Giannis Andreou

What is proof-of-reserves?
At its core, proof-of-reserves is a public demonstration that a custodian holds the assets it claims to hold on behalf of users, typically using cryptographic methods and onchain transparency.
If every crypto exchange can publish a proof-of-reserves (PoR) report, why can withdrawals still be delayed or halted during a crisis?
The truth is that proof-of-reserves is not a trust guarantee. It shows whether verifiable assets exist on a platform at a single point in time, but it does not confirm that the platform is solvent, liquid or governed by controls that prevent hidden risk.
But even when executed properly, PoR is often a point-in-time snapshot that can miss what happened before and after the reporting moment.
Without a credible view of liabilities, PoR cannot prove solvency, which is what users actually need during periods of withdrawal stress.
What PoR proves and how it is usually done
In practice, PoR involves two checks: assets and, ideally, liabilities.
On the asset side, an exchange shows that it controls certain wallets, usually by publishing addresses or signing messages.
Liabilities are trickier. Most exchanges take a snapshot of user balances and commit it to a Merkle tree, often a Merkle-sum tree. Users can then confirm that their balance is included using an inclusion proof, without everyone’s balances being made public.
When done properly, PoR shows whether onchain assets cover customer balances at a specific moment.
How an exchange can “pass PoR” and still be risky
PoR can improve transparency, but it shouldn’t be relied on as the sole measure of a company’s financial health.
Of course, a report on assets without full liabilities does not demonstrate solvency. Even if onchain wallets appear strong, liabilities can be incomplete or selectively defined, missing items such as loans, derivatives exposure, legal claims or offchain payables. That can show funds exist without proving the business can meet all of its obligations.
Also, a single attestation does not reveal what the balance sheet looked like last week or what it looks like the day after the report. In theory, assets can be temporarily borrowed to improve the snapshot, then moved back out afterward.
Next, encumbrances often do not show up. PoR typically cannot tell you whether assets are pledged as collateral, lent out or otherwise tied up, meaning they may not be available when withdrawals spike.
Liquidity and valuation can also be misleading. Holding assets is not the same as being able to liquidate them quickly and at scale during periods of stress, especially if reserves are concentrated in thinly traded tokens. PoR does not address this issue; clearer risk and liquidity disclosures might.
PoR isn’t the same as an audit
A lot of the trust problem comes from a mismatch in expectations.

Many users treat PoR like a safety certificate. In reality, many PoR engagements resemble agreed-upon procedures (AUPs). In these cases, the practitioner performs specific checks and reports what was found without providing an audit-style opinion on the company’s overall health.
Indeed, an audit or even a review is designed to deliver an assurance conclusion within a formal framework. AUP reporting is narrower. It explains what was tested and what was observed, then leaves interpretation to the reader. Under International Standard on Related Services (ISRS) 4400, an AUP engagement is not an assurance engagement and does not express an opinion.
Regulators have highlighted this gap. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has warned that PoR reports are inherently limited and should not be treated as proof that an exchange has sufficient assets to meet its liabilities, especially given the lack of consistency in how PoR work is performed and described.
This is also why PoR drew increased scrutiny after 2022. Mazars paused work for crypto clients, citing concerns about how PoR-style reports were being presented and how the public might interpret them.
What’s a practical trust stack, then?
PoR can be a starting point, but real trust comes from pairing transparency with proof of solvency, strong governance and clear operational controls.
Start with solvency. The real step up is showing assets versus a complete set of liabilities, ensuring assets are greater than or equal to liabilities. Merkle-based liability proofs, along with newer zero-knowledge approaches, aim to close that gap without exposing individual balances.
Next, add assurance around how the exchange actually operates. A snapshot does not reveal whether the platform has disciplined controls such as key management, access permissions, change management, incident response, segregation of duties and custody workflows. This is why institutional due diligence often relies on System and Organization Controls (SOC)-style reporting and similar frameworks that measure controls over time, not just a balance at a single moment.
Make liquidity and encumbrance visible. Solvency on paper does not guarantee that an exchange can survive a run. Users need clarity on whether reserves are unencumbered and how quickly holdings can be converted into liquid assets at scale.
Anchor it in governance and disclosure. Credible oversight depends on clear custody frameworks, conflict management and consistent disclosures, especially for products that introduce additional obligations such as yield, margin and lending.
PoR helps, but it can’t replace accountability
PoR is better than nothing, but it remains a narrow, point-in-time check (even though it’s often marketed like a safety certificate).
On its own, PoR does not prove solvency, liquidity or control quality. So, before treating a PoR badge as “safe,” consider the following:
Are liabilities included, or is it assets only? Assets-only reporting cannot demonstrate solvency.What is in scope? Are margin, yield products, loans or offchain obligations excluded?Is it reporting a snapshot or ongoing? A single date can be dressed up. Consistency matters.Are reserves unencumbered? “Held” is not the same as “available during stress.”What kind of engagement is it? Many PoR reports are limited in scope and should not be read like an audit opinion.
$BTC $ETH $SOL

The speculative phase of the previous market cycle has largely ended. In its place, 2026 is revealing a different pattern. Capital is no longer flowing toward narratives built on future potential alone. It is concentrating around assets that already perform a function, generate cash flow, or provide system-level utility.
This shift can be described as a realization phase. Investors are reassessing what actually matters when growth slows, capital tightens, and geopolitical risk becomes persistent. Assets that consume capital without producing value are being repriced quickly. Assets tied to infrastructure, energy, security, and scarcity are attracting sustained interest.
The themes below reflect where capital is moving, not where marketing narratives are loudest. They are grouped by the role they play in the evolving global system rather than by short-term performance.
Artificial intelligence demand is exposing physical bottlenecks
One of the largest misconceptions about the artificial intelligence cycle was the belief that it would remain primarily digital. By 2026, that assumption has broken down. AI growth is running directly into physical constraints.
Data centers and power capacity are becoming strategic assets
Compute demand is no longer theoretical. Training and inference workloads are stressing existing infrastructure. Data center capacity, grid reliability, and power availability are now binding constraints.
The beneficiaries are not limited to chip designers. They include owners of data center real estate, utilities, grid modernization firms, and power providers capable of delivering consistent baseload energy. These assets now function as critical infrastructure rather than peripheral support.
Nuclear energy is re-entering the strategic conversation
Intermittent energy sources cannot reliably support twenty-four hour compute clusters at scale. This has forced governments and corporations to reconsider nuclear power.
Uranium pricing has found structural support as utilities reassess long-term supply security. At the same time, interest in small modular reactors is accelerating as a way to deploy scalable, carbon-free baseload power closer to demand centers.
Energy availability is no longer a background variable. It is a competitive constraint.
Copper remains a straightforward supply problem
Electrification is copper-intensive. Data centers, transmission lines, electric vehicles, and industrial automation all require large amounts of it.
New mine discovery remains historically low and permitting timelines are long. Supply growth is constrained at the same time demand is becoming less flexible. Among commodities, copper represents one of the clearest structural mismatches between future demand and available supply.
Hard assets are regaining relevance in a soft monetary environment
Fiscal deficits across much of the developed world remain elevated. Monetary credibility is increasingly questioned. In that context, the definition of safety is changing.
Silver is no longer just a monetary hedge
Silver occupies a unique position. It functions as a monetary hedge while also serving as a critical industrial input. Unlike gold, silver is consumed rather than stored.
Industrial demand from energy systems and electronics continues to rise. At the same time, above-ground inventories are being drawn down. Monetary demand is returning alongside this industrial pressure. That combination is structurally supportive.
Bitcoin is transitioning toward an institutional asset profile
Bitcoin is no longer trading purely as a high-beta risk proxy. Volatility has moderated relative to earlier cycles while long-term accumulation has increased.
In 2026, the strategy matters more than the narrative. Exposure is shifting toward self-custody, infrastructure ownership, and mining capacity rather than short-term trading. The asset is increasingly treated as permissionless monetary infrastructure rather than speculative technology.

UAE real estate reflects capital migration trends
Capital mobility is being shaped by regulation, taxation, and political stability. As policy tightens in parts of the West, demand for predictable jurisdictions is rising.
Dubai has moved beyond tourism-led growth. It is now a regional base for corporate headquarters, family offices, and long-term residency. Real estate demand reflects utility and permanence rather than speculative flipping.
Global fragmentation is reshaping capital allocation
The dominant force in geopolitics is no longer integration. It is fragmentation. Supply chains are regionalizing and political risk is being priced explicitly.
Defense technology and cybersecurity benefit from permanent instability
Geopolitical tension has become a baseline condition rather than an exception. Defense budgets are shifting toward asymmetric capabilities such as drones, counter-drone systems, and AI-driven cybersecurity.
This is one of the few sectors where government spending is structurally supported regardless of the economic cycle.
Emerging markets with demographics are attracting long-term capital
Manufacturing diversification away from single-country dependence is accelerating. India and parts of Southeast Asia are benefiting from this shift.
These regions combine demographic growth with increasing capital inflows. They represent long-duration growth rather than short-term tactical trades.
Blockchain infrastructure is being judged on throughput and usage
As stablecoins and on-chain payments scale, network performance has become decisive. Throughput, latency, and reliability are no longer secondary considerations.
In 2026, slower networks are losing relevance. Capital is concentrating around systems capable of handling real economic volume. Active users and transaction velocity matter more than theoretical claims.
Biotech is emerging as a defensive growth sector
Advances in metabolic health treatments have expanded investor focus toward longevity and healthspan research. Combined with AI-driven drug discovery, the sector is becoming structurally defensive.
An aging global population reinforces long-term demand for innovation in this area.
Scarcity is the common constraint across winning assets
Across all ten themes, one factor is consistent. Scarcity.
Scarce energy for compute.
Scarce hard assets in a debt-heavy system.
Scarce jurisdictions offering regulatory stability.
Scarce infrastructure that cannot be replicated quickly.
Markets in 2026 are rewarding assets constrained by physics, regulation, or geography rather than by narrative. The emphasis is shifting away from speculation and toward ownership of systems the future depends on.
The defining question is no longer which story sounds compelling. It is which assets remain difficult to replace once demand arrives.

$BTC $BNB $XRP

The speculative phase of the previous market cycle has largely ended. In its place, 2026 is revealing a different pattern. Capital is no longer flowing toward narratives built on future potential alone. It is concentrating around assets that already perform a function, generate cash flow, or provide system-level utility.

This shift can be described as a realization phase. Investors are reassessing what actually matters when growth slows, capital tightens, and geopolitical risk becomes persistent. Assets that consume capital without producing value are being repriced quickly. Assets tied to infrastructure, energy, security, and scarcity are attracting sustained interest.

The themes below reflect where capital is moving, not where marketing narratives are loudest. They are grouped by the role they play in the evolving global system rather than by short-term performance.
Artificial intelligence demand is exposing physical bottlenecks

One of the largest misconceptions about the artificial intelligence cycle was the belief that it would remain primarily digital. By 2026, that assumption has broken down. AI growth is running directly into physical constraints.

Data centers and power capacity are becoming strategic assets

Compute demand is no longer theoretical. Training and inference workloads are stressing existing infrastructure. Data center capacity, grid reliability, and power availability are now binding constraints.

The beneficiaries are not limited to chip designers. They include owners of data center real estate, utilities, grid modernization firms, and power providers capable of delivering consistent baseload energy. These assets now function as critical infrastructure rather than peripheral support.

Nuclear energy is re-entering the strategic conversation

Intermittent energy sources cannot reliably support twenty-four hour compute clusters at scale. This has forced governments and corporations to reconsider nuclear power.

Uranium pricing has found structural support as utilities reassess long-term supply security. At the same time, interest in small modular reactors is accelerating as a way to deploy scalable, carbon-free baseload power closer to demand centers.

Energy availability is no longer a background variable. It is a competitive constraint.

Copper remains a straightforward supply problem

Electrification is copper-intensive. Data centers, transmission lines, electric vehicles, and industrial automation all require large amounts of it.
New mine discovery remains historically low and permitting timelines are long. Supply growth is constrained at the same time demand is becoming less flexible. Among commodities, copper represents one of the clearest structural mismatches between future demand and available supply.

Hard assets are regaining relevance in a soft monetary environment

Fiscal deficits across much of the developed world remain elevated. Monetary credibility is increasingly questioned. In that context, the definition of safety is changing.

Silver is no longer just a monetary hedge

Silver occupies a unique position. It functions as a monetary hedge while also serving as a critical industrial input. Unlike gold, silver is consumed rather than stored.

Industrial demand from energy systems and electronics continues to rise. At the same time, above-ground inventories are being drawn down. Monetary demand is returning alongside this industrial pressure. That combination is structurally supportive.

Bitcoin is transitioning toward an institutional asset profile

Bitcoin is no longer trading purely as a high-beta risk proxy. Volatility has moderated relative to earlier cycles while long-term accumulation has increased.

In 2026, the strategy matters more than the narrative. Exposure is shifting toward self-custody, infrastructure ownership, and mining capacity rather than short-term trading. The asset is increasingly treated as permissionless monetary infrastructure rather than speculative technology.

UAE real estate reflects capital migration trends

Capital mobility is being shaped by regulation, taxation, and political stability. As policy tightens in parts of the West, demand for predictable jurisdictions is rising.

Dubai has moved beyond tourism-led growth. It is now a regional base for corporate headquarters, family offices, and long-term residency. Real estate demand reflects utility and permanence rather than speculative flipping.
Global fragmentation is reshaping capital allocation

The dominant force in geopolitics is no longer integration. It is fragmentation. Supply chains are regionalizing and political risk is being priced explicitly.

Defense technology and cybersecurity benefit from permanent instability

Geopolitical tension has become a baseline condition rather than an exception. Defense budgets are shifting toward asymmetric capabilities such as drones, counter-drone systems, and AI-driven cybersecurity.

This is one of the few sectors where government spending is structurally supported regardless of the economic cycle.

Emerging markets with demographics are attracting long-term capital

Manufacturing diversification away from single-country dependence is accelerating. India and parts of Southeast Asia are benefiting from this shift.

These regions combine demographic growth with increasing capital inflows. They represent long-duration growth rather than short-term tactical trades.

Blockchain infrastructure is being judged on throughput and usage

As stablecoins and on-chain payments scale, network performance has become decisive. Throughput, latency, and reliability are no longer secondary considerations.

In 2026, slower networks are losing relevance. Capital is concentrating around systems capable of handling real economic volume. Active users and transaction velocity matter more than theoretical claims.

Biotech is emerging as a defensive growth sector

Advances in metabolic health treatments have expanded investor focus toward longevity and healthspan research. Combined with AI-driven drug discovery, the sector is becoming structurally defensive.

An aging global population reinforces long-term demand for innovation in this area.
Scarcity is the common constraint across winning assets

Across all ten themes, one factor is consistent. Scarcity.

Scarce energy for compute.
Scarce hard assets in a debt-heavy system.
Scarce jurisdictions offering regulatory stability.
Scarce infrastructure that cannot be replicated quickly.

Markets in 2026 are rewarding assets constrained by physics, regulation, or geography rather than by narrative. The emphasis is shifting away from speculation and toward ownership of systems the future depends on.

The defining question is no longer which story sounds compelling. It is which assets remain difficult to replace once demand arrives.

$BTC $ETH $XRP

What Actually Changed
The Federal Reserve did not cut rates at its latest meeting. It did not announce a new policy framework. It did not promise easing. Yet the message delivered by the vote, the language, and Jerome Powell’s answers left little ambiguity. The rate-hiking phase is finished.
Rates were held steady in the 3.5 to 3.75 percent range. More revealing was the internal split. Ten members supported holding rates unchanged. Two preferred cuts. No one argued for another hike. In a system built around dissent and caution, that absence matters.
Powell reinforced the shift directly, stating that a rate increase is not anyone’s base case. Central banks rarely speak in absolutes. When they do, markets listen. The discussion inside the Fed has moved away from whether policy needs to tighten further. The focus is now on how long current conditions should remain in place before easing becomes appropriate.
That change alters how markets interpret risk, duration, and forward expectations across asset classes.
Trade silver on eToro. eToro is a multi-asset investment platform. The value of your investments may go up or down. Your capital is at risk.
Inflation Is No Longer the Same Problem It Was
Powell acknowledged that inflation remains above target. He also spent an unusual amount of time explaining where that inflation is coming from. According to the Fed’s assessment, a significant portion of current pressure reflects tariff-related price effects rather than demand-driven excess.
That distinction changes everything. Demand-driven inflation compounds through wages, credit growth, and consumption feedback loops. Tariff-driven inflation behaves more like a level adjustment. Prices rise, absorb the shock, and then stop accelerating.
When tariff effects are excluded, core PCE inflation is only modestly above the Fed’s two percent target. Powell indicated that tariff-related pressure is expected to peak around mid-2026 and begin easing earlier. If that timeline holds, restrictive policy no longer serves the same purpose it did in earlier phases of the cycle.
The Fed is not declaring victory over inflation. It acknowledges that the nature of the problem has changed.
Growth Is Strong Enough Without Being Dangerous
The Fed also addressed growth and employment. U.S. economic activity has continued to surprise modestly to the upside. That strength has not translated into overheating. Employment conditions are stabilizing rather than accelerating. Unemployment is no longer deteriorating meaningfully, but wage growth is also not re-accelerating.
From the Fed’s perspective, current policy is already doing what it needs to do. Financial conditions tightened substantially over the past cycle. Credit growth slowed. Inflation expectations remained anchored.
Central banks continue hiking only when they believe policy is insufficient. Powell made it clear that, in the Fed’s view, that is no longer the case. Monetary policy is already restrictive enough to manage inflation risks without pushing the system further.
That belief explains the unanimity against additional hikes.
The Next Move Is Lower Even If Timing Is Unclear
Powell avoided committing to a timeline for rate cuts. That restraint is intentional. Forward guidance creates constraints the Fed prefers to avoid.
Still, direction matters. Rate hikes are no longer under discussion. The next policy adjustment, whenever it comes, is expected to ease. Current policy is described as close to neutral, leaning restrictive, rather than deeply restrictive.
Markets are adjusting accordingly. Investors are no longer pricing how much higher rates could go. They are pricing how long rates stay elevated and what happens when that phase ends.
That shift does not require immediate cuts to change asset behavior. Expectations alone influence capital flows.
The Dollar, the Deficit, and Gold’s Reaction
Powell reiterated that the Fed does not target the U.S. dollar and noted little evidence that foreign investors are aggressively hedging dollar exposure. That helped stabilize currency expectations.
More notable was his direct commentary on fiscal policy. Powell described the U.S. federal deficit as unsustainable and stated that addressing it sooner would be preferable to delaying action. Central bankers rarely speak so plainly about fiscal risk.
Gold responded immediately. The rally was not driven by inflation fear. It reflected concern about long-term monetary credibility and fiscal discipline at a time when tightening had ended.
Historically, those conditions support precious metals even without economic stress.
Tariffs, Politics, and Institutional Credibility
On tariffs, Powell characterized them as a one-time price shock rather than a persistent inflation engine. If those effects fade as expected, the Fed gains flexibility to ease policy without reopening inflation risk.
He also addressed concerns around political pressure. Powell stated that the Fed remains independent and data-driven. Whether markets fully accept that claim is secondary. What matters is that current policy decisions align with economic conditions rather than electoral timelines.
So far, they do.
What This Shift Means Going Forward
Taken together, the message from this meeting is consistent.
Rates are no longer rising.
Inflation pressure is easing in structure, not just in headline measures.
Tariffs remain the primary residual risk.
Financial conditions are no longer tightening.
The system is moving from restriction toward stabilization.
This does not guarantee asset appreciation. It removes a constraint.
Markets are no longer focused on how restrictive policy could become. They are focused on duration and eventual release. That transition marks a new phase in the cycle, even if the next step takes time to arrive.

$BTC $BNB $SOL