The Cryptonomist

In recent months, the topic of stablecoins has become central to the debate on cryptocurrency taxation in Italy. Not so much for their use as a payment tool or for stabilizing volatility, but rather for the fiscal distortions that some recent regulatory choices are causing.

During an Instagram live session, tax expert Stefano Capaccioli analyzed one of the most controversial aspects of the current regulation: the tax treatment of E-money tokens, particularly those denominated in euros, such as EURC, compared to dollar-pegged stablecoins, like USDC.

Russia is tightening access conditions for the digital ruble, adding extra identification hurdles just as authorities prepare for the national rollout of the central bank currency.

Bank of Russia updates requirements for opening accounts

The Bank of Russia has approved new rules for opening digital ruble accounts, significantly expanding the information that applicants must provide. The changes affect both ordinary citizens and small businesses, and they are expected to complicate initial access to the platform.

Under the revised rules, individuals and sole proprietors must now submit their taxpayer identification numbers and social security numbers directly to the regulator. Moreover, this data requirement is in addition to existing KYC checks performed by commercial banks.

The regulation also obliges applicants to register with Russia’s Unified Identification and Authentication System (ESIA). This state system underpins access to a wide range of public services, including those offered via the Gosuslugi portal, which has become central to Russia’s digital bureaucracy.

To complete the process, future users have to appear in person at an ESIA point of service and obtain a unique electronic signature key. However, this in-person step may slow onboarding, particularly for residents in remote regions and for small entrepreneurs with limited time.

Restrictions on citizen use and expanded professional access

Russian crypto media, including Bits.media, highlighted the updated rules on Friday, when the amendments to the regulation governing the CBDC platform were officially published. The new text specifies how Russian citizens are allowed to use their regular accounts.

According to the document, standard accounts of private individuals can only be used for non-business transactions. However, this explicit restriction means that citizens are formally barred from using these wallets for commercial activity, even if volumes are modest.

That said, self-employed persons who are not registered as sole proprietors will still be permitted to conduct transfers tied to their professional activities. This carve-out is intended to accommodate Russia’s rapidly growing segment of freelancers and gig workers.

In addition to self-employed citizens and individual entrepreneurs, the regulation broadens the list of professionals allowed to use CBDC accounts for work-related payments. Notaries, lawyers, patent attorneys, mediators, insolvency agents and appraisers are now all explicitly included in the group of users with access for professional purposes.

The tighter wording does not change the regime for other types of digital ruble accounts, such as those held by legal entities, including companies, banks and non-bank organizations. However, branches of these institutions will not be allowed to open separate CBDC accounts, which may centralize corporate usage at the head-office level.

Mass adoption plans and phased rollout of Russia’s CBDC

The project to issue the Russian ruble in digital form has been underway for several years. Trials of the platform with a limited circle of participants began in 2023, and the pilot has been gradually expanded as more banks and users joined.

A full-scale launch of the state-backed coin was initially targeted for 2025. However, the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) later postponed this deadline to give financial institutions and businesses extra time to upgrade their infrastructure and compliance systems.

Following a call from President Vladimir Putin in the spring of last year for mass adoption of the CBDC, the monetary authority moved to accelerate its roadmap. Lawmakers in Moscow subsequently approved a new timetable that breaks the introduction into several stages.

Under the current plan, the first phase is scheduled to start on September 1, 2026. At that point, Russia’s largest banks will be required to support transactions in the digital form of the national currency for their clients, both retail and corporate.

Officials at the Bank of Russia describe the CBDC as a third form of the ruble, alongside cash and traditional bank money. Moreover, some within the institution believe it could eventually capture up to 5% of non-cash payments in the country, assuming technology and user experience prove robust.

Economic expectations and adoption uncertainties

Despite official optimism, there is still no consensus inside the CBR or among lawmakers about how quickly Russians will embrace the new platform. While some predict rapid take-up driven by government services and mandatory integration, others expect a more cautious transition.

Advisor Kirill Tremasov, who works closely with CBR Governor Elvira Nabiullina, argues that the main benefits will emerge in the public sector and for the wider Russian economy. According to estimates released in August, the digital ruble could add up to $3.3 billion annually to economic output once fully implemented.

