital Pound Lab experiment, and #Polygon will partner with NOBO Finance and Dun & Bradstreet to take part in the testing. The experimental environment provides features such as wallets, APIs, smart contracts, and even allows testing of “atomic swaps between digital assets and the digital pound.”
The biggest significance of this for the crypto space isn’t that the Bank of England will “adopt Polygon,” but that traditional finance is actually testing how CBDCs, blockchains, and digital assets can interoperate. If this kind of architecture is rolled out in the future, RWA, stablecoins, and on-chain payments may be more easily integrated into the traditional financial system.
However, it’s important to note that the current Digital Pound Lab is only a simulated experiment, with no real funds or users. The UK has also not yet officially decided to issue a digital pound, so it cannot be directly interpreted as Polygon ($POL ) obtaining adoption by the Bank of England.
The Bank of England is moving forward with Phase 2 of the Digital Pound Lab experiment, and #Polygon will partner with NOBO Finance and Dun & Bradstreet to take part in the testing. The experimental environment provides features such as wallets, APIs, smart contracts, and even allows testing of “atomic swaps between digital assets and the digital pound.”
The biggest significance of this for the crypto space isn’t that the Bank of England will “adopt Polygon,” but that traditional finance is actually testing how CBDCs, blockchains, and digital assets can interoperate. If this kind of architecture is rolled out in the future, RWA, stablecoins, and on-chain payments may be more easily integrated into the traditional financial system.
However, it’s important to note that the current Digital Pound Lab is only a simulated experiment, with no real funds or users. The UK has also not yet officially decided to issue a digital pound, so it cannot be directly interpreted as Polygon ($POL ) obtaining adoption by the Bank of England.
🇺🇸 US CPI year-over-year rose 3.4%, exactly in line with market expectations of 3.4%.
Inflation showed no unexpected acceleration, and in the short term it is neutral-to-positive for the crypto market.
Next, attention will turn back to the Fed’s interest-rate stance; if rate-cut expectations heat up, risk assets such as $BTC 、 $ETH are likely to receive support.
Inflation showed no unexpected acceleration, and in the short term it is neutral-to-positive for the crypto market.
Next, attention will turn back to the Fed’s interest-rate stance; if rate-cut expectations heat up, risk assets such as $BTC 、 $ETH are likely to receive support.
【Bitcoin shows an early bull market signal for the second time—has the bottom been reached?】
CryptoQuant’s bull-bear cycle indicator shows that Bitcoin has displayed this cycle’s second “early bull market” signal. Historically, after the first signal, prices may still fall; the second signal, however, more often appears during the bottoming phase. As a result, the market is beginning to discuss whether BTC is getting close to the end of the bear market.
On the positive side, Bitcoin’s whale holdings have risen from around 2.87 million coins in December 2025 to 3.06 million, indicating that large capital is absorbing supply. If BTC can stabilize and stop its decline, it may also help reduce the downward pressure on altcoins such as
$ETH and $ADA .
However, this does not mean the bottom has been confirmed. When the same signal first appeared in May this year, $BTC was around $80,000, but prices later fell to the vicinity of $60,000. The current price is also still above the realized price of about $52,900, so there remains the possibility of another downward test.
Therefore, this looks more like the bear market may be moving into its later stage, rather than the bull market officially returning.
CryptoQuant’s bull-bear cycle indicator shows that Bitcoin has displayed this cycle’s second “early bull market” signal. Historically, after the first signal, prices may still fall; the second signal, however, more often appears during the bottoming phase. As a result, the market is beginning to discuss whether BTC is getting close to the end of the bear market.
On the positive side, Bitcoin’s whale holdings have risen from around 2.87 million coins in December 2025 to 3.06 million, indicating that large capital is absorbing supply. If BTC can stabilize and stop its decline, it may also help reduce the downward pressure on altcoins such as
$ETH and $ADA .
However, this does not mean the bottom has been confirmed. When the same signal first appeared in May this year, $BTC was around $80,000, but prices later fell to the vicinity of $60,000. The current price is also still above the realized price of about $52,900, so there remains the possibility of another downward test.
Therefore, this looks more like the bear market may be moving into its later stage, rather than the bull market officially returning.
Brazil’s largest bank, Itaú, partners with OpenAssets, joins an asset tokenization pilot led by ANBIMA, and uses DLT to complete the issuance, trading, and settlement of corporate bonds, fixed-income products, and investment funds.
For cryptocurrency holders, this development brings three benefits:
① It increases the acceptance of blockchain in traditional financial markets.
② It may attract more institutional capital into the crypto market.
③ If it eventually connects to public blockchains, it will increase real demand for ETH, stablecoins, and the RWA ecosystem.
But there are also three drawbacks:
① The pilot uses a permissioned private network, which may not adopt Ethereum or other public chains.
② The bank may use blockchain technology while excluding existing cryptocurrencies and DeFi.
③ Once financial institutions enter, rules around KYC, wallet tracking, and asset freezes may become stricter.
Therefore, this is a positive for “blockchain being adopted by mainstream finance,” but it doesn’t mean the $ETH or #RWA tokens will immediately benefit. The real key is: will it ultimately connect to public blockchains, or will it remain a closed financial system used only within banks.
For cryptocurrency holders, this development brings three benefits:
① It increases the acceptance of blockchain in traditional financial markets.
② It may attract more institutional capital into the crypto market.
③ If it eventually connects to public blockchains, it will increase real demand for ETH, stablecoins, and the RWA ecosystem.
But there are also three drawbacks:
① The pilot uses a permissioned private network, which may not adopt Ethereum or other public chains.
② The bank may use blockchain technology while excluding existing cryptocurrencies and DeFi.
③ Once financial institutions enter, rules around KYC, wallet tracking, and asset freezes may become stricter.
Therefore, this is a positive for “blockchain being adopted by mainstream finance,” but it doesn’t mean the $ETH or #RWA tokens will immediately benefit. The real key is: will it ultimately connect to public blockchains, or will it remain a closed financial system used only within banks.
Harmony（ONE）Appears to Have Encountered a Major Security Incident! On-chain researchers have found that approximately 4.0 billion ONE were minted without authorization, representing about 26% of the original supply. Of these, about 2.8 billion have already flowed to exchanges. After the news was exposed, the coin price quickly plunged.
Harmony’s official team is currently contacting exchanges to freeze the related funds and is also working on patching the program and roll-back plans. However, the cause of the vulnerability, the actual amount cashed out, and whether a rollback will be carried out are still not confirmed.
If you hold $ONE , it is not advisable to rush into buying the dip at this stage. You should pause cross-chain activity, DeFi use, and large transfers, and watch to see whether exchanges stop deposits and withdrawals.
Harmony’s official team is currently contacting exchanges to freeze the related funds and is also working on patching the program and roll-back plans. However, the cause of the vulnerability, the actual amount cashed out, and whether a rollback will be carried out are still not confirmed.
If you hold $ONE , it is not advisable to rush into buying the dip at this stage. You should pause cross-chain activity, DeFi use, and large transfers, and watch to see whether exchanges stop deposits and withdrawals.
【SharpLink suffers a disastrous single-quarter loss of $394 million—should holders of $ETH be worried?】
Ethereum Reserve Company #SharpLink has released its Q2 2026 financial results. The company’s net loss for the quarter is as high as $394.3 million. The headline alone certainly sounds alarming, but that doesn’t mean the company has really burned nearly $400 million. The losses mainly come from accounting mark-to-market changes caused by a drop in the price of ETH.
In the second quarter, ETH fell by about 23%, leading SharpLink to record $321 million in unrealized losses. In addition, it suffered impairment losses of $76.1 million related to LsETH and weETH. Together, the two amount to roughly $397 million—and both are non-cash accounting losses. The amount of ETH the company holds has not decreased as a result.
In other words, it’s more like you hold 10 ETH: when the price drops, the value of your assets shrinks, but as long as you don’t sell, it’s not a realized loss. If ETH rebounds in the future, the fair value of the native ETH may rise again as well; however, under U.S. accounting rules, impairment losses on liquid staking tokens cannot be directly reversed, so the two are still different.
The financial report also isn’t all bad news. SharpLink’s Q2 revenue reached $11.5 million, of which about $11.1 million came from ETH staking—indicating that its ETH reserves are still generating cash returns. As of the end of June, the company held about 887,000 ETH and value-equivalent assets, and it resumed purchases during the period when ETH prices were falling.
For holders of $ETH , SharpLink is not currently dumping a large amount of ETH due to this loss. Instead, it has chosen to keep increasing its holdings. This suggests that its long-term ETH strategy has not changed.
Ethereum Reserve Company #SharpLink has released its Q2 2026 financial results. The company’s net loss for the quarter is as high as $394.3 million. The headline alone certainly sounds alarming, but that doesn’t mean the company has really burned nearly $400 million. The losses mainly come from accounting mark-to-market changes caused by a drop in the price of ETH.
In the second quarter, ETH fell by about 23%, leading SharpLink to record $321 million in unrealized losses. In addition, it suffered impairment losses of $76.1 million related to LsETH and weETH. Together, the two amount to roughly $397 million—and both are non-cash accounting losses. The amount of ETH the company holds has not decreased as a result.
In other words, it’s more like you hold 10 ETH: when the price drops, the value of your assets shrinks, but as long as you don’t sell, it’s not a realized loss. If ETH rebounds in the future, the fair value of the native ETH may rise again as well; however, under U.S. accounting rules, impairment losses on liquid staking tokens cannot be directly reversed, so the two are still different.
The financial report also isn’t all bad news. SharpLink’s Q2 revenue reached $11.5 million, of which about $11.1 million came from ETH staking—indicating that its ETH reserves are still generating cash returns. As of the end of June, the company held about 887,000 ETH and value-equivalent assets, and it resumed purchases during the period when ETH prices were falling.
For holders of $ETH , SharpLink is not currently dumping a large amount of ETH due to this loss. Instead, it has chosen to keep increasing its holdings. This suggests that its long-term ETH strategy has not changed.
Log in to explore more content