Crypto Breaking

Key Insights

Charles Hoskinson suggests community centers as the way to achieve sustainable growth instead of expensive crypto conferences.

The Cardano (ADA) community declined a plan to spend 14 million ADA on hosting large-scale international events.

ADA lacks momentum even amid constant efforts of ecosystem expansion and cross-chain integrations.

Cardano Moves Away from Media Attention Towards Long-Term Growth

Cardano (ADA) becomes the focus point for a discussion on governance, with the coin’s creator, Charles Hoskinson, questioning the necessity of major crypto conferences.

As ADA has been struggling to make any significant progress in price action terms, the topic of discussion has moved away from media appearances to the issue of the optimal use of funds accumulated in the treasury to achieve the greatest possible growth of the ecosystem.

According to Hoskinson, appearances at conferences and participating in cryptocurrency-related events is not what can help users develop their interest in the project. He claims that, at this stage of Cardano’s development, there is nothing more important than fostering regular and valuable participation in the community.

This comes against the backdrop of ADA trading near $0.2383 as the bearish sentiment persists in the market.

Hoskinson Proposes Development of Community Hubs Instead of Global Events

Instead of investing money in costly global events, Charles Hoskinson has started a new initiative of developing community hubs across many cities around the world. The main aim behind such an initiative is that the developer community can get together on a consistent basis to foster innovations and learning.

As per the initiative, there would be regular meetups, hackathons, and startup incubation camps organized to create a pipeline of developers and startups. Already one example of such a community hub is in the city of Buenos Aires where there are about 100-200 participants every single event.

As the community hubs have been planned to be hosted bi-monthly, there would be no shortage of activities at all for interested participants. Such events can provide sustainable benefits compared to global events which cannot offer any long-lasting connections and benefits.

Community Rejects Proposing Spending of 14 Million ADA on Event

A more heated discussion began following the community vote on allocating 14 million ADA on hosting crypto events. These included attendance at international conventions such as TOKEN2049 in Singapore and upcoming Cardano summits.

Nonetheless, this proposal was eventually voted against by the community. This was because the representatives in charge of governance had raised objections regarding the ROI of investing in such events.

Many agreed that such money could have been much more wisely spent on activities fostering ecosystem development. It is worth noting that this trend signifies an increase in decentralized governance among the Cardano (ADA) blockchain platform.

Expansion of the Ecosystem via Cross-Chain Strategy

Even amid the current difficulties, Charles Hoskinson still sees a bright future for Cardano. The founder has not stopped talking about the importance of increasing the number of users and introducing new features such as cross-chain connections.

One of the projects which is expected to be a part of the cross-chain strategy of Cardano is Midnight. The goal of the protocol is to attract people who currently use other blockchains, including Bitcoin, Solana, and XRP.

Such an initiative might lead to the further development of decentralized finance solutions and improve adoption rates.

Prospects: Adoption vs Price Growth

Despite efforts directed at expanding the ecosystem, the prices of ADA have demonstrated poor results compared to those of the competition. In general, analysts have different expectations regarding the future of this project.

There are those who think that the current strategies related to infrastructure development and increased participation in it from developers are bound to eventually boost prices. At the same time, others have their concerns regarding lackluster metrics and overall market environment.

This article was originally published as Cardano (ADA) Creator Charles Hoskinson Denies Event-Driven Approach as ADA Lags on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Key Insights

The TAO token of Bittensor falls over 20% post-exit of Covenant AI, citing governance issues.

Fears of centralization impact the sentiment of the crypto market negatively.

Currently, TAO is testing the $250-$263 support level, which requires a recovery above $280.

Price Plunge for TAO Due to Governance Issues

The native coin of Bittensor named TAO fell dramatically by more than 20% to reach approximately $273. This dramatic price plunge came as a rude shock to many traders after witnessing steady gains by the token.

The reason behind this selloff could be the unexpected departure of Covenant AI from the Bittensor network. Although departures happen all the time in blockchain projects, the reason why this departure became noteworthy was due to the substantial reputation that Covenant AI holds in the ecosystem.

Changes in Market Sentiment Happen Quickly

The news about Covenant AI being accused spread quickly throughout cryptocurrency circles, leading to a swift change in market sentiments. Investors who used to consider Bittensor a potential decentralized AI platform started rethinking the possible dangers related to governance transparency and sustainability in the long run.

Apart from damaging the reputation of the project, the departure of Covenant AI also led to negative changes in terms of finances. The organization is said to have liquidated a significant number of TAOs, putting additional pressure on the already falling price of the asset. Moreover, as soon as traders saw how Covenant AI sold its tokens, they rushed to do the same to avoid losses.

Thus, the market sentiment worsened quickly. The governance mechanism of Bittensor was accused of centralization and failing to distribute governance among many members of the network.

Liquidity Puts Downward Pressure on TAO Price

This led to massive selling by leveraged investors whose trades depended on further increases in the price. Their exits accelerated the downward trend. In other words, forced liquidations added further pressure on the TAO price as new sell orders entered the market after the positions were liquidated.

In addition, breaking below $300 was particularly important as it showed how strong bullish sentiment had been before the breakdown. Notably, just a few days earlier, the price was above $340.

Critical Support Zone Comes Into Focus

TAO is now attempting to stabilize in the mid-$260 range, an area that aligns with previous support levels and technical retracements. The immediate support zone between $250 and $263 has become crucial for short-term price action.

If this range holds, the market could enter a consolidation phase, allowing buyers to regain confidence and potentially rebuild momentum. A move back above $280 would be an early signal of recovery and renewed bullish interest.

However, risks remain elevated. If TAO fails to maintain support above $250, the next downside target could emerge around $233. This scenario would likely confirm continued bearish pressure and prolonged uncertainty.

Prognosis Is Still Unclear

Recent developments in relation to Bittensor show how the issue of governance can affect investor sentiment and confidence, particularly within decentralized networks.

Although the project may still have good prospects for success within the realm of AI-blockchain applications, investor sentiment currently remains highly volatile.

In the meantime, investors will be paying close attention to how the price develops, along with any progress within the network itself. The position taken by the Bittensor development team regarding any governance problems may become critical in determining future moves.

For the moment, however, caution appears to prevail.

This article was originally published as TAO Token of Bittensor Tumbles by 20% Post Governance Conflict Triggers Sell-Off in Market on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Deutsche Börse is stepping deeper into the crypto economy, agreeing to invest $200 million in Payward, the parent company of Kraken. The deal, which would grant Deutsche Börse a 1.5% fully diluted stake in Kraken via a secondary share purchase, is subject to regulatory approval and is expected to close in the second quarter. The investment signals a widening appetite among traditional finance firms to participate in regulated crypto markets and tokenized assets as exchanges accelerate partnerships and product development.

The move builds on Deutsche Börse’s ongoing collaboration with Kraken to broaden access for institutions to regulated crypto investment products, including spot trading, tokenized markets and derivatives, and the integration of Kraken-backed xStocks into its 360X digital asset infrastructure. Deutsche Börse disclosed the stake plan as part of its broader strategy to offer a wider array of blockchain-based securities and tokenized investment opportunities.

Key takeaways

The deal values Kraken at a level consistent with a $200 million secondary investment, yielding Deutsche Börse a 1.5% stake on a fully diluted basis, pending regulatory clearance and completion in Q2.

The investment reinforces Deutsche Börse’s broader plan to expand access to tokenized assets, custody, settlement and collateral management through its 360X platform, following a December 2025 strategic collaboration with Kraken.

Kraken has been actively expanding its market footprint, including a confidential IPO filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced on Nov. 19, 2025, shortly after Kraken disclosed an $800 million funding round that valued the company at $20 billion.

Traditional financial firms are increasingly partnering with crypto venues: Nasdaq linked with Kraken to build an equities tokenization gateway; Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) invested in OKX to bring NYSE-listed tokenized stocks toward market in 2026; CME Group outlined plans for crypto futures on multiple assets.

The crypto exchange sector remains dynamic, with Kraken consistently ranked among the top exchanges by daily trading volume, according to CoinMarketCap data supporting its market presence.

Deutsche Börse deepens crypto collaboration amid a wave of TradFi activity

The announcement illustrates a broader push by traditional market operators to embed digital assets into mainstream finance. Deutsche Börse’s investment comes alongside a multi-faceted effort to deliver regulated crypto investment products that sit at the intersection of traditional custody, settlement, and tokenized on-chain markets. The company previously described its collaboration with Kraken as a catalyst for expanding institutional access to regulated crypto instruments, leveraging Kraken’s trading and custody capabilities with Deutsche Börse’s infrastructure reach.

The stake purchase will be funded through a secondary share acquisition, positioning Deutsche Börse to participate in Kraken’s growth without altering Kraken’s primary capital structure. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter, subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions. The collaboration also aligns with Deutsche Börse’s ambition to tokenize a broader array of asset classes, enabling new trading, clearing and settlement workflows on its platform.

TradFi accelerates into tokenized markets and crypto derivatives

The Deutsche Börse-Kraken move sits within a spate of high-profile industry collaborations aimed at accelerating crypto adoption among institutional users. Earlier this year, Nasdaq expanded its exposure to Kraken by partnering with Kraken’s infrastructure subsidiary, Backed, to develop an equities transformation gateway that complements Nasdaq’s tokenization efforts and the regulatory frameworks around tokenized stocks.

Meanwhile, Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) invested in crypto exchange OKX to bring NYSE-listed tokenized stocks to a broader audience, signaling continued appetite from large exchange operators to bridge traditional markets with crypto trading and tokenization. In the futures space, CME Group unveiled plans to launch crypto futures tied to Cardano, Chainlink and Stellar, with later expansions to Avalanche and Sui expected to begin in May, subject to regulatory approvals.

These moves underscore a broader narrative: traditional market operators are no longer hedging their exposure to crypto; they are actively building the rails for regulated, institution-friendly access to crypto and tokenized assets. The ongoing cadence of partnerships and product announcements suggests a shift toward a market infrastructure-compatible future where crypto strategies align with conventional trading, settlement and risk management practices.

In context, Kraken’s trajectory remains notable. The firm disclosed a confidential IPO filing in the U.S. around Nov. 19, 2025, shortly after revealing an $800 million fundraising round that implied a $20 billion valuation. The company remains one of the largest crypto exchanges by daily volume, a status reflected in industry data.

As Deutsche Börse steps further into crypto-enabled markets, investors will be watching closely how regulatory approvals unfold and how this stake relates to future product development, custody capabilities, and the broader ecosystem of tokenized assets. The evolving landscape suggests that more traditional finance players could follow a similar path, potentially broadening access to regulated crypto investment products for institutions and wealthy individuals alike.

Readers should watch upcoming updates on the closing timeline, potential product announcements tied to 360X and the concrete rollout of Kraken-backed tokenized equities in European markets, as well as how other TradFi players balance risk, compliance and innovation in this rapidly evolving space.

This article was originally published as Deutsche Börse fuels Kraken growth with $200M Payward investment on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Hacken’s Q1 2026 security snapshot tallies $464.5 million in losses across 43 Web3 incidents, underscoring a shift in where attackers hit and how damage accumulates. The report highlights phishing and social-engineering campaigns as the dominant threat, totaling $306 million in losses for the quarter. A separate, highly disruptive incident—a $282 million hardware-wallet scam in January—was responsible for 81% of the quarter’s damage, according to Hacken. Smart-contract exploits reached $86.2 million, while access-control failures, including compromised keys and cloud-service breaches, accounted for $71.9 million. The quarter stands as the second-lowest first quarter since 2023, helped by the absence of a Bybit-scale mega hack that drove much of the year-ago decline.