However, the increased documentation demands, in-person ESIA registration and activity-based restrictions on retail accounts may slow user onboarding in the early years. How quickly citizens, professionals and businesses adapt to the new rails will likely determine whether the CBDC meets those economic expectations.

In summary, Russia is moving toward a phased national rollout of its state-backed digital currency, but stricter access requirements and usage limits may shape the pace and profile of adoption across the country.

Recent upgrades and new features are pushing the xrp ledger toward an institutional DeFi model, with XRP and compliance tooling at the center of its roadmap.

Ripple’s institutional DeFi strategy on XRPL

Ripple and core XRPL contributors have detailed a growing stack of so-called institutional DeFi components on the network, according to a Thursday blog post. The plan is to make the XRP Ledger suitable for regulated finance by combining compliance-oriented infrastructure with XRP as a settlement and bridge asset for cross-border flows and onchain credit.

Moreover, XRP’s role in forex and stablecoin payment rails is being emphasized as a primary use case. The team is highlighting stablecoin corridors, remittance activity, and tokenized collateral flows as examples of how network usage can be tied directly back to the native token and its fee and reserve mechanics.

Compliance-first architecture and permissioned markets

Unlike many smart contract platforms that add compliance layers later, XRPL has focused on embedding identity and control tools at the protocol level. That said, the roadmap stresses multi-purpose token standards (MPT), permissioned domains, credential-backed access, and batch transactions as the current foundation for institutional systems.

Permissioned domains and credentials let market operators gate participation to verified entities, which institutions often view as a prerequisite for onchain activity. This permissioned domains access model is presented as a response to regulatory and risk-management expectations, especially for banks, asset managers, and payment processors entering tokenized markets.

New lending protocol and credit market design

Looking ahead, the XLS-65/66 XRPL lending protocol is set to extend the network into on-ledger credit. It is designed to support pooled lending and underwritten credit without pushing every risk decision fully onchain, balancing transparency with institutional control over credit models.

Moreover, the roadmap describes single-asset vaults, fixed-term lending instruments, and optional permissioning layers aimed at institutional risk teams. These tools seek to mirror existing offchain credit workflows while using onchain settlement and programmable logic for efficiency and auditability.

In this framework, the xrp ledger is positioned as a venue where tokenized collateral, reserves, and lending markets can interoperate, while still allowing institutions to maintain familiar governance over exposures and counterparty risk.

Privacy-preserving transfers and regulatory expectations

Privacy is another pillar of the institutional pitch. Confidential transfers for MPTs, expected to arrive in the first quarter, are framed as privacy preserving transfers that still operate within defined compliance boundaries. However, they are intended to ensure transaction-level anonymity with the option for controlled disclosure when regulators or auditors require insight.

These features are meant to help enterprises address internal policies and jurisdiction-specific privacy rules. At the same time, they seek to avoid the full opacity associated with some legacy privacy coins, blending selective transparency with enterprise-grade confidentiality.

EVM sidechain and developer ecosystem expansion

Critics have long argued that XRPL lacks EVM-style programmability, which has limited some DeFi experimentation. The new evm sidechain axelar connection is intended to address that concern by linking an EVM-compatible sidechain to the main network through the Axelar bridge.

Furthermore, this design lets Solidity developers use familiar tooling while accessing XRPL liquidity, identity frameworks, and XRP-based collateral and reserves. Fee-driven XRP burn mechanics on the main ledger remain part of the economic model, even as sidechain applications expand what developers can build around the ecosystem.

XRP’s market performance amid roadmap rollout

Despite the strategic focus on institutional DeFi, XRP prices have fallen 22% over the past seven days. The move is broadly in line with a wider crypto market decline rather than a network-specific event.

Moreover, network activity such as stablecoin corridors, remittance flows, and token escrows denominated in XRP continues to be cited by Ripple as a key demand driver. Object reserves and auto-bridging between assets aim to reinforce XRP’s role across payments, foreign exchange, and tokenized asset settlement.

In summary, Ripple and XRPL contributors are promoting an institutional DeFi roadmap that combines on-ledger identity, permissioned markets, credit tooling, privacy features, and an EVM sidechain, all anchored by XRP’s settlement and bridge utility.

