Crypto Breaking

Tokenized gold is getting a burst of investor attention this year, tracking a surge in physical bullion demand as gold prices have repeatedly set fresh highs. But a new report from RedStone suggests that—despite improving market conditions—only a small portion of tokenized gold is actually being used in decentralized finance.
RedStone data points to a widening gap between market interest in tokenized bullion and its deployment in DeFi lending. In the first quarter, tokenized gold spot trading volume reached $90.7 billion as gold futures climbed above $5,600 per troy ounce. Yet just $63 million worth of tokenized gold—via Tether Gold (XAUT) and PAX Gold (PAXG)—is currently posted as collateral on Aave v3 and Morpho, according to RedStone. That collateral usage represents roughly 1.5% of the tokens’ combined $4.2 billion market capitalization.
Key takeaways
Tokenized gold saw high activity in spot markets, with $90.7 billion in Q1 trading volume.
Despite that liquidity, DeFi adoption remains thin: only about $63 million in XAUT and PAXG is used on Aave v3 and Morpho.
RedStone highlights a real stress test: Aave processed its largest cluster of XAUT liquidations on March 23 without disruption during a sharp gold sell-off.
Gold has been under pressure from expectations of higher US interest rates, which can reduce demand for non-yielding assets.
A resilient collateral asset, but with limited deployment
RedStone’s report frames tokenized gold as “battle-tested” in DeFi collateral, even while showing that the broader adoption story is still early. The core issue is not whether tokenized bullion can hold up during market volatility—it can—but whether enough capital is being placed into decentralized lending markets to make tokenized gold a meaningful on-chain primitive.
To ground that claim, RedStone points to Aave’s performance during a major sell-off. On March 23, Aave processed its largest cluster of XAUT liquidations without disruption as gold prices moved sharply lower. RedStone presents this as evidence that tokenized bullion can function reliably as DeFi collateral when markets turn fast.
That liquidation episode landed after gold dropped around 10% over the prior week—its worst weekly performance in more than four decades. Earlier coverage linked the sell-off to what JPMorgan precious metals strategist Greg Shearer called an “extremely brutal flush,” reflecting heightened risk-off behavior and fast repricing in commodity markets.
Why DeFi use is lagging: the market is there, collateral is not
RedStone’s numbers point to a mismatch between trading interest and productive DeFi usage. Tokenized gold spot volume suggests there is plenty of demand to buy, sell, and exchange tokenized bullion exposure. But the amount actually locked or committed to decentralized lending stays relatively small—about $63 million across Aave v3 and Morpho.
That matters because lending protocols are where tokenized real-world assets can translate from “tradable exposure” into “composable financial infrastructure.” If only a tiny fraction of the token supply is being used as collateral, DeFi’s ability to scale tokenized assets—especially during periods of high volatility—remains constrained by capital deployment rather than technical viability.
RedStone also situates the findings within a broader RWA expansion. Gold is one component of a market that includes private credit and tokenized US Treasurys paired with equity-related structures. In June, Token Terminal reported the sector had topped $43 billion in value, underlining that tokenization momentum is visible beyond gold alone.
Gold’s macro headwind could cut both ways
Even though the DeFi collateral test showed operational resilience, the report arrives during a period when gold itself has been under pressure. Since peaking in January, gold futures have fallen more than 26%. RedStone attributes the decline to expectations of higher US interest rates—an environment that tends to weigh on non-yielding assets like precious metals.
For tokenized gold, that matters for two reasons. First, falling prices can increase liquidation activity in lending protocols; the March 23 event shows that this process can occur without disruption. Second, if rates remain elevated, investor demand for bullion exposure may fluctuate, influencing both the spot trading volumes and the willingness of lenders/borrowers to engage with tokenized collateral strategies.
At the same time, RedStone’s reporting implies that DeFi adoption hasn’t accelerated in proportion to the broader “tokenized gold” trading narrative. If gold volatility persists, investors may demand more robust collateral mechanisms—but the current deployment levels suggest that the industry still has work to do to turn resilience into sustained utilization.
Centralized exchanges may be moving faster than on-chain lending
While RedStone’s focus is on DeFi collateral usage, the report’s broader framing highlights a contrast: centralized platforms are increasingly integrating tokenized assets as they try to bridge traditional finance and digital assets. According to a CoinGecko report referenced in the article, an emerging “crypto TradFi” market had grown to $6.6 billion as of June.
This difference in pace helps explain the adoption gap. Tokenized gold can be actively traded on centralized exchanges without necessarily being locked into on-chain lending. Until more liquidity and integrations flow directly into decentralized collateral ecosystems, tokenized real-world assets may remain more of a trading product than a primary DeFi building block.
As the tokenized RWA market expands—both on-chain and off-chain—readers should watch whether DeFi collateral usage of XAUT and PAXG rises meaningfully beyond current levels. The March 23 liquidation test suggests protocols can handle stress, but the next key question is whether capital continues to move from spot trading activity into sustained lending and other decentralized use cases.
This article was originally published as Tokenized Gold Clears DeFi Stress Test as Collateral Usage Stays <2% on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Crypto adoption in Canada is rising fast, according to new research from the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC). The regulator’s latest survey suggests that the share of Canadians who own cryptocurrency has climbed to 25% in 2026—up sharply from 10% in 2023—while awareness has also increased.
In findings released Tuesday, the OSC reported that 59% of surveyed adults said they are aware of crypto assets, and 25% reported holding them. The survey polled 2,360 Canadians aged 18 and over between December 2025 and January 2026, offering a snapshot of how quickly retail interest has expanded in recent years.
Key takeaways
OSC survey data indicates crypto ownership reached 25% in 2026, versus 10% in 2023.
Awareness among Canadian adults rose to 59%, up from levels reported in earlier OSC research.
Roughly half of crypto owners said they check whether a platform is registered before using it.
Many owners still appear to misunderstand core protections such as regulation, insurance coverage, and transaction capabilities.
Federal policy discussions—such as proposed restrictions on crypto political donations and digital asset ATMs—continue in parallel with growing retail participation.
OSC survey shows rapid rise in ownership and awareness
The OSC’s survey points to a significant shift in how mainstream crypto has become among Canadian adults. While crypto awareness has increased, the more notable change is ownership: 25% of respondents reported holding crypto assets, a jump compared with the 10% ownership level reported in 2023.
OSC framed the results as evidence that Canadians are “participating” in crypto markets more than they were only a few years ago. In its release, the regulator highlighted the value of monitoring “emerging trends and behaviors” to refine how it approaches oversight.
Knowledge improving—but investor understanding of protections still lagging
Beyond adoption, the OSC also examined how informed owners appear to be. The findings suggest some improvement in basic due diligence: about 50% of crypto owners said they check whether a platform is registered before using it.
However, the OSC noted that the survey also reflected “misunderstanding” around multiple areas that matter for consumer protection. The regulator said many respondents had incomplete or incorrect beliefs related to regulation, insurance protections, and transaction capabilities.
For investors, this matters because the practical safety of an investment often depends not just on whether a platform exists, but on what protections apply when things go wrong—such as custody issues, service failures, or disputes about transactions. The OSC’s takeaway implies that higher ownership does not automatically translate into stronger investor literacy.
Growing retail participation intersects with Ottawa’s policy push
Canada’s shift toward wider crypto ownership is occurring as lawmakers debate how crypto should be regulated and where restrictions should apply. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph highlighted two federal moves that align with the OSC’s consumer-protection themes.
In April, the federal government advanced a bill that could ban the use of crypto for political donations. In the same period, Ottawa also proposed banning digital asset ATMs, citing concerns about fraud.
These initiatives reflect a broader tension that regulators often face as adoption rises: extending access while limiting pathways that could be exploited for wrongdoing. If more consumers are entering the space, policymakers may feel stronger pressure to tighten safeguards—particularly around rails that can be used anonymously or with limited oversight, such as certain payment or cash-conversion channels.
What to watch next as regulation meets expanding demand
The OSC’s survey underscores that crypto is no longer a niche activity in Canada. With one in four surveyed adults reporting ownership and more than half expressing awareness, future regulatory decisions will increasingly affect a mainstream retail population rather than a small enthusiast base.
At the same time, the OSC’s warning about gaps in understanding suggests that education and clearer consumer-facing disclosures may be just as important as rulemaking. Investors should watch whether regulators emphasize registration checks, platform disclosure standards, and specific protections related to custody and transactional processes—and whether federal proposals tied to donations and ATMs move forward.
As the next round of research or consultations approaches, the key question will be whether Canada’s regulatory response keeps pace with the pace of adoption—and whether consumers gain not only access, but also the ability to evaluate risk and protections with confidence.
This article was originally published as OSC Survey Shows Canadian Crypto Ownership Rises to 25% on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase reported its Q2 earnings, posting $1.2 billion in revenue and missing Wall Street estimates on sales and profits for a third straight time.
The exchange blamed low spot trading volumes and low volatility for missing earnings estimates. Coinbase lost $1.36 per share, significantly higher than Wall Street’s estimate of a loss between 17 cents and 44 cents, as transaction, subscription, and stablecoin revenue came in lower than expectations.
Coinbase Posts $1.2 Billion In Revenue
The mixed Q2 earnings come as weak trading activity dragged expected results lower despite cornering a record share of the cryptocurrency market. Coinbase reported $1.2 billion in net revenue for Q2, a 19% decline from the previous year.
The GAAP net loss of $359 million was significantly higher than market expectations of a $122 million loss. Coinbase’s subscription revenue, transaction revenue, services revenue, and adjusted EBITDA also fell short of expectations.
Transaction revenue was also lower at $599 million against the expected $636 million. Subscription services revenue clocked in at $555 million, narrowly missing the estimated $590 million.
Coinbase reported $292 million in stablecoin revenue, a $17 million decline from Q2 2025, and lower than StreetAccount’s estimate of $327.2 million. The company’s shares fell over 5% during after-hours trading following the earnings report.
Weak Spot Trading Activity Dampens Q2
Despite the lower numbers, Coinbase’s share of the cryptocurrency market jumped to an all-time high of 10.3%, substantially higher than the 9.1% reported in Q1. The increase in market share comes despite a struggling crypto market and weak trading activity.
Coinbase has attributed the lower-than-expected results to weak institutional and retail trading activity. Spot trading volume has dropped 25% quarter-over-quarter, while cryptocurrency prices have remained low thanks to geopolitical tensions and policy headwinds.
Brian Armstrong Bullish On Coinbase
Coinbase is positioning itself as an “Everything Exchange” as it expands its presence into derivatives, prediction markets, payments, and tokenized assets. CEO Brian Armstrong highlighted the exchange’s record market share, adding that it could operate in any market, stating,
“Coinbase is no longer a bet just on the price of bitcoin. All of financial services are getting updated by crypto, whether that’s trading or payments or lending.”
Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.
This article was originally published as Coinbase Reports $1.2 Billion In Q2 Revenue, Misses Wall Street Estimates on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Crypto’s next phase of altcoin trading may look less like a wide, multi-token “altseason” and more like a tighter set of bets, according to market maker Wintermute. In its OTC flow report for the first half of 2026, the firm says institutional counterparties became the dominant source of spot trading on its desk—an important signal for how liquidity and momentum may behave during future rallies.
Wintermute reports that institutions generated 72% of spot flow across all tokens in its OTC activity, the highest share on record. The figure rose from 61% in the second half of 2025 and from 59% in the first half of the prior year.
Key takeaways
Institutional spot OTC flow reached 72% in H1 2026, up from 59% in H1 2025—marking a clear shift toward narrower participation.
Institutional liquidity appears to concentrate in fewer tokens, while demand weakens across the market’s “long tail.”
After price surges, institutional interest fades faster: roughly one day versus about three days for retail, Wintermute says.
Third-party data echoes the concentration trend, including exchange-volume clustering among the largest altcoins.
Why Wintermute’s OTC data changes the altcoin outlook
Wintermute’s report points to a structural change in how capital is allocated across the altcoin market. When institutions concentrate their activity in a smaller set of tokens, liquidity tends to follow the institutions’ preferences. That can reshape both market depth and the duration of momentum when prices jump.
Wintermute argues that this concentration also affects the “long tail”—the many smaller, less liquid assets that often benefit when broader retail speculation kicks in. As institutional activity becomes more focused, those smaller tokens may not receive the same sustained attention during breakout moments, reducing the odds of broad-based rallies.
Concentration is rising, and it’s not just a theory
Beyond the headline share of institutional flow, Wintermute highlights how widespread the trading footprint is on its OTC desk. Between the first half of 2024 and the first half of 2026, the number of unique tokens traded by Wintermute’s institutional counterparties increased by 24%. Over the same period, the number for retail clients rose by 76%.
In practical terms, this suggests institutions are not only accounting for more of the activity—they are also broadening more slowly across tokens. That matters for traders because it implies that liquidity and “spot attention” can become more clustered, potentially increasing the chance that rallies are sharper in a handful of assets while fading sooner elsewhere.
Wintermute also examines what happens after a token’s price and volume surge. The firm says institutional activity following such spikes typically fades after roughly one day. Retail participation, by contrast, often stays elevated for about three days. That time gap is a key difference: it can influence how long market participants expect follow-through, and it can alter the risk profile of buying after a sudden move.
Signals from other market data: rotation is less visible
Wintermute’s findings align with other monitoring of crypto trading behavior. On June 20, CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju said the traditional rotation of Bitcoin profits into smaller crypto assets had “basically disappeared.” According to CryptoQuant data highlighted in that context, Bitcoin-denominated altcoin pair volumes were near their weakest level since 2021.
The broader pattern is that altcoin trading may be becoming less driven by systematic cross-market rotation and more focused on a narrower set of assets with deeper liquidity and clearer institutional demand.
Concentration is also visible in market share statistics. The 10 largest non-stablecoin altcoins were said to account for roughly 80.5% of the capitalization of the non-Bitcoin, non-stablecoin market. On the exchange side, Kaiko reported a similar clustering: in July 2025, the data provider said the ten largest altcoins represented 63% of altcoin trading volume, rising from around 50% several months earlier as activity in smaller tokens weakened.
From “altseason” breadth to selective moves
The implication of this body of data is that “altseason” may increasingly resemble selective sector rotation rather than a catch-all surge across a wide universe of coins. The market narrative is being reshaped by the participants who can move size and manage risk efficiently—especially institutions.
Commentary from DWF Labs managing partner Andrei Grachev argued that broad altcoin rallies are giving way to more selective sector moves. In March, he suggested that too many tokens compete for limited capital, while institutional investors maintain focus on Bitcoin, Ether, and tokenized real-world assets.
Wintermute’s OTC report provides a quantitative way to interpret that shift: if institutions concentrate spot OTC liquidity, then price pressure and sustained post-surge buying may cluster around a smaller portion of the altcoin landscape. Retail activity may still energize moves across a broader set of tokens, but the institutional “after-effect” appears shorter-lived in Wintermute’s findings—potentially reducing the runway for long-cycle altcoin runs.
As H2 2026 unfolds, investors and traders may want to watch whether this institutional dominance persists across more tokens—or whether it continues to narrow liquidity further. The next signal to monitor is whether post-surge institutional follow-through remains compressed to about a day, since that would reinforce a market regime where winners are more concentrated and rallies fade faster outside the most liquid, institution-favored assets.
This article was originally published as Wintermute Data Shows 72% Institutional OTC Flow in 1H 2026 as Altseason Narrows on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Wintermute says the next phase of altcoin momentum may look different from past cycles: fewer tokens could attract sustained inflows as institutional desks concentrate their activity into a narrower basket of assets. In a first-half 2026 OTC flow report, the market maker found that institutional counterparties accounted for the vast majority of spot trading activity on its desk—an outcome that, if mirrored across the broader market, would likely make “altseason” less broad and more selective.
The shift also appears to include a timing mismatch. Wintermute reports that institutional participation tends to fade quickly after a token’s price and volume spike, while retail activity typically stays elevated for longer—suggesting any future rallies could be more short-lived and restricted to the tokens institutions already favor.
Key takeaways
Wintermute’s first-half 2026 OTC data shows institutional counterparties generated 72% of spot flow across all tokens on its desk—the highest share recorded—up from 61% in H2 2025 and 59% in H1 2025.
Liquidity and attention are concentrating in the “short list” of assets institutions choose, while activity in the market’s smaller “long tail” weakens.
The number of unique tokens traded by institutional counterparties rose only 24% from H1 2024 to H1 2026, versus 76% growth for retail clients.
Institutional activity after a price-and-volume surge typically cools within about one day, while retail activity remains elevated for around three days.
Institutional desks are pulling OTC liquidity toward a smaller set of tokens
Wintermute’s OTC flow report points to a structural change in how capital is deployed across the altcoin market. According to Wintermute, institutional counterparties drove 72% of spot flow across all tokens handled on its OTC desk in the first half of 2026—its highest recorded level. That compares with 61% in the second half of 2025 and 59% in the first half of the previous year.
While institutional participation has been rising, Wintermute’s interpretation matters for traders and investors: when the majority of activity is concentrated among a smaller group of counterparties and assets, rallies can become narrower. The firm said liquidity is increasingly clustering in tokens institutions favor, while the broader “long tail” of smaller tokens sees less consistent engagement.
That concentration effect is reinforced by the growth rates in token participation. Wintermute found that from H1 2024 to H1 2026, the number of unique tokens traded by institutional counterparties increased by 24%, whereas retail clients increased their number of unique traded tokens by 76% over the same span. In practical terms, the data suggests that retail participants explore a wider range of assets, while institutional flow remains comparatively disciplined.
Faster institutional pullbacks after spikes could reshape altcoin rally dynamics
Another detail in Wintermute’s report relates to how quickly activity cools after a token experiences a surge. The firm found that institutional activity following spikes in a token’s price and volume faded after roughly one day. Retail behavior differed: Wintermute says retail activity typically stays elevated for about three days after similar surges.
If these patterns extend beyond Wintermute’s OTC venue, they can influence how traders structure exposure during altcoin moves. Short-lived institutional participation can mean that order flow—and therefore liquidity—does not remain supportive for as long as it may have in earlier cycles when broader rotation into many assets sustained momentum.
For market participants, the implication is straightforward: rallies may require faster decision-making and more asset-selective positioning, because the “institutional bid” may not persist the way it once did across a wide swath of tokens.
Other data points suggest “altseason” rotation is narrowing across venues
Wintermute’s proprietary OTC findings add to a growing set of signals that capital is clustering around fewer altcoins. On June 20, CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju said the “traditional rotation of Bitcoin profits” into smaller assets had “basically disappeared.” CryptoQuant data referenced by Young Ju suggested that trading volume in Bitcoin-denominated altcoin pairs was near its weakest level since 2021.
Meanwhile, CryptoQuant’s CEO also pointed to market cap concentration. The 10 largest non-stablecoin altcoins accounted for about 80.5% of the non-Bitcoin, non-stablecoin market’s capitalization—another indicator that the market’s center of gravity is increasingly tilted toward the biggest names in the category.
Exchange-level data has also suggested a similar pattern. In July 2025, Kaiko reported that the ten largest altcoins made up 63% of altcoin trading volume, up from roughly 50% several months earlier as activity in smaller tokens weakened. Together with Wintermute’s OTC numbers, the message across different datasets is consistent: liquidity and trading interest are drifting toward the same smaller group of assets.
Market debate: broad rallies vs. selective sector moves
The question now facing investors is whether this concentration will permanently reduce the breadth of future altcoin runs—or simply change their shape. DWF Labs managing partner Andrei Grachev has argued that broad altcoin rallies are giving way to more selective sector activity. In March 2025, Grachev said too many tokens were competing for limited capital, while institutional investors remained focused on Bitcoin, Ether, and tokenized real-world assets.
This framing aligns with the mechanics Wintermute describes: if institutions are more concentrated, and their participation fades quickly after price and volume spikes, “rotation” may become less of a market-wide wave and more of a series of targeted moves. In such an environment, tokens outside the institutional comfort zone may struggle to attract sustained liquidity, even if retail interest remains visible for a brief period.
It also highlights a potential tension between retail and institutional behavior. Retail participation appears to spread across more tokens and remain elevated longer after bursts. But if institutional desks dominate overall spot flow on major venues and OTC desks, retail-led excitement may not be enough to maintain broad-based momentum without follow-through from larger pools of capital.
For readers, the key watch items are whether institutional concentration continues to increase beyond H1 2026, and whether the “one-day” institutional fade and “three-day” retail persistence become stable patterns across more tokens and more trading conditions. If they do, the definition of “altseason” may shift from a widespread rotation into many names to a narrower, faster-moving set of trades that reflect where liquidity is actually concentrated.
This article was originally published as Wintermute Warns Crypto’s Next Altseason Could Be Less Lucrative on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Canadian hardware wallet vendor Coinkite has issued an urgent security advisory for its Coldcard Mk3 signing device, warning users to move funds away from wallets whose seed phrases were generated on certain Mk3 firmware versions. The company says the issue affects Mk3 firmware 4.0.1 through 5.0.3, and that affected seeds may put funds at risk.
The warning arrives as Bitcoin investigators and security specialists scrutinize an unrelated-looking but highly unusual sweep of 594.48 BTC from single-signature addresses. While commentators have connected the timing to Mk3 devices, Coinkite stresses that no definitive public proof has linked its firmware warning to the broader sweep.
Key takeaways
Coinkite’s advisory targets Coldcard Mk3 firmware versions 4.0.1 to 5.0.3; Mk4, Q, and Mk5 are stated as not affected.
The recommended response is to generate a fresh seed on an unaffected device, verify backups and receiving addresses, then send test transactions before moving remaining funds.
Early internal analysis from Coinkite indicates BIP-39 passphrases (distinct from the device PIN) may face minimal risk.
Security experts are analyzing a separate event: a sweep of 594.48 BTC across 500 transactions within a narrow three-block window from single-signature addresses.
Coinkite flags an Mk3 firmware window
In a post on its official blog, Coinkite said that seeds created on a Coldcard Mk3 running firmware version 4.0.1 (released in March 2021) or any later Mk3 firmware may expose funds to risk. The company extends the affected range through firmware version 5.0.3, described as the final firmware supporting the Mk3.