Hacken’s chief executive and co-founder, Yev Broshevan, emphasized a notable trend: the costliest failures increasingly occur outside the code itself. “The most expensive failures happen outside the code layer entirely,” he told Cointelegraph, pointing to real-world weaknesses in operational and infrastructure layers that traditional code audits often miss.

For context, Hacken’s review arrives as regulators and institutional players sharpen expectations around security. The report notes that regulatory regimes such as the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) and the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) are moving from framework to enforcement, while regulators in the UAE, Singapore, and Dubai’s regulator, among others, tighten oversight and incident-response requirements. These shifts are shaping what Hacken calls “regulator-ready” security stacks that demand continuous monitoring and rapid containment measures.

Key takeaways

$464.5 million in losses across 43 incidents in Q1 2026, with phishing/social engineering driving $306 million of that total. A single January incident of $282 million hardware-wallet theft accounted for a large share of the quarter’s damage.

Smart-contract exploits totaled $86.2 million, while $71.9 million stemmed from access-control and compromised-key or cloud-service failures.

The quarter marks the second-lowest first quarter since 2023, aided by the absence of a mega hack on the scale of Bybit’s 2025 incident.

Attack patterns are shifting toward operational and infrastructure risk, reinforcing the view that audits of on-chain code alone are insufficient to measure a protocol’s security posture.

Regulators are tightening expectations. MiCA, DORA, Dubai’s VARA, Singapore’s Basel-aligned requirements, and the UAE’s Capital Market Authority push for stronger incident reporting, continuous monitoring, and defined response timelines.

Operational risk dominates the early 2026 landscape

The Hacken analysis stresses a transition in the vulnerability ledger from purely on-chain code issues to failures rooted in operations and infrastructure. The most expensive losses, the report suggests, arise from misconfigurations, compromised credentials, and weak third-party integrations rather than only from bugged smart contracts. This is consistent with a broader industry message: a robust security program must cover people, processes, and technology in parallel with code audits.

Hacken’s interview with Broshevan reinforces this view: the most consequential incidents tend to emerge from non-contract layers, such as identity and access management, cloud configurations, and supply-chain dependencies. The result is a security problem that requires defense-in-depth measures that extend beyond formal audits of deployed code.

Legacy code and multi-year vulnerabilities persist

Even as the industry grapples with modern attack vectors, the report highlights several high-cost incidents rooted in legacy deployments or well-known vulnerability patterns. Notably, a $26.4 million loss at Truebit stemmed from a Solidity contract bug deployed roughly five years ago. Venus Protocol faced a donation-style attack that exploited long-standing patterns around contract governance. In another example, a $40 million loss occurred via a North Korea-linked fake venture-capital outreach targeting Step Finance, illustrating how social-engineering campaigns still deliver significant damage.

In parallel, Resolv Labs experienced a compromise of its AWS key-management service, illustrating how access-control failures can underpin large losses even when the code itself isn’t the root cause. Hacken’s incident mapping also flags the broader “playbook” that attackers used in 2025—fake VC outreach, malicious video-call tooling, and endpoint compromises—that reportedly contributed to roughly $2.04 billion in sector-wide losses that year.

Beyond these marquee cases, six audited projects—among them Resolv (18 audits) and Venus (five auditing firms)—accounted for $37.7 million in losses. The data hints at a nuanced relationship between audit activity and loss exposure: higher-value protocols with more assets at stake may attract more sophisticated attackers, even if audited.

Audits, TVL, and the resilience gap

The finding that six audited projects were responsible for millions in losses despite having undergone multiple audits raises a practical question for builders: does audit severity or frequency translate into real-world risk reduction? Hacken notes that these audited protocols typically carry higher total value locked (TVL), which equates to bigger prize pools for attackers. In other words, audits alone may not solve the complex, multi-layer risk profile faced by high-TVL projects, underscoring the need for continuous security monitoring and layered defenses.

Regulatory tightening and the move toward “regulator-ready” security

The quarter’s regulatory backdrop reinforces the story that security is becoming a market and a compliance issue. MiCA and DORA are moving deeper into enforcement, with regional regulators increasing expectations for ongoing security practices. In Dubai, the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority tightened its Technology and Information Rulebook, while Singapore has enforced Basel-aligned capital and rapid incident-notification timelines. The UAE’s new Capital Market Authority has assumed broader digital-asset oversight with stiffer penalties. Hacken frames these developments as a call to operators to demonstrate constant security readiness, not just to pass a one-off audit.

As part of this shift, Hacken advocates a concrete framework for “regulator-ready” security architectures. The blueprint includes:

Proof-of-reserves attestations backed by daily internal reconciliation;

24/7 on-chain monitoring across treasury wallets and privileged roles;

Automated circuit-breakers for minting and governance actions;

Incident notification clocks calibrated to the strictest applicable standard.

Hacken also references a spectrum of response-time targets, distinguishing between “realistic” and “aspirational” goals. Realistic aims include awareness within 24 hours, labeling within four hours, and blocking within 30 seconds. Aspirational targets envision detection within 10 minutes and a 1-second block, drawing on data from Global Ledger’s 2025 Laundering Race. While ambitious, these benchmarks outline concrete steps for projects seeking to align with regulator expectations and institutional counterparties.

Threat actors, playbooks, and the evolving risk landscape

The report keeps returning to the human factor: North Korean actor clusters are identified as the most consistent operational threat in Q1 2026. The combination of social-engineering campaigns, fake professional outreach, and compromised employee endpoints continues to provide a reliable pathway to large losses. The Step Finance case and the Bitrefill-related infrastructure breach illustrate a broader pattern where attackers blend social manipulation with technical exploitation to extract value, often targeting high-value protocols with sophisticated tooling.

For investors, developers, and operators, the takeaway is clear: a successful‑looking deployment with strong smart contracts can still be undermined by weak operational practices, poor key management, or insufficient incident response readiness. The evolving threat landscape demands a multi-layered security approach, ongoing monitoring, and a clear plan for rapid containment—precisely what regulators are now pushing as non-negotiable standards. For builders, this means integrating security into product design from day one and maintaining a culture of continuous testing, diligence, and resilience.

Further reading and related reporting reinforce the broader context: industry-wide security incidents in early 2026 came with a cautionary reminder that DeFi risk resides not just in code but in how projects operate, govern, and respond under pressure. As enforcement tightens and security expectations rise, market participants will be watched not just for audits and audits’ results, but for visible, verifiable resilience across people, processes, and technologies.

Looking ahead, observers will be watching whether Q2 2026 echoes the Q1 trend toward infrastructure and operational risks or whether new defenses and policy measures begin to close the gap. The balance between code quality, operational hygiene, and regulatory compliance will determine how quickly the ecosystem can move toward a posture that can withstand both sophisticated attacks and tougher supervisory regimes.

This article was originally published as Phishing Drives Majority of Web3 Losses to $464M in Q1, Hacken on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The U.S. Department of Justice has opened a compensation process for victims of the OneCoin crypto Ponzi scheme, drawing from forfeited assets seized from the operation’s principals. The department announced that more than $40 million in recovered assets is available to reimburse individuals who bought OneCoin between 2014 and 2019 and recorded a net loss.

US Attorney for Manhattan Jay Clayton called the program “an important step toward returning funds to those harmed.” The case highlights how large-scale crypto fraud can unfold and how authorities are attempting to recoup proceeds for victims, even years after a scheme collapses.

OneCoin, launched in 2014 with the ambition of rivaling Bitcoin, rapidly gained attention before revelations of its lack of real utility led to a global crackdown. The project rose to prominence in the crypto market, only to fall as authorities worldwide launched investigations into its operations.

“Between 2014 and 2019, OneCoin’s founders sold a lie disguised as cryptocurrency, costing victims more than $4 billion worldwide,” Clayton said. “While no recovery can fully undo the damage, our Office will continue working to seize criminal proceeds and prioritize getting money back into the hands of victims.”

Key takeaways

The Department of Justice has established a compensation process for OneCoin victims, drawing on more than $40 million in forfeited assets.

Eligible claimants are individuals who purchased OneCoin between 2014 and 2019 and sustained a net loss.

OneCoin’s co-founders were Ruja Ignatova and Karl Sebastian Greenwood; Greenwood has since been sentenced to 20 years in prison, while Ignatova remains at large despite ongoing efforts to locate her.

Authorities estimate that the scheme stole more than $4 billion from about 3.5 million victims between 2014 and 2016, with some broader estimates suggesting global losses could reach as high as $19 billion.

Before its collapse, several central banks warned investors about OneCoin, and Bulgarian police later raided the company’s headquarters in 2018, resulting in Greenwood’s arrest.

The OneCoin arc: from promise to collapse

OneCoin launched in Bulgaria in 2014, spearheaded by Ruja Ignatova and Karl Greenwood, and quickly spread to the United States around 2015. The DOJ notes that the operation quickly attracted millions of participants, convincing many that they were investing in a legitimate alternative to established cryptocurrencies.

Despite its spectacular rise, investigators uncovered that the coin did not possess real value or functional utility beyond the marketing and pyramid-like incentives that fueled its expansion. By the time authorities moved in, the scheme had already exhausted substantial sums from a wide global base of investors.

According to the DOJ, between 2014 and the end of 2016, the scheme stole more than $4 billion from roughly 3.5 million victims. Some external estimates have placed global losses significantly higher, underscoring the scale and reach of the fraud as it unfolded across borders.

Prior to its collapse, several national central banks publicly warned investors about OneCoin, labeling it as a potential Ponzi scheme. The investigation culminated in Bulgarian police raids on the company’s headquarters in 2018, and Greenwood was subsequently arrested.

Greenwood’s prosecution culminated in a 20-year prison sentence handed down in September 2023 for his role in the scheme. Ignatova’s whereabouts remain unknown since 2017 when she was last seen boarding a flight to Athens. The FBI lists Ignatova on its Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, and authorities have offered a $5 million reward for information leading to her capture and conviction.

The OneCoin case remains a stark reminder of how quickly crypto investment narratives can diverge from real utility, and how enforcement authorities pursue asset recovery even after schemes collapse.

Implications for victims and the broader crypto landscape

The new compensation process represents a tangible step by the U.S. government to translate enforcement outcomes into restitution for ordinary investors who were harmed by a high-profile crypto fraud. While the $40 million pool cannot fully compensate billions in alleged losses, it signals a channel for victims to recover at least a portion of their losses, funded from confiscated assets rather than taxpayer money.

For investors and practitioners, the OneCoin episode underscores several enduring lessons about risk in crypto markets. First, the presence of rapid wealth narratives around “cryptocurrency” does not guarantee legitimate value creation. Second, cross-border enforcement can eventually converge on asset recovery, even when the underlying assets prove illiquid or non-existent in utility terms. Finally, the case adds to the growing jurisprudence around what constitutes a legitimate crypto asset and how regulators differentiate between genuine innovation and deceptive schemes.

As authorities continue to unwind the remaining legal and financial tail of OneCoin, observers will be looking for updates on additional forfeitures, the effectiveness of the compensation framework, and how such processes could influence future cases involving mass-market crypto schemes.

For readers tracking this story, the next milestones to watch include the administration of the compensation process, any further asset seizures tied to the case, and ongoing efforts to locate Ignatova or recover further proceeds linked to the scheme.

This article was originally published as DOJ Opens Compensation Program for Victims of $4B OneCoin Fraud on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin enthusiasts and market observers are once again debating whether the flagship crypto will endure a final, liquidity-driven flush before any meaningful recovery takes hold. With price action mostly consolidating after recent swings, several prominent analysts say the path to a durable uptrend could still require a deeper test of support around the $50,000 region, even as episodic rallies surface on shifting macro news.

Key takeaways

Several respected traders argue a final downside sweep toward roughly $50,000 could precede a lasting recovery, even as Bitcoin has shown intermittent strength in other macro setups.

Despite a bounce to just under $75,000 linked to hopes for a US–Iran deal, the broader trend remains down according to noted analysts, who see any big bullish impulse as contingent on a shift in market structure and macro conditions.

Chart patterns and cycle theory feature prominently: a bear-flag setup is still considered active by some analysts, suggesting further declines before a potential distribution phase and new accumulation.

In the longer view, the market is wrestling with a different macro regime and a higher degree of institutional participation, factors that could blunt historic drawdown magnitudes in this cycle.

Fidelity Digital Assets has cautioned that downside risk in 2026 may be less dramatic than in prior cycles, signaling a potentially more resilient macro-structure for Bitcoin amid ongoing adoption.

Bitcoin’s near-term trajectory: the debate among traders

Among the most vocal skeptics is Ivan Liljeqvist, the trader and author known for his social commentary on price action. In a recent post, he argued that Bitcoin has yet to witness a true “big flush,” suggesting that the market could test lower levels before a durable turn toward higher prices. His view centers on the idea that the current bounce strength is insufficient to mark the end of the bear phase, and that the downtrend remains intact.

“I don’t think we’ve had it yet, I don’t think $60,000 was the bottom. Trend is still down,” Liljeqvist wrote, underscoring the persistent breadth of selling pressure that has characterized this cycle. The implication for traders is straightforward: a mild rebound may prove unsustainable without accompanying macro or institutional shifts that breathe new life into demand at scale.

Another veteran observer, Merlijn Enkelaar, has framed Bitcoin’s path in a broader cycle view. He argues that the asset could be entering its second bear-market phase after a period of accumulation, with a potential “manipulation phase” pushing prices down toward the $50,000 region before a third, or distribution, phase takes hold. The framing implies a longer-than-expected consolidation period, punctuated by volatile drawdowns that shake out weaker hands and reset expectations for institutions stepping in later in the cycle.

“This could potentially set up for stronger bullish momentum once the flush concludes, but the institutionalization of crypto markets places consistent buying pressure at current levels.”

For Nick Ruck, director at LVRG Research, the narrative centers on accumulation zones and macro resilience. He interprets a move toward $50,000 as the last meaningful accumulation window before any sustained rebound, positioning it as a cyclic reset amid broader macro headwinds and capital rotation challenges. Ruck’s perspective highlights a tension in the market: while doom-oriented voices dominate headlines, a longer arc of accumulation could still unfold if non-price factors align in favorable ways.

From the charts to the macro matrix

The discussion isn’t confined to price psychology alone. The current debate sits at the intersection of chart-driven patterns and macro-market structure. On the chart, some analysts point to a bearish flag formation that remains “in play,” signaling continued downside pressure until a new balance is found. A bear-flag pattern has historically served as a continuation signal, suggesting the trend may extend lower before buyers re-emerge with conviction.

Even as some market players look for a bottoming signal, Bitcoin did experience a relief rally earlier in the month, climbing to just under $75,000. The move was attributed to renewed optimism over a potential Iran–U.S. deal, a development that temporarily lifted markets across risk-on assets. Yet the price action once again underlines the fragility of near-term resistance: even sharp intraday squeezes can be reversed if macro news reverts to risk-off concerns or if liquidity conditions tighten.

On the longer horizon, the drawdown history remains a salient reference point. The 2017 bear market retraced roughly 82% from its high, while the 2021 cycle saw about a 77% peak-to-trough decline. In light of those precedents, some observers concede that the current cycle may diverge from the textbook 60% drawdown baseline they had expected earlier in the year. As one analyst noted, the market environment today is macro-structured in a way that could limit such a clean retreat, complicating any attempt to predict an exact bottom or the pace of subsequent recovery.

Further nuance comes from Fidelity Digital Assets, which has recently argued that downside risk in 2026 could be less dramatic than in past cycles. The assessment points to a world in which institutions already possess deeper exposure to digital assets and where the macro backdrop—while still challenging—appears less prone to catastrophic, regime-shifting drawdowns for Bitcoin than during prior bear markets.

What to watch next in a market evolving under new dynamics

As the debate unfolds, several indicators could shape the next phase of Bitcoin’s cycle. First, the $50,000 region looms as a potential pivot point, especially if the market breaks decisively below key demand zones on high-volume selloffs. A decisive move through this level would not only test investor conviction but also influence the timing and scale of any subsequent accumulation by institutions or large holders.

Second, the pace of institutional participation continues to be a critical variable. If the market’s “institutionalization” indeed places steady buying pressure at current price levels, the upswing could be more gradual and less prone to sharp, V-shaped recoveries. In that context, traders may need to tolerate broader ranges and more pronounced drawdowns during the transition to a new cyclical phase.

Third, macro developments—ranging from geopolitical tensions to liquidity conditions and monetary policy signals—will continue to drive risk sentiment and cross-asset correlations. The ongoing sensitivity of Bitcoin to these macro factors reinforces the idea that price action alone cannot tell the full story of where the market is headed next. Investors and builders will want to monitor how the macro story evolves alongside on-chain activity and sector adoption, as those elements often feed into longer-term cycles more decisively than short-lived price spikes.

Finally, the market’s risk-reward calculus remains nuanced. While some traders anticipate a deeper flush, others point to the possibility of a measured, protracted recovery as institutions allocate capital to crypto-related strategies and products. In this tension lies the potential for a steadier ramp higher rather than an abrupt, speculative rally—an outcome that could align with a structurally improved macro environment and greater clarity around regulatory and custodial frameworks.

For readers and market participants, the near future will likely test these competing theses in real time. The immediate question remains whether Bitcoin can sustain any rally without revisiting the lower sub-50k zones, or whether a test of those levels becomes a necessary precondition for a durable breakout. As always, the answer will partly hinge on how the macro narrative unfolds and how patient capital responds to evolving price discovery signals.

As the year progresses, watchers should keep a close eye on price action around the 50,000 to 60,000 band, the behavior of large holders, and the tempo of institutional activity. The convergence—or divergence—of these factors will illuminate whether this cycle is on track for a traditional recovery arc or a more complex, protracted consolidation shaped by macro realities and market participants increasingly anchored to crypto markets.

Readers should watch the next price action and macro developments closely, as the coming weeks may determine whether Bitcoin breaks decisively toward a new regime or tests a deeper trough before gathering momentum for a broader, more sustainable upswing.

This article was originally published as Bitcoin Bears Eye $50K Bottom as Analysts Warn One More Drawdown on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

error code: 524

This article was originally published as Former CFTC Chair Giancarlo Leaves Law for Crypto Advisory on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Foundry Digital, a leading crypto mining pool operator, has launched a dedicated Zcash mining pool aimed at institutional participants. The company says the new pool now accounts for about 29.2% of the Zcash network hashrate, built through partnerships with multiple institutional miners. Foundry did not disclose the specific miners behind the capacity, stating only that a broad base of institutional clients is participating.

As part of the roll-out, Foundry also launched a Zcash block explorer, which shows the Foundry Zcash Pool has mined 2,344 blocks since its launch earlier this month. Zcash blocks are produced roughly every 75 seconds, with a block reward of 1.25 ZEC, which translates to about $458 at prevailing prices. According to Zcashinfo.com, the pool began accumulating hashrate around March 4—roughly a week before the public unveiling.

Foundry’s asserted hashrate share arrives after the pool operator’s rapid ascent reshaped the Zcash mining terrain. The shift has coincided with a notable decline in ViaBTC’s dominance, which had previously controlled a large slice of the network. Zcashinfo.com data indicate ViaBTC’s share has fallen from 68.1% on Feb. 27 to about 37% at the time of writing, underscoring how institutional players are reconfiguring the network’s mining distribution. In context, Coinbase’s security PSA from September 2023 singled out ViaBTC’s dominant position as a risk factor for network security, highlighting ongoing concerns about concentration in PoW ecosystems.

Key takeaways

Foundry launches a dedicated Zcash pool and claims it now controls about 29.2% of the network hashrate, built through multiple institutional partnerships; the pool’s operators have not disclosed the participating miners.

The pool has mined 2,344 blocks since launch, with Zcash block times around 75 seconds and a block subsidy of 1.25 ZEC (roughly $458 at current prices).

Foundry’s rise appears to be shifting Zcash’s mining leadership away from ViaBTC, whose share has dropped toward 37% from well over 68% earlier in the year, according to Zcashinfo.com.

Context on market dynamics and security: Coinbase flagged ViaBTC’s dominance as a risk in 2023, illustrating broader concerns about centralization in PoW networks.

Assessing the impact on Zcash’s network and the broader mining ecosystem

The emergence of a substantial institutional Zcash pool marks a notable development for a privacy-focused PoW network that has historically seen concentration around a handful of operators. Foundry’s approach—positioned as a compliant, purpose-built mining solution for institutions—reflects a growing demand among professional miners seeking predictable governance and operational resilience in a privacy-oriented blockchain environment. In practical terms, this shift can influence network security dynamics, fee structures, and block production consistency, particularly if more institutional actors join or reallocate capacity to Zcash over time.

From a market perspective, Zcash has enjoyed a period of outperformance versus many peers, with a marked price rally over the past year. Data from CoinGecko show ZEC’s market capitalization hovering around the multi-billion-dollar range, and the asset has been among the better performers within the broader crypto space over the last year, including a pronounced uptick in the month following Foundry’s initial Zcash Pool announcement. The current macro context—coupled with rising attention to privacy-focused assets—helps explain why institutions might view Zcash as a credible, long-horizon exposure despite broader market headwinds.

Industry observers will be watching whether additional institutional operators follow Foundry’s lead and join the Zcash mining scene, and how the distribution of hashrate evolves in the near term. A more diversified pool ecosystem could reduce single-point failure risk but may also complicate governance and monitoring for network security. As with other PoW networks, centralized concentration remains a perennial concern; how this balance shifts in practice will influence miners’ decision-making, hardware deployment, and the perceived resilience of Zcash’s privacy guarantees.

For readers seeking more granular data, Foundry’s Zcash Pool is documented in the press release and related materials, including coverage of the pool launch. The company’s own disclosures align with broader reporting on mining pool dynamics and the ongoing discussions around centralization risk in proof-of-work networks.

To follow the latest developments in Zcash mining and market activity, keep an eye on pool-hashrate distributions, block explorer metrics, and commentary from major industry players as institutional participation in privacy-focused networks continues to evolve.

What happens next may hinge on whether additional institutional clients enroll with Foundry or pursue similar deployments with other privacy-centric projects. As Zcash and other PoW networks navigate security concerns and decentralization trade-offs, readers should watch for updates on hashrate concentration, regulatory considerations, and any new tooling or audits that accompany institutional mining ventures.

Sources and context: Foundry’s pursuit of an institutional-grade Zcash pool was announced in collaboration with industry coverage and corroborating data from Zcashinfo.com, which tracks pool distribution, as well as contemporaneous reporting on ViaBTC’s historical dominance and Coinbase’s security notes. Public references to Zcash block economics and market position can be explored via CoinGecko’s Zcash page and related market data.

