BITZ0

A privacy coin changes what a public ledger reveals about a transfer. It changes nothing about your relationship with the casino receiving it.
That sentence is the whole article, and it gets lost constantly. The chain and the operator are two separate layers, and privacy on one says nothing about the other.
Three Coins, Three Different Models
The category is treated as one thing and is not.
Monero applies privacy by default. Ring signatures mix the real transaction signature among decoy keys, stealth addresses generate a one-time destination for every payment, and RingCT conceals the amount. All three run on every transaction, with no option to disable them.
Zcash makes privacy optional. It supports shielded transactions alongside transparent ones, and the transparent path behaves much like Bitcoin. Because shielding is a choice and not a default, a large share of Zcash activity is not private at all, which surprises people who assume the label covers everything.
Litecoin added privacy as an extension. MWEB, activated in May 2022, introduced optional confidential transactions that hide amounts while keeping fees under a cent. The trade is confirmations: an MWEB send may need six or more, where a standard Litecoin transfer needs two or three.
So one coin is private always, one is private sometimes, and one is a mainstream chain with a privacy layer alongside. Treating them interchangeably leads to wrong expectations in both directions.
Acquiring Them Got Harder
The market has moved sharply, and it affects you before you ever reach a casino.
OKX removed its XMR, ZEC, and DASH pairs in January 2024. Binance delisted Monero globally in February 2024. Kraken withdrew it in Ireland and Belgium that June and across the entire European Economic Area on 31 October 2024.
MiCA has effectively removed privacy coins from EU exchange listings since December 2024, and 2025 alone recorded 73 cumulative Monero delistings, the highest single-year total on record.
One clarification matters and is routinely muddled: delisting is not illegal. Holding and trading these assets remains lawful in most jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union. Exchanges removed them to simplify their own compliance position, not because the assets are prohibited.
The practical effect is friction. Fewer venues means wider spreads, and many people now acquire a mainstream asset first and swap, which adds a step and a cost.
The Layer They Do Not Touch
This is the section that matters most, and it needs stating instead of implying.
A casino accepting a privacy coin still knows who holds the account. Whatever verification the licence demands still runs, risk-based checks still fire, and documentation can still be requested before a withdrawal clears. On-chain privacy is a property of the ledger, not of your account.
Nor does it alter your legal position. Territory restrictions apply identically, tax obligations apply identically, and a platform that does not serve your country does not begin serving it because you funded in a different asset.
Anyone treating a privacy coin as a route around any of that has misread the technology. It obscures transaction detail on a public chain. It creates no exemption from anything downstream of the deposit.
Four Platforms and Where They Stand
Support varies more here than for mainstream assets, precisely because of the exchange picture described above.
Dexsport added Monero support in August 2026, which runs counter to the exchange trend and makes it one of the more recent additions in this category. Its multi-coin cashier spans a wide range of assets and networks, and as with any coin at any platform, the cashier screen is the authority on what is live today. The platform is non-custodial, so a settled balance sits in a wallet you hold, and it operates under an Anjouan licence, lighter than Curacao or Malta, with restricted territories covering the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia.
Stake and BC.Game both run large multi-coin cashiers where coin support shifts over time, and both hold balances custodially. Litecoin is standard at each, so MWEB-capable funding is available even where a dedicated privacy coin is not.
Cloudbet has traded since 2013 with its company named on a Curacao licence, and its orientation toward larger positions makes acquisition friction proportionally less significant for its typical player.
Across all four, the pattern holds: coin lists move, and a published summary ages faster than a cashier screen does. Costs and support differ considerably between coins, and privacy assets move the most of all.
Reading the Trade Honestly
Privacy coins offer strong on-chain confidentiality and, in Monero's case, fees under a cent. What they cost you is convenience:
Harder acquisition, with the major exchanges out and a swap step often needed
Thinner markets, meaning wider spreads on larger amounts
Longer confirmations on some sends, particularly MWEB transfers
Fewer venues accepting them, at exchanges and at casinos alike
Whether that trade makes sense depends on why you want on-chain privacy. If the answer involves avoiding checks a licensed operator is required to run, the trade does not work, because those checks happen at the account level where no chain reaches.
Licensing determines what an operator must do regardless of which asset arrives in the cashier.
Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply.
Responsible gambling is unaffected by which coin funds a balance, and the tools worth using are the same ones: deposit limits, loss limits and a budget set before the session starts.


Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Nothing here is guidance on avoiding verification, reporting or tax obligations, all of which apply regardless of the asset used. Exchange listings, coin support and regulations change frequently, so confirm current details before transferring. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Toronto, Canada, September 4th, 2026, Chainwire
CoinRabbit has been named Best Crypto Lending Platform 2026 by International Business Magazine, highlighting a lending product that has issued more than $1.45 billion in loans since 2020.
About the International Business Magazine Award
The International Business Magazine Awards recognize companies and executives making a significant impact across global industries. The selection process combines public nominations with jury review, with nominees assessed on their work, progress, and contribution to their respective industries.
For CoinRabbit, the award comes at an important stage in the company’s development. It is moving beyond borrowing against crypto and building a broader ecosystem for managing digital-asset capital.
Why CoinRabbit Was Named the Best Crypto Lending Platform
The Best Crypto Lending Platform 2026 award recognizes the work CoinRabbit has put into its ecosystem. The platform provides borrowers with fast access to liquidity and confidence that their funds remain secure. CoinRabbit maintains a clear no-rehypothecation policy, giving clients greater certainty that their collateral is not being reused or lent out elsewhere.
That focus on a predictable borrowing experience has remained central as CoinRabbit has expanded the product. There is no traditional credit check because crypto collateral does the underwriting, and the lending process takes about 10 minutes whether a client is borrowing a few hundred dollars or managing a six-figure position.
The award jury also highlighted CoinRabbit’s Private Program as a high-touch approach for clients with significant balances. Designed for portfolios of $500,000 and above, it offers a more personalized way to manage assets around each client’s financial goals, liquidity needs, and timing. As part of CoinRabbit’s broader digital-asset ecosystem, the program gives clients a more private banking-style experience.
Capital Preservation at the Core
CoinRabbit is expanding into capital management, but lending remains at the core of the business. By giving clients access to liquidity without a need to sell their crypto, it helps preserve capital and keep assets invested for the long term.
Walter Barrett, Chief Strategy & Growth Officer at CoinRabbit, commented:
"We’ve spent years building and refining the product, and it’s rewarding to see that work recognized. At the same time, CoinRabbit is becoming more than just a lending platform. With the Private Program, we’re bringing a private credit approach to managing crypto. Clients can work directly with a success manager to find the right strategy for their needs, with a more tailored way to build crypto capital. We also continue to improve the core lending product, keeping it simple. For us, the goal is to make both sides of the business stronger as we grow."
As CoinRabbit evolves, capital preservation remains a central idea behind the company’s products and services.
About CoinRabbit
CoinRabbit is a crypto asset management platform built for long-term capital preservation. It provides flexible liquidity management across multiple environments. Instant payments and lending, yield and trading products, and also the Private Program are available from a single platform. Since 2020, CoinRabbit has maintained a 100% capital reserve model, ensuring that client assets are fully reserved and never rehypothecated.
ContactCoinRabbitmarketing@coinrabbit.io
Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Bitzo, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Chicago, United States, September 4th, 2026, Chainwire
Liquid Mercury today announced that ACQUA1, LLC completed the initial closing of its MERC exchange offering on September 1, 2026.
ACQUA1 is a Liquid Mercury subsidiary that operates Liquid Mercury’s Lab Company program, licensing Liquid Mercury technology to companies primarily tokenizing real-world assets and receiving fees plus a minority equity stake in return. Liquid Mercury is the majority holder and Manager.
“Over the past 18 months, dozens of companies have approached Liquid Mercury seeking to tokenize their assets," said Tony Saliba, CEO and founder of Liquid Mercury. "Many assumed they would need to raise capital and build this infrastructure from scratch. Licensing Mercury RWA lets them launch on systems that were already live and proven, at a fraction of the time and cost. ACQUA1 token holders now own a slice of the business that earns equity, plus fees from the companies in the Lab Company program.”
Verified accredited investors subscribed by exchanging MERC for non-voting Class B units of ACQUA1 at the initial conversion rate of 10 MERC per unit. Under its operating agreement, ACQUA1 must burn 100% of the MERC it receives at each closing within five business days and may not transfer, trade, lend, stake, pledge, or otherwise deploy it.
On September 2, all 563,230,000 MERC received at the initial closing were burned via a transfer to the dead address, as the offering documents require.
Initial Closing Highlights
Initial closing: September 1, 2026
MERC burned: 563,230,000
Transferred to the dead address September 2, 2026
Units issued: 56,323,000
Non-voting Class B units of ACQUA1, LLC under Rule 506(c) of Regulation D
10 MERC per unit
Evidenced on-chain by ACQUA1-C tokens
ACQUA1-C tokens convert one-for-one into ACQUA1 tokens upon issuance
Remaining closings: On or about October 30 and December 31, 2026
ACQUA1 may skip or terminate at its discretion
The conversion rate at subsequent closings may differ
Verification Links
Burn transaction
ACQUA1-C contract
Verified accredited investors can request full terms at acqua1.liquidmercury.com/contact.
About Liquid Mercury
Liquid Mercury powers professional crypto trading and digital asset marketplaces. The company delivers institutional-grade infrastructure, access to deep liquidity, and best-in-class trading tools and workflow automation across its Pro, OTC, and RWA platforms. Through Mercury RWA, Liquid Mercury is extending that infrastructure into tokenized real-world assets, with $MERC serving as the access and platform layer token. For more information, visit www.liquidmercury.com.
Investor Notice
This press release does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Class B units of ACQUA1, LLC and the ACQUA1 tokens representing them are offered and sold in reliance on the exemption from registration provided by Rule 506(c) of Regulation D under the Securities Act of 1933, solely to verified accredited investors as defined in Rule 501(a) of Regulation D, and solely pursuant to ACQUA1’s confidential private placement memorandum, as supplemented, and definitive subscription documents, which contain important information, including risk factors. ACQUA1 tokens are restricted securities, are subject to transfer restrictions under ACQUA1’s operating agreement and may remain illiquid indefinitely; investors should not assume that Rule 144 will be available. Statements regarding future revenues, valuations, portfolio performance, and subsequent closings are forward-looking and subject to risks and uncertainties; actual results may differ materially. The MERC contract has no burn function; tokens are removed from circulation by transferring to the dead address. Supply outstanding excluding the dead address is 5,436,770,000 MERC, as of the date of publication.
ContactsDirectorKent EganLiquid Mercuryke@liquidmercury.comDirectorRyan HansenLiquid Mercuryhansenr@liquidmercury.com
Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Bitzo, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s record $12.2 billion fiscal third-quarter revenue is a forceful signal that AI and networking demand is reaching the company’s income statement. Revenue rose 34% from a year earlier, while GAAP operating profit increased 464% and non-GAAP operating profit rose 155%, according to HPE’s results release.
The less straightforward question is how much of that demand HPE can physically deliver. Management says memory is the principal supply bottleneck, and earnings-call commentary indicated that constrained component availability limited unit growth. Higher average selling prices therefore accounted for part of the revenue increase, rather than all growth coming from a larger number of systems shipped.
That distinction matters for the upgraded outlook. HPE has evidence of real commercial momentum, but the route from AI orders to sustained revenue, cash generation and longer-term growth runs through a supply chain that remains constrained.
Record Q3 and a higher framework
Following the third-quarter performance, HPE raised its fiscal 2026 outlook and lifted its fiscal 2027 framework. The company now targets consolidated revenue growth of 13% to 17% in fiscal 2027, Cloud & AI revenue growth of 14% to 18%, earnings per share of $4.40 to $4.60, and at least $5 billion in free cash flow, according to its Q3 FY26 earnings presentation.
Those are not merely incremental revisions to a near-term sales estimate. The framework places growth in the Cloud & AI business above the consolidated range, making that segment central to management’s case for expansion through fiscal 2027. The free-cash-flow target also sets a more demanding standard than revenue growth alone: HPE must convert its opportunity while managing the capital tied up in securing components.
The Q3 figures give management a substantial starting point. A 34% year-over-year revenue increase is large enough to support the view that demand is broad and consequential for HPE, while the increase in operating profit points to an earnings improvement that goes beyond a marginal sales gain. Still, an annual framework is a promise about repeatability. The company’s ability to access constrained parts will help determine whether the reported quarter becomes a durable run rate or a period in which prices temporarily did more of the work.
Cloud & AI momentum from Q2
HPE’s preceding quarter suggests the latest upgrade did not emerge from a weak base. In fiscal Q2, Cloud & AI revenue reached $7.7 billion, up 22.9% year over year, and segment operating margin rose to 12.4% from 6.6%, according to the company’s Q2 results release.
The margin change is especially relevant to the current debate. It shows a material improvement in profitability in the business management identifies as a faster-growing part of the 2027 plan. Q3’s consolidated operating-profit gains then reinforce the picture of an operating acceleration rather than a solitary demand spike.
There is, however, a difference between a business benefiting from high-value AI demand and one that can meet all of that demand in volume. HPE’s 14% to 18% Cloud & AI growth range implies management expects the business to remain a growth engine. The supply backdrop means that the composition of that growth—shipments, system mix and pricing—remains as important as the headline percentage.
For investors and customers, that is the practical tension in the numbers. A stronger revenue framework indicates confidence in demand and execution; it does not remove the component availability constraints that can delay or cap the systems HPE is able to ship.
Memory shortages and unit growth
Management has identified memory as the primary bottleneck, followed by NAND, CPUs and drives, Reuters reported. These are not peripheral inputs for the systems HPE is seeking to deliver into AI and related infrastructure demand. Limits on availability can therefore constrain output even when end-customer appetite is intact.
The company’s response has been to pursue longer-term supply agreements intended to improve component access, as Reuters reported via Euronext. That is a rational operational response to scarcity, but it makes supply procurement part of the commercial strategy rather than a background purchasing function.
Q3 call commentary provides the key qualification to an uncomplicated bullish reading of the 34% revenue growth. Component constraints limited unit growth, while higher average selling prices contributed to revenue growth, according to an earnings-call transcript published by Benzinga. Pricing can support reported revenue and profitability when supply is tight, but it is not identical to a proportional expansion in physical deliveries.
That does not undermine the demand case. On the contrary, customers paying higher prices amid constrained availability can demonstrate the value placed on the equipment. But it changes the test embedded in HPE’s guidance: future performance depends not only on continued demand, but on whether component availability improves enough for unit growth to contribute more fully alongside pricing.
The distinction may become more consequential as comparisons get harder. Revenue gains driven partly by average selling prices can be powerful in a constrained period, yet a growth framework extending into fiscal 2027 ultimately invites scrutiny of how much capacity HPE can translate into actual systems shipped.
Inventory, commitments and cash flow
HPE had already begun positioning for this challenge earlier in the fiscal year. In fiscal Q1, it reported approximately $6.9 billion of inventory, saying it was building inventory for supply assurance amid industry-wide constraints, particularly in memory. It also increased purchase commitments sequentially, according to the Q1 FY26 earnings transcript.
Inventory building and longer-term agreements can help HPE protect deliveries when key parts are scarce. They may give the company a better chance of serving demand that competitors cannot meet promptly. In that sense, supply access can be an advantage, not simply a risk.
It is also an execution and cash-management commitment. Carrying more inventory and expanding purchase commitments requires HPE to align component purchases, customer deliveries and product demand closely enough that supply assurance supports growth without unduly burdening working capital. That makes the company’s target of at least $5 billion in fiscal 2027 free cash flow an important companion to the revenue target.
HPE’s higher guidance rests on a credible set of current operating facts: record Q3 revenue, sharply higher operating profit and an improving Cloud & AI business. The constraint is equally concrete. Memory remains the leading bottleneck, and HPE’s own preparations—more inventory and longer-term supply arrangements—show that fulfilling AI demand may depend as much on disciplined access to components as on winning the next order.
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.

Bitcoin’s recovery above $77,500 has arrived alongside a far less accommodating shift in U.S. rate expectations. The cryptocurrency was trading near $77,800 after the rebound, with roughly $77,200 identified as an immediate downside reference ahead of Friday’s employment report.
That leaves the move exposed to a macroeconomic test. The August Employment Situation is due at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time on September 4, the last major labor-market release before the Federal Reserve’s September 15–16 meeting. For Bitcoin, the report is not simply a read on whether hiring remains healthy. It is a test of whether labor-market cooling has become persuasive enough to dislodge a market now leaning toward another rate increase.
Bitcoin rebound and hike repricing
CME FedWatch showed a roughly 66.4% probability of a 25-basis-point increase at the September meeting as of September 3, compared with 33.6% odds of a hold. A week earlier, the balance had been almost the reverse: 39.6% for a hike and 60.4% for no change.
The speed of that repricing matters more than the level alone. Bitcoin has regained a nearby round-number threshold while the expected policy backdrop has become more restrictive, rather than more supportive. That makes it difficult to read the recovery as a clean risk-on endorsement. The market is instead approaching a single economic release with both a recovered price level and a sharply altered rates consensus in view.
The $77,200 reference cited by TradingNews gives the immediate setup some definition, but it does not establish a durable directional threshold. Friday’s data are the nearer catalyst because they arrive before policymakers meet and could change the probabilities traders are using to value short-term risk.
A jobs report that reinforces inflation-sensitive rate expectations would leave Bitcoin’s bounce having occurred despite, not because of, the policy repricing. Conversely, a sufficiently weak report could challenge the premise behind the 66.4% hike probability. The important question is the composition of the labor evidence, not merely whether the payroll headline is positive or negative.
July’s uneven labor signal
The July report supplied grounds for both concern about labor demand and caution about assuming an easier monetary-policy response. Nonfarm payrolls declined by 23,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Yet the unemployment rate was 4.1%, while average hourly earnings increased 3.2% from a year earlier.
Those figures help explain why weak hiring has not produced an unambiguously dovish market narrative. A payroll decline is plainly a cooling signal, but 4.1% unemployment and continuing wage growth do not by themselves describe an economy where inflation pressure has evidently disappeared.
Fed Chair Kevin Warsh made the policy conflict explicit at Jackson Hole on August 28. He said labor markets were generally consistent with full employment, citing the 4.1% unemployment rate, while noting that 12-month PCE inflation stood at 3.7% and six-month PCE inflation at 4.1%, according to the Federal Reserve Board.
The juxtaposition is central to Friday’s market reaction. If employment softens but unemployment remains contained and wage measures retain momentum, the report may offer the Fed evidence of cooling without supplying a clear reason to set inflation risk aside. That outcome would not necessarily settle the September decision, but it would fit more comfortably with the hike-heavy probabilities already priced in.
For Bitcoin, the distinction matters because the asset is trading into a policy debate that cannot be reduced to growth anxiety. A softer labor market can increase concern over the expansion, but the transmission to rate expectations depends on whether it also changes the judgment that inflation remains too high.
Revisions and openings raise the stakes
The July payroll report’s revisions recast the recent hiring run as weaker than initially reported. The BLS revised May and June employment lower by a combined 103,000 jobs: May to a gain of 63,000 from 129,000, and June to an increase of 20,000 from 57,000.
That makes the August Employment Situation important for more than its August payroll figure. Its revisions and unemployment rate will help show whether labor-market cooling remains orderly or becomes more consequential.
July’s JOLTS release offered additional context: 7.3 million job openings, a 4.4% openings rate, 5.1 million hires and 3.1 million quits. June openings were revised down by 177,000 to 7.2 million. Together with the payroll revisions, those figures suggest labor demand is cooling across more than one release.
The data do not eliminate the countervailing considerations cited by Kevin Warsh. Unemployment remains at 4.1%, and recent PCE inflation readings are above the Federal Reserve’s target.
As a result, the August report has unusual leverage over the near-term narrative. Softer hiring, adverse revisions and a higher unemployment rate would make July’s decline harder to dismiss as noise; less evidence of deterioration could preserve the view that the economy remains near full employment.
A policy conflict before price validation
Bitcoin’s move above $77,500 has not yet resolved this policy conflict; it has placed the conflict closer to a tradable price reference. With the market near $77,800 and $77,200 serving as the immediate downside area, the employment release may determine whether the rebound can coexist with a rate path that has shifted abruptly toward tightening.
The strongest challenge to the current hike consensus would not be weak payrolls in a vacuum. It would be a report that adds convincing evidence that labor-market deterioration is persistent, particularly through the unemployment rate and revisions, at a time when prior data already show reduced openings and a lower recent employment baseline.
Even then, policymakers would still face the inflation and wage backdrop. July average hourly earnings were up 3.2% year over year, while Warsh cited 3.7% 12-month PCE inflation and 4.1% six-month PCE inflation. The report must therefore do more than signal slower growth if it is to materially weaken the rationale markets have attached to a September increase.
That is the constraint on interpreting the Bitcoin bounce. Friday’s release, scheduled less than two weeks before the September 15–16 FOMC meeting, will test whether cooling labor data are becoming strong enough to change the policy path now reflected in the 66.4% implied odds of a quarter-point hike.
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.

U.S. private-sector employment increased by 38,000 jobs in August, according to the ADP National Employment Report. The result was below July's revised 46,000 gain, which was revised from 44,000, and marked private employers' slowest pace of job creation since January.
The report is produced by ADP Research in collaboration with the Stanford Digital Economy Lab. Its August reading points to a modest net increase in private hiring, with the overall gain reflecting sharply different results between goods-producing businesses and service providers.
Data Snapshot
MetricCurrentPreviousChangePeriodAs ofSourceChange in U.S. Private Employment38,000——August 2026September 2, 2026ADPChange in U.S. Private Employment38,00046,000The July total number of jobs added was revised from 44,000 to 46,000.August 2026 compared with July 2026September 2, 2026ADPGoods-producing-10,000——August 2026September 2, 2026ADPService-providing48,000——August 2026September 2, 2026ADPMedian Change in Base Pay — All workers3.2%——Year over year, August 2026September 2, 2026ADPMedian Change in Gross Pay — All workers4.7%——Year over year, August 2026September 2, 2026ADP
Goods-producing employment split
Goods-producing employers lost 10,000 jobs in August and service-providing employers added 48,000, ADP reported, leaving private employment up 38,000 overall.
Within the industry breakdown, ADP recorded losses in manufacturing, professional services and information, alongside solid hiring in education and health care, construction, and leisure and hospitality. The result was a positive private-employment total without broad gains across every major part of the private sector: service-providing employment rose as goods-producing employment moved lower.
ADP Pay Insights graphic accompanying the August 2026 employment report. — Source: ADP
Pay-growth measures
For all workers, ADP reported a 3.2% year-over-year median change in base pay and a 4.7% year-over-year median change in gross pay in August 2026.
ADP included the measures with its private-employment estimate. The reported data provided no prior-period comparison for either one.
Neither figure is a count of jobs added or lost; the measures describe compensation and should not be treated as a direct measure of the August hiring total.
Next labor-market release
The U.S. Department of Labor's Employment Situation for August 2026 is scheduled for Friday, September 4, 2026, at 8:30 a.m., according to its release schedule. It will be the next concrete observation point for the August labor market.
Because the release is separate from ADP's private-sector employment estimate, its figures and ADP's should not be treated as interchangeable.
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.

Twenty-one international financial institutions announced on September 1 plans to create a company in the second half of 2026 to support the issuance of a U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoin. The consortium is targeting a market launch in the first half of 2027, according to the group’s announcement published by Wells Fargo.
The initiative would bring several large banks and financial firms into a common stablecoin structure rather than leaving issuance to separate experiments. Its proposed token is intended for cross-border payments and digital-asset settlement in wholesale, institutional and retail markets.
Consortium to form stablecoin company in late 2026
The planned company is due to be established during the second half of 2026 and would support the stablecoin’s issuance; Wells Fargo said participants include Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, UBS, Wells Fargo, Fidelity Investments, Santander, BBVA and MUFG Bank.
Dollar token targeted for first-half 2027
The consortium said it aims to bring the initial dollar token to market in the first half of 2027. The stated use cases cover cross-border payments and settlement of digital assets, across customer segments ranging from wholesale markets to retail users.
That timetable makes the establishment of the issuance-supporting company the next announced milestone. The group has not stated a more specific launch date.
Euro expansion and regulatory frameworks
After the dollar-denominated offering, the initiative plans to expand into additional G7 currencies, with a euro stablecoin identified as the priority, Reuters reported.
The venture also intends to comply with the U.S. GENIUS Act and the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, or MiCA, where those frameworks apply. The announcement frames the planned dollar token as the first stage of a broader multi-currency stablecoin effort.
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.

World Foundation announced ProveKit on September 2, 2026, describing it as an open-source, production-ready toolkit for generating zero-knowledge proofs locally on phones, browsers and other devices.
For a digital identity check, the model is local: a user can prove a particular attribute without transmitting a document or full personal details to a service. The launch also makes the proof mechanism used in World ID available to developers building other applications.
Published benchmarks put the practical question in view for mobile privacy systems—whether such proofs can be generated on modest hardware.
ProveKit opens World ID’s local proof mechanism to other apps
ProveKit is already integrated into World ID, where the toolkit supports claims about a user’s age, nationality and ownership of a valid identity document, according to the World Foundation.
The practical distinction is what an application receives: proof that a condition has been met, not the underlying identity data. A service checking whether someone is above a given age could therefore receive proof of that attribute instead of a passport or identity card.
World is open-sourcing ProveKit as a production-ready stack for local proving on phones, browsers and other devices.
Local proofs and document sharing
The privacy proposition rests on where the proof is created and what is disclosed. World says ProveKit lets users establish attributes without exposing the personal data behind those attributes. In the model described by the company, a document can be used as input on a user’s device while the relying application receives only the resulting proof.
The Next Web reported that the toolkit is intended to move identity checks away from centralized document uploads. It said users can prove specific details locally without sending passport or ID data to an external server.
That approach addresses a practical feature of many online identity flows: services often collect copies of sensitive documents to establish eligibility, age or identity status. ProveKit is aimed at replacing disclosure of the source material with a check of the specific fact an application needs.
Official ProveKit supporting diagram illustrating client-side mobile proof generation. — Source: World Foundation
Mobile benchmarks
The ProveKit website reports proving times of roughly two to three seconds on an iPhone SE 3 and less than 30 seconds on a low-end Motorola Moto E15. It also reports a proving payload below 3 MB and proof sizes below 1 MB.
For a process designed to run locally on phones, the practical distinction is what moves between the device and the service: a compact completed proof rather than an original document file, with the sensitive computation kept off a remote server. On that measure, the Moto E15 benchmark is the more consequential of the two for broad mobile use, since it tests the design on hardware with tighter performance constraints.
These remain ProveKit’s published project benchmarks, not results from independent device testing.
WHIR, audit and developer integrations
World says ProveKit does not require a trusted setup and uses the WHIR hash-based commitment scheme. The foundation also says the system targets 128-bit post-quantum security and has undergone an independent audit by security firm Least Authority.
For developers, the project’s open-source repository compiles Noir programs into R1CS constraints, then generates and verifies WHIR proofs. It lists integrations for Rust, JavaScript, Swift, Kotlin and C-compatible foreign-function interfaces, covering a mix of backend, web and native mobile development environments.
Those language options matter because local proving needs to be embedded where users already interact with an application, rather than confined to a standalone cryptographic tool. World’s release provides the code and its stated security design to outside developers; adoption will depend on whether applications can translate that capability into identity checks that ask for less user data in the first place.
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.

A BEP20 casino deposit is now among the least expensive available, and BNB Chain got there quietly to fund a casino account, and it did it by cutting block times three times in eighteen months. A transfer now costs about half a cent and confirms in under a second.
Here is where that cost comes from, the choice that used to go wrong and no longer can, and where to spend it.
Why a BEP20 Transfer Costs So Little
Five things stack up, and the first is the one that did most of the work.
The network standardised on 0.05 gwei. BNB Chain's own documentation puts the standard gas price there, which produces typical transaction fees around $0.005 or less. That is a network-wide convention, not a temporary market condition.
Block time fell to roughly 0.45 seconds. Three consecutive hardforks did it: Lorentz, Maxwell, and Fermi took the chain from three seconds down to under half a second. Faster blocks mean less queuing and less fee pressure.
Capacity outruns demand. With blocks arriving twice a second, the chain rarely fills, so the auction dynamic that pushes Ethereum fees up has little room to operate.
It is EVM-compatible without Ethereum's congestion. BEP-20 is a direct adaptation of ERC-20, so tooling and address formats are familiar, without inheriting the fee market that comes with them.
Real-world cost lands between half a cent and five cents. Third-party tracking through 2025 and 2026 puts typical transfers in the $0.01 to $0.05 range depending on token and contract complexity, which is the figure to plan around instead of the theoretical floor.
Exchanges and platforms typically credit BEP-20 deposits in under two minutes, so the practical experience is quick and inexpensive without needing you to configure anything.
The Network Choice That Used to Catch People
This one is worth knowing because outdated guides still warn about it.
BNB used to exist across two standards. BEP-2 belonged to the old Beacon Chain and BEP-20 to BNB Smart Chain, and choosing the wrong one sent funds somewhere the recipient could not reach. It was a genuine source of lost deposits for years.
BEP-2 retired with Beacon Chain in 2024 and its assets migrated across. So in 2026, when a cashier asks which BNB network to use, the answer is effectively always BNB Smart Chain, BEP-20. The old failure mode has been removed by decommissioning the thing that caused it.
One requirement remains. Gas in BNB is the requirement here, so moving a BEP-20 token means holding a small BNB balance for gas.
Arriving with only USDT and no BNB leaves you looking at a balance you cannot send, which is the same pattern as ETH on Ethereum. At half a cent per transaction, a dollar of BNB covers an enormous amount of activity.
Five Platforms Crediting BEP20
All five accept BNB Chain deposits, which matters because the chain hosts one of the largest USDT supplies in circulation. Ordered on what the cashier adds above network cost.
Dexsport adds nothing above the network fee, so a BEP-20 deposit costs you what BNB Chain charges. It runs a multi-coin, multi-network cashier with BNB Chain among the supported networks, and being non-custodial means a settled balance sits in a wallet you hold instead of behind a withdrawal threshold. The licence is Anjouan, lighter than Curacao or Malta, and restricted territories cover the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia.
Stake credits BEP-20 across a large cashier with per-asset withdrawal minimums published, which is the figure deciding whether a small balance can leave. Balances are custodial.
BC.Game offers comparable breadth under a long Curacao trading record, with BNB Chain among the standard rails and clearly documented minimums.
Vave supports BEP-20 within multi-coin funding across several chains, with a solid third-party catalogue and no originals suite.
Mega Dice accepts BNB Chain deposits through a Telegram-first flow, though withdrawal terms are documented less clearly than at the platforms above.
Cashier cost is one factor and the smaller one at these prices. How a platform records and settles activity affects your experience considerably more than a few cents of gas.
BEP20 Against the Alternatives
Worth placing honestly, because several chains now cluster at the cheap end.
BNB Chain, Solana, Litecoin and TON all deliver sub-cent or near-sub-cent transfers with quick settlement. None of them is dramatically better than the others for a casino deposit, and choosing between them mostly comes down to which asset you already hold and which network your platform credits.
Where BEP-20 has an edge is familiarity:
EVM addresses you already recognise from Ethereum
MetaMask compatibility without configuring anything unusual
ERC-20 style tooling, so nothing new to learn, without Ethereum's fees That counts for more than a fractional cost difference, especially if you are still building confidence with crypto deposits and want to avoid the platforms that exploit inexperience.
Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply.
Responsible gambling connects to low-cost rails directly, because a deposit costing half a cent carries no friction at all, and friction is often the only thing that makes a person pause before repeating one.


Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Network fees, block times and platform terms change, so confirm current details before transferring. Crypto transfers are irreversible. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

According to Reuters via Investing.com, Snowflake shares rose more than 20% in extended trading on September 2 after the cloud-data company beat earnings expectations and raised its fiscal 2027 product-revenue outlook to $6.07 billion. Adjusted earnings were $0.62 a share, compared with the $0.45 analyst consensus compiled by LSEG. Snowflake reported accelerating adoption of its AI offerings, including its CoCo and CoWork products.
FY2027 product-revenue target rises to $6.07 billion
Snowflake lifted its fiscal 2027 product-revenue target from $5.84 billion to $6.07 billion. The new target implies 36% year-over-year growth, according to the company’s September 2 SEC filing.
Product revenue is the central metric in Snowflake’s updated outlook, and the higher target was announced alongside second-quarter growth that ran slightly ahead of the full-year rate implied by the guidance.
Second-quarter product revenue grew 37% to $1.492 billion
For the second quarter of fiscal 2027, Snowflake reported product revenue of $1.492 billion, up 37% from a year earlier. Total revenue rose 35% to $1.55 billion, the company said in the filing.
The quarterly product-revenue growth rate was one percentage point above the 36% growth embedded in Snowflake’s updated fiscal-year target. Its $0.62 adjusted earnings per share also exceeded the $0.45 consensus cited by Reuters via Investing.com.
Official Q2 FY27 infographic showing 37% product-revenue growth, $1.49 billion product revenue, 126% net revenue retention, and AI adoption metrics. — Source: Snowflake Investor Relations
CoCo and CoWork account adoption accelerates
CoCo surpassed 9,100 accounts and CoWork reached 5,800 during the quarter, Snowflake said, describing AI adoption as accelerated.
The company presented those figures as evidence of demand for its AI products alongside its revised forecast. It did not separately quantify how much revenue came from CoCo or CoWork.
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.

TON had an unusual 2026. In April a consensus upgrade cut settlement from around ten seconds to roughly one. In May, Telegram announced it was taking over as the network's largest validator, and fees fell about sixfold.
For anyone who already lives in Telegram, that combination changes what funding a casino account looks like.
What Actually Changed This Year
Three developments, and they compound.
Catchain 2.0 went live on 9 April 2026. Block times dropped from roughly 2.5 seconds to about 400 milliseconds, transaction settlement collapsed from around ten seconds to approximately one, and throughput rose an estimated tenfold. TON now publishes sub-second finality of 0.6 seconds, which puts it in the same tier as the quickest production chains.
Telegram became the largest validator on 4 May 2026. Pavel Durov announced that Telegram would replace the TON Foundation in that role, formally pulling the network back inside the company that created it in 2018. A platform with more than a billion users tying itself directly to one chain is not a small structural change.
Fees fell roughly sixfold. A typical transaction now costs in the region of $0.0005, which is negligible at any deposit size and effectively removes network cost as a consideration.
The Telegram Angle Is the Actual Point
Speed and cheap fees are available on several chains. Native access to a messaging client with a billion users is not.
The practical effect is that a Telegram-first player can sign in, hold funds and move them without leaving the app they already have open. Wallets live inside Telegram, the chain settles in under a second, and the friction that usually accompanies a wallet handoff on mobile largely disappears.
That matters because mobile wallet connection is the weakest link in Web3 gambling generally.
Handing off from a browser to a wallet app and back is fiddly and frequently fails, and which wallets a platform supports is a real constraint on mobile. A Telegram-native route sidesteps the problem instead of solving it.
You Need TON to Move USDT on TON
The gotcha worth knowing before you fund anything.
USDT launched on TON in April 2024 and is now widely accepted, with a typical transfer costing around 0.00104 TON after this year's reduction. Gas in TON is the requirement: fees are paid in TON, not in the token you are moving.
That is the same pattern as needing ETH to move an ERC20 token or TRX to move USDT on Tron, and it catches people arriving with a wallet holding nothing but stablecoins. You will see the balance and be unable to send it.
Keep a small TON balance for gas. At current fee levels, a dollar covers an enormous number of transactions, so this is a one-time setup step, not an ongoing cost.
Four Platforms Compared
Where each sits on Telegram access, TON support and what the cashier adds.
Platform
Telegram sign-in
TON supported
Cashier fee
Custody
Dexsport
Yes, alongside wallet and email
Yes
Network fee only
Non-custodial
Mega Dice
Telegram-native access
Yes
Network fee only
Custodial
Stake
No
Yes
Network fee only
Custodial
BC.Game
No
Yes
Network fee only
Custodial
Dexsport is the only entry here completing the Telegram-first path end to end: you can sign in through Telegram, fund in TON, and settle back to a wallet you control, since the platform is non-custodial.
It also offers wallet and email routes, which matters as a fallback and not as a limitation. The licence is Anjouan, lighter than Curacao or Malta.
Mega Dice is Telegram-native by design with around 50 providers behind its catalogue, though balances are operator-held and its withdrawal terms are documented less clearly than at the larger platforms.
Stake and BC.Game both credit TON deposits within large multi-network cashiers, but neither offers a Telegram sign-in route, so the chain is a funding option and not an integrated experience.
Whether TON Suits You
The case is narrow and it is strong where it applies.
If Telegram is already where you spend time, a TON-funded account on a platform with Telegram sign-in removes almost every friction point:
Settlement in under a second
Fees you will never notice at around $0.0005
No app switching and no wallet handoff
Without Telegram in your daily routine, TON is simply another quick, cheap chain competing with Solana, Litecoin and BNB Chain, and the choice comes down to which your platform credits and which you already hold.
That decision is worth making alongside how a platform runs one balance across products instead of on chain speed alone.
Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply.
Responsible gambling deserves particular thought on a Telegram-first setup, since a casino inside a messaging app you check all day sits considerably closer to hand than one behind a browser and a login.


Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Network performance, fees and platform features change, so confirm current details before transferring. Crypto transfers are irreversible. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

XRP settles in three to five seconds for a fraction of a cent, with none of the confirmation-counting other chains require. An XRP casino deposit is close to an ideal rail, and it carries one requirement that trips up more people than every other coin combined.
The destination tag. Here is why it exists and what happens when you forget it.
Why XRP Works Differently
The XRP Ledger lets one address serve many customers. Platforms use that: instead of generating a fresh wallet for every player, most issue a single shared deposit address and identify individual accounts using a numeric tag attached to each payment.
That design keeps costs down and reserves low. It also means the address alone does not tell the platform who sent the money, because thousands of deposits arrive at the same place.
The tag is the account number. The address is only the building.
With a Tag Against Without
The outcome differs sharply, and it is worth seeing side by side.

Tag included
Tag missing or wrong
Does the transfer confirm?
Yes
Yes
Do funds reach the platform?
Yes
Yes
Is your account credited?
Yes, usually within a minute
No
Are the funds lost?
No
No, but they are unallocated
What fixes it?
Nothing needed
A support ticket with the transaction hash
Read the fourth row carefully, because this is where XRP differs from the failure people fear. A missing tag is not the same as sending on the wrong network. The money arrived at the right address on the right chain and behaved exactly as instructed. Nothing was destroyed and nobody else received it.
What happened is that the platform received a payment it cannot attribute. That is an administrative problem, and support can normally resolve it once you provide the transaction hash. Annoying, not fatal.
A tag entered incorrectly behaves the same way, and so does a tag attached to the wrong field.
The Rest of the Mechanics
Three more things worth knowing before you send.
Settlement is deterministic. The ledger closes every three to five seconds and a validated transaction is final, so there is no confirmation count to watch and no probabilistic waiting period. Once it is in, it is in.
The fee is negligible and destroyed. A transfer costs around 0.00001 XRP, and that amount is burned and not paid to validators, which is an unusual design and keeps costs stable regardless of demand.
Accounts carry a base reserve. The ledger requires a small XRP balance to remain in an active account, so you cannot empty a wallet completely. Budget for it when planning a full withdrawal.
Four Platforms Taking XRP
All four credit XRP deposits. What differs is how the deposit screen handles the tag.
1. Dexsport
Dexsport runs a multi-coin cashier spanning a wide range of assets and networks, with XRP among them.
The habit that matters here applies at any platform: take the address and the tag from the same screen, in the same session, and paste both before sending. Reusing a tag you saved previously is the common failure, since platforms may rotate them.
Because the platform is non-custodial, a settled balance returns to a wallet you hold instead of sitting in an operator account. It runs under an Anjouan licence, lighter than Curacao or Malta, with restricted territories covering the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia.
2. Stake
A large cashier with XRP among many supported assets and per-asset withdrawal minimums published.
The deposit screen presents the tag prominently, which is the behaviour you want. Balances are custodial and held between sessions.
3. BC.Game
Comparable coin breadth built over a long Curacao trading record, with XRP handled conventionally through a shared address and tag.
Documentation is easy to find, which matters more here than on chains without an extra field to get right.
4. Cloudbet
Operating since 2013 with its company named on the licence, and XRP supported for most of that history.
Its orientation toward larger positions suits players for whom XRP's speed matters more than its cost.
One Rule for Every Ripple Deposit
Copy the tag at the same time as the address, every time, from the deposit screen you are looking at.
Two situations cover everything you will meet:
A tag field is shown — copy it with the address and paste both before sending
No tag field appears — the platform has issued you a unique address and identifies you by that instead, which is equally valid
Read the screen instead of assuming either way, since deposit and withdrawal handling varies between platforms more than the coin list suggests.
XRP remains one of the quickest and least costly ways to fund an account, and cost differences between coins are worth weighing alongside the small amount of extra care this one asks for.
Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling applies whichever rail you use, and a deposit that clears in four seconds removes a pause that slower chains impose without intending to.


Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Deposit procedures, fees and platform terms vary and change, so confirm current details on the cashier before transferring. Crypto transfers are irreversible. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Only four commodity vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday in preliminary shipping data, down from 10 a day earlier and below the 10-day average of around 13. The reading stood out even as Brent crude futures remained above $95 a barrel, underscoring the market’s focus on risk around a waterway that carried about one-fifth of global oil consumption before the conflict.
Data Snapshot
MetricCurrentPreviousChangePeriodAs ofSourceBrent crude futures$95.2 a barrel—fell 43 cents, or 0.45%at 0029 GMT on ThursdaySeptember 3, 2026Reuters via Investing.comWest Texas Intermediate crude futures$90.77 a barrel—down 24 cents, or 0.26%at 0029 GMT on ThursdaySeptember 3, 2026Reuters via Investing.comCommodity vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuzfour commodity vessels10 commodity vessels a day earlier—Wednesday; preliminary shipping dataSeptember 3, 2026Reuters via Investing.comTen-day average of commodity-vessel transits through Hormuzaround 13——10-day averageSeptember 3, 2026Reuters via Investing.comOil transiting the Strait of Hormuz17 million barrels——MondaySeptember 3, 2026Reuters via Investing.com
Transit count falls below 10-day average
The preliminary count of four commodity vessels reflects movements through the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday, not the quantity of oil moving through the strait. It was less than half the 10 commodity vessels recorded a day earlier and well below the recent 10-day average of around 13. Vessels with transponders switched off are excluded from Kpler’s transit data, according to Reuters, so the preliminary figure captures only vessels visible through that methodology.
Monday oil volume reached 17 million barrels
Oil transiting the Strait of Hormuz reached 17 million barrels on Monday.
U.S. officials called that the largest volume of crude to pass through the waterway since the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran began, Reuters reported.
The figure is not directly comparable with Wednesday’s preliminary count of four commodity vessels. The two readings cover different measures—oil volume and vessel count—and different days, although they show that a low vessel-count snapshot can coexist with a large volume reading on another day.
Brent holds above $95 amid renewed strikes
Brent crude futures fell 43 cents, or 0.45%, to $95.2 a barrel at 0029 GMT on Thursday, and West Texas Intermediate crude futures fell 24 cents, or 0.26%, to $90.77 a barrel.
Prices remained elevated amid heightened shipping risks following renewed exchanges between the United States and Iran. The United States said its strikes targeted Iranian radar and missile systems, while Iran retaliated, according to Reuters via Investing.com. The Strait of Hormuz carried about one-fifth of global oil consumption before the conflict, Reuters reported via Baird Maritime.
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.

Eightco treasury composition as of September 2, 2026: $90M OpenAI equity (indirect), $18M Beast Industries equity, 16,278 ETH, nearly 302 million WLD holdings, and $122M cash and equivalents, totaling approximately $380 million
Eightco recently repurchased over 25 million shares of common stock in the last month under its previously announced $125 million share repurchase program
Eightco previously participated in World Foundation's $52.5M funding round, led by Pantera with participation from Bain Capital Crypto, Selini Capital, Susquehanna Crypto, and additional investors
Eightco provides indirect exposure to some of the most innovative private companies including OpenAI and Beast Industries
EASTON, Pa., Sept. 3, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Eightco Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: ORBS) ("Eightco" or the "Company") today provided an update on its total holdings, highlighting its position across digital assets and strategic investments in leading private technology companies. Over the past month, Eightco has repurchased over 25 million shares of its common stock under its previously announced $125 million share repurchase program.
As of September 2, 2026, at 8:00 p.m. ET, ORBS' holdings include a $90 million investment (indirectly, through SPVs) in OpenAI, an $18 million funded investment in Beast Industries, a $1 million investment in Mythical Games, 301,971,219 Worldcoin (WLD) at $0.37 per WLD (per Coinbase), 16,278 Ethereum (ETH), and approximately $122 million in total cash and stablecoins, for total holdings of approximately $380 million.
Top Headlines Driving the News:
Eightco's management believes the Company's treasury portfolio holds some of the most critical components for the future AI and digital financial system. This week's top headlines include:
On September 2, World announced it has open-sourced ProveKit, a zero-knowledge identity proving toolkit. The launch makes ProveKit available to developers outside World. ProveKit is built into World ID and powers the privacy-preserving features that make proof of human useful for enterprises, consumer platforms, and developers (World).
On September 1, SB Energy, an AI power infrastructure company backed by Softbank, OpenAI and Nvidia, filed for a potential IPO. In its initial filing, the company said it is "substantially dependent" on the performance of OpenAI as both a tenant and equity investor in SB Energy (CNBC).
On September 1, MrBeast released a book with one of the world's bestselling authors James Patterson, called The Most Dangerous Games (HarperCollins).
On August 31, OpenAI announced that its advertising business, ChatGPT Ads, reached $1 billion in annualized revenue run rate less than 200 days after launch. The platform is now used by tens of thousands of advertisers and continues to expand globally (Axios).
On August 31, OpenAI announced its support for the California Senate Bill 1119 to advance youth AI safety. This legislation is intended to establish meaningful safeguards for how young people use AI while preserving their access to tools that can help them learn, create, and prepare for the future (OpenAI).
On August 21, it was announced that peaqOS and World ID partnered to enable Proof of Human for robots and machines. A machine can check that the person in front of it is a real human, and the same one who placed the order. It never learns a name, a face, or a number (peaq).
"AI stocks have been under pressure recently, partly a result of backlash against data centers. This seems to be an issue resonating with voters," said Tom Lee, Board Member of ORBS. "But despite this setback, AI progress continues at a rapid pace as evidenced by the multiple meaningful announcements in the past week."
"Eightco executed additional share buybacks as the Company has judged that accretively acquiring shares is a high return use of capital," stated Lee.
Eightco: Exposure to key mega-trends
Eightco is built around three mega-trends the Company expects to shape the next decade of innovation: artificial intelligence, digital identity, and the creator economy, with positions in each trend through indirect investment in OpenAI (24% of ORBS' treasury holdings), Worldcoin (29%), and Beast Industries (5%).
Artificial Intelligence — OpenAI
Eightco has invested approximately $90 million in special purpose vehicles with exposure to equity interests in the parent company of OpenAI, representing approximately 24% of treasury assets, one of the highest disclosed concentrations of any listed vehicle.
ChatGPT, OpenAI's consumer app, is the #1 consumer AI app worldwide (Sensor Tower). On July 31, 2026, OpenAI announced that its models now reach more than one billion active users and more than two million businesses. Six months after signing up, people send roughly 50 percent more messages each day and use ChatGPT for about twice as many kinds of work.
Digital Identity — WLD Token
Eightco holds nearly 302 million WLD, approximately 8.3% of circulating supply, the largest publicly disclosed institutional position globally and approximately 29% of the Eightco treasury's assets.
Worldcoin is the native token of World, a global Proof of Human network built by Tools for Humanity (co-founded by Sam Altman and Alex Blania) and stewarded by the World Foundation. Its Orb devices issue a privacy-preserving World ID that verifies a user is a unique human, not an AI agent.
Under World's announced business model, applications pay per-verification fees while end-user verification remains free, with both credential issuers and the World protocol monetizing verified-human authentication. World identifies a $6.35 trillion combined addressable revenue opportunity across 13 industries spanning banking, e-commerce, gaming, social media, and agentic AI (per Tools for Humanity).
Creator Economy — Beast Industries
Eightco has invested $18 million in Beast Industries equity, approximately 5% of treasury assets.
Beast Industries operates one of the largest direct-to-consumer reach footprints in the world, with a combined 500 million-plus follower base across platforms, anchored by MrBeast as the most-watched person on YouTube globally. As AI commoditizes content production, distribution and audience trust become increasingly scarce assets.
About Eightco Holdings Inc.
Eightco Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: ORBS) is a publicly traded company executing a first-of-its-kind Worldcoin (WLD) treasury strategy, providing investors single-ticker indirect exposure to three of the defining trends of this cycle: artificial intelligence through its indirect investment in OpenAI, digital identity through its position as the largest public holder of WLD and the Proof of Human protocol, and the creator economy through its equity stake in MrBeast's Beast Industries. Backed by leading institutional investors including Bitmine Immersion Technologies Inc. (NYSE: BMNR), MOZAYYX, World Foundation, Discovery Capital Management, FalconX, Payward/Kraken, Pantera, and GSR, Eightco is building the infrastructure layer for human verification in the agentic AI era.
For more information:
X: @iamhuman_orbs
Website: 8co.holdings
Frequently Asked Questions
What is ORBS stock?
Eightco Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: ORBS) is a publicly traded company on Nasdaq. ORBS provides indirect exposure to OpenAI and Beast Industries, and holds one of the largest publicly disclosed positions in Worldcoin (WLD).
Who owns the most Worldcoin (WLD)?
Eightco Holdings (NASDAQ: ORBS) holds nearly 302 million WLD, approximately 8.3% of circulating supply and the largest publicly disclosed institutional position globally.
What is Proof of Human?
Proof of Human is cryptographic verification that a user is a unique, living person, not a bot or AI agent. It is foundational infrastructure for social networks, banking, agentic commerce, and any system requiring "one person, one account" in the agentic AI era.
How does Eightco (ORBS) relate to Proof of Human?
Eightco Holdings (NASDAQ: ORBS) is the largest publicly disclosed institutional holder of Worldcoin (WLD), the token powering World's Proof of Human network.
Who is the CEO of Eightco Holdings?
Kevin O'Donnell is the CEO of Eightco Holdings (NASDAQ: ORBS). The Company's Board includes Tom Lee (Managing Partner and Head of Research at Fundstrat, and Chairman of Bitmine Immersion Technologies (NYSE: BMNR)) and, as an advisor to the Board, Brett Winton (Chief Futurist at ARK Invest).
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements in this press release other than statements of historical fact could be deemed forward-looking, including, without limitation, statements regarding: the Company's expectations that artificial intelligence, digital identity, and the creator economy will shape the next decade of innovation; management's belief that the Company's treasury portfolio holds some of the most critical components for the future AI and digital financial system; management's belief that accretively acquiring shares is a high return use of capital; statements that AI progress continues at a rapid pace; statements regarding World's addressable revenue opportunity of $6.35 trillion across industries spanning banking, e-commerce, gaming, social media, and agentic AI; statements that distribution and audience trust become increasingly scarce assets as AI commoditizes content production; statements that the Company is building the infrastructure layer for human verification in the agentic AI era; statements that Proof of Human is foundational infrastructure for social networks, banking, agentic commerce, and systems requiring verified human identity; statements regarding the Company providing indirect exposure to defining trends through its investments in OpenAI, WLD, and Beast Industries; and statements regarding continued share repurchases under the Company's $125 million share repurchase program. Words such as "plans," "expects," "will," "anticipates," "continue," "expand," "advance," "develop," "believes," "guidance," "target," "may," "remain," "project," "outlook," "intend," "estimate," "could," "should," "positioned," "view," and other words and terms of similar meaning and expression are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such terms. Forward-looking statements are based on management's current beliefs and assumptions that are subject to risks and uncertainties and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement as a result of various factors, including, without limitation: the Company's inability to direct the management or operations of private businesses where it is not a controlling stockholder, including OpenAI and Beast Industries; risk of loss or markdown on the Company's strategic investments, including its indirect position in OpenAI equity (held through special purpose vehicles), its position in WLD, and its position in Beast Industries equity; the Company's ability to maintain compliance with Nasdaq's continued listing requirements; unexpected costs, charges, or expenses that reduce the Company's capital resources or otherwise delay capital deployment; inability to raise adequate capital to fund or scale its business operations or strategic investments; volatility in digital asset prices, including WLD and ETH, which could materially affect the value of the Company's treasury holdings; regulatory changes, future legislation, and rulemaking negatively impacting digital assets, artificial intelligence adoption, or biometric data collection; risks related to the development, adoption, and market acceptance of Proof of Human technology and the World network; uncertainty regarding the pace and trajectory of agentic AI deployment in enterprise and consumer applications; uncertainty regarding OpenAI's product roadmap, business model developments, and any future liquidity events; risks related to Beast Industries' ability to achieve its growth projections; competition in the digital identity and AI infrastructure markets; reliance on third-party sources for the valuation of certain investments; uncertainty regarding MrBeast's continued success and the performance of Beast Industries' creator-driven business model; risks related to the Company's concentrated positions in certain digital assets and private company investments; risks related to the Company's share repurchase program, including the timing, pricing, and amount of any repurchases; shifting public and governmental positions on digital assets or artificial intelligence-related industries, including potential backlash against data centers; risks related to the timing, features, and commercial reception of OpenAI's model releases; risks related to OpenAI's advertising business and its ability to sustain revenue growth; and risks that WLD supply dynamics may not result in anticipated market effects. Given these risks and uncertainties, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. For a discussion of other risks and uncertainties, and other important factors, any of which could cause Eightco's actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements herein, see Eightco's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), including the risk factors and other disclosures in its Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 15, 2026, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on May 15, 2026 and other publicly available SEC filings. All information in this press release is as of the date of the release, and Eightco undertakes no duty to update this information or to publicly announce the results of any revisions to any of the forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect actual results or any change in its expectations.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Bitzo, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Core DAO said on Sept. 2 that it had contained an excess validator-reward issue, preventing malicious validators from drawing further rewards, and was coordinating an emergency hard fork. The planned change will be a forward upgrade rather than a rollback, according to the network's announcement.
Core DAO says excess-reward claims are contained
The update is the most concrete indication so far that the protocol has stopped the additional reward claims at the center of the incident. Core DAO did not provide a deployment date, implementation details or a timetable for the emergency hard fork in its Sept. 2 statement.
By characterizing the fork as forward-only, the DAO distinguished the planned upgrade from a chain rollback. Its statement did not say how the upgrade would address rewards that had already accrued.
The undisclosed excess CORE supply
Core DAO first disclosed the issue on Aug. 31, saying that a small number of validators had accrued rewards above the protocol's intended issuance. It said at the time that user assets, network security and fund custody were unaffected.
The key supply questions remain unanswered. Cointelegraph reported on Sept. 2 that Core DAO had not disclosed the amount of excess CORE issued, the duration of the activity or whether the tokens had entered circulation. Those omissions limit an assessment of the incident's effect on token supply even as the DAO says further claims have been halted.
Validator rewards combine minted CORE and transaction fees
The issuance question matters because validator compensation is not limited to transaction fees. Core's validator documentation says rewards include newly minted CORE and fees, with 90% allocated to validators and 10% sent to the System Reward Contract.
Core DAO has not publicly quantified how the rewards accrued by the affected validators compared with the protocol's intended issuance.
Coinbase had temporarily paused CORE sends and receives
On Aug. 30, Coinbase temporarily paused CORE sends and receives on the Core DAO network, according to its status page, which listed the incident as “Paused Sends/Receives - Core DAO Network.” Coinbase said CORE buys, sells, conversions and fiat transactions were unaffected.
The status information supports a transfer disruption but does not show whether it was directly linked to the validator-reward issue or when service resumed.
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.

Crypto treasury companies were worth about $340 billion in aggregate equity-market value on September 1, 2026. The more revealing comparison is not the 10% rise from mid-August, but the much smaller $121.4 billion of combined crypto net asset value tracked across 119 companies two days earlier.
That gap does not mean every treasury company is richly valued, nor does it show that all of the equity value is attributable to crypto holdings. It does show why these vehicles cannot be treated as simple token proxies. Public-market investors are valuing claims on balance sheets, future capital raising, management decisions and, in some cases, operating businesses alongside the tokens themselves.
$340 billion of equity versus $121.4 billion of crypto NAV
The Block put the cumulative market capitalization of crypto treasury companies at about $340 billion on September 1. The sector remained well below its roughly $490 billion market-cap range in October and November 2025, a useful reminder that the current rebound has not restored the prior peak.
Its tracker, meanwhile, listed $121.4 billion of combined crypto NAV as of August 30, with Bitcoin accounting for 81.2% of that figure. The measures are fundamentally different: NAV tracks the reported value of crypto assets, while market capitalization measures what investors will pay for corporate equity. The difference can embody cash, debt, other operations and expectations around future issuance or deployment; it can also embody a premium or discount to the crypto assets a company holds.
That distinction becomes particularly important for altcoin treasury vehicles. Their holdings can be more concentrated, their financing strategies more consequential and their operating links to a network more material than is typical for a passive crypto allocation. A share price can therefore rise faster than the underlying token when the market believes that corporate structure adds something; it can just as readily fall below asset value when that belief weakens.
CYPH and PURR outpaced ZEC and HYPE
The recent divergence was sharp. Since August 17, Cypherpunk Technologies’ CYPH returned 142%, compared with 56% for ZEC, according to The Block. That left an 86-percentage-point spread.
Hyperliquid Strategies’ PURR returned 62% over the same period, versus a 36% gain for HYPE—a 26-percentage-point lead. The comparisons identify two instances in which equity buyers assigned more value to the vehicle than to direct exposure to the token’s price change, but they do not establish a permanent valuation rule or isolate every driver of the share moves.
The mechanisms are not identical. PURR’s case centers on the company’s ability to raise equity and turn the proceeds into a larger HYPE position, while retaining liquidity and presenting investors with exposure to activity in the Hyperliquid ecosystem. CYPH combines a concentrated ZEC treasury with a mining operation that gives it a direct role in Zcash’s network infrastructure.
PURR as a HYPE accumulation vehicle
Hyperliquid Strategies reported a $647 million equity raise and an increase in its HYPE treasury from 12.5 million tokens to 29.3 million. Its June 30 balance sheet also showed $149.9 million in cash-like instruments and no debt, according to the company’s August 27 SEC filing.
The same filing said approximately $945 million accrued to the Hyperliquid ecosystem during the 12 months ended June 30. It reported a roughly 77% quarterly rise in HYPE against an approximately 13% decline in total digital-asset market capitalization.
For PURR, the attraction is therefore not limited to token exposure. The company can raise equity, direct the proceeds toward HYPE, retain liquidity, and offer a corporate claim on an ecosystem that it says generated substantial accrual. The approach remains dependent on issuance terms: dilution can exceed treasury growth on a per-share basis.
On August 27, DeFiLlama listed Hyperliquid Strategies at a 0.69x realized mNAV. Three institutions held 33.79 million HYPE, worth about $2.79 billion and representing 15.19% of circulating supply, according to the same data.
The 0.69x figure means the equity traded below the value of its tracked HYPE holdings at that measurement. That fact does not erase PURR’s recent outperformance against HYPE; the two measures answer different questions. Relative returns cover a period of movement, whereas mNAV is a valuation snapshot, so a treasury stock can outperform its token while remaining below the reported value of its holdings.
Chart image accompanying The Block’s analysis of digital-asset treasury companies and altcoin DAT performance. — Source: The Block
Cypherpunk’s ZEC treasury and mining control
Cypherpunk’s position is more concentrated. As of August 11, the company reported holding 323,394.38 ZEC at a weighted-average cost of $341.83 per token, equivalent to about 1.92% of Zcash’s circulating supply. Its June 30 filing valued the holdings at $129.4 million and disclosed $7.6 million in cash, according to its 10-Q.
For a public company, ownership of nearly 2% of circulating supply creates a more specific equity story than generic ZEC exposure. It also leaves little room to interpret the balance sheet as diversified liquidity: on the figures disclosed, ZEC was overwhelmingly the defining treasury asset.
Then came the operational addition. Cypherpunk said it launched a Zcash mining fleet with 4.2 GSol/s of hashrate, approximately 18% of the network, through a $33.33 million equity-based transaction with Winklevoss Capital. The disclosure was made in an August 18 exhibit filed with the SEC.
Mining capacity is not the same as a token treasury. It introduces an operating asset and a claim on production, giving CYPH shareholders exposure to execution that direct ZEC holders do not have. That additional exposure may help explain why CYPH gained 86 percentage points more than ZEC since August 17. It also makes the equity harder to value solely by marking its token balance to market.
Altcoin treasury premiums depend on execution
Both companies illustrate why a treasury-company share can diverge from its underlying token. Hyperliquid Strategies has demonstrated access to equity capital, a greatly enlarged HYPE treasury and cash-like reserves with no reported debt. Cypherpunk has coupled a large ZEC holding with mining capacity. These are active corporate strategies, not merely custody arrangements.
But the structures that create room for a premium also create the conditions for a discount. Equity financing can dilute holders. Concentrated token holdings can magnify liquidity and price risk. Mining adds operating exposure whose value depends on execution rather than token beta alone. And a vehicle built to accumulate tokens must convince investors that each deployment improves the per-share proposition rather than simply enlarging gross assets.
The broader sector’s valuation history reinforces that point. At about $340 billion, the group was still roughly $150 billion below the October-November 2025 range cited by The Block, despite its mid-August gain. Meanwhile, the $121.4 billion tracker NAV is concentrated in Bitcoin, leaving altcoin treasury valuations especially dependent on company-specific judgments rather than a uniform sector multiple.
Hyperliquid Strategies’ 0.69x realized mNAV offers the clearest available check on a simple premium narrative. Over a given stretch, the market can reward an equity vehicle more than its token, as PURR did against HYPE, while still withholding a full valuation for its tracked holdings. For crypto treasury companies, the decisive question is whether the corporate wrapper can convert capital, concentration and operating exposure into durable per-share value—not simply whether the token rises.
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.

Binance on Sept. 1 announced options on more than 1,000 selected U.S. stocks and exchange-traded funds for eligible users outside the United States, expanding its multi-asset product lineup. The contracts are physically settled, so exercised options result in delivery or receipt of the underlying U.S.-listed shares or ETFs.
Binance’s 1,000-stock-and-ETF options rollout
Binance said Nest Trading Limited will act as introducing broker for the offering, while Alpaca Securities will handle execution, clearing, settlement and custody. Access is limited to eligible users outside the U.S.
Eligible retail users can buy calls and puts. Binance said losses on those purchases are capped at the premium paid. Physical settlement distinguishes the product from contracts settled in cash: an exercised option entails receiving or delivering the underlying shares or ETF units.
Equity-linked perpetuals led August TradFi activity
The options announcement follows a sharp increase in Binance’s reported TradFi perpetual-futures activity. The exchange reported about $433.4 billion in volume during August 2026, roughly 15 times the $29.5 billion it reported for January.
Equity-linked perpetuals accounted for about 79% of August TradFi perpetual activity, or approximately $342.9 billion, according to The Block. That compares with $410.9 million in January, underscoring how concentrated the August total was in equity-linked contracts.
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.

Bitcoin’s 30-day correlation with gold reached 0.8 by late August, an unusually close alignment between an asset still shaped by crypto-market plumbing and a metal with centuries of monetary history. Its 90-day rolling correlation with gold also hit an all-time high, according to The Block.
The timing makes the signal less straightforward than the phrase “digital gold” suggests. The Federal Reserve’s 10-year inflation-indexed Treasury yield stood at 2.42% on August 28, up from 1.88% at the start of the year in the available series. That is a less forgiving backdrop for gold and bitcoin alike: neither provides an income stream, so higher inflation-adjusted returns on government debt increase the cost of holding them.
There is a coherent macro case for treating the two assets as expressions of concern about currency purchasing power. But a correlation says that prices have moved together over a defined window, not that they are responding to one force in the same way, or that they will continue to do so. The late-August alignment is better understood as a market regime than as proof that bitcoin has acquired gold’s enduring role.
A record 0.8 correlation meets rising 10-year real yields
Correlation can be useful because it captures a change in market behavior that price levels alone may conceal. A 0.8 reading on a 30-day rolling basis means bitcoin and gold were moving in unusually close synchronization during that period. For a market looking for evidence of a broad debasement trade, the comparison is naturally appealing.
Yet the same setup contains the trade’s main vulnerability. Real yields are the return investors can seek from inflation-protected Treasury securities, and they provide a practical benchmark for assets that do not generate cash income. When real yields rise, the relative appeal of holding gold or bitcoin can diminish even if concerns about inflation, fiscal policy or currencies remain part of the market narrative.
The move from 1.88% at the beginning of 2026 to 2.42% on August 28 is material precisely because it runs against the simple version of that narrative. A shared fear of monetary debasement is not the only condition that matters. The price of forgoing a real return elsewhere matters too, and it can become the common pressure point for both assets.
This does not mean a higher real-yield environment mechanically requires lower bitcoin or gold prices. Markets can price several forces at once, and the evidence available here shows the two assets rose together in late August despite the increase in real yields. It does mean that the current co-movement should not be read as a one-way macro relationship. A further rise in real yields could test the alignment rather than confirm it.
Past correlation spikes preceded bitcoin rallies, but not a permanent relationship
The bullish historical case has real, if limited, support. After bitcoin-gold correlation reached roughly 0.6 in late 2020, bitcoin gained 172%. When correlation rose from about zero to 0.5 in late 2022, bitcoin rallied nearly 350% over the following 14 months, according to the figures reported by The Block.
Those episodes are enough to make the present reading noteworthy. They suggest that a period in which bitcoin begins to trade more closely with gold can precede bitcoin taking the lead in a rally. In that sense, the correlation may be a useful signal of changing investor appetite or a shift in the macro factors receiving the most attention.
They do not establish that correlation caused the subsequent gains. Nor do two prior episodes turn a short-term statistical relationship into a durable equivalence between the assets. The distinction matters because the digital-gold label often compresses a much larger claim: that bitcoin will reliably share gold’s behavior when monetary conditions become uncertain.
Bitwise’s 90-day chart instead shows bitcoin’s correlation with gold moving widely between positive and negative readings since 2016. Its relationship with the dollar has often been inverse, but the gold linkage itself has not been stable. The historical record therefore supports a narrower conclusion: the current synchronization may identify a particular market regime, not a permanent change in bitcoin’s market character.
A regime can be valuable to traders and observers without being structural. It can last long enough to shape portfolio flows and public narratives, then weaken once a different driver becomes dominant. That is particularly relevant for bitcoin, where access vehicles and fund flows can have an identifiable influence on demand over short periods.
August’s bitcoin rally had an ETF-demand mechanism
The late-August bitcoin move was not solely a macro expression. Bitwise reported that U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs recorded approximately $865 million of net inflows in the second week of August 2026. Bitcoin later rose from roughly $62,900 to $78,300 during the final week of the month.
The sequence does not prove that those inflows alone produced the rally. Markets rarely offer a single clean cause, particularly across a month in which broader macro positioning may also be changing. But it identifies a concrete demand channel beneath the bitcoin leg of the apparent shared trade.
That channel is important because it is specific to bitcoin’s current market structure. Spot ETFs allow capital to enter bitcoin through a familiar fund format, and net inflows are evidence of buying demand through those products. Gold can also be bought through ETFs, but the supplied data show a notably different pattern in its investment flows during the second quarter.
The point is not that ETF demand invalidates a debasement narrative. The two can coexist: investors may use spot bitcoin ETFs to express a macro view. The problem comes when a visible price correlation is treated as though it separates those explanations. It does not. Bitcoin’s August performance included a product-flow mechanism that must be considered before assigning the move entirely to a shared monetary hedge thesis.
BTC 90-day rolling correlations with the Nasdaq 100, DXY and gold; data as of August 27, 2026. — Source: Bitwise Europe
Gold’s central-bank bid is support bitcoin cannot replicate
Total gold demand reached 2,522 tonnes in the first half of 2026, up 2% year over year and worth a record $380 billion, according to the World Gold Council. The same data show Q2 investment demand falling 51% quarter on quarter to 262.2 tonnes, with gold ETFs recording 44.8 tonnes of outflows.
The more durable distinction lies elsewhere in the demand mix. Central banks and other institutions bought an estimated 288.9 tonnes of gold in Q2, up 62% from a year earlier, following 243.7 tonnes in Q1. The World Gold Council expects central-bank demand in 2026 to remain strong, although probably below 2025 levels.
Bitcoin has no equivalent structural buyer base in the evidence presented here. Its late-August support included substantial U.S. spot-bitcoin-ETF inflows; gold combined official-sector and institutional purchases with a quarter of gold-ETF outflows. Gold’s total demand could remain strong even when one investment channel weakens, whereas bitcoin’s observed support had a more direct ETF-flow component.
That is why the 0.8 correlation should be read as a description of a synchronized moment rather than proof of interchangeability. Rising real yields could pressure both non-yielding assets and break the apparent correlation, while gold would still retain its distinct official-sector source of demand.
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.

Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands, September 3rd, 2026, Chainwire
DWF Labs, an established, market-tested investor and market maker built to strengthen digital asset market infrastructure at scale, today announced an expansion of its global regulatory footprint with a group entity granted Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) regulatory approval from the British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission (BVI FSC).
Granted under the BVI's Virtual Assets Service Providers Act 2022, the approval authorizes DWF Labs as a registered VASP, to provide the exchange of one or more forms of virtual assets, as well as to participate in, and provide financial services related to an issuer's offer and/or sale of a virtual asset.
The approval enables institutional clients access to DWF Labs’ integrated OTC trading and market making capabilities, including spot trading across thousands of digital assets and stablecoins, through a regulated BVI entity. It also strengthens the company’s ability to deliver investment, incubation and ecosystem development services to support token issuers and digital asset projects on a global scale.
The BVI has established itself as a leading jurisdiction for decentralized ledger deployments and structured real-world asset (RWA) tokenization. The territory now represents nearly 10% of the global tokenization US treasuries market, with $1.5 billion in distributed value. BVI-domiciled entities also facilitate more than $1.2 billion in active, circulating stablecoins - figures underpinned by more than 24,700 stablecoin asset holders and weekly transfer volumes of $694.1 million. These figures (Source: rwa.xyz treasuries and stablecoins) reflect the strength of both the regulatory and market infrastructure DWF Labs is now positioned to operate within.
Heng Lee, Managing Director and Partner at DWF Labs said, “The Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) approval from the British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission (BVI FSC) is a key step in responsibly expanding and delivering DWF Labs’ regulated digital asset services to international institutional clients.”
“As the digital asset market and industry continue to mature, and adoption increases, this addition to our regulatory framework will enable us to deliver a broader range of solutions, products, and services, while reinforcing our focus upon transparency and governance.”
DWF Labs will continue to expand its regulatory footprint across key global markets, supporting its international growth strategy and commitment to operating within robust regulatory frameworks.
About DWF Labs
Established in 2022, DWF Labs is an investor and market maker, focused on giving builders the capital, liquidity, expertise, and partnerships needed to take ideas from concept to scale. DWF Labs is among the world's largest high-frequency digital asset trading organizations, active on more than 80 centralized and decentralized exchanges. The firm supports over 20% of CoinMarketCap's Top 100 projects and 35% of its Top 1,000, and has worked with more than 1,000 blockchain companies across Layer 1 and Layer 2 networks, DeFi, gaming, AI, payments, infrastructure, and tokenization.
The firm's work is organized across four business lines: Liquidity (institutional market making and liquidity provision), Investment and Incubation (strategic capital and token advisory for emerging projects), Ecosystem Development (go-to-market support), and OTC and Structured Markets (tailored trading solutions for institutions, funds, and protocol treasuries). DWF Labs also founded and incubated Falcon Finance, a synthetic dollar and universal collateralization protocol.
DWF Labs operates a globally distributed team on a 24/7/365 basis.
For more information, visit www.dwf-labs.com, or follow DWF Labs on X, LinkedIn, and Telegram.
ContactDWF Labspress@dwf-labs.com
Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Bitzo, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Silhouette said on September 1 that its request-for-quote, or RFQ, system had gone live on Hyperliquid mainnet, initially supporting xStocks tokenized equities. The launch gives traders a way to solicit competing prices from market makers and settle the selected trade onchain, creating a new liquidity route for tokenized stocks beyond Hyperliquid’s existing spot order books.
xStocks is Payward’s tokenized-equity framework. The RFQ rollout matters because supported assets can be made tradable through market-maker quotes before they have a dedicated market on HyperCore, Hyperliquid’s trading layer.
Silhouette opens RFQ trading for xStocks on Hyperliquid
Silhouette said in its September 1 announcement that the RFQ system was live on Hyperliquid mainnet, with xStocks as its initial tokenized-equity offering.
A trader requests a quote for a supported xStocks token, after which onboarded market makers can submit competing bids. The winning trade settles onchain, and the workflow is designed to handle trades of varying size at any hour, according to The Block.
That arrangement allows supported xStocks to trade without a dedicated, continuously visible order book for each asset and makes market-maker bids central to price formation. The initial rollout remains limited to xStocks rather than all tokenized-equity products; neither the announcement nor subsequent reporting specified the number or individual identities of the xStocks available through the RFQ system.
RFQ creates a route to HyperCore markets without an order book
Supported xStocks can trade through Silhouette’s RFQ system without first sustaining dedicated order books. The Block reported that assets generating sufficient activity may later graduate to individual HyperCore markets, creating a potential path from market-maker quoting and subsequent trading activity to a native market.
The available reporting does not specify the activity threshold or identify who decides whether an asset receives a native market. RFQ therefore allows a supported xStock to trade without immediately launching a separate native spot market.
That model supplements, rather than replaces, the five xStocks pairs that launched as native HyperCore spot markets on August 10. Payward said the initial USDC-quoted lineup was NVDAx, SPYx, QQQx, SKHYx and MUx, representing US stocks and exchange-traded funds.
Whether more assets move from RFQ trading to native HyperCore status will depend on post-launch trading activity.
Official xStocks and Hyperliquid launch graphic for native tokenized-equity markets on HyperCore. — Source: Payward
xStocks brings scale to the onchain liquidity test
The rollout arrives with xStocks already carrying material reported transaction activity. Payward said the product had generated nearly $40 billion in transaction volume since its June 2025 launch. The Block later reported more than $40 billion in volume, more than 200,000 holders and nearly $20 billion settled onchain.
Those figures provide context for the market-maker quoting model now being deployed on Hyperliquid, though they describe xStocks activity more broadly rather than RFQ volume on the platform. No post-launch trading figures for Silhouette’s Hyperliquid system were included in the available reports.
The Block, citing RWA.xyz data, put the wider tokenized-equity market at about $2.53 billion and valued xStocks at approximately $620.1 million. The figures position xStocks as a substantial component of the sector measured by that dataset, while the RFQ launch adds a new onchain trading path for its supported assets on Hyperliquid.
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.