Small businesses are gaining new tools to compete as Loyyal rolls out Perxi AI, promising to reshape how loyalty programs are created and managed.

Loyyal introduces an AI loyalty agent for messaging apps

On Feb. 6, 2026 in Dubai, enterprise SaaS provider Loyyal announced the launch of Perxi AI, described as the world’s first AI Agent of Loyalty. The platform is designed to let small and medium businesses (SMEs) instantly create and run branded loyalty programs directly within messaging channels, starting with WhatsApp.

Unlike traditional software-heavy systems, Perxi AI operates as a conversational assistant embedded in existing chat apps. Moreover, it targets SMEs that have historically lacked access to advanced retention technology due to setup complexity and budget constraints.

Removing cost and complexity for SME loyalty programs

For years, many SMEs avoided loyalty initiatives because of expensive software licenses, long commercial commitments, and the need for specialist staff and training. That said, these barriers allowed only major corporations to deploy sophisticated but high value customer retention tools, leaving smaller players at a disadvantage.

Perxi AI is built to eliminate these hurdles through an instant loyalty launch model. SMEs can rapidly set up and manage their programs without upfront fees, turning deployment into a simple chat-based interaction instead of an IT project.

The entire system runs through familiar social channels. In particular, its WhatsApp chat interface is optimized to feel like conversing with a friend, guiding business owners step by step as they configure rewards, rules, and customer engagement flows.

WhatsApp-first design and frictionless participation

Neither the business nor its customers are required to download an extra app, which is a common source of friction in loyalty participation. Instead, all management tasks and customer touchpoints occur inside the existing WhatsApp environment, where users already spend significant time each day.

Moreover, Perxi AI supports interaction in any language, enabling both merchants and customers across the globe to communicate in their preferred tongue. This multi language capability allows highly localized yet scalable experiences, which is crucial for SMEs operating in diverse markets.

Driving retention, personalization, and smarter decisions

The new platform is positioned as a way to transform an SME’s competitive posture. By automating core loyalty mechanics, it helps merchants secure repeat business, while allowing them to deliver more personalized experiences tailored to customer purchase patterns and preferences.

Beyond simple point collection, Perxi AI provides data-driven insights and analytics dashboards. However, instead of forcing owners to learn complex tools, the agent surfaces key metrics through chat, helping them understand customer behavior and the effectiveness of campaigns in everyday language.

Another strategic pillar is ecosystem integration. Through Loyyal’s marketplace, small businesses can plug into larger loyalty programs and cross-partner networks. This ecosystem access significantly expands their potential reach and can enhance the value of their own rewards by connecting to broader experiences.

From loyalty management to broader AI-powered operations

Loyyal is positioning Perxi AI as more than a loyalty chatbot over the long term. The roadmap includes a dedicated finance module that will sit inside the same conversational interface. In future phases, SMEs will be able to access functions such as business finance management and credit lending workflows directly in chat.

Moreover, this expansion suggests a gradual evolution from a pure loyalty solution into a broader ai loyalty platform supporting everyday operational decisions. By keeping everything in a single interface, Loyyal aims to reduce the fragmentation typical of small business software stacks.

Award recognition and technology foundation

Perxi AI secured a key validation milestone by winning the META Llama AI Startupbootcap Program 2025. This recognition underscores that the product draws on state-of-the-art conversational AI models, tailored for high-frequency interactions between merchants and consumers.

According to Ashish Kumar Singh, CEO at Perxi AI & Loyyal, the goal is to shift the competitive balance between small firms and large enterprises. He noted that by anchoring loyalty management in WhatsApp, the company enables small business owners to deploy hyper personalized retention tools that once required a full corporate team.

Furthermore, Singh emphasized that loyalty is becoming universally accessible, intelligent, and simple, aligning with Loyyal’s broader strategy to apply AI and Web3 to next-generation customer engagement.

About Loyyal and its loyalty ecosystem

Loyyal operates as an enterprise SaaS development firm focused on loyalty and payments, built on patented blockchain infrastructure. Its technology is designed to convert traditional loyalty programs from cost centers into profit-generating ecosystems for brands and partners.

The company’s product suite includes Access Point, Reward Point, Xpand Point, and Perk Point, alongside Perxi AI. Moreover, it offers an integrated Technology + Content + Commerