ElShowdelTrading

The July U.S. PPI came in flat (0.0%), right in line with expectations, after last week’s CPI showed a slowdown. A key data point because the PPI measures inflation at the producer level: if input costs don’t rise, companies don’t pass pressure on to final prices, and the Fed has fewer excuses to keep rates high.

In crypto, this matters because **risk-on lives on low rates**. A flat PPI combined with last week’s soft CPI reinforces the September cut scenario. Fed Funds futures are already pricing in about ~70% odds of a -25 bps move.

But watch out: the market has already priced this in. BTC is at 63.1K, moving sideways for days, with a bearish bias on the 4H and 1H charts but bullish on the monthly. The Fear Index rose by just two points to 29, still in Fear territory. If the cut comes and price doesn’t react, it’s a sign that liquidity isn’t flowing into crypto yet.

**What matters now isn’t the macro—it’s the internal structure**: BTC swept liquidity below 63.2K (the prior day’s low) and bounced, but it hasn’t reclaimed highs. That’s relative weakness. A flat PPI doesn’t change the lack of buy-side volume above 64K.

Do you think the September cut will trigger a rally, or is everything already priced in? What level are you watching to confirm a bullish turn in BTC?

#USJulyPPIFlat

The U.S. OCC has just confirmed that digital firms can apply for national bank status. It sounds bureaucratic, but it’s a structural change: until now, traditional banks had the exclusive right. Now, an exchange, a crypto fintech, or any company in the ecosystem can apply for a direct banking license.

What changes? Access to interbank payment systems, accounts at the Fed, direct clearing. Everything that previously forced you to rely on an intermediary bank. This reduces friction, costs, and above all the risk that a traditional bank will close your account due to "internal policies".

This also adds to the possible SEC exemption for tokenized securities, which could be announced on Friday, and to the fact that Kalshi received the green light from the CFTC to keep operating. Everything points in the same direction: they’re building regulatory rails so that crypto can be integrated without destroying the existing system.

Bitcoin is at $63,727, mixed bias across timeframes, Fear Index at 29. The market expects macro catalysts. And even though this doesn’t move price today, it’s the kind of catalyst people will be talking about in six months.

Do you think this accelerates institutional adoption, or is it just regulatory theater?

#OCCSaysDigitalFirmsCanSeekNationalBankStatus

**What does it mean for the SEC to announce an exemption for tokenized shares?**

The trend points to a possible regulatory framework that would allow issuing traditional shares (Apple, Tesla—whatever) as tokens on the blockchain, without violating securities laws.

Today, if you want to represent a share as a token, technically you’re issuing an unregistered security in most jurisdictions. The SEC has historically halted these attempts (remember the Telegram, Ripple, etc. cases).

**What would an exemption change?**
It would allow companies and platforms to offer tokenized shares legally: tradable 24/7, divisible into fractions, with instant settlement on the blockchain. It would be the bridge between traditional finance and DeFi that many have been expecting since 2017.

**Why does it matter?**
Because it opens the door for **real-world assets (RWAs)** to enter crypto networks at scale. Not just stocks: bonds, real estate, commodities. If the SEC gives the green light, other regulators could follow.

It’s still speculation, but the fact that it’s being discussed shows that regulatory maturity is moving forward. Follow for more context on RWAs and tokenization.

#CriptoEducación #RWA #Tokenization

#SECMayUnveilTokenizedStockExemptionAsSoonAsFriday

The SEC would be preparing a regulatory exemption for tokenized securities that could be announced as soon as this Friday. If confirmed, it would be the first clear legal framework for traditional companies to issue and trade securities on blockchain without falling into the gray zone that has stalled projects for years.

What changes? Instant settlement instead of T+2 days, 24/7 markets without stock exchange hours, trivial fractional ownership, and, most importantly, legitimizing crypto infrastructure for real financial use cases. This isn’t just regulatory news: it’s a sign that the architecture built without permission is starting to be adopted by the center of the system.

This isn’t isolated. The OCC has just said that crypto companies can apply for national bank status, and the CFTC ordered Kalshi to keep operating. Everything points to a shift in posture: less war, more framework. If the SEC makes a move before Congress votes on the Clarity Act in September, it’s staking a claim: "we can regulate too without waiting for the law."

Meanwhile, Bitcoin is trading at 63,402 USD (+0.18% in 24h) after sweeping liquidity below 63,211 without a bearish continuation. The multi-timeframe bias remains mixed, and the Fear Index fell to 27.

Do you think the SEC will really announce the exemption this Friday, or is it another trial balloon? Leave your take in the comments.

#SECMayUnveilTokenizedStockExemptionAsSoonAsFriday

**MoneyGram expands its cash-to-crypto service to Solana**

MoneyGram, one of the giants of traditional money transfers, has just integrated Solana into its cash-to-crypto buying platform. Until now, the service operated mainly with Bitcoin and Ethereum; now it adds SOL, expanding access for users who prefer not to go through an exchange.

Why does this matter? Because each time a traditional company adopts a blockchain, it validates its infrastructure. Solana had been hit by network outages and technical doubts; this integration is a vote of confidence in its ability to scale.

But there’s more: cash-to-crypto services are key in emerging markets, where banking access is limited. MoneyGram has a presence in more than 200 countries; if it gains traction, Solana could capture remittance flow—a market worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year.

This is a strategic move: MoneyGram wants to diversify revenue as traditional money transfers lose margin. Solana wants real-world use cases beyond speculative trading. Both benefit from increased exposure.

The question is whether the end user—the one sending money to their family—will prefer SOL over stablecoins. Because stablecoins don’t fluctuate, and that matters when you’re moving your monthly paycheck.

Do you see Solana capturing remittance flow, or is this just another integration without impact on real volume?

#MoneyGramExpandsCashCryptoServiceToSolana

The U.S. Senate has just postponed the CLARITY Act vote until September, and that brings a key question back to the forefront: what does it mean for an asset to be a “commodity” or a “security”?

In the United States, that distinction determines who regulates what. Commodities (raw materials, gold, wheat… and, according to some, Bitcoin) fall under the CFTC. Securities (stocks, bonds, investment instruments) are regulated by the SEC.

The fight between the two agencies has been going on for years. The SEC argues that most tokens are unregistered securities; the CFTC says that decentralized crypto-assets are digital commodities. The CLARITY Act aims to draw a clear line: if a token is sufficiently decentralized and doesn’t depend on the efforts of a third party to generate value, it would be a commodity. If there is an identifiable issuer that promises returns, it would be a security.

Why does it matter? Because that classification determines whether a project can trade on U.S. exchanges, whether it needs to register with the SEC, and even whether it can offer staking without being sued. While Congress delays, projects operate in a gray area.

For traders, this translates into regulatory volatility: every SEC announcement or legislative delay can move markets. Understanding the underlying framework helps you anticipate why certain tokens react more than others to news from Washington.

If you want to navigate crypto with judgment, follow along: here we break down what the noise doesn’t tell you.

#SenateDelaysCLARITYActVoteToSeptember

MoneyGram has just integrated Solana into its cash-to-crypto conversion network, and the market still hasn’t fully priced in the weight of this move.

We’re talking about a remittance network with a physical presence in more than 200 countries, which now lets you hand over banknotes at a branch and receive SOL in your wallet. No bank, no centralized exchange, no heavy KYC.

For Solana, this validates its infrastructure as a real payments rail—not just a speculative platform or NFTs. MoneyGram doesn’t integrate a network unless it passes compliance filters, settlement speed, and operating costs.

Timing is key: while Bitcoin is trading at 63.5K with a bearish bias across almost all timeframes and the Fear Index sits at 29, institutional adoption news acts as a narrative catalyst. You shouldn’t expect SOL to jump 30% because of this, but you can expect the piece to add to the board of legitimacy over the medium term.

What WE DON’T know: projected volumes, whether MoneyGram buys SOL on the open market or uses OTC derivatives, or what percentage of global users have access to the service. Those operational details are crucial for measuring real price impact.

Meanwhile, South Korea is tightening rules for exchanges, and the Supreme Court is proposing a crypto asset freeze. More compliance = more value for those who already have a license and operate within the legal framework.

What’s your take? Does MoneyGram position itself ahead of a regulatory shift, or is it just testing a marginal niche? Drop your thoughts in the comments.

#MoneyGramExpandsCashCryptoServiceToSolana

**Grayscale withdraws three altcoin ETF filings** is the news, but the underlying concept is more important: what is a **crypto ETF** and why does it matter when an institutional giant steps back?

An ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund) is an exchange-traded fund that tracks the price of an asset—in this case, cryptocurrencies—without you having to buy and custody the token directly. You buy shares of the ETF through your regular broker, and the fund handles holding the underlying asset. For institutional or retail investors who don’t want to deal with crypto wallets and exchanges, it’s the entry point.

When Grayscale (or BlackRock, Fidelity, etc.) files an ETF, it signals that it sees enough institutional demand. When it withdraws the filing, it can mean: uncertain regulation, low market interest, or simply incorrect timing. It’s not a death sentence for the asset, but it does suggest that the traditional institutional path is still under construction.

For you as a trader, ETFs matter because they bring **volume, liquidity, and legitimacy**. Bitcoin has had an ETF approved in the U.S. since 2024; Ethereum also has. Altcoins are still waiting. Each approval (or rejection) moves the price, because it shifts the narrative from "speculative asset" to "regulated financial product."

Follow along for more context behind the news that moves the market.

#GrayscaleWithdrawsThreeAltcoinETFFilings

**U.S. Senate Delays Clarity Act Vote Until After August Recess**

The vote on the Clarity Act, which seeks to define which cryptoassets are securities and which are not, has been pushed back until after the Senate’s summer recess. The bill has bipartisan support and already passed the House of Representatives, but the legislative calendar left it out of July’s schedule.

**Why does it matter?**
Regulatory clarity is the only thing that stops massive institutional flows into altcoins. Without a legal definition, asset managers can’t launch products, exchanges operate in a gray area, and large capital stays in Bitcoin and Ethereum.

The delay isn’t a rejection, but it does mean extra time in limbo. Meanwhile, projects like Solana, XRP, and others keep building, but without the regulatory backing that would unlock real institutional demand.

The question is: has the market already priced in this delay, or will we see bearish pressure in altcoins once it’s officially confirmed?

**The technical structure remains compressed:** Bitcoin at $63,899, down -1.94% in 24H, with a possible upthrust at the daily high ($65,482). Multi-period biases diverge: bearish daily, bullish monthly. Fear Index at 30 (Fear).

If the Clarity Act doesn’t move forward before the end of the year, the institutional cycle in altcoins will be pushed back another year. Simple.

Do you think the delay is already priced in, or is there a lack of reaction?

#CLARITYActSenateVoteDelayedPastRecess

Bitcoin’s BIP-110 fork has just signaled activation this weekend, according to today’s data. This is the first soft fork attempt since Taproot in 2021, and the community is divided. BIP-110 proposes changes in the way nodes validate certain transactions, aiming to improve efficiency without breaking compatibility. But here’s the detail: a successful soft fork requires miner consensus (95% of hashrate signaling over a difficulty period). If that threshold isn’t reached, the fork automatically aborts. Historically, fork attempts have generated short-term volatility in BTC—not because of the technical change itself, but due to uncertainty about the network’s cohesion. In 2017, the SegWit/SegWit2x debate took Bitcoin from $2,500 to $20,000 over the course of months, but with brutal drops in the middle every time consensus seemed to break. Today, Bitcoin is trading at $64,633, in a range between $64,482 and $65,482. If the fork moves forward without friction, it’s neutral. If it sparks controversy or a split, look at the supports: $62,268 (PWL) is the next magnet for liquidity below. Do you think BIP-110 will go through without noise, or will we see drama like in 2017? Share your take in the comments.

#BIP110ForkSignalingExpectedThisWeekend

BIP 110: the concept behind the noise

When you see "BIP 110 Fork Signaling" in the trends, it’s not just about code. It’s the tension between two visions of Bitcoin: controlled evolution vs. absolute rigidity.

A BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal) is the way the community proposes changes to the protocol. BIP 110, specifically, aims to adjust how transaction size is measured to optimize the use of block space. It sounds technical, but the real issue is political: who decides what changes in Bitcoin?

Soft forks (like this attempt) are backward-compatible updates: nodes that don’t upgrade keep working. But they need miner consensus (signaling). If they don’t achieve it, the fork dies or turns into a hard fork, splitting the network.

Bitcoin has a lot of history here: the block-size war (2017) ended with Bitcoin Cash. Since then, any controversial BIP creates noise.

Why should you care? Because these debates move price—not due to the technical change itself, but because of uncertainty. If a fork leads to division, the market prices in risk. If it reaches consensus quickly, it signals healthy governance.

Follow along for more context behind the trends that move your portfolio.

#BIP110ForkSignalingExpectedThisWeekend

**Saylor hints again at a Bitcoin purchase for Strategy**

Michael Saylor posted a critical tweet that those of us who follow his moves read as a signal: Strategy could be about to execute another BTC purchase. This isn’t the first time he’s used this pattern: a cryptic tweet, the market speculates, and days later he confirms the acquisition.

Why does it matter? Strategy is the largest corporate Bitcoin holder (over 400K BTC on its balance sheet), and each of its purchases acts as a short-term catalyst: it reinforces the institutional narrative, drives volume, and often aligns with technical rebounds.

This time the timing is interesting: Bitcoin has just swept liquidity below $64,700 and recovered with a bullish bias in shorter timeframes (4H and 1H), though the longer structures (weekly, yearly) remain negative. If Strategy confirms, it could be the push the price needs to try to recover the $66K—$67K zone, where key resistance sits according to the EMA analysis.

Heads up: until there’s official confirmation (SEC filing or formal announcement), this is speculation. But Saylor’s historical pattern carries weight, and the market knows it.

Do you think Strategy will buy this week, or is it just noise? Share your take in the comments.

#SaylorHintsStrategyBitcoinBuy

The topic that drove the technical conversation this weekend was **BIP-110**, an attempted fork that aimed to remove the block size limit in Bitcoin. Signaling kicked off, exactly **two blocks** were mined, and that was it. Without support from large pools, exchanges, or wallets, the alternative chain was left orphaned.

Why does it matter? Because it highlights how hard it is to change Bitcoin without distributed consensus. Remember SegWit2x in 2017: it had massive corporate backing and still didn’t succeed. Here, there wasn’t even visible coordination.

Meanwhile, the price stays at **65.2K**, with no reaction. The market dismissed the fork as noise. The structure remains range-bound: neutral daily, bearish weekly, bullish monthly. There were liquidity sweeps above the previous high (65.16K) and below the low (64.78K), confirming the thesis of **a range with liquidity on both sides**. Price is looking for the opposite side before committing to direction.

This reinforces the immutability narrative: Bitcoin is extremely resistant to unilateral changes, and that friction is part of the design.

Do you think Bitcoin’s rigidity is a strength or a weakness? How far does decentralization go when a technical change needs approval from concentrated actors? Share your take in the comments.

#BIP110ForkSignalingExpectedThisWeekend

**BIP 110: what is a soft fork and why the signaling matters**

A BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal) is a formal proposal to change or improve the Bitcoin protocol. BIP 110, in particular, addresses how miners **signal support** to activate changes without breaking the network.

When a **soft fork** (backward-compatible change) is implemented, older nodes continue to work, but new nodes apply stricter rules. To activate the fork safely, consensus is needed: a high percentage of miners must signal "yes, I'm ready" during a period. This signaling happens in the blocks they mine.

BIP 110 proposes to improve the **signaling mechanism**, making it clearer and more predictable when a change is activated. This reduces uncertainty and avoids chaotic forks (like the SegWit drama in 2017).

**Why should you care?** Because fork signaling can move price: if the market sees fast consensus, there's confidence; if there's a dispute, volatility follows. Understanding the process gives you context when you see headlines like "impending fork."

Follow us for more guides that break down the technical details without beating around the bush.

#BIP110ForkSignalingExpectedThisWeekend

This weekend, BIP 110 signaling is expected—a technical proposal that aims to optimize how Bitcoin handles certain transaction limits. It’s not a divisive fork, but a consensual improvement that miners will vote on with their hash power. Why does it matter? Because it reinforces that Bitcoin continues evolving as a network, even when the price is trading in a range.

Meanwhile, BTC is trading at 65,061 (+0.37% in 24h), rebounding from 64.7K after sweeping liquidity below prior lows. The 1H and 4H structures are turning bullish, but the daily, weekly, and yearly context remains bearish. The spring thesis (sweeping lows before moving up) is on the table, but it’s only confirmed if price breaks through major resistances with volume. For now, it’s a technical bounce within a bearish structure.

Key levels: 65.4K (PDH) is the immediate resistance; if it breaks, it opens room toward 65.7K (PWH) and 66.9K (PMH). If it loses 64.7K, it returns to the sweep zone and the spring thesis is invalidated. The Fear Index is at 30 (Fear), just one point above the previous day.

BIP 110 won’t move the price tomorrow, but it does strengthen the narrative of the network’s technical strength. In a context where fear is still present and the larger structures haven’t turned yet, any signal of orderly evolution helps support the floor. Do you see this bounce as the start of a reversal, or just another technical relief?

#BIP110ForkSignalingExpectedThisWeekend

SpaceX has just surpassed Meta in market capitalization, reaching **$1.613 trillion**. Why does this matter for crypto? Because Elon Musk remains one of the strongest cultural catalysts in the space: every move by his companies is read as a signal of where venture capital and the tech narrative are heading.

SpaceX’s valuation doesn’t come from social media or advertising, but from government contracts, satellite launches, and the promise of Starlink. It’s heavy institutional capital betting on infrastructure—not hype. And that contrasts with the current moment in crypto, where the lack of regulatory clarity (the Clarity Act was pushed to September) keeps large funds behind the barrier.

But there’s a deeper read: **money is flowing into long-term infrastructure assets**, not speculative beta. That partly explains why Bitcoin continues to trade sideways around 65K despite technical rebounds. There isn’t a macro catalyst pushing fresh flows into crypto; meanwhile, capital is looking for certainty elsewhere.

SpaceX is growing because it has contracts and a timetable. Crypto still waits for the Senate to decide whether it wants to play or keep kicking the ball down the field. Until that changes, every technical rebound is only that: technical.

Do you think institutional capital will return to crypto with force this year, or is it already all in real infrastructure? Share your take in the comments.

#SpaceXMarketCapTops$1.613TPassingMeta

While SpaceX surpasses Meta’s market cap, there’s a background concept every investor should understand: **valuation by multiples**.

When a private company reaches $1.6 trillion without being publicly traded, analysts use industry comparables (other tech, aerospace companies) and projections of future cash flow. There’s no daily market price, so the valuation comes from funding rounds and secondary transactions.

In crypto, something similar happens with pre-listed projects: FDV (fully diluted valuation) tells you what the token’s capitalization would be if all future issuance were circulating today. An FDV of 10,000M with only 10% in circulation means the market is valuing the entire project at that number, even though 90% of the supply hasn’t been created yet.

The trap is clear: when that supply unlocks, selling pressure can disconnect the price from the narrative. That’s why many projects drop 70–80% after listing even though, “technically,” they’re worth the same on paper.

Understanding valuation lets you separate hype from fundamentals, and know when a price reflects future expectations versus present reality.

If you find these breakdowns useful, follow me for more context behind the trends.

#SpaceXMarketCapTops$1.613TPassingMeta

**SpaceX surpasses Meta in market valuation: $1.613 trillion**

The news is moving fast: SpaceX has just overtaken Meta in market capitalization, reaching **$1.613 trillion**. This isn’t a rumor; it’s the result of the company’s latest private valuation round led by Elon Musk, placing it among the most valuable private companies on the planet.

Why does it matter in crypto? Because SpaceX has indirect exposure to the ecosystem: Musk is a central figure in the crypto narrative (Dogecoin, BTC acceptance on Tesla, Starlink as potentially decentralized infrastructure). In addition, the tokenized token **SPCXB** (SpaceX on bStocks) rose **+16.1% in 24h**, reflecting immediate speculative interest.

SpaceX’s valuation is surging while traditional markets face volatility. Meta, meanwhile, comes off a difficult year, with declining ad revenues and questions about its bet on the metaverse. The contrast is clear: private capital is flowing into frontier technology (space, AI, crypto) and moving away from traditional advertising models.

For the crypto market, this kind of move reinforces a thesis: **capital is migrating toward alternative assets and innovation-driven, disruptive narratives**. If SpaceX eventually goes public or tokenizes part of its structure, the impact on DeFi and the tokenization of real-world assets (RWAs) could be enormous.

Do you think tokenizing private stocks like SpaceX could be the next big catalyst for RWAs in crypto? Share your take in the comments.

#SpaceXMarketCapTops$1.613TPassingMeta

**Japan Pushes for Crypto Withdrawal Limits on Exchanges**

Japanese regulators are urging local exchanges to implement limits on crypto withdrawals, according to recent reports. The measure aims to curb money laundering and protect users from suspicious activity, but it also sparks a debate about custody and financial freedom.

Japan already has one of the strictest crypto regulations in the world. Since 2017, exchanges must register with the FSA (Financial Services Agency) and comply with KYC/AML rules. Now, the pressure goes further: limiting how much you can withdraw from your own account.

The official argument is security. But the reality is that every withdrawal limit is another step toward forced custody: your crypto, but with the exchange’s permission to move it.

This lines up with the Coldcard exploit (funds sent to mixers) and the MyTrade case (wash trading with bots). Regulators view these events as justification for more control. The industry, on the other hand, says the limits don’t stop organized crime; they only make life harder for legitimate users.

**What’s your take?** Are withdrawal limits necessary protection or excessive control? Share your thoughts in the comments.

#JapanRegulatorsUrgeCryptoWithdrawalLimits

The unemployment claims data in the U.S. falling below 200K sounds technical, but it’s a key piece for understanding how money moves in crypto.

When the labor market is strong (low unemployment, jobless claims falling), the Federal Reserve has room to keep interest rates high without fear of breaking the economy. High rates = more expensive money = less risk appetite = bearish pressure on volatile assets like Bitcoin and altcoins.

But here comes the double-edged sword: if the data is too good, the market starts pricing in that the Fed will NOT cut rates soon. And that can trigger selling in risk-on (crypto included).

The core concept is **macro correlation**: crypto no longer moves solely based on internal narratives. Now it dances to the rhythm of employment data, inflation, and central bank decisions. A low unemployment number can be positive for the real economy, but negative for your portfolio if the market interprets that liquidity will stay tight.

To trade with your head, you can’t just look at the BTC chart. You need to understand what’s happening outside, because that context determines whether the next move has structure or is just noise.

Follow along for more analysis that connects macro with crypto—no beating around the bush.

#USInitialJoblessClaimsStayBelow200K