Coinkite’s early analysis also draws a boundary around which components of wallet setup are most relevant. It said seeds used with a BIP-39 passphrase face minimal risk, while clarifying that this refers to a passphrase rather than the Coldcard PIN.
Importantly, the company framed its guidance as a precautionary measure. “Out of an abundance of caution,” Coinkite urged users with potentially affected seeds to generate a new seed on an unaffected device, confirm the backup, verify the receiving address, send a small test transaction, and only then transfer the rest of their funds. Coinkite added that its investigation is still ongoing and that it will deliver a formal technical review.
What triggered renewed attention: the 594.48 BTC sweep
Interest in this broader incident intensified after a Reddit user reported that a wallet drained from an account associated with a Coldcard Mk3 purchased in May 2021 had later been restored onto a Coldcard Mk4 in January 2026. That user’s account is self-reported and does not, by itself, establish a direct connection between the Mk3 firmware warning and the sweep activity.
Separately, AnchorWatch CEO and co-founder Rob Hamilton published a preliminary analysis stating that 1,324 unspent transaction outputs were swept across 500 transactions in a three-block window, moving a total of 594.48 BTC. In his write-up, Hamilton noted that all affected addresses were single-signature, and that 562 BTC was later consolidated into another address.
Hamilton described the pattern as consistent with “flawed entropy in wallet generation somewhere along the way,” echoing the possibility that randomness quality during seed creation may have mattered. At the time of writing, the 594.48 BTC was estimated to be worth about $38.3 million based on Bitcoin’s price of $64,364.07, according to CoinGecko.
Experts debate cause: low-entropy seeds and partial drainage
Another security researcher, Wizardsardine CEO Kevin Loaec, offered a hypothesis focused on the randomness source itself rather than the sweep mechanics. In a separate post, Loaec said his current theory is that a low-entropy random-number generator—potentially located in a software library, a secure element, or a specific device batch or firmware version—produced wallet seeds with insufficient randomness.
Loaec further suggested that if attackers were aware of the flaw, they may have used an AI-generated brute-force script. In his account, the search was confined to a limited set of BIP-84 derivation paths, which could help explain why the sweep appears concentrated in native SegWit addresses and why some wallets were only partially drained. He emphasized that the idea remains unconfirmed.
Crucially, Loaec warned that if his model is correct, wallets that saw only partial drainage could remain vulnerable to additional attempts. He also said funds in other address types might be exposed if the attacker expands scanning beyond the initially targeted formats.
Why the guidance matters for users—especially in light of the speculation
Even though Coinkite has not publicly connected the Coldcard Mk3 firmware issue to the 594.48 BTC sweep, the overlap in themes—seed quality, single-signature theft, and concentrated sweep behavior—means the advisory should be treated as a direct action item. Hardware-wallet incidents differ from typical “compromised computer” narratives: if the weakness is in seed generation, reusing the same seed (even on a different device) can keep exposure alive.
That’s why Coinkite’s recommended operational steps are specific and defensive: creating a new seed on an unaffected device, validating backups, confirming the correct receiving address, and using a small test transfer before moving the remainder. This sequence is aimed at reducing the risk of both theft and user error during migration—two failure modes that often show up around recovery events.
For users, the key uncertainty is whether the sweep investigators will eventually find deterministic evidence linking the Mk3 firmware range to the stolen outputs. Until then, Coinkite’s advisory stands independently as a risk-management decision for any Coldcard Mk3 owner who created seeds during the stated firmware window.
Going forward, readers should watch for Coinkite’s promised formal technical review and for any public forensic work that either corroborates or rules out a relationship between the Mk3 seed-generation warning and the 594.48 BTC sweep pattern described by security specialists.
This article was originally published as Coldcard Mk3 Flags After 594 BTC Moves Without Clear Cause on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Canadian hardware wallet maker Coinkite has issued an urgent security warning for owners of its Coldcard Mk3 signing device, advising users to move funds away from wallets whose seed phrases were generated using specific affected firmware versions. The company said the risk applies to Mk3 firmware 4.0.1 (released in March 2021) through 5.0.3, the last firmware version that supports the Mk3—while its Mk4, Q, and Mk5 models are not affected, based on early analysis.
The alert arrives amid renewed scrutiny from Bitcoin security researchers investigating an unexplained, coordinated sweep of 594.48 BTC from single-signature addresses. Coinkite emphasized that, at this stage, there is no definitive public proof linking the Mk3 seed-generation issue to that activity, but the company is asking users to act “out of an abundance of caution.”
Key takeaways
Coinkite warns Coldcard Mk3 users to migrate funds from wallets whose seeds were created on affected firmware versions 4.0.1 through 5.0.3.
The issue does not appear to affect newer hardware models (Mk4, Q, Mk5), according to Coinkite’s early findings.
Coinkite’s guidance focuses on safer recovery hygiene: generate a new seed on an unaffected device, verify backups and receive addresses, and test with a small transaction first.
Security analysts are examining a 594.48 BTC sweep from single-signature addresses, but no public evidence currently ties it directly to the Mk3 firmware problem.
Coinkite says seeds protected with a BIP-39 passphrase (distinct from the Coldcard PIN) show minimal risk in its preliminary assessment.
Coinkite’s Mk3 seed-generation warning
In a post on its official blog, Coinkite said seeds created on an Mk3 running firmware version 4.0.1 or later versions—up to 5.0.3—may put funds at risk. The company’s early analysis did not identify the same concern for Coldcard Mk4, Q, or Mk5 devices.
The company’s recommendation is practical and staged. Coinkite urged affected users to generate a new seed on a device considered unaffected, confirm that the backup is correct, and ensure they are using the intended receive address. Users should then send a small test transaction before transferring the remainder of the balance.
Coinkite also tried to clarify a point of confusion that often arises in hardware wallet security discussions: in its assessment, the “BIP-39 passphrase” is the relevant protection mechanism, and it should not be conflated with the Coldcard PIN.
From firmware versions to real-world user risk
The significance of Coinkite’s warning lies in how deterministically Bitcoin wallets derive addresses from seed phrases. If seed generation was compromised in a way that reduced randomness—or introduced patterns an attacker could exploit—then previously used addresses may become more guessable. Hardware wallets are designed specifically to make theft difficult precisely because the seed should be unpredictable, so any defect that affects entropy can have downstream consequences.
While the company did not provide technical details in the excerpted warning, it did set boundaries around what users need to check: not every Coldcard Mk3 seed is automatically suspect, but those created on the specified firmware range. For users who cannot confidently identify the exact firmware version used during seed generation, Coinkite’s steps imply a conservative approach: treat the wallet as potentially exposed and migrate funds accordingly.
That “caution first” posture is particularly important given the broader environment. Hardware wallet security incidents—even when the evidence remains circumstantial—tend to trigger defensive behavior from both users and threat researchers, because a stolen seed can sometimes lead to recurring attempts rather than a single breach.
Security researchers link context, not causation
Attention intensified after a Reddit user described a wallet drain they claimed involved a Coldcard Mk3 purchased in May 2021. According to the user’s account, the seed was later restored onto a Coldcard Mk4 in January 2026, meaning it was entered into a second device afterward. The information, however, is self-reported and does not, on its own, establish a direct connection between Coldcard hardware and a larger set of suspicious transactions.
Separately, AnchorWatch CEO and co-founder Rob Hamilton published a preliminary analysis claiming that 594.48 BTC was swept across 500 transactions over a three-block window. In that assessment, Hamilton noted that 1,324 unspent transaction outputs were involved and that the addresses appeared to be single-signature. He also stated that roughly 562 BTC was later consolidated into another address. Hamilton suggested the pattern “looks like there was flawed entropy in wallet generation somewhere along the way,” describing the event as consistent with randomness issues, though this remains an interpretation rather than proof.
At the time of the reporting, the 594.48 BTC was valued at approximately $38.3 million using a Bitcoin price of $64,364.07, according to CoinGecko.
Another researcher, Wizardsardine CEO Kevin Loaec, offered a hypothesis focused on how low-entropy seeds might be produced. In his view, a low-quality random-number generator—potentially from a software component, secure element behavior, device batch, or specific firmware—could have resulted in wallets with insufficient randomness. Loaec suggested an attacker with knowledge of the flaw might use an AI-generated script to brute-force affected wallets, while limiting the search to a narrower set of BIP-84 derivation paths. That would align with why the sweep appears concentrated in native SegWit addresses, and why some wallets may have been only partially drained. He stressed that this theory is still unconfirmed and that further scanning might expose additional holdings.
The key tension across these analyses is the difference between “consistent with a flaw” and “proven caused by this specific device.” Coinkite’s warning sits in the first category—credible internal assessment that certain Mk3 firmware versions may expose users—while the external sweep investigation remains a broader pattern that researchers are still trying to attribute.
What to watch next for affected users
If Coinkite’s risk assessment is accurate, the most important variable for users is whether their seed phrase originated from the affected firmware range and whether it was protected with a BIP-39 passphrase. The company’s preliminary statement that BIP-39 passphrase seeds face “minimal risk” provides some comfort, but it does not eliminate the need for verification and safe migration steps.
Going forward, readers should watch for Coinkite’s promised formal technical review and for further independent analysis that either strengthens or weakens the suspected link between the Mk3 seed-generation issue and the 594.48 BTC sweep. Until that picture is clarified, the prudent takeaway remains the same: treat potentially affected wallets as exposed, and move funds using newly generated seed material on unaffected hardware.
This article was originally published as Coldcard Mk3 Alert as Experts Investigate $38M Bitcoin Wallet Drain on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has introduced legislation aimed at creating a dedicated US anti-corruption bureau, arguing that existing oversight is not designed to stop presidents from profiting while in office—an accusation he ties directly to President Donald Trump’s cryptocurrency-related investments.
Schumer’s proposal, the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act, would establish a new federal agency with authority to “investigate, enforce, and prevent executive branch corruption,” according to a Thursday announcement from Schumer’s office. The bill also seeks to consolidate key ethics and enforcement bodies under one roof—an approach lawmakers supporting the measure say could strengthen accountability more than the current “patchwork” of watchdogs.
Key takeaways
Schumer’s bill would create a new federal anti-corruption bureau with investigative, enforcement, and preventive powers focused on executive branch conduct.
The legislation points to reported Trump earnings from investments, including cryptocurrency exposure, as part of a broader argument for tighter safeguards.
The proposed bureau would incorporate the Federal Election Commission, the Office of Government Ethics, and the Office of Special Counsel into a single structure.
Supporters are also pushing the measure alongside continued negotiations over the Senate’s crypto market-structure effort, the CLARITY Act, which still lacks a scheduled vote.
Even if the bureau legislation clears Congress, Trump could veto it; overriding a veto would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers.
A new enforcement model pitched as a response to crypto-related conflicts
In a statement released with the bill introduction, Schumer said he had introduced the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act to address executive branch corruption more directly. The proposal is built around Congress’ findings—stated in the bill text—that Trump disclosed earning more than $2 billion from investments in 2025, including $1.4 billion associated with cryptocurrency, and that his family holds more than $1 billion in a crypto fund tied to foreign governments.
Schumer framed the new agency as having “real teeth,” emphasizing that it would include enforcement authority rather than acting only as a monitor. He also said the bureau would be staffed by a bipartisan group of seven members confirmed by the Senate.
To address remedies for wrongdoing, the bill includes mechanisms allowing private citizens and state authorities to pursue recovery of funds that Schumer described as stolen from Americans “through corruption.”
“This new bureau is one where these institutions work in symbiosis, strengthening each other and eliminating barriers between them which often got in the way,” Schumer said. “It replaces a broken patchwork of watchdogs, none of which were built for this moment, with one, powerful anti-corruption agency, ready to act anywhere, anytime corruption strikes.”
White House pushes back on conflict claims tied to investment accounts
The anti-corruption push arrives amid persistent Democratic criticism of Trump’s involvement in the crypto industry while in office. Schumer’s office noted concerns that have also hovered over the Senate’s broader crypto policy effort, the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act.
While the White House agreed to certain ethics provisions in CLARITY, many lawmakers have argued those changes do not adequately address potential conflicts of interest.
In a statement to Cointelegraph, White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly reiterated the administration’s position that there were “no conflicts of interest” related to Trump’s investments. Kelly said the investments were “held in fully discretionary accounts managed by independent third-party financial institutions.”
Consolidating ethics and enforcement under one “roof”
A notable feature of Schumer’s bill is its plan to reorganize parts of the federal oversight landscape. The proposal would place the US Federal Election Commission, the Office of Government Ethics, and the Office of Special Counsel “under one roof” within the new bureau.
The intent, as described in Schumer’s remarks, is to reduce the friction between agencies and streamline action when corruption is alleged—an argument he made by contrasting the proposed bureau with what he characterized as outdated or mismatched oversight structures.
Schumer introduced the bill with cosponsors Andy Kim, Alex Padilla, and Jeff Merkley.
What’s happening with the Senate’s CLARITY Act remains uncertain
Schumer’s anti-corruption initiative is moving alongside a separate, more technical fight in the Senate: whether and when the CLARITY Act will advance.
The article notes that the Senate has just over a week before lawmakers break for a month-long state work period. That calendar pressure is heightening uncertainty for pending legislation, including CLARITY, especially as lawmakers face the prospect of competing priorities ahead of the 2026 midterms.
As of Thursday, the Senate had not scheduled a vote on the CLARITY Act, despite encouragement from some Republican lawmakers and industry figures. Former Securities and Exchange Commission official John Reed Stark said the situation is difficult to predict, describing “enormous drama” surrounding the bill and stating that experts he spoke with could not confidently forecast what would happen that week.
Industry leaders have also signaled confidence while acknowledging timing risks. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said the bill was at the “one-yard line,” while Senator Cynthia Lummis continued pushing for a vote, according to posts cited in the report.
Legislative math: momentum doesn’t eliminate veto risk
Even if Schumer’s anti-corruption bureau legislation gains traction, it still faces major hurdles. The bill would require Republican support in both chambers to pass, with the party holding only a slim majority in the Senate. If it clears the Senate and House before 2028, President Trump could still veto the legislation.
Overriding a presidential veto would require a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, leaving the outcome dependent on whether Democrats can sustain enough cross-party backing.
For crypto watchers, the near-term focus is likely to split: whether the Senate can find a path forward on the CLARITY Act before its schedule runs out, and whether Schumer’s anti-corruption bureau proposal gains enough bipartisan traction to survive both legislative and veto thresholds—especially given the ongoing dispute over how (or whether) current ethics arrangements address potential conflicts tied to crypto.
This article was originally published as Schumer Backs Anti-Corruption Agency, Targets Crypto Disclosure Issues on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Telegram founder Pavel Durov has responded to Russia’s latest legal actions by accusing authorities of trying to impose mass surveillance and censorship on the messaging platform, while also claiming the state has moved to restrict his ability to publish online.
Speaking in a Telegram post on Thursday—one day after Russia announced new charges—Durov said Russian authorities labeled him a “terrorist” following his refusal to comply with government demands related to monitoring and restricting content on Telegram.
Key takeaways
Durov says Russia designated him a “terrorist” after he resisted demands tied to mass surveillance and censorship of Telegram.
He also claims Russian authorities barred him from publishing information on the internet.
Russia’s Federal Security Service alleges Telegram failed to remove channels linked to terrorist groups and Ukrainian intelligence services.
The Russian case follows a separate, ongoing investigation in France tied to accusations that Telegram inadequately moderates illegal content and does not sufficiently respond to law enforcement requests.
Additional legal pressure is reportedly building in Australia through court proceedings over alleged failures to remove terrorism-related content.
Russia escalates allegations against Durov
According to the timeline reported earlier by Cointelegraph, the comments came a day after Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) accused Durov of facilitating terrorist activity. The FSB’s allegation centers on a claim that Telegram did not remove channels used by terrorist organizations and by what Russia described as Ukrainian intelligence services.
Durov’s response on Telegram frames the situation as part of a broader conflict over how governments seek control of online communication. He told Telegram users that Russia had also blocked him from “publishing information on the Internet,” and added that authorities appeared to be “confused about who can ban whom from the Internet.”
How the Russian investigation started
The current escalation builds on a criminal investigation Russia launched in February, as previously detailed by Cointelegraph. At the time, regulators accused Telegram of leaving nearly 155,000 channels, chats, and bots online despite Telegram’s position that such content did not violate relevant Russian law.
The investigation was tied to a wide range of alleged violations, including rules covering extremist material, terrorism, drug trafficking, and other illicit activity categories—suggesting that Russian authorities are treating Telegram’s moderation and compliance as a central issue rather than targeting isolated incidents.
Broader legal challenges in Europe and beyond
While Russia’s charges are the latest development, Durov’s legal problems extend beyond the country. Cointelegraph previously reported that Durov was arrested in France in August 2024 and remains under judicial investigation over allegations that Telegram facilitated criminal activity by failing to adequately moderate illegal content and respond to law enforcement requests.
Durov has denied wrongdoing, saying French authorities did not follow due process in efforts to obtain information from Telegram. His arrest also sparked an organized public push from the TON community, which—according to Cointelegraph—raised more than 9 million signatures on an open letter urging French authorities to release him.
The case has also involved changes to how restrictions on his movement were handled. Cointelegraph reported that French authorities allowed Durov to return temporarily to Dubai in March 2025, before lifting travel restrictions entirely later in 2025.
New pressure reported in Australia
Alongside Europe and Russia, Telegram is facing further legal scrutiny in Australia. Cointelegraph reported that Australian regulators this week launched court proceedings alleging Telegram failed to remove terrorism-related content.
For Telegram and Durov, these separate legal tracks underscore a recurring theme in cross-border platform enforcement: different jurisdictions are asking the same underlying question—how much responsibility a messaging provider should bear for removing content and supporting law enforcement access.
Durov’s privacy-and-surveillance messaging
Durov has portrayed himself as a defender of free speech and digital privacy, using recent statements to argue that compliance efforts can drift into broader surveillance. Cointelegraph noted that in April he warned the European Union’s proposed age-verification app could open the door to wider online monitoring.
That same month, Cointelegraph also reported that Durov linked alleged tax data leaks to a wave of crypto-related kidnappings in France, and said Telegram would leave the country rather than grant authorities access to users’ private messages.
In the current dispute with Russia, his public framing follows the same pattern: he positions government demands as attempts to expand control over messaging infrastructure rather than as targeted enforcement of specific legal obligations.
As Russia’s case develops and other jurisdictions—such as France and Australia—pursue their own enforcement actions, investors and builders in crypto-adjacent ecosystems may want to watch for any tangible changes in platform moderation, legal compliance requirements, and cross-border cooperation that could affect how TON and Telegram-related services operate in practice.
This article was originally published as Pavel Durov Responds as Russia Flags Telegram Over Terrorism on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup became a major stress test for crypto-native betting and tokenized fan experiences, generating an estimated $20 billion in blockchain-based prediction market activity, according to a report by blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis.
Chainalysis breaks the figure into trading conducted before and during the tournament, with bettors placing about $5.7 billion in wagers across the World Cup’s five-week run. During that period, World Cup-related markets represented roughly 63% of all prediction market activity, underscoring how quickly attention can concentrate on a single global event.
Key takeaways
$20B in blockchain prediction market volume was recorded around the 2026 World Cup, including activity before and during the tournament.
Bettors placed approximately $5.7B in wagers over the tournament’s five-week timeframe.
World Cup markets made up about 63% of prediction market trading during the event window.
Chainalysis reports that fewer than 1% of participating wallets had links to illicit actors, despite identifying around $5.4M in flows from sanctioned and other illicit sources.
Fan activity also expanded: about $24M in trading of FIFA Collect NFTs and more than 100,000 match tickets distributed via the platform.
World Cup betting went truly global, led by major trading regions
One of the most notable findings in Chainalysis’ analysis is the breadth of participation. The report says users from every continent except Antarctica took part in World Cup prediction markets, indicating that these markets are not confined to a narrow crypto-heavy geography.
For attributable trading volume, the United States and China topped the list, followed by Canada, Thailand, and the United Kingdom. While those rankings don’t necessarily indicate where most individual users are located, they do suggest where the highest-value activity was concentrated during the tournament cycle.
The concentration of volume also matters for market participants because it hints at where liquidity and market-making activity may be strongest during large-cycle events. In practice, that can affect execution quality—especially for smaller bettors who rely on predictable spreads and order depth.
Illicit exposure was limited—but not zero
Despite the scale of participation, Chainalysis found that illicit involvement was relatively small by wallet share. The firm said fewer than 1% of wallets active in World Cup prediction markets had ties to illicit actors.
However, Chainalysis also identified approximately $5.4 million in transaction flows connected to sanctioned entities and other illicit sources. This distinction is important: even if the proportion of risky wallets is low, the absolute value of illicit flows can still be meaningful—particularly in high-volume environments where automated systems and cross-border activity can increase the chance of compliance gaps.
The report’s overall interpretation is that blockchain-based prediction markets can reach broad audiences without becoming dominated by bad actors, but it also emphasizes the need for continued attention to compliance and identity controls as platforms scale.
FIFA Collect: collectibles and ticketing draw fans into blockchain platforms
Beyond betting, Chainalysis pointed to growing adoption of blockchain-based digital collectibles tied to the World Cup. During the tournament, fans traded about $24 million worth of FIFA Collect NFTs.
It also reports that more than 100,000 match tickets were distributed through the platform. In other words, the event wasn’t only about wagering on outcomes; it also served as a conduit for token-linked fan engagement, merging prediction markets with collectible and ticket distribution activity.
Chainalysis added that wallets connected to sanctioned entities represented less than 0.01% of FIFA Collect users. The firm attributed this low share in part to platform identity verification requirements, suggesting that compliance tooling and onboarding friction can meaningfully reduce illicit participation—at least within collectible and ticketing use cases.
That matters for investors and builders because collectible platforms and ticketing systems often sit closer to mainstream adoption than pure trading venues. As user bases widen, the effectiveness of KYC/identity verification and transaction monitoring can become a deciding factor for whether regulators and large partners see the ecosystem as “usable” rather than merely speculative.
What the World Cup signals for future crypto-native events
Chainalysis’ findings collectively point to a broader trend: blockchain appears poised to play a larger role in major global events, not only through prediction markets but also via tokenized fan products and distribution mechanisms.
Just as importantly, the report frames compliance as central to sustaining growth. With thousands of wallets participating across regions and the majority of activity concentrated around a single event window, the World Cup demonstrated both the potential for mass participation and the ongoing challenge of managing sanctioned and illicit flows even when they remain a small fraction of users.
Looking ahead, market watchers will likely focus on whether future large tournaments see similar engagement patterns—especially the share of trading volume tied to event-specific markets, and whether identity verification keeps illicit exposure low as platforms onboard even more mainstream users.
This article was originally published as World Cup Drives $20B in Blockchain Prediction Market Volume: Chainalysis on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Telegram founder Pavel Durov says Russian authorities have designated him a “terrorist” after he refused government demands for mass surveillance and censorship on the messaging platform. Durov posted his response publicly in a Telegram message published a day after Russia announced new criminal charges against him.
In that post, Durov claimed Russia also blocked him from “publishing information on the Internet,” adding that authorities appear to have “got confused about who can ban whom from the Internet.”
Key takeaways
Durov’s latest statement follows Russia’s announcement of charges, after Russia’s security service accused him of facilitating terrorist activity.
The Russian allegations center on Telegram’s alleged failure to remove channels tied to terrorist groups and Ukrainian intelligence services.
Russia’s case builds on a criminal probe reportedly launched in February over alleged non-compliance with Russian rules on extremist and terrorism-related content.
Durov is also facing separate legal scrutiny in France, and regulators in Australia have reportedly initiated court proceedings over terrorism-related content.
Russia escalates case with “terrorist” label
Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) accused Durov of facilitating terrorist activity, according to earlier coverage from Cointelegraph. The claim is that Telegram did not remove certain channels used by terrorist organizations as well as channels linked to Ukrainian intelligence services.
Durov’s rebuttal came through his own Telegram account the day after Russia made the allegations public. In addition to responding to the charges, he framed the dispute as a conflict over Telegram’s stance toward government demands, particularly around surveillance and content restrictions.
The message also suggests a broader disagreement about control of online speech and information access—Durov saying Russian authorities barred him from publishing information on the internet, while disputing the legitimacy of who can impose such restrictions.
February investigation tied to alleged content non-removal
Russia’s current push does not appear out of nowhere. Cointelegraph previously reported that a criminal investigation in February followed regulatory accusations that Telegram left nearly 155,000 channels, chats, and bots accessible despite Telegram’s alleged violations of Russian laws relating to extremist material, terrorism, drug trafficking, and other illicit categories.
That earlier context matters because it indicates that the case is tied to a longer-running compliance argument—how Telegram moderates content and how it responds to removal requests. For investors and platform users watching the regulatory risk landscape, these developments reinforce that messaging platforms can face escalating consequences when regulators argue they are not acting quickly or thoroughly enough to meet local legal standards.
At the same time, much remains uncertain: public allegations do not automatically translate into immediate changes on the ground, and the specifics of what was or wasn’t removed—and under what procedural thresholds—are not detailed in the statements referenced here.
Legal pressure extends beyond Russia
Durov’s legal situation has been international. Cointelegraph reported that he was arrested in France in August 2024 and has remained the subject of a judicial investigation over allegations that Telegram facilitated criminal activity, including by allegedly failing to moderate illegal content adequately and respond to law enforcement requests.
According to earlier coverage, Durov has denied wrongdoing, arguing that French authorities did not follow due process when seeking information from Telegram. His arrest was followed by a TON Community-backed campaign that collected more than 9 million signatures on an open letter urging French authorities to release him.
There have also been reported changes in travel conditions: French authorities initially allowed Durov to return temporarily to Dubai in March 2025 before lifting travel restrictions entirely later that year, as noted by Cointelegraph. The implication is that while legal pressure can be intense, authorities may adjust constraints over time depending on the status of the proceedings.
Meanwhile, Cointelegraph also reported that Australia has moved toward court proceedings, with regulators alleging Telegram failed to remove terrorism-related content. The platform’s exposure in multiple jurisdictions highlights a recurring regulatory theme worldwide: governments increasingly expect major communication platforms to take meaningful action against content they deem illegal, even when the platforms frame enforcement as complex, global, and constrained by legal standards.
Privacy, surveillance, and the EU debate
Beyond the courtroom, Durov has publicly positioned himself around digital privacy and free speech. In April, he warned that a proposed European Union age-verification app could open the door to broader online surveillance, according to Cointelegraph. The argument—tying age verification to a wider data-collection trajectory—signals how Durov views regulatory measures as potentially expanding monitoring rather than simply improving safety.
In the same period, Cointelegraph reported that Durov blamed alleged tax data leaks for an increase in crypto-related kidnappings in France. He said Telegram would leave the country rather than grant authorities access to users’ private messages, tying the debate back to the line between lawful access and what he frames as unacceptable intrusion into private communications.
Taken together with the Russia and France allegations, these public remarks suggest that Durov is consistent in his framing: that enforcement actions aimed at removing content or complying with requests can also become mechanisms for surveillance or compelled access to private data.
What to watch next is how each jurisdiction’s process unfolds—whether courts compel specific operational changes, whether regulators escalate further, and how Telegram responds in practice. For users, the key question is whether enforcement will lead to tangible moderation shifts; for the broader industry, it will be whether these cases set precedents for how governments can pressure encryption-adjacent communication platforms to cooperate with investigations.
This article was originally published as Pavel Durov Responds After Russia Labels Telegram Ties to Terrorism on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup turned into a major proving ground for crypto-based consumer activity, with blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimating $20 billion in blockchain-linked prediction market volume and $24 million in trades of FIFA-related digital collectibles during the tournament cycle.
In Chainalysis’s analysis, bettors placed about $5.7 billion in wagers over the five weeks of the World Cup itself, while activity tied to World Cup markets made up roughly 63% of all prediction market trading during that span. The numbers point to how quickly blockchain infrastructure can become embedded in mainstream global events—if platforms can onboard large audiences while keeping compliance controls effective.
Key takeaways
Chainalysis attributes $20 billion in blockchain-based prediction market volume to the 2026 World Cup, including trading before and during the tournament.
About $5.7 billion was wagered across the five-week event window, with World Cup markets representing approximately 63% of prediction market activity during that period.
More than 400,000 wallets participated in blockchain betting, with the United States and China leading in attributable volume.
Illicit exposure appears limited by wallet count: fewer than 1% of participating wallets had ties to illicit actors, though Chainalysis detected roughly $5.4 million in flows from sanctioned and other illicit sources.
Fan engagement extended beyond betting: around $24 million in FIFA Collect NFT trades and over 100,000 match tickets distributed through the platform, with sanctioned-linked users under 0.01%.
World Cup prediction markets draw large-scale participation
Chainalysis’s report frames the World Cup as a rare instance where blockchain-based prediction markets reached a broad, geographically distributed audience. According to the firm, participation came from every continent except Antarctica.
In terms of where attributable trading volume originated, the United States and China topped the list, followed by Canada, Thailand, and the United Kingdom. That distribution matters for investors and builders because it suggests these platforms are no longer confined to a small, crypto-native user base—at least for high-interest global events.
Chainalysis also noted that World Cup-related prediction markets dominated the sector’s activity during the five-week tournament window. With World Cup markets accounting for about 63% of prediction market trading during that period, the event effectively acted as a concentration point for demand, liquidity, and user attention.
Wagering volume is huge, but illicit activity stays comparatively low
While the scale of betting activity was significant, Chainalysis’s findings indicate that outright illicit participation was limited when measured by the number of wallets involved. The firm said fewer than 1% of wallets participating in World Cup prediction markets had ties to illicit actors.
However, the report does not claim the ecosystem was free of risk. Chainalysis identified roughly $5.4 million in flows that originated from sanctioned entities and other illicit sources. The distinction is important: even if bad-actor wallet counts are low, illicit flows can still materialize within total volume—especially in markets with high throughput during major events.
For platforms and users, the takeaway is not simply that “crime is small,” but that compliance controls likely play a central role in keeping participation cleaner as user numbers expand.
Digital collectibles and ticketing add another layer of on-chain engagement
Beyond prediction markets, Chainalysis highlighted growing usage of blockchain-based digital collectibles connected to major sports moments. Fans traded approximately $24 million worth of FIFA Collect NFTs during the tournament period.
The report also cited a distribution figure that is relevant to how tokenized collectibles can move beyond trading: more than 100,000 match tickets were distributed through the platform. Together, NFT trading and ticket distribution suggest that blockchain tooling is being used for both monetization and operational delivery of event-related assets.
Chainalysis further reported that wallets linked to sanctioned entities represented less than 0.01% of FIFA Collect users. The analytics firm attributed this low level, at least in part, to identity verification requirements implemented by the platform. That correlation between onboarding friction and lower sanctioned exposure is likely to remain a key design and regulatory consideration as more mainstream consumers join tokenized experiences.
Why Chainalysis’s analysis matters for the next wave of mainstream crypto
The World Cup data illustrates two simultaneous trends. First, blockchain ecosystems can absorb large numbers of users during mass-market events—pushing prediction markets to multi-billion-dollar volumes and turning collectibles into a meaningful consumer behavior. Second, scale increases the importance of compliance: even with sub-1% illicit wallet participation, the report still found millions in flows tied to sanctioned or illicit sources.
Chainalysis said its results point to blockchain playing a growing role in major global events, while also underscoring the need for compliance measures as platforms attract broader participation.
For market participants, the practical question going forward is whether the same pattern—high engagement combined with strong enforcement—will hold outside tournament peaks. Investors and traders will likely watch whether platforms can sustain clean onboarding and monitor activity as user bases expand beyond the temporary surges created by global championships.
As blockchain-based prediction markets and collectibles keep testing mainstream adoption, the next signals to monitor are how platforms refine identity verification, how compliance improves over time, and whether illicit flows remain constrained as user participation grows beyond event-driven demand.
This article was originally published as Chainalysis: World Cup Boosted Blockchain Prediction Markets to $20B on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Coinbase reported mixed results for the second quarter, showing profitability pressure as overall crypto trading activity softened—despite the exchange winning a record slice of global market volume. The company’s performance underscored a key tension for large exchanges this year: when user activity and volatility decline, even strong market share gains may not be enough to offset revenue headwinds.
For the quarter, Coinbase generated about $1.2 billion in net revenue, broadly in line with expectations but down 19% from the prior year. The exchange posted a GAAP net loss of $359 million, widening significantly versus analysts’ expectations for a loss around $122 million.
Key takeaways
Coinbase’s net revenue for Q2 was roughly $1.2 billion, down 19% year over year, as trading-related revenue weakened.
The company reported a GAAP net loss of $359 million, materially worse than expected.
Transaction revenue fell short of consensus, while subscription and services revenue also missed estimates.
Despite weaker industry activity, Coinbase reached a record 10.3% share of global crypto spot trading volume, up from 9.1% in Q1.
Revenue softness and a wider-than-expected loss
Coinbase’s top-line picture was restrained. Transaction revenue totaled $599 million, below analyst expectations of $636 million. Subscription and services revenue came in at $555 million, missing the $590 million consensus estimate.
The gap between performance and expectations showed up most clearly in the bottom line. Coinbase’s GAAP net loss of $359 million was substantially larger than forecasts for a roughly $122 million loss, reflecting the squeeze across revenue categories tied to market participation and trading conditions.
Why trading revenue declined
The exchange pointed to weaker engagement across both consumer and institutional trading. According to Coinbase, transaction revenue fell as total crypto spot trading volume dropped 25% quarter over quarter, with lower market volatility and weaker crypto prices contributing to the decline.
That explanation matters for investors because it highlights what likely drove the quarter: not a loss of competitive position, but a reduction in the underlying trading “fuel” that generates fee income. Even when an exchange captures a larger share of a smaller market, the absolute level of activity can still weigh on results.
Market share at a record level, even as volumes weakened
While revenue suffered, Coinbase’s routing and distribution strength appeared resilient. The company reported an all-time high 10.3% share of global crypto trading volume, up from 9.1% in the first quarter.
This is an important counterpoint to the earnings misses. In prior periods, exchange earnings have often been highly sensitive to both share and total market activity. Here, Coinbase demonstrated share gains even as industry-wide trading activity softened, suggesting competitive momentum. The open question for traders and analysts is whether market share growth can continue translating into better financial outcomes when price movement and volatility are weak.
Strategic push beyond spot trading
Coinbase also framed the results within its broader push to expand beyond spot trading. The company continues to position itself as an “Everything Exchange,” extending into areas including derivatives, prediction markets, tokenized assets, and payments.
That diversification angle is particularly relevant in quarters like this one, where spot activity declines can pressure transaction fees. Investors will likely watch whether non-spot products can help stabilize revenue during periods when spot volumes and volatility fall, or whether the business remains too dependent on traditional trading patterns.
Coinbase shares fell more than 5% in after-hours trading after closing up 2.2% during regular trading.
Going forward, readers should focus on whether Coinbase’s record market-share gains persist and, more importantly, whether its expansion into derivatives and other digital-asset services can deliver stronger revenue resilience when spot trading volume and volatility remain under pressure.
This article was originally published as Coinbase Q2 Profit Falls Short as Crypto Trading Share Hits Record on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Ripple-backed Evernorth Holdings has advanced its public market plans after updating its SEC registration. The company completed executive employment agreements and submitted another amended Form S-4 filing. Meanwhile, the latest disclosures also outlined compensation packages, merger progress, and financial impacts linked to recent XRP price weakness.
Ripple-Backed Evernorth Completes Leadership Agreements
Evernorth Holdings submitted Amendment No. 5 to its Form S-4 registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The filing completed employment agreements for the remaining members of the executive leadership team. As a result, the company has finalized compensation arrangements before its proposed public listing.
The agreements cover Chief Legal Officer Jessica Jonas, Chief Business Officer Sagar Shah, and Chief Operating Officer Meg Nakamura. Each executive will receive a base salary, annual bonus eligibility, employee benefits, and restricted stock units. The compensation packages follow the company’s 2026 Omnibus Incentive Plan.
Jonas received the largest equity award among the newly announced executives. Her initial equity package carries a value of $4.5 million under the agreement. Meanwhile, Shah and Nakamura each received equity awards valued at $2.8 million, subject to shareholder and compensation committee approval.
Evernorth Advances Merger With Armada Acquisition Corp II
The latest filing follows earlier agreements with Chief Executive Officer Asheesh Birla and Chief Financial Officer Matt Frymier. Those agreements already established executive salaries, bonuses, equity awards, and vesting schedules. Consequently, Evernorth has now completed employment terms across its senior leadership team.
The company continues preparing for its planned business combination with Armada Acquisition Corp II. Arrington Capital sponsors the special purpose acquisition company leading the proposed transaction. Following completion, the combined company intends to trade on Nasdaq under the ticker symbol XRPN.
Evernorth has secured more than $1 billion in gross proceeds from strategic backers supporting the transaction. Funding has come from Ripple, Arrington Capital, SBI Holdings, Pantera Capital, and Kraken. The company has also assembled a board featuring senior executives from blockchain, finance, and technology organizations.
Ripple Chief Legal Officer Stuart Alderoty will serve on the board after the merger closes. Other directors include Asheesh Birla, Ted Janus, Robert Kaiden, and Derar Islim. The proposed public company, therefore, combines experienced leadership from digital assets and financial services.
The transaction supports Evernorth’s strategy to establish one of the largest publicly traded XRP treasury companies. Corporate treasury models have gained attention as several firms increase exposure to digital assets. As a result, Evernorth aims to expand institutional participation through a publicly listed structure backed by XRP holdings.
XRP Price Weakness Leads to Impairment Charge
Evernorth also disclosed financial effects resulting from recent XRP market performance. The company reported a $38.4 million impairment tied to declining XRP valuations during the past four months. Consequently, the value of its combined XRP holdings fell to approximately $640 million.
XRP traded between $1.05 and $1.09 during the latest market session. The token changed hands near $1.07 after declining during the previous 24 hours. In addition, XRP has recorded losses exceeding 5% during the past week while trading activity weakened.
Daily trading volume also declined by approximately 10% during the latest session. Market sentiment remained under pressure as regulatory developments continued affecting cryptocurrency prices. Meanwhile, delays surrounding the CLARITY Act added another challenge for digital asset markets.
Armada Acquisition Corp II shares also recorded a modest decline during recent trading sessions. However, the stock maintained its broader year-to-date gains despite the latest movement. At the same time, Evernorth continued progressing toward its planned merger while strengthening executive leadership before entering public markets.
The updated SEC filing marks another milestone in Evernorth’s listing process. Executive agreements, governance appointments, and merger preparations now appear substantially complete. As a result, the company has strengthened its organizational structure before completing its proposed Nasdaq debut and expanding its XRP treasury strategy.
This article was originally published as Ripple-Backed Evernorth Completes Executive Agreements Ahead of XRP Treasury Listing on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has introduced new federal legislation aimed at creating an “Anti-Corruption Bureau” with the power to investigate, enforce, and prevent executive-branch corruption. The proposal also folds into a wider political fight over cryptocurrency ethics and market-structure reform, as Schumer’s remarks directly referenced President Donald Trump’s financial ties to crypto.
According to Schumer’s office, the bill—called the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act—would establish a new agency designed to replace what he described as a fragmented system of oversight bodies. Schumer and cosponsors presented the effort as a targeted response to conflicts of interest they say stem from public office and lucrative crypto-related investments.
Key takeaways
Schumer introduced the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act, proposing a dedicated US agency to investigate, enforce, and prevent executive-branch corruption.
The bill’s rationale ties to alleged Trump-linked financial gains, including references to crypto exposure mentioned in Schumer’s Thursday notice.
Schumer’s proposal would consolidate multiple ethics and oversight functions, grouping entities including the Federal Election Commission and other government ethics offices “under one roof.”
Supporters position the bureau as a “real teeth” enforcement mechanism, while passage could still face hurdles in the House and Senate—and a potential veto by Trump.
The timing overlaps with ongoing uncertainty around the Senate’s handling of the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, a major market-structure effort backed by many in the industry.
A new enforcement-focused anti-corruption bureau
In a Thursday press notice, Schumer said he introduced the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act. He described the agency as one with enforcement authority, designed to “investigate, enforce, and prevent executive branch corruption.” The legislation also sets out “Congress’ findings” that Schumer claims include disclosures about Trump’s earnings from investments and additional crypto exposure connected to foreign governments through a family fund, as referenced in Schumer’s notice.
Schumer framed the proposal as an institutional fix. In remarks shared through a Public Citizen forum about the bill, he characterized the bureau as having “real teeth” and argued it would help harmonize enforcement across institutions that currently operate with overlapping or inconsistent authority.
The bill’s structure, as described in connection with the forum, calls for a bipartisan group of seven members to be confirmed by the Senate. It also includes mechanisms intended to allow private citizens and state authorities to seek recovery of funds they allege were stolen through corruption, according to descriptions tied to the proposal.
How crypto ethics enters the political equation
For Democrats weighing support for comprehensive crypto market structure legislation, President Trump’s business ties have become a central flashpoint. Many lawmakers, despite White House agreement to certain ethics provisions in the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, have argued that the offered safeguards do not fully address potential conflicts of interest.
Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that debates around the CLARITY Act have kept ethics provisions at the center of discussions, with lawmakers saying the measures fall short. Schumer’s new anti-corruption bill adds a separate enforcement pathway to that same broader argument: that oversight should be strengthened to prevent public office from translating into private financial benefit, including in crypto-related business interests.
Consolidating enforcement and ethics offices
A notable feature of the anti-corruption proposal is its intent to gather multiple oversight functions under one organizational umbrella. As described in the coverage, the legislation would place the US Federal Election Commission, the Office of Government Ethics, and the Office of Special Counsel “under one roof” within the new bureau.
Supporters argue the consolidation would reduce the gaps they believe exist across current watchdog systems. Schumer’s messaging emphasized replacing “a broken patchwork of watchdogs” with a single agency capable of acting “anywhere, anytime corruption strikes.” Critics of the current system—particularly those focused on ethics enforcement—often point to jurisdictional complexity and uneven prioritization across agencies; this bill attempts to address that by reorganizing responsibilities rather than relying solely on incremental reforms.
Cointelegraph reported that it reached out to the White House for comment but did not receive an immediate response regarding the proposal.
Cosponsors, vote math, and what happens next
The bill was introduced by Schumer and has cosponsors including Senators Andy Kim, Alex Padilla, and Jeff Merkley. Passage would require Republican support in the House and Senate, where the party holds a slim majority.
Even if it advances before 2028, the president would have veto power. If Trump vetoed the legislation, Congress would need a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override it, according to the rules typically governing federal veto overrides.
The timing is also important because the Senate is approaching a break. As described in the coverage, the Senate had just over a week left before lawmakers planned to leave for a month-long state work period. That looming calendar could affect the speed at which both ethics-related and market-structure measures move in the upper chamber.
CLARITY Act uncertainty persists alongside the anti-corruption push
While Schumer’s anti-corruption proposal targets executive-branch conduct, it arrives in the midst of unresolved negotiations around the CLARITY Act, which many see as a key step toward a clearer US framework for digital assets.
As of Thursday, the Senate had not scheduled a vote on the CLARITY Act, despite pushes from Republican lawmakers and industry stakeholders. Cointelegraph previously highlighted that ethics provisions remain a sticking point for some Democrats, and this week’s status underscores how procedural timing may be just as decisive as policy design.
According to remarks attributed in the coverage to former SEC official John Reed Stark, after a public forum hosted by Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Van Hollen, it was unclear whether lawmakers would move the CLARITY Act during the available window. The same report cited statements from Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong referring to the bill nearing a critical stage, alongside continued advocacy from Senator Cynthia Lummis for a vote.
The political sequence matters for market participants: if crypto market structure legislation is delayed by calendar constraints, lawmakers may re-focus on broader political disputes about ethics and enforcement, potentially reshaping what “safe enough” looks like for legislators and regulators. Conversely, if the CLARITY Act advances, it could clarify the legislative pathway for industry—while leaving ethics and anti-corruption reforms to run in parallel.
For now, investors and builders should watch two developments closely: whether the Senate schedules and votes on the CLARITY Act before its break, and whether Schumer’s anti-corruption bureau proposal gains traction early enough to overcome House and Senate vote hurdles and any eventual veto risk.
This article was originally published as Schumer Pushes New Agency for Corruption Oversight, Targets Crypto Ties on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Tokenized gold has seen a surge in trading this year as physical bullion reached record levels, but most of the “on-chain” gold supply still isn’t being actively used inside DeFi. A new report by RedStone points to a clear bottleneck: only a small portion of tokenized gold is showing up as collateral in major lending protocols such as Aave v3 and Morpho.
RedStone reports that tokenized gold spot trading volume hit $90.7 billion in the first quarter, during a period when gold futures rallied to above $5,600 per troy ounce. Yet only about $63 million worth of Tether Gold (XAUT) and PAX Gold (PAXG) is currently posted as collateral on Aave v3 and Morpho—roughly 1.5% of the combined $4.2 billion market capitalization of those tokens.
Key takeaways
Tokenized gold trading is already large, with $90.7 billion in spot volume in Q1, but on-chain DeFi usage remains limited.
Only about $63 million of XAUT and PAXG is deployed as collateral on Aave v3 and Morpho—around 1.5% of the tokens’ combined value.
RedStone highlights resilience under stress: Aave processed its largest cluster of XAUT liquidations without disruption on March 23.
Gold’s drawdown—futures down more than 26% since January—has reduced demand for non-yielding assets, even as tokenized gold remains actively traded.
The main remaining challenge for tokenized gold is not performance in DeFi, but scaling collateral adoption across protocols.
Trading is surging, but DeFi collateral is lagging
The contrast between trading activity and collateral deployment is at the center of RedStone’s assessment. Despite strong market interest in tokenized bullion, the share actually put to work in lending markets is small.
According to the report, $63 million of XAUT and PAXG combined is being used as collateral on Aave v3 and Morpho, while the tokens collectively represent $4.2 billion in market capitalization. That means a large majority of tokenized gold is moving in spot markets without translating into deeper composability—at least within the two lending venues RedStone analyzed.
RedStone frames this as an adoption gap rather than a liquidity or reliability issue. In other words, the question is less “can tokenized gold operate in DeFi?” and more “why isn’t more of it being used as DeFi collateral?”
March’s liquidation test showed it can hold up
One reason tokenized gold continues to attract attention is that it has already faced a real stress scenario in DeFi. RedStone notes that on March 23, Aave handled its largest cluster of XAUT liquidations without disruption during a sharp downturn in gold.
The liquidation wave followed a painful move in the underlying commodity. RedStone ties the event to a period where gold fell 10% over the previous week—described by JPMorgan precious metals strategist Greg Shearer as an “extremely brutal flush.”
Earlier that week, gold’s broader sell-off reflected macro pressure: expectations for higher US interest rates reduced the appeal of non-yielding assets like precious metals. Cointelegraph previously reported that gold’s digital rally mirrored rising stress around the US dollar and interest-rate expectations, underscoring how quickly the commodity complex can shift.
From an investor or DeFi participant’s perspective, this matters because collateral reliability is foundational. If tokenized bullion fails to function during volatility, protocols would face operational risk and potentially forced deleveraging. RedStone’s takeaway is that, at least in that test, the system held.
Gold’s macro headwinds haven’t vanished
Even with a strong start to the year, gold has continued to face rate-driven headwinds. RedStone notes that gold futures have declined by more than 26% since peaking in January.
The decline aligns with the broader logic that higher expected US rates can make it harder for non-yielding assets to compete. That dynamic helps explain why the commodity market can generate both volatility and skepticism—even as tokenized versions of the asset continue to draw trading interest.
For tokenized gold, the implication is straightforward: DeFi collateral won’t exist in a vacuum. When gold moves aggressively, the tokenized form must be liquid enough and operationally stable. RedStone’s March example is a reminder that performance during stress may be improving, but it doesn’t guarantee automatic growth in collateral usage.
Why collateral adoption remains the bottleneck
RedStone’s report emphasizes that tokenized gold’s next hurdle is broader DeFi adoption. Proven resilience helps, but scaling requires more than technical compatibility. It also depends on incentives, protocol support, and user demand for borrowing and leverage against tokenized RWA collateral.
The tokenized real-world assets (RWA) market has been expanding beyond gold. RedStone points to a growing ecosystem that includes areas such as private credit and tokenized US Treasurys paired with equities. Token Terminal previously reported that the sector topped $43 billion in value.
At the same time, centralized crypto exchanges are rapidly building on-ramps for tokenized assets as they attempt to bridge traditional finance and digital markets. CoinGecko data (as reported by Cointelegraph) described an emerging “crypto TradFi” market reaching $6.6 billion as of June, suggesting that distribution and access for tokenized products are improving.
That backdrop raises a key question that investors may want to track: if tokenized assets are easier to access through centralized channels, why hasn’t that translated into proportionally higher DeFi collateral usage—at least in the specific tokens and protocols RedStone cited? The report doesn’t offer a single cause, but the data clearly shows the gap.
Going forward, the most important thing for readers to watch is whether tokenized gold’s demonstrated ability to function under volatility leads to meaningful increases in collateral deployment across DeFi lending platforms—especially as the sector continues to grow and as commodity-driven volatility returns.
This article was originally published as Tokenized Gold Clears DeFi Stress Test as Collateral Use Stays <2% on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Canadian crypto participation is rising quickly, according to fresh research from the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC). The regulator’s latest survey suggests that the share of Canadians who own cryptocurrencies has climbed to 25% in 2026, up from 10% in 2023—an expansion that also coincides with broader awareness of crypto assets.
The OSC released the findings Tuesday, based on a poll of 2,360 Canadians aged 18 and over conducted between December 2025 and January 2026. The study found that 59% of respondents said they are aware of crypto assets, while 25% reported that they currently hold cryptocurrencies.
Key takeaways
The OSC survey reports crypto ownership has reached 25% in 2026, compared with 10% in 2023.
Awareness increased alongside ownership, with 59% of respondents indicating they know about crypto assets.
About half of crypto owners said they check whether a platform is registered before using it.
Despite growing caution, the OSC found widespread confusion about regulation, insurance protections, and transaction capabilities.
Ownership and awareness move upward
The OSC’s survey points to a clear jump in both familiarity and direct engagement with crypto. In 2026, a majority of respondents—59%—reported awareness of crypto assets, while one-quarter said they hold cryptocurrencies.
That shift matters for regulators because it implies crypto is moving from a niche activity toward mainstream consumer behavior. As more Canadians participate, investor protection issues typically become more urgent, particularly around how users choose platforms, understand risk, and interpret what protections (if any) apply when assets are held or transacted through a service.
OSC executive vice president of strategic regulation Naizam Kanji said the regulator expects “emerging trends and behaviors” to help it anticipate opportunities and risks, with the goal of supporting investor protection while fostering fair and efficient markets.
Checking registrations—alongside continuing misunderstandings
One of the more actionable details in the OSC findings is how some users evaluate platforms. The survey indicates that about 50% of crypto owners reported checking whether a platform is registered prior to using it.
However, the report also suggests that heightened awareness does not necessarily translate into a correct understanding of the rules that govern crypto activity in Canada. The OSC said many respondents still had “some misunderstanding” around key issues—namely regulation, insurance protections, and transaction capabilities.
For investors, this mix of behavior is significant. Register checks can be a useful step, but misunderstanding the practical meaning of registration—or assuming protections exist where they do not—can expose users to avoidable losses. The OSC’s results imply that more effective education and clearer disclosures may be needed, even as adoption rises.
How Ottawa’s crypto proposals fit the trend
The OSC’s survey lands amid ongoing policy debate in Canada about the appropriate ways to regulate different crypto-related activities. According to the report, lawmakers in Ottawa have been considering measures tailored to how cryptocurrencies are used in practice.
Earlier this year, the federal government advanced a bill that could prohibit political donations made using crypto. The government also proposed banning crypto ATMs, citing concerns about scams and money laundering. Taken together, these proposals highlight a broad regulatory theme: as crypto use grows, authorities are focusing not just on trading and custody, but also on high-risk channels that can enable fraud.
While the OSC survey focuses on awareness, ownership, and user understanding, Ottawa’s legislative direction underscores a parallel concern among policymakers—reducing harm where crypto intersects with consumers and enforcement challenges.
What to watch next for Canadian investors
The OSC’s data suggests that Canada’s crypto base is expanding while gaps in consumer understanding remain. The most important question for users and market participants is whether regulators will translate these survey insights into clearer requirements, better consumer education, and more targeted enforcement—especially in areas where misunderstanding could lead to financial harm.
As the next rounds of research and policy developments emerge, Canadians should pay close attention to how platform registration is communicated in practice, what protections users can realistically expect, and which services regulators move to restrict or supervise more tightly.
This article was originally published as Ontario Survey Finds Canadian Crypto Ownership Rises to 25% on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin traded with subdued volatility on Thursday as a rebound in US equities and a softer read on inflation reduced the pressure investors had placed on risk assets. In late US trading, BTC held near $64,500, largely steady from the prior day, after market attention shifted to June’s US Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) inflation release.
The PCE report showed inflation cooling to 3.7% year-on-year—matching expectations—while S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite gains reflected a broader “risk-on” tone. Even so, commentators cautioned that the numbers still sit well above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target, keeping the longer-term debate about the inflation path alive.
Key takeaways
Bitcoin largely shrugged off Thursday’s macro-driven volatility, holding around the $64,500 area as US stocks rebounded.
June PCE inflation came in at 3.7% year-on-year, in line with forecasts, ending a short-term uptrend in the data.
Despite the cooler print, inflation remains materially above the Fed’s 2% target, limiting “all clear” confidence.
Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan argued that future interest-rate moves may be smaller—potentially reducing how strongly BTC reacts to rate headlines.
BTC stays range-bound as equities recover
Charting from TradingView showed BTC/USD action focusing around $64,500, with price behavior described as broadly unchanged versus the previous day. Earlier in the week, crypto had faced a headwind from a broad sell-off in semiconductor stocks, a move that spilled into other risk assets during US trading. That pressure eased on Thursday, helping keep Bitcoin from forcing a sharp reaction to the day’s macro catalyst.
At the time of writing, the S&P 500 was up about 1% and the Nasdaq Composite gained roughly 2.3%, reflecting improving sentiment across markets following the inflation data release.
PCE cools to 3.7%—but remains far above the Fed target
June’s PCE inflation print provided the day’s primary momentum. The year-on-year reading of 3.7% matched market expectations, while May’s figure had been 4.1%, which was described as the highest in three years. PCE is widely treated as the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation measure because it is based on a broad basket of consumer spending and updates more quickly as consumer choices shift in response to prices. The Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland describes this framing as a key advantage of the PCE approach.
In its release, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) attributed the month’s increase in current-dollar PCE to higher spending—most notably services. The BEA said the $65.2 billion rise in current-dollar PCE reflected increases of $58.2 billion in spending on services and $7.0 billion in spending on goods.
Even with the cooling headline number—and the BEA noting a month-on-month decline—some market watchers treated the report as cautiously supportive rather than decisive. The Kobeissi Letter highlighted that the 3.7% rate was still the second-highest result since October 2024. The account also argued that inflation was running at nearly double the Fed’s 2.0% target.
Economist Steve Hanke also pushed back against complacency, describing inflation as a “genie the Fed just can’t put back in the bottle,” while emphasizing the mismatch between current inflation and the Fed’s goal.
Fed policy uncertainty persists—Bitwise expects weaker rate sensitivity
Beyond the inflation print, Thursday’s narrative also centered on interest-rate expectations. The Federal Reserve left rates unchanged at its latest meeting on Wednesday, with an emerging split among Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) members over the appropriate policy path.
Matt Hougan, chief investment officer at Bitwise, argued that Bitcoin’s sensitivity to future rate announcements may be lower than what investors have historically experienced. On social media, Hougan pointed to the pattern of rate swings during Bitcoin’s history—ranging across very wide levels—and suggested that future changes may be more incremental. His comment referenced CME Group’s FedWatch Tool, which implies a smaller trajectory for rates over the coming year compared with prior cycles.
Hougan also tied his view to expectations around leadership. He stated that new Fed chair Kevin Warsh is likely to echo former chair Alan Greenspan in terms of the scale of policy moves, contrasting that with Jerome Powell. In addition, he referenced earlier signals from US President Donald Trump suggesting Warsh would take a more dovish stance on policy, a development that, if realized, could support risk-asset performance and reduce the market’s fear of abrupt tightening.
What investors should watch next
Bitcoin’s muted reaction to Thursday’s macro headlines suggests investors are still willing to hold through volatility when equities stabilize, but the debate over whether inflation is truly on a sustainable path remains unresolved. The next key factor will be whether incoming PCE reads continue to ease toward the Fed’s target and whether rate expectations—tracked via tools like CME FedWatch—continue to shift more gradually rather than re-pricing abrupt policy changes.
This article was originally published as Bitcoin Holds Steady as US PCE Inflation Falls for First Time in 6 Years on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Telegram is facing a fresh legal fight in Australia after the country’s online safety regulator moved to seek civil penalties, alleging the messaging service did not adequately address terrorism-linked content.
According to a statement from Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, the regulator filed civil penalty proceedings against Telegram in the Federal Court on Thursday, accusing the platform of failing to meet obligations under the nation’s Online Safety Act.
Key takeaways
Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has launched civil penalty proceedings against Telegram in Federal Court over alleged failures to tackle pro-terror content.
The regulator alleges Telegram did not respond sufficiently to multiple user complaints and that some reported material remained visible for as long as three weeks.
eSafety claims Telegram failed to take adequate preventive steps, including actions to remove or disrupt repeat violators such as channels and groups.
The case forms part of broader, escalating scrutiny of Telegram’s moderation practices in multiple countries.
eSafety says penalties could reach up to 54.6 million Australian dollars (about $35.8 million) for violations of the Online Safety Act.
Australia’s allegations focus on delayed takedowns and repeat violations
In its filing, eSafety says it conducted a year-long investigation and concluded that Telegram did not remove certain unlawful material after it became aware of it. The regulator alleges that, in some instances, reported content continued to be visible for up to three weeks.
eSafety further argues that Telegram’s approach was not only reactive but insufficiently protective against repeat behavior. The regulator alleges Telegram did not take adequate steps to prevent renewed violations, including removing accounts and groups used to distribute pro-terror material.
The regulator also contends Telegram failed to detect known extremist content in advance. eSafety cites examples that later were removed, including footage from the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings and the 2022 Buffalo mass shooting.
What the regulator is asking the court to decide
eSafety is seeking financial penalties, reflecting the seriousness of its claimed breaches of Australia’s online safety framework. Under the Online Safety Act, eSafety notes that violations can carry penalties up to 54.6 million Australian dollars (about $35.8 million).
Telegram has not publicly issued an official statement addressing the Australian proceedings. However, its official X account posted a video captioned “freedom of expression.”
Telegram did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the case.
Telegram’s moderation scrutiny extends beyond Australia
Australia’s action arrives amid intensifying pressure on Telegram’s leadership and the platform’s content-handling practices internationally.
Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) announced it had charged Telegram founder Pavel Durov with facilitating terrorist activity and initiated steps to place him on an international wanted list. The Russian authorities alleged Telegram failed to remove channels, chats and bots that they say were used by Ukrainian intelligence services, terrorist groups and extremist organizations to coordinate attacks, recruit operatives and conduct cyber fraud.
Telegram has not issued an official response to the latest legal developments in Russia, though it has posted content related to Durov on its social channels.
Broader legal pressure on Durov in Europe
Durov also remains under investigation in France following his arrest in August 2024 at Le Bourget Airport, as previously reported by Cointelegraph. French prosecutors have charged him with offenses including complicity in the distribution of illegal content, including material connected to organized crime, through Telegram.
Durov has in the past criticized what he described as increasing threats to online privacy, warning that governments were rolling back protections for a free internet.
In an October 2025 post on X, Durov wrote that “What was once the promise of the free exchange of information is being turned into the ultimate tool of control.”
Why this matters for investors and platform users
Even beyond the immediate legal stakes, regulators targeting moderation and takedown performance could reshape how Telegram handles harmful content at scale—especially if courts accept eSafety’s allegations about delayed removal and insufficient preventive measures. Readers should watch for the court’s findings and any changes Telegram makes to notice-and-action processes, repeat-violation handling, and detection workflows.
This article was originally published as Australia Sues Telegram Over Alleged Extremist Content on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

South Korean crypto markets saw a sharp burst in activity after the KOSPI suffered steep losses this week, highlighting how equity sell-offs can quickly redirect attention toward digital assets—and related products traded overseas. According to data from Upbit, trading between the Korean won and Tether (USDT) accelerated rapidly during the index’s decline.
Meanwhile, analysts are pointing to a different storyline in parallel: despite the macro pressure weighing on risk assets, Bitcoin has shown relative strength compared with large U.S. stock benchmarks. Bitwise’s latest research argues that the cryptocurrency’s performance is increasingly notable as financial conditions tighten.
Key takeaways
Upbit KRW/USDT volume nearly hit 200 billion won (about 140 million USDT) on July 29, up from roughly 20 million USDT on July 25—about a 600% jump.
Local analysis linked the surge to fund rotation away from Korean equities and toward crypto trading or stock-linked derivatives available through overseas venues.
Prior KOSPI volatility showed a similar pattern: Upbit recorded a volume spike after a 10% one-day drop on July 14.
Bitwise says Bitcoin has outperformed major U.S. mega-cap stocks and has remained comparatively “flat” since late June’s semiconductor peak.
KRW/USDT trading surges as equities slide
Upbit’s exchange data shows the most direct evidence of the equity-to-crypto link. Trading volume between KRW and USDT climbed rapidly between July 25 and July 29, according to the figures cited in reporting that referenced Upbit’s KRW/USDT market. On July 29, the volume approached 200 billion won (around 140 million USDT), compared with about 20 million USDT on July 25.
That surge arrived alongside a broader wave of downside momentum in South Korea’s KOSPI. The index’s sharp weekly decline—described in the coverage as close to 18% over the period—was tied to weakness in chip-related equities, particularly chip-maker stocks. The implication for investors is straightforward: when liquid, familiar markets begin to fall quickly, some participants look for alternatives that can be traded at any hour and can offer both spot exposure and leveraged strategies.
Local reporting cited analysis from Seoul Economic Daily suggesting that capital may have rotated out of stocks into crypto during the sell-off, or that traders sought access to derivatives tied to Korean equities through overseas exchange platforms. The same coverage also highlighted a possible preference for moving funds to overseas venues or personal wallets to trade perpetual equity futures.
“There is a possibility that demand increased for moving funds to overseas exchanges or personal wallets to trade perpetual stock futures,” said Cho Yoon-sung, a senior researcher at Tiger Research, according to the publication.
In other words, the KRW/USDT spike appears less like random day-trading noise and more like a measurable byproduct of stress in traditional markets. Traders can reposition quickly when the equity tape deteriorates—especially in environments where crypto already functions as a high-velocity risk market.
Stock sell-offs and “overseas” trading pathways
South Korea’s crypto ecosystem continues to be closely intertwined with how local investors express risk. The coverage emphasized that the country’s market remains highly active, with younger participants in particular showing a taste for leveraged products. That appetite tends to amplify volume responses when shocks hit adjacent assets like equities.
There is also a structural element: some investors may prefer to access certain equity-linked exposures through crypto-native derivatives offered by overseas platforms. When KOSPI volatility rises, the willingness to shift capital—either to trade crypto directly or to use perpetual contracts tied to equity themes—can increase.
What’s notable here is that the surge wasn’t entirely new behavior. Earlier in the month, Upbit reportedly registered a conspicuous volume spike after the KOSPI fell 10% in a single day on July 14, as described in earlier coverage referencing Yahoo Finance. That establishes a pattern: large, fast equity moves have previously coincided with elevated crypto trading activity.
Bitcoin’s resilience amid semiconductor pressure
While won-based volumes rose sharply in response to South Korean equity turmoil, analysts elsewhere were examining whether macro weakness would “spill over” into crypto performance. Andre Dragosch, European head of research at Bitwise, argued that Bitcoin has not behaved like a fragile extension of the semiconductor trade.
In commentary shared on social media and referenced by the reporting, Dragosch suggested that Bitcoin has been largely range-bound—“essentially flat”—since semiconductors peaked in late June. His framing is that the expected contagion from a semiconductor-driven risk repricing did not materialize in the way some market participants may have anticipated.
Bitwise’s broader analysis, released earlier in the week, reinforced that view through relative performance. The firm attributed what it called “remarkable outperformance” to Bitcoin versus a set of U.S. mega-cap stocks. In the coverage, Bitwise pointed to comparison benchmarks including large-cap tech exposure and even SpaceX (SpaceX was referenced as part of the comparison set in the text).
Bitwise’s argument went beyond simple relative returns. It linked Bitcoin’s strength to the possibility that the asset may already be pricing early signals of future monetary-policy easing—even while inflation remains a concern and near-term interest-rate hike risks persist. The firm also used the well-known “canary in the macro coal mine” metaphor to describe Bitcoin’s sensitivity to macro conditions.
Bitwise stated in its analysis that Bitcoin continues to show “remarkable outperformance and resilience” versus U.S. mega-cap stocks such as the Magnificent 7 and SpaceX (as cited in the coverage), calling the relative strength “all the more notable” amid tightening financial conditions.
For investors, this matters because it suggests crypto’s behavior is not simply being dictated by the same narrative driving equities. If Bitcoin’s relative strength persists, it may indicate that markets are treating Bitcoin less as an equity proxy and more as a separate macro instrument responding to different expectations—particularly around future policy.
What traders should watch next
The near-term question is whether the KOSPI-driven volume spike is a one-off reaction to a violent week, or a sign that equity volatility is again feeding crypto activity in South Korea. Traders should watch whether KRW/USDT volumes remain elevated through subsequent market days and whether Bitcoin’s outperformance versus U.S. mega-cap benchmarks holds as the macro narrative shifts.
This article was originally published as South Korea Crypto Trading Spikes as Stock Market Drops on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.