This article was originally published as Foundry’s Zcash Pool Captures 29% of Hashrate in First Month on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin avoided a fresh collapse after a weekend dip and reclaimed the $74,000 level, buoyed by a wave of institutional demand for spot BTC ETFs in the United States. Yet the path ahead remains tethered to traditional markets and macro headlines, with derivatives signals suggesting cautious optimism rather than a decisive shift out of bear-market territory. The saga underscores how flow-driven rallies can coexist with persistent structural headwinds, including miner inventory dynamics and an unsettled regulatory backdrop.

Key takeaways

US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs drew net inflows of about $615 million over Thursday and Friday, forming a key pillar of renewed investor interest.

Bitcoin’s price action remains closely correlated with the S&P 500 and broader macro developments, even as the market tests higher levels.

Derivatives indicators, including a 2-month futures premium around 2% annualized, point to tepid bullish leverage rather than a bullish breakout.

Miners continue to trim exposure, with Mara, Riot, and Cango reporting BTC sales in the last 30 days, adding to near-term selling pressure.

Regulatory progress remains a tether for upside: lawmakers weigh the CLARITY Act and exchanges voice concerns over DeFi scope and tokenized assets, while the SEC signals urgency.

ETF inflows, price recovery, and a signaling rally

Bitcoin’s struggle to decisively break into new highs remains tempered by the same macro currents that have dominated the market for months. On the supply side, fresh evidence of institutional demand surfaced as US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs posted strong net inflows, with the cohort pulling in roughly $615 million between Thursday and Friday. This inflow coincided with a broader bid for risk assets that helped Bitcoin reclaim the $74,000 level after a period of choppy trading tied to macro headlines and evolving geopolitical risk sentiment.

In parallel, a recent weekly update highlighted renewed buying by Strategy (a notable corporate investor), which reportedly acquired about 13,927 BTC over the past week using its yield-bearing instrument STRC. The development underscores how yield strategies and institutional capital are attempting to materialize into direct BTC exposure, even as the sector remains mindful of ongoing regulatory and market uncertainties. See the broader market picture: a backdrop where ETF inflows can act as a stabilizing bid, yet do not automatically translate into a sustained breakout without accompanying improvements in risk appetite.

The price action around $74,000 comes after Bitcoin briefly cooled from higher ground as markets weighed geopolitical headlines and macro risk. The S&P 500 futures shifted higher in intraday trade, helping risk assets recover from a weekend dip that pushed Bitcoin toward $70,500. Analysts caution that while the rally looks constructive on a technical basis, the absence of multipliers in the derivatives market signals that long-only conviction remains limited. The reconciled picture suggests an environment where spot demand supports price, but leveraged bets are not yet aligned with a true bull run.

Analysts also point to the interplay between Bitcoin and traditional asset classes as a continuing price driver. With the S&P 500 trading fairly flat year to date and Brent futures hovering near recent highs before a pullback, the macro regime continues to shape Bitcoin’s trajectory more than idiosyncratic crypto developments. The takeaway for investors is clear: ETF-driven inflows are meaningful but not a guarantee of a lasting leg up unless macro momentum shifts decisively higher.

“The latest inflows into US-listed spot BTC ETFs show there is durable institutional interest, but the bear-market dynamics haven’t disappeared,”

said one market observer, noting that price recovery alone does not reflect broad market conviction.

Derivatives signals and what they imply for momentum

Two-month Bitcoin futures markets offer a useful lens into the mood of traders and whether the rally has legs. The latest data show a 2-month futures annualized premium of roughly 2%, well below neutral levels that would typically compensate for the cost of carry (roughly 4% to 8%). This suggests a market waiting for clearer catalysts before expanding bullish exposure. Even as the spot price pushes toward higher ground, the lack of a robust premium indicates that institutions and risk-takers are not yet prepared to fund aggressive long positions with leverage.

The 18% year-to-date decline in Bitcoin against a relatively flat S&P 500 adds to the narrative: a market that has faced significant drawdowns and is seeking confirmation that demand can outpace selling pressure. Traders will be watching whether the ETF inflows can sustain demand over a fuller cycle or whether volatility returns as geopolitical and macro headlines evolve.

“Derivatives remain a caution flag—spot demand is supportive, but leverage remains restrained,”

noted a researcher tracking term-structure data.

Regulatory clarity and the broader policy backdrop

Beyond price action, the sector continues to grapple with a regulatory landscape that remains uncertain in places even as clearer signals emerge in others. Lawmakers have shown renewed appetite to articulate a framework for crypto activities that could shape incentives, compliance burdens, and the operational latitude for stablecoins and tokenized assets.

U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis has urged colleagues to consider the CLARITY Act, a proposal that could define how stablecoin issuers operate and set thresholds for tokens to be considered decentralized. The bill is at a pivotal stage as it moves through the Senate Banking Committee, where lawmakers weigh potential late-stage amendments related to DeFi restrictions and asset tokenization.

Meanwhile, the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s leadership has signaled urgency for Congress to advance crypto regulation, underscoring a broader appetite for a formal framework rather than piecemeal rulemaking. Stakeholders—including major exchanges—have voiced concerns about the scope of DeFi provisions and the precise coverage of tokenized assets, arguing for clarity that can protect investors without stifling innovation.

Amid this regulatory flux, stablecoin markets are also signaling demand dynamics. Data showing USD stablecoins trading at a modest discount to the official USD/CNY rate points to capital flight expectations and the regulatory friction associated with cross-border remittances in certain corridors. The dynamic underscores how policy moves can ripple through the liquidity chains that crypto markets rely on, particularly when capital controls and FX considerations interact with crypto demand.

Miners’ selling pressure and its implications for supply/demand balance

The supply side of the Bitcoin market remains a point of emphasis for several analysts. Publicly listed miners have been trimming exposure and reducing inventories, a trend that could offset some of the renewed demand from ETFs and strategic buyers. Over the past 30 days, Mara Mining (MARA US) disclosed the sale of 15,133 BTC, Riot Platforms (RIOT US) reduced its holdings by 2,325 BTC, and Cango (CANG US) sold 2,000 BTC. While a single month of activity cannot fully define supply dynamics, these moves contribute to a broader narrative of mitigated miner accumulation and, in some cases, outright selling pressure.

For Bitcoin to extend its rally toward higher targets—such as an anticipated move to $80,000—the market will need a more favorable risk environment and a shift in trader mood toward higher appetite for leveraged positions. The macro regime and regulatory clarity will continue to shape how much of the current ETF-driven demand translates into sustained price momentum.

The network’s fundamentals—miner economics, hash rate resilience, and energy-price dynamics—also continue to interact with these flows. If miners remain in a mode of balancing cash flow with treasury management, their selling could limit the upside unless offset by robust inflows or a shift in risk sentiment.

What to watch next

Looking ahead, the next several weeks will test whether ETF inflows can remain a reliable driver of price in an environment still dominated by macro and policy headlines. Key watchpoints include ongoing regulatory developments around the CLARITY Act and DeFi, the trajectory of major ETFs’ inflows, and any new indications from miners about inventory strategies. Bitcoin’s path to new highs will likely hinge on a convergence of improved risk appetite, a positive macro backdrop, and a sustainable uptick in leveraged long positions—signals that have yet to fully coalesce.

This evolving mix of institutional demand, policy clarity, and miner behavior suggests a market that can mount rallies without losing sight of the structural challenges that still characterize the current cycle. Investors should remain mindful of the potential for further volatility as the regulatory environment clarifies and macro data evolve.

Sources: Cointelegraph, SoSoValue, TradingView, Laevitas

This article was originally published as Bitcoin Clears $74K as Spot ETF Demand Outpaces Miner Sell Pressure on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has issued a staff statement that clarifies how broker-dealer regulations may apply to software interfaces that facilitate crypto transactions, particularly when users rely on self-custodial wallets. The guidance suggests that, in certain circumstances, these interfaces may not require registration as broker-dealers.

Released by the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets, the staff statement explains that interfaces designed to assist users engaging in user-initiated crypto asset securities transactions on blockchain protocols using the user’s own self-custodial wallet may qualify for an exemption from broker-dealer registration. The key caveats are that the interface must not solicit investors to engage in specific crypto asset securities transactions, should not provide commentary on potential execution routes displayed to a user, and must meet other limited conditions. The document is intended to clarify how federal securities laws apply to activities involving crypto asset securities and to reduce ambiguity in a rapidly evolving space.

The staff statement is not the same as a formal rule proposed for public comment and review, but the SEC framed it as a way to bring more predictable application of securities laws to crypto-related activities. It arrives as part of a broader wave of guidance issued after the inauguration of U.S. President Donald Trump in January 2025, a period observers characterized as bringing a friendlier posture toward the crypto industry and, in turn, shaping leadership dynamics at the commission and related agencies.

In a contemporaneous public discourse around the topic, SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce emphasized that while staff guidance can be useful, a more durable regulatory framework is preferable. She noted the tension between evolving market realities and how the securities laws are interpreted, emphasizing the need for a clear, stable broker-dealer definition that reflects current market structures. “Crypto is forcing the Commission to confront its inner demons that have driven it toward ever more expansive readings of the securities laws,” Peirce remarked in a speech linked to the commission’s statements.

Key takeaways

The SEC’s staff statement clarifies that certain interfaces enabling user-initiated crypto asset transactions with self-custodial wallets may avoid broker-dealer registration under specific conditions.

Two principal constraints matter: the interface must not solicit investors to engage in particular crypto asset securities transactions and must not provide commentary on potential execution routes shown to users.

The guidance is advisory in nature, not a formal rule, but it aims to reduce uncertainty around how federal securities laws apply to crypto asset activities.

The development comes amid a broader post-inauguration regulatory environment that some observers view as gentler toward crypto, though leadership at the SEC and CFTC remains constrained by staffing and partisan balance.

Staff guidance and what it changes for participants

At the core of the staff statement is a delineation of when a crypto-transaction interface might be treated as a simple tool rather than a broker-dealer. Interfaces that assist users in initiating crypto asset transactions directly with their own wallets, without making tailored investment recommendations or steering users toward particular assets, may fall outside the broker-dealer registration regime. This distinction matters for developers, wallet providers, and platforms that build user experiences around crypto trading and custody.

Nevertheless, the SEC underscored that the analysis hinges on behavior and presentation. If an interface crosses the line into soliciting investments or actively commenting on execution options—essentially guiding a user through a specific trading path—the broker-dealer registration requirements could become relevant. The note also cautions that other circumstances could push a given interface back into the registration framework, indicating a nuanced, fact-specific inquiry rather than a binary rule.

While officials characterized the staff statement as only one piece of a broader regulatory conversation, the document offers market participants a roadmap for evaluating new user-interface designs. For developers and exchanges exploring new front-end experiences, the guidance signals a need to separate informational and execution-related content from any product that could be construed as facilitating a securities transaction or steering a user toward a particular asset.

For investors and users, the guidance provides a signal that not every wallet-driven interface will trigger regulated broker-dealer activity. It also reinforces the importance of independent custody and the potential legal distinctions between a user’s wallet and an intermediary that might otherwise be treated as an active broker-dealer under the securities laws.

Regulatory leadership and market implications

The staff statement arrives amid a broader political context in which regulatory leadership remains sparse and politically aligned. Following President Trump’s early-2025 nominations, some observers have described the transition as introducing a friendlier stance toward crypto, even as the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) continue to navigate staffing constraints. The article notes that, at the SEC, three Republican commissioners remain on the five-member commission, while the CFTC faced leadership vacancies, with the chair position tied to a Republican appointment during this period.

In parallel, lawmakers have floated ideas to ensure regulators have adequate staffing to supervise market activity. A proposed provision attached to a Senate market-structure bill would require a minimum level of staffing at the SEC and CFTC before the legislation can take effect. The move underscores a sense among lawmakers that effective oversight depends not only on rulemaking but also on the practical resources available to agencies enforcing those rules.

Industry participants are watching closely how these dynamics unfold. For platform builders, the principal takeaway is that there will be ongoing attention to the line between everyday crypto wallet functionality and activities that could be regulated as traditional securities trading. For traders and users, the evolving landscape could influence the design of future interfaces, including how risk disclosures, execution options, and governance features are presented in wallet-based experiences.

What to watch next

Key questions remain: Will the SEC publish more formal rulemaking around the broker-dealer definition that clarifies or codifies these thresholds for crypto interfaces? How will the agency balance enforcement and innovation as more self-custody solutions emerge? And as staffing and leadership evolve at the SEC and CFTC, will there be a clearer, more durable framework guiding how crypto asset securities of various kinds are offered, traded, or described to investors?

For market participants, the central takeaway is that the landscape continues to shift toward greater clarity but not yet certainty. Interfaces that merely present information, without steering investors toward particular assets or execution possibilities, may escape broker-dealer registration under the current staff view. Those that provide strategic commentary or actively solicit participation in specific securities transactions, however, could fall under traditional securities regulations. As the regulatory tide changes, developers and platforms should design with an emphasis on neutrality, user autonomy, and transparent disclosure to navigate the evolving rules with less friction.

Readers should keep an eye on forthcomingSEC statements and any formal rulemaking that may follow. The balance between fostering innovation and protecting investors is likely to shape the next phase of crypto regulation in the United States.

Stay tuned for updates on how these interpretations evolve and which interfaces might be reclassified as the regulatory framework matures.

This article was originally published as SEC Signals Exemption for Crypto Interfaces From Broker Registration on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

As quantum computing edges closer to practical reality, a nuanced risk picture is taking shape for Bitcoin. Rather than a sudden, network-wide catastrophe, researchers and industry observers are highlighting a tiered vulnerability focused on dormant addresses with exposed public keys. Many of these are among the oldest coins from Bitcoin’s early era, and their combination of long-standing exposure, high value, and inertia in defense makes them salient targets for a first generation of quantum-enabled attackers, should such capabilities mature.

Key takeaways

Dormant Bitcoin addresses with exposed public keys represent a concentrated risk, especially among early-era holdings that haven’t moved in years.

Quantum threats affect public-key cryptography (ECDSA/Schnorr) more directly than hash functions, meaning on-chain exposure of a public key is a critical vulnerability.

The risk separates into on-spend attacks (tight time windows tied to block confirmations) and at-rest attacks (longer horizons when keys are exposed but no immediate transaction is triggered).

Large, long-dormant holdings — including many 50 BTC block rewards from the early mining era — create a high-value target pool that could attract quantum-driven attacks first.

Beyond technology, the dormant-wallet challenge raises governance questions about asset salvage, protection, and how the protocol might accommodate or address historically inaccessible coins.

Where the risk converges on Bitcoin’s cryptography

Bitcoin relies on two cryptographic pillars: the hash function SHA-256 for mining and block security, and public-key cryptography (ECDSA/Schnorr) for transaction signatures. Quantum computers would affect these components in distinct ways. Hash functions are relatively resilient; even with Grover’s algorithm, they would be weakened but not rendered obsolete. Public-key cryptography, however, presents a sharper exposure path. With Shor’s algorithm, a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could derive a private key from a known public key. In practical terms for Bitcoin, that means any coins whose public key has been revealed could theoretically be spent by an attacker if a quantum-capable adversary can perform the computation in time to act on a vulnerability.

The on-spend vs at-rest distinction and why it matters

Understanding the timing of attacks is crucial to assessing risk. There are two broad categories of quantum attacks:

On-spend attacks

Trigger a transaction to reveal the user’s public key.

Attackers must derive the private key within a short window — roughly the span of a single block, or about 10 minutes — to successfully move funds.

At-rest attacks

Target coins whose public keys are already exposed on-chain.

Aim for a longer horizon: days, weeks, or longer — with time as the primary constraint, not a rapid transaction window.

No immediate transaction trigger is required; attackers can plan and execute when they have sufficient quantum capability.

The contrast is telling. On-spend attacks face a tight clock, while at-rest attacks operate on a long-term timescale, hinging on technical breakthroughs rather than a race against a block window. If a large tranche of the supply has already disclosed its public keys, the window for opportunistic action expands dramatically.

Dormant wallets: three vulnerability factors

Dormant wallets—those that have not actively moved funds or upgraded security—combine three attributes that amplify risk:

No defensive action: Active holders can migrate funds, refresh security models, or move assets into newer, quantum-resistant formats. Dormant holders lack such pathways, leaving coins exposed without recourse.

Long exposure windows: Since public keys may already be on-chain, attackers can operate offline with less urgency, reducing the urgency imposed by short confirmation times.

High-value concentration: Many early Bitcoin holdings have appreciated substantially in value. High-value, dormant coins create a prime target profile for any future quantum-era exploit.

Notes from industry observers emphasize that coins in inactive wallets cannot upgrade their security after the fact. Thus, the burden of adoption and migration would fall to active participants and future protocol changes, not the dormant accounts themselves.

Which wallets are most exposed

The risk is not uniform across the blockchain. Several categories stand out as more exposed than others:

Old P2PK outputs

These early formats reveal public keys directly on-chain when spent, offering little additional protection against quantum-enabled adversaries.

Address reuse

When an address is spent from and then reused, the public key becomes visible after the first spend. Any remaining funds in that address become more vulnerable as well.

Certain modern script formats, such as those associated with Taproot, also expose public-key material in ways that could fall into an at-rest exposure category under quantum assumptions. While Taproot was designed to improve efficiency and privacy, it does not entirely escape the theoretical risk if keys remain exposed long-term due to address reuse or legacy holdings.

The scale of the problem: dormant coins dominate the risk

Quantifying quantum risk goes beyond theoretical math; it hinges on measurable exposure. Reports indicate that billions of dollars’ worth of Bitcoin remains in addresses whose public keys are exposed, with a significant portion tracing back to early-era mining rewards. A notable share of these coins has not moved for more than a decade, creating a silent pool of assets that could become vulnerable as quantum capabilities advance. Among the most cited examples are the large blocks rewarded to miners in Bitcoin’s infancy — many of these blocks yielded 50 BTC rewards that subsequently remained idle for years. This concentration implies that the largest quantum-targets are often the largest Bitcoin holdings.

A deeper challenge: Dormant wallets and network governance

The emergence of a quantum threat for dormant wallets also raises governance and policy questions that extend beyond pure cryptography. If a future quantum attack were to surface, the Bitcoin community might face difficult choices about asset salvage, fund protection, or even temporary protocol adjustments to address long-dormant coins. Questions include whether such coins should remain spendable, whether there should be mechanisms to protect or freeze longitudinal holdings, and how public policy interacts with the immutable nature of the protocol when a subset of assets appears irrecoverable by design.

Why this doesn’t mean Bitcoin is broken

Crucially, observers stress that there is no current, widely accepted evidence that quantum computers capable of breaking Bitcoin’s cryptography exist today. The development path toward practical, scalable quantum systems is expected to span years, if not decades, of sustained engineering progress. The risk is not imminent, but incremental and evolving. In the near term, the impact is likely to be selective rather than universal as early-stage quantum capabilities emerge and defenses are refined. Active users can adapt more quickly than dormant wallets, which means mitigation may initially favor those who actively manage their keys and upgrade security models.

What can be done in the meantime

Holders and the broader ecosystem can take concrete steps to reduce exposure and accelerate readiness:

Minimize public-key exposure: Avoid address reuse and curb unnecessary early revelation of public keys, maintaining better separation between on-chain activity and key exposure.

Migration pathways: Develop and promote clear routes for moving funds into quantum-resistant formats as these technologies mature, ensuring a smooth transition for users who want to upgrade their security posture.

Continued protocol research: Ongoing work explores integrating quantum-resistant cryptography with Bitcoin’s core properties, aiming to preserve security and decentralization without introducing new central points of failure.

Practically, these measures primarily benefit active participants today, highlighting the gap between movable funds and long-dormant assets. The broader lesson is that a staged approach to upgrading cryptography may be essential to maintain resilience as technology evolves.

In summary, the dormant-wallet vulnerability reframes the quantum risk narrative for Bitcoin. It underscores a layered challenge: the network isn’t threatened as a monolith, but certain pockets of the supply could be more fragile than others if and when quantum capabilities advance. The future resilience of Bitcoin will depend not only on breakthroughs in quantum hardware but on decisive action by the ecosystem to strengthen, migrate, and adapt the way keys are managed across the lifecycle of the blockchain.

Readers should watch for ongoing research into quantum-resistant cryptography, milestones in post-quantum upgrades, and policy discussions about how to handle historical holdings that may be irretrievably exposed to future computational breakthroughs. The next phase will likely hinge on practical migration pathways and protocol-level safeguards that can extend protection to both active and dormant users without compromising Bitcoin’s core principles.

This article was originally published as Dormant Bitcoin Wallets Pose the Biggest Quantum Risk, Explained on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Scope of Interfaces to Be Covered

The Commission outlined covered user interfaces as websites, browser extensions, or applications associated with crypto wallets. These applications assist users to plan and start transactions on blockchain platforms or smart contracts. Also in the guidelines, there are platforms that provide routing information, pricing and cost estimates of transactions. Such interfaces provide support to users that make use of self-custodial wallets to conduct crypto asset securities trades. They might also contain aggregators and swap platforms that show execution paths. As a result, the SEC acknowledges their functions in operations but does not differentiate them from the traditional intermediaries.

The SEC, however, added that it will not object to some platforms functioning without registration of a broker-dealer in some circumstances. The platforms should enable users to customise the parameters of transactions and offer educational aids to make informed choices. In addition, they should not give instructions to the users on certain securities transactions. The Commission highlighted that platforms should be neutral when offering trading options. The interface providers can provide default execution facilities, but they are not able to rank or favor specific trades. Therefore, it requires compliance by ensuring that the user is in control and restricting access to the results of transactions.

Section 15 of the Exchange Act that regulates the registration of brokers is referred to as the guidance. Though certain interfaces might fit the definition of brokers, the SEC made it clear that there are situations in which the enforcement might not be applicable. Moreover, such a strategy is an indication of a loose reading of the law on securities. The research head of Galaxy Digital Alex Thorn claimed that the SEC is moving forward with market structure without legislation. He observed that the agency is developing rules that resemble the ones suggested in the CLARITY Act. Furthermore, he emphasised the fact that the guidance provided to the staff might change with time.

Also, the guidance can facilitate future exemption of innovation covered by the SEC leadership. This may go as far as tokenised securities trading via automated systems and decentralised applications. The agency therefore keeps on demarcating operational limits of new crypto services. The crypto regulation debate in the U.S. Senate is set to be reintroduced in the near future. The legislators can proceed with official reviews and amendments of the suggested bill. The schedule indicates that there will be ongoing liaison between regulatory and legislative action.

This article was originally published as The SEC Conditionalises DeFi Platforms to Be Avoided for Broker Registration on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

This editorial introduces a press release describing a rapid market reassessment driven by geopolitical tensions and a rise in oil prices. It notes that talks with Pakistan collapsed and a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has occurred, shifting sentiment from relief to caution across energy and equity markets. The release links higher crude costs to potential inflationary pressure and central‑bank policy responses, while framing the upcoming earnings season as a gauge for how firms price energy risk. A market analyst is quoted on whether the move signals a short‑term tactic or the start of a longer supply shock, a distinction readers will weigh carefully.

Key points

Crude prices have risen about 8% on the development, signaling tighter energy markets.

US equity futures have slipped as markets reassess risk and potential supply disruptions.

Emergency stockpiles are being drawn down and the IEA warns that supply pressures could intensify.

S&P 500 earnings are expected to grow about 12.6% this quarter, with major banks set to report; forward guidance will be critical.

Why it matters

The practical effect of geopolitical risk and higher energy costs extends to inflation expectations, borrowing costs, and corporate forecasting. If the disruption proves temporary, markets may adjust; if it persists, inflation and policy responses could become louder market drivers. For readers, traders, and investors, the message is to monitor how energy risk is priced into forecasts and what earnings commentary reveals about resilience or vulnerability in the near term.

What to watch

The ceasefire deadline of April 22 and any progress toward a resolution.

How companies adjust guidance on energy costs and demand in earnings reports.

Oil maintaining levels above $100 per barrel and the implications for inflation and policy.

Market volatility in response to headlines and headline-driven risk reassessment.

Disclosure: The content below is a press release provided by the company or its PR representative. It is published for informational purposes.

Markets Reprice as Oil Surges and Geopolitical Risks Escalate

Abu Dhabi, UAE -13 April 2026: Markets have rapidly shifted from optimism to uncertainty following the collapse of Pakistan talks and the immediate blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, reversing last week’s relief rally driven by ceasefire hopes. The move has already pushed crude prices higher by around 8%, while US equity futures have slipped, underscoring growing investor concern over potential disruptions to global energy supply.

Josh Gilbert Market Analyst At Etoro

Josh Gilbert, Market Analyst at eToro, said: “The key question for markets right now is whether this is a short-term negotiating tactic or the start of a more prolonged supply shock. If it’s temporary, markets may look through it. But if this disruption persists, the inflationary consequences will be significant and will quickly move back to the top of the agenda for investors.”

Higher oil prices are already feeding into global inflation expectations, complicating the outlook for central banks that had been edging closer to rate cuts. With oil expected to remain above USD $100, policymakers may be forced to delay easing plans, adding further pressure on consumer sentiment and economic growth.

The impact is being felt globally, with emergency stockpiles being drawn down and limited buffer capacity to absorb further shocks. Warnings from the International Energy Agency suggest supply pressures could intensify in the coming weeks, increasing the risk of sustained volatility across energy markets.

This backdrop coincides with the start of US earnings season, where the S&P 500 is expected to report earnings growth of approximately 12.6%, marking a sixth consecutive quarter of double-digit growth. Major banks including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, and Citi are set to report, offering early insight into how rising geopolitical tensions are impacting the real economy.

Gilbert added: “Forward guidance will be critical this earnings season. While first-quarter results may not fully reflect the impact of higher oil prices, the real focus will be on whether companies are starting to factor in a prolonged disruption. Any signs of caution around consumer spending, corporate confidence, or deal activity could add another layer of pressure on markets.”

With the ceasefire deadline approaching on April 22 and no clear path to resolution, markets are expected to remain highly sensitive to headlines. Volatility is likely to persist, with investors needing to stay prepared for further downside risks if tensions continue to escalate.

About eToro

Etoro Logo

eToro is the trading and investing platform that empowers you to invest, share and learn. Founded in 2007 with the vision of a world where everyone can trade and invest in a simple and transparent way, today eToro has 40 million registered users from 75 countries.

eToro believes in the power of shared knowledge and that investors can become more successful by investing together. The platform has built a collaborative investment community designed to provide users with the tools they need to grow their knowledge and wealth. On eToro, users can hold a range of traditional and innovative assets and choose how they invest: trade directly, invest in a portfolio, or copy other investors.

Visit eToro’s media centre for the latest news.

This article was originally published as Markets Reprice as Oil Surges on Escalating Geopolitical Risks on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The European Central Bank is charting a cautious path toward tokenizing Europe’s capital markets, arguing that the gains from distributed ledger technology (DLT) hinge on anchoring transactions in central bank money, ensuring interoperable infrastructures, and maintaining a robust regulatory framework.

In its latest Macroprudential Bulletin, the ECB notes that tokenization could deepen the EU’s savings and investments union, but warns gains depend on policy action keeping pace with evolving risks. The stance signals a measured push to modernize market plumbing without compromising financial stability or monetary control.

Key takeaways

Tokenization could streamline the issuance-to-settlement chain and boost liquidity, but true gains require interoperable platforms and central bank money for settlement, not just private or commercial instruments.

Early evidence from tokenized bonds points to lower borrowing costs and tighter bid-ask spreads, yet these improvements depend on scale, risk controls, and market adoption.

Tokenized money market funds and euro-denominated stablecoins are analyzed as experiments in on-chain cash-like instruments, bringing new operational vulnerabilities alongside familiar liquidity risks.

MiCA-compliant euro stablecoins could influence sovereign-bond demand and market resilience, depending on how issuers meet deposit and reserve requirements.

Across five Bulletin pieces, the ECB stresses that tokenization can support a more integrated capital market only if policy, prudential rules, and central-bank infrastructure evolve in tandem.

Tokenized capital markets: Conditions and expected benefits

The ECB’s analysis outlines how tokenized assets could rewire the issuance-to-settlement chain by moving both securities and cash onto compatible ledgers and by automating corporate actions. By doing so, the authors argue, operational frictions tied to multiple intermediaries and legacy systems could be reduced, potentially unlocking improved secondary liquidity. Yet the potential gains hinge on avoiding a patchwork of incompatible platforms and ensuring that central bank money—not merely commercial bank money or privately issued tokens—can be used for settlement in tokenized markets.

One article in the Bulletin highlights that tokenization and DLT are moving from concept to early-scale deployment, but the benefits will be realized safely only if European policy action keeps pace. This framing underscores the balance policymakers are seeking: enabling innovation while preserving financial stability and monetary integrity. For market participants, that means pilots and gradually expanded use cases rather than rapid, broad-based deployment.

The Bulletin also flags the need for robust interoperability standards and risk governance to prevent fragmentation as tokenized infrastructure expands. In practical terms, that could mean common settlement rails, standardized corporate-action workflows, and clear rules on settlement finality and collateral management across platforms.

Tokenized MMFs and euro stablecoins under the lens

The bulletin treats tokenized money market funds (MMFs) as a parallel set of experiments that largely mirror the liquidity and run-risk profile of traditional MMFs, but with added operational vulnerabilities inherent to on-chain structures. The analysis invites scrutiny of how such funds would behave under stress and how they interact with on-chain cash-like instruments during adverse conditions.

A separate piece examines euro-denominated, MiCA-compliant stablecoins and their potential impact on sovereign debt markets. Depending on whether issuers meet deposit and reserve requirements, these on-chain tokens could act as a liquidity buffer in turbulent times or, conversely, become a channel for bank contagion. The report emphasizes the regulatory hinge: the way deposits, reserves, and governance are structured will shape how these stablecoins influence demand for government bonds and overall market stability.

Broader implications and what to watch

Together, the five pieces in the Bulletin lay out a clear, conditional path for tokenization: it can support Europe’s goal of a more integrated and efficient capital market, but only if policy direction, prudential oversight, and central-bank infrastructure evolve in lockstep. The ECB’s nuanced stance reflects an intention to reap potential benefits while keeping a tight line on risk management, liquidity resilience, and monetary integrity as tokenized formats scale beyond flagship deals and select issuers.

For investors and market builders, the early signals are instructive. Tokenized bonds showing lower borrowing costs in initial deployments suggest real efficiency gains from streamlined settlement and enhanced transparency. Yet those advantages are not guaranteed to persist once activity broadens: scale, legal clarity, and robust liquidity mechanisms will determine whether the benefits are durable or merely episodic. The same tension applies to tokenized MMFs and stablecoins, where innovation can improve access to liquidity but must not outpace safeguards around reserve adequacy and systemic risk.

Policymakers appear determined to preserve a centralized architectural logic—anchoring settlements in central bank money and ensuring regulatory clarity—while allowing the market to experiment with tokenized formats. The coming months could bring pilot programs, shared standards, and possible adjustments to settlement infrastructures, as Europe weighs how best to harmonize technology, law, and prudential rules.

Readers should watch how the ECB formalizes these concepts in concrete policy and industry guidance, and how market participants respond to any push toward standardized cross-platform settlement rails. The balancing act between innovation and stability will continue to shape the pace and scope of tokenized instruments across Europe.

The ECB did not respond to Cointelegraph for comment by publication.

This article was originally published as ECB Approves Tokenized EU Capital Markets With Guardrails on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Netflix enters Q1 with a clearer narrative after shelving the Warner Bros. Discovery acquisition, shifting investor attention toward fundamentals and growth drivers. The company reiterates a Q1 revenue target of $12.16 billion, about 15% higher than a year earlier, and an EPS of $0.76, while guiding full-year revenue of $50.7–$51.7 billion and a 31.5% operating margin (up from 29.5% in 2025). The message also notes the resumption of its buyback program, US price increases, and a rapidly expanding advertising business that could diversify revenue beyond subscriptions. With $20 billion planned for content this year, the question is whether growth remains profitable.

Key points

Q1 revenue guidance of $12.16B with about 15% YoY growth and EPS of $0.76.

Full-year revenue guidance of $50.7–$51.7B and an operating margin of 31.5% (vs 29.5% in 2025).

Warner Bros. Discovery deal abandoned; buyback program resumed; US price increases implemented.

Advertising revenue rose sharply in 2025 (to about $1.5B) and is expected to reach roughly $3B in 2026.

Why it matters

The preview signals Netflix is balancing strong content investment with profitability, as investors assess whether growth can continue alongside margin expansion. The removal of the Warner deal overhang, renewed buybacks, and a rising ad-supported tier give a more complete picture of Netflix’s revenue mix and potential for higher-margin growth beyond subscriptions.

What to watch

Q1 actual results: revenue, EPS, and how they compare to guidance.

Performance of the ad-supported tier and total ad revenue progression toward $3B in 2026.

Impact of US price increases and content spending on margins and subscriber dynamics.

Disclosure: The content below is a press release provided by the company or its PR representative. It is published for informational purposes.

Netflix Q1 Preview: $12.16B Revenue, 15% Growth

Abu Dhabi, UAE -13 April 2026: Netflix enters its first-quarter earnings in a notably different position compared to three months ago, with renewed investor focus on fundamentals following key strategic shifts, according to the latest market commentary from eToro.

Josh Gilbert Market Analyst At Etoro

Josh Gilbert, Market Analyst at eToro, highlighted that Netflix’s decision to walk away from the Warner Bros. Discovery acquisition in March has removed a major overhang for investors, while the resumption of its share buyback programme and recent US price increases have further reshaped sentiment around the stock.

“Netflix is heading into this earnings season with a cleaner narrative,” said Gilbert. “With the Warner deal off the table, investor attention can now return squarely to fundamentals and growth drivers.”

Netflix has guided for Q1 revenue of $12.16 billion, representing approximately 15% year-on-year growth, alongside earnings per share of $0.76. For the full year, the company expects revenue between $50.7 billion and $51.7 billion, with an operating margin of 31.5%, up from 29.5% in 2025.

Gilbert noted that the company’s previous earnings fell short of analyst expectations, particularly around forward guidance, placing added pressure on this quarter’s results.

“With $20 billion earmarked for content spend this year, the market will be looking closely at whether Netflix can sustain growth without eroding profitability,” he added.

A key area of focus for investors this quarter will be Netflix’s advertising business. Following a milestone of more than 325 million subscribers last quarter, the company’s advertising revenue more than doubled in 2025 to approximately $1.5 billion and is expected to double again to $3 billion this year.

“Advertising is quickly becoming a critical second revenue engine for Netflix,” Gilbert explained. “If Q1 results show the ad-supported tier remains on track, it strengthens the case that Netflix can drive higher-margin growth beyond subscriptions.”

With the Warner deal no longer a factor, the buyback programme back in motion, and its advertising business scaling rapidly, Gilbert believes Netflix has an opportunity to reinforce its leadership position in the streaming sector.

“This is a pivotal quarter for Netflix to remind the market why it continues to lead the streaming space,” he concluded.

About eToro

Etoro

eToro is the trading and investing platform that empowers you to invest, share and learn. Founded in 2007 with the vision of a world where everyone can trade and invest in a simple and transparent way, today eToro has 40 million registered users from 75 countries.

eToro believes in the power of shared knowledge and that investors can become more successful by investing together. The platform has built a collaborative investment community designed to provide users with the tools they need to grow their knowledge and wealth. On eToro, users can hold a range of traditional and innovative assets and choose how they invest: trade directly, invest in a portfolio, or copy other investors.

Visit eToro’s media centre for the latest news.

This article was originally published as Netflix Q1 Preview: Revenue at $12.16B, 15% Growth on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin markets are digesting a milestone in traditional finance as Morgan Stanley launches a spot bitcoin ETF (MSBT). The announcement sits alongside recent price action and macro-headline risk, illustrating how institutional access to crypto could broaden exposure for clients managed by thousands of advisors. The ETF’s debut is described as strong, with notable first-day inflows and trading activity, while privacy-focused assets and other major developments continue to shape the crypto landscape. As macro data and geopolitical narratives unfold, readers should watch how this product interacts with market dynamics and what it signals for future crypto offerings.

Key points

Morgan Stanley launched a spot bitcoin ETF (MSBT).

First-day inflows exceeded $33.8 million and more than 1.6 million shares were traded.

Morgan Stanley’s advisor network (~16,000 advisors, ~$6.2 trillion in client assets) positions the product to attract inflows.

Morgan Stanley has filed for spot ether and spot solana ETFs for potential launches later this year.

Why it matters

This development signals growing access to bitcoin exposure through established financial networks, potentially expanding the buyer base and impacting liquidity in the spot market. As Morgan Stanley leverages its advisory footprint (16,000 advisors overseeing about $6.2 trillion), the ETF could draw inflows beyond existing crypto holdings. In the near term, price action will likely respond to macro data, including the US PPI, and to shifts in risk sentiment, making the relationship between traditional finance products and crypto markets an important watch for traders, investors, and developers.

What to watch

Near-term ETF performance: inflows and trading activity for MSBT.

Potential launches of spot ether and spot solana ETFs by Morgan Stanley later this year.

Macro data, especially US PPI, and its influence on crypto momentum.

Disclosure: The content below is a press release provided by the company or its PR representative. It is published for informational purposes.

Bitcoin rallies to three-week high as Morgan Stanley launches spot bitcoin ETF

Abu Dhabi, UAE -13 April 2026: Bitcoin climbed to a three-week high of $73,800 last week, before pulling back amid renewed geopolitical uncertainty, according to the latest market commentary from eToro.

Simon Peters Crypto Analyst Etoro

Simon Peters, Crypto Analyst at eToro, noted that markets were initially supported by news of a temporary two-week ceasefire. However, sentiment weakened following the failure of the US and Iran to reach a broader agreement, alongside escalating tensions after the US Navy’s move to blockade Iran’s ports.

“Geopolitical developments have reintroduced caution into the market after a brief period of optimism,” said Peters.

Looking ahead, investor attention is turning to upcoming US Producer Price Index (PPI) data, with markets assessing whether rising oil prices are beginning to filter through supply chains.

“A stronger-than-expected PPI reading could reinforce expectations that the Federal Reserve may keep rates higher for longer, or even consider further tightening, which could weigh on risk assets including crypto in the near term,” Peters added. “Conversely, softer inflation data may support the disinflation narrative and help restore upward momentum in crypto markets.”

Bitcoin has faced resistance in the $74,000–$76,000 range since February, with upcoming macroeconomic data likely to play a key role in determining whether a breakout is possible.

Privacy coins outperform

Elsewhere in the crypto market, privacy-focused assets led gains for a second consecutive week. Zcash ($ZEC) and Dash ($DASH) rose 41% and 34% respectively, driven by increasing interest in privacy solutions.

Peters highlighted that a growing number of influential voices within the crypto space are advocating for enhanced privacy on blockchain networks, arguing that increasing transparency is pushing some investors towards privacy-focused alternatives.

Morgan Stanley launches spot bitcoin ETF

In a significant industry development, Morgan Stanley launched its spot bitcoin ETF last week, trading under the ticker MSBT. This marks the first spot bitcoin ETF issued by a major US investment bank.

The fund recorded a strong debut, attracting over $33.8 million in inflows on its first day, with more than 1.6 million shares traded. According to Morgan Stanley’s Head of Digital Asset Strategy, Amy Oldenburg, the ETF had “the best first day of trading for any of our ETFs since we’ve started the ETF product line.”

With a network of over 16,000 financial advisors overseeing approximately $6.2 trillion in client assets, the bank is well-positioned to drive significant inflows into the product. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas estimates the fund could reach $5 billion in assets under management within its first year, potentially placing it among the top five spot bitcoin ETFs globally.

Morgan Stanley has also filed for spot ether and spot solana ETFs, which could launch later this year.

About eToro

eToro is the trading and investing platform that empowers you to invest, share and learn. Founded in 2007 with the vision of a world where everyone can trade and invest in a simple and transparent way, today eToro has 40 million registered users from 75 countries.

eToro believes in the power of shared knowledge and that investors can become more successful by investing together. The platform has built a collaborative investment community designed to provide users with the tools they need to grow their knowledge and wealth. On eToro, users can hold a range of traditional and innovative assets and choose how they invest: trade directly, invest in a portfolio, or copy other investors.

Visit eToro’s media centre for the latest news.

This article was originally published as Bitcoin rallies to a high as Morgan Stanley launches spot bitcoin ETF on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin Leads Inflows As Market Sentiment Improves

Digital asset investment products recorded US$1.1 billion in inflows during the past week. This marks the highest weekly total since early January. The rise came as investor sentiment improved across global markets.

Lower than expected US CPI data supported risk appetite. At the same time, easing geopolitical tensions added confidence among investors. These factors helped push fresh capital into crypto funds.

Bitcoin remained the main driver of these inflows. It attracted US$871 million during the week. This brought its year-to-date total close to US$2 billion.

Digital asset investment products saw US$1.1bn of inflows, the strongest since January, driven by improved lower than expected CPI and easing geopolitics.

Bitcoin led with US$871m inflows, Ethereum saw a notable recovery, while short-bitcoin products recorded their largest… pic.twitter.com/A7nRdNhw2f

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) April 13, 2026

However, short Bitcoin products also saw activity. They recorded US$20.2 million in inflows. This was the largest weekly figure since November 2024, and it pointed to continued hedging by some investors.

A market note stated, ‘$871M BTC inflows alongside rising short-bitcoin products is a notable split.’ It added that these positions may reflect hedging rather than bearish views.

Ethereum Rebounds While Regional Flows Stay US-Focused

Ethereum showed a recovery in investor demand during the same period. It recorded inflows of US$196.5 million. This marked a shift after weeks of weaker sentiment.

Despite the recent inflows, Ethereum remains in a net outflow position for the year. This shows that earlier withdrawals still outweigh recent gains. Still, the latest data suggests improving confidence.

Other digital assets saw limited movement. XRP recorded inflows of US$19.3 million. Meanwhile, Solana posted small outflows of US$2.5 million during the week.

Regionally, the United States dominated the inflow data. It accounted for US$1.06 billion, or about 95% of total flows. This shows that US investors drove most of the activity.

Germany followed with US$34.6 million in inflows. Canada and Switzerland reported smaller figures of US$7.8 million and US$6.9 million. These numbers show a more modest response outside the US.

Trading Volumes Rise But Remain Below Yearly Average

Trading activity increased during the week, although it stayed below typical levels. Volumes rose by 13% compared to the previous week. However, total trading reached only US$21 billion.

This remains below the year-to-date weekly average of US$31 billion. The gap suggests that while inflows improved, overall trading activity is still moderate. Investors may be adding positions without heavy trading.

Assets under management also showed recovery. Total AuM returned to levels last seen in early February. This reflects both price stability and renewed inflows into funds.

The mix of strong Bitcoin inflows and rising short positions suggests a balanced approach. Some investors appear to be adding exposure, while others are managing risk. A note stated, ‘The shorts could be institutional hedges on spot ETF positions, not directional bets.’

As market conditions stabilize, fund flows may continue to respond to macro signals. Investors are closely monitoring inflation data and global developments. These factors remain key drivers of crypto fund activity.

This article was originally published as Bitcoin Tops $1.1 Billion Crypto Inflows as Ethereum Posts Strong Rebound on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Key Takeaways

Strategy buys Bitcoin faster than miners produce new supply

Holdings near 800K BTC as accumulation pace sharply increases

$14.5B unrealized losses fail to slow aggressive buying strategy

Bitcoin traded near $71,800, maintaining strength above the $70,000 level for several days. Meanwhile, Michael Saylor indicated another acquisition cycle for Strategy. The signal followed a recent price pullback after highs above $73,000.

Strategy recently acquired 4,871 BTC, expanding its already dominant position in the market. Consequently, total holdings reached 766,970 BTC, valued at over $54 billion. The company continues to accumulate despite short-term price fluctuations and market uncertainty.

The firm now carries nearly $14.5 billion in unrealized losses based on recent filings. Its average acquisition cost stands at $75,644 per Bitcoin. Even so, the company maintains its long-term accumulation strategy without slowing purchases.

Bitcoin Supply Dynamics Shift as Strategy Outpaces Miners

Strategy’s buying pace now exceeds the rate of new Bitcoin production by miners. In March alone, the company accumulated 46,233 BTC. Meanwhile, global mining output produced approximately 16,200 BTC during the same period.

This imbalance highlights a tightening supply environment driven by institutional demand. As a result, analysts point to a potential supply squeeze in the market. The company’s actions amplify pressure on available circulating Bitcoin.

At the same time, Strategy continues funding purchases through its preferred equity product. The structure allows ongoing capital inflows to support accumulation. Therefore, sustained demand depends on continued investor participation in these offerings.

Bitcoin Strategy Expands Holdings Despite Losses and Market Pressure

Strategy began accumulating Bitcoin in 2020 and has completed over 100 purchases. Its current reserve remains the largest among corporate holders. By comparison, other firms hold significantly smaller Bitcoin reserves.

Some companies have reduced exposure during the same period due to market pressure. For instance, MARA Holdings sold over 15,000 BTC to improve financial flexibility. This contrast highlights differing approaches within the sector.

Looking ahead, Strategy’s holdings may exceed 800,000 BTC if current trends continue. The company maintains a consistent buying pace despite volatility. As a result, its actions continue shaping Bitcoin’s broader market dynamics.

This article was originally published as Bitcoin Holds Above $70K as Strategy Signals New Buy on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The technology that promises to scale community engagement is actually destroying the human element that made crypto worth building.

The Irony Nobody’s Talking About

Cryptocurrency was supposed to return power to communities. Decentralized. Grassroots. Built by humans, for humans. The early Bitcoin forums weren’t managed by algorithms. Ethereum communities didn’t scale through automation. These movements grew because real people, with real conviction, showed up and built something together.

Now? Walk into any crypto Discord and you’ll find:

AI bots managing moderation and engagement

Automated responses to community questions

Algorithm-driven content recommendations

Community managers using AI to scale their outreach

The irony is crushing: we’re using technology designed to remove human friction to manage communities that only existed because of human connection.

What We’re Actually Losing

This isn’t a Luddite complaint about AI. This is about what happens when you optimize for scale at the expense of authenticity.

Before: A crypto project launched. Community members chose to be there. They read whitepapers. Asked hard questions. Built genuine conviction. The forum discussions were messy, contradictory, human. That friction created real believers.

Now: A crypto project launches. AI bots welcome users. Automated systems answer FAQs. Content feeds are algorithmically optimized. The experience is frictionless. And completely hollow.

The difference sounds small. It isn’t.

When you remove friction, you remove thinking. When you automate responses, you remove dialogue. When you optimize engagement through AI, you remove commitment.

What you’re left with is the illusion of community—metrics that look good (Discord members: 50K! Engagement rate: 8%!) but no actual humans who believe in anything.

This Is Happening Right Now

Look at what’s actually happening in crypto in 2025:

Discord communities are being managed by AI systems that detect sentiment, respond to questions, and moderate automatically. These systems are efficient. They’re also soulless. A 23-year-old with a real question about tokenomics gets an AI response. They feel seen by an algorithm, not a community.

Telegram groups are flooded with AI-generated trading advice, price predictions, and engagement content. Nobody’s writing these posts because they believe them. They’re generated by systems trained to maximize engagement. The signal-to-noise ratio is collapsing.

NFT communities that once rallied around artist vision are now using AI to generate community engagement content. Projects that built brand loyalty through authentic artist-community connection are replacing that with scaled, automated, generic content.

DeFi protocol governance is increasingly mediated through AI that analyzes sentiment and optimizes community feedback. Real humans discussing real governance decisions are being filtered through systems that reward certain types of arguments and suppress others.

This is the death of community masquerading as community optimization.

Why This Matters For Crypto Specifically

Other industries can handle this. Consumer brands can use AI to manage customers. SaaS companies can scale support through automation.

But crypto is different. Crypto’s entire value proposition is that it’s not managed by corporations. It’s not optimized by algorithms owned by distant companies. It’s built by communities that actually care.

When you automate community, you’re not just optimizing operations. You’re destroying the thing that made crypto different in the first place.

The early wave of crypto adoption happened because people felt something real. They read Satoshi’s whitepaper and thought: This is actually different. They joined forums and debated with actual humans who also believed. That belief—earned through friction, through real dialogue, through actual community—is what created adoption.

Now? You join a crypto project’s Discord and you’re interacting with bots. You ask a question and get an AI response. You see community engagement that’s algorithmically optimized. And somewhere deep down, you know none of it’s real.

You can’t build movements on that. You can build metrics. But not movements.

The Cost of Scale

Here’s the brutal truth: AI community management works. It scales. It’s efficient. Discord members grow. Engagement metrics rise. Twitter impressions increase. From a dashboard perspective, it looks great.

But it’s the wrong optimization.

Crypto doesn’t need to scale community. It needs to deepen it. It needs fewer people who actually believe, not more people who feel nothing.

The projects that will actually survive the next cycle aren’t going to be the ones with the biggest Discord or the highest engagement rate. They’ll be the ones with communities that are genuinely convinced. That made real decisions about the technology. That showed up because they believed, not because an algorithm told them to.

And those communities? They’re built by humans, in real conversations, with real friction.

What Authentic Community Actually Looks Like

If you want to see the difference, look at the projects that are still building community the old way:

Founders who show up and answer questions personally

Communities where conversations are messy and contradictory

Discord servers where actual humans moderate slowly, imperfectly

Projects that prioritize depth of engagement over scale

These communities are smaller. They’re slower. They’re less efficient. They’re also the only ones that actually believe in what they’re building.

The Question For Builders

If you’re building a crypto project right now, here’s the real question: Do you want a community, or do you want community metrics?

Because you can’t have both.

You can scale engagement with AI. You can grow Discord members with bots. You can optimize content with algorithms. But you’ll be left with an audience, not a community. And audiences are hollow. They’re here for the next thing. They don’t believe.

Communities are people who show up because they actually care. They’re built slowly, through real conversation, by real humans who believe in what you’re building.

The crypto that wins in the next cycle won’t be the projects with the best AI community tools. It’ll be the ones that had the courage to leave community in the hands of humans.

Even if that means it grows slower. Even if that means engagement rates are lower. Even if that means it’s messier.

Because authentic beats scaled every single time.

The Uncomfortable Truth

We’re at a inflection point in crypto. The technology is maturing. Projects are getting serious. Organizations are professionalizing.

That’s fine. But not if it comes at the cost of what made crypto worth building in the first place.

If every crypto project becomes just another professionally managed community, optimized by AI, scaled by algorithms, then crypto becomes just another thing. Just another app. Just another platform.

The moment you automate community, you’ve admitted defeat. You’ve said: We can’t actually inspire people, so we’ll simulate the appearance of inspiration with algorithms.

That’s not community. That’s performance art.

And crypto was never supposed to be performance art.

This article was originally published as How AI Is Killing Authentic Crypto Community on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

StarkWare, the zero-knowledge scaling pioneer behind zk-STARKs, is restructuring its operations and reducing staff as it pivots from pure infrastructure development to revenue-driving products. CEO Eli Ben-Sasson outlined a plan to create two focused business units—one handling applications and the other continuing Starknet development—with a “startup mode” mindset designed to accelerate monetization. The company did not disclose how many employees will be affected.

The move highlights a broader trend in the crypto industry: firms tightening strategy and trimming headcount in pursuit of clearer product-market fit and stronger monetization opportunities. In the past few weeks, other notable players, including Messari, the Algorand Foundation, and Crypto.com, announced layoffs or organizational adjustments as part of a wider recalibration.

Key takeaways

StarkWare will split into two business units—Applications and Starknet development—to concentrate on revenue-generating activities.

Leadership emphasizes converting StarkWare’s technology into meaningful revenue and usage, reducing reliance on external blockchains or third-party teams to demonstrate value.

The restructuring adopts a “startup mode,” prioritizing a smaller set of initiatives with higher revenue potential and cost discipline across the organization.

The broader crypto sector has seen several high-profile layoffs and realignments, underscoring a shift toward sustainable business models and clearer monetization paths.

StarkWare’s pivot: monetizing core tech through a two-unit model

In remarks shared with staff, Ben-Sasson described the next phase for StarkWare as an explicit shift from building infrastructure to turning its stack into revenue. He said the company would “innovate across not just infrastructure, as we’ve done so far, but across the whole stack of infrastructure and product.” The two-unit structure is intended to differentiate product-oriented applications from ongoing Starknet development work, allowing each to pursue distinct paths to growth.

Ben-Sasson stressed that the company must translate its technical edge into tangible commercial outcomes. “We’re going to achieve this by innovating across not just infrastructure, but across the whole stack of infrastructure and product,” he said. A key aim is to deliver products with clear revenue potential that can be built on StarkWare’s foundational technology, rather than relying primarily on external blockchains or third-party teams to validate value.

While StarkWare has long been recognized for its technical prowess in layer-2 scaling, the leadership signal here is that the team plans to move beyond experimental deployments and toward solutions that users and developers will pay for. The company signaled a tighter focus on initiatives with measurable monetization upside, even as it continues to invest in core zk-STARK capabilities and Starknet development.

Broader sector context: a wave of retrenchment across crypto

The restructuring at StarkWare mirrors other recent moves across the crypto industry as firms reassess priorities amid macro uncertainties and a crypto downturn. In March, Messari announced layoffs alongside leadership changes as it pivoted toward AI-powered research and data tools for institutional clients. Shortly after, the Algorand Foundation said it would cut about a quarter of its workforce to better align resources with long-term technology and ecosystem priorities. Crypto.com also disclosed a 12% workforce reduction as it reorganized around AI initiatives and growth areas.

Industry observers say the pattern reflects a broader market recalibration where economic realities and the need for sustainable business models trump rapid expansion. For StarkWare, the question is whether the two-unit approach can accelerate the commercialization of zk-based solutions while preserving the research depth that underpins its technology stack.

Implications for StarkNet, developers, and investors

The shift toward monetized applications built on StarkWare’s stack could create clearer value pathways for developers and enterprises seeking scalable, privacy-preserving solutions. By separating application-focused work from Starknet core development, the company can cultivate a more predictable product roadmap and potentially faster go-to-market cycles. For investors and ecosystem participants, the move potentially signals a more disciplined balance between research excellence and revenue generation—an important consideration in a field where long-tail adoption depends on viable business models as much as technical superiority.

However, the path forward also carries risks. Staff reductions can strain ongoing research and engineering momentum, particularly in a field where rapid iteration and collaboration with external partners drive progress. The two-unit framework will need to demonstrate that it can sustain innovation while delivering reliable, market-ready products. If revenue-focused initiatives lag behind plans, the company’s ability to attract ongoing talent and maintain ecosystem trust could hinge on the tangible outcomes of its new structure.

From an ecosystem perspective, there is potential upside for StarkNet users and developers if the company’s applications unit launches tools and services that lower integration costs or offer compelling throughput gains. If monetization aligns with user demand—such as cost-effective transaction throughput, privacy-preserving features, or developer-friendly tooling—the resulting adoption could reinforce StarkWare’s position in the zk-rollup landscape. Yet the timeline for monetization remains a key unknown, given the nascent stage of many zk-powered offerings and the competitive dynamics of layer-2 ecosystems.

What to watch next

Readers should monitor how the two-unit structure unfolds in practice, including whether the applications unit produces revenue-generating products within a defined timeline and how Starknet development performance tracks alongside commercial initiatives. The tech community will be watching closely to see if StarkWare can translate its technical edge into repeatable business outcomes and how this approach affects collaboration with developers building on StarkNet.

Given the broader industry backdrop, investors and builders may view StarkWare’s restructuring as a test of whether a high-caliber research-centric firm can pivot toward sustainable monetization without compromising technical leadership. The coming quarters will reveal how effectively the company can align its ambitious zk-stack with market demand, and whether the two-unit model can deliver the revenue stability that many crypto projects have sought but struggled to achieve.

As StarkWare pursues this transition, stakeholders should watch for concrete milestones—from product launches and revenue milestones in the applications unit to updates on Starknet development milestones that reflect progress beyond research prototypes. The outcome could influence how other zk-focused firms think about balancing deep technology with market-ready offerings in a climate where disciplined execution increasingly governs success.

In the meantime, the broader market will likely continue to recalibrate around governance, adoption, and monetization signals. The coming months will show whether StarkWare’s restructuring translates into durable value for users, developers, and investors alike, and how the company navigates the inevitable tensions between maintaining cutting-edge research and delivering commercial-grade products.

This article was originally published as StarkWare Cuts Staff to Focus on Revenue-Generating Products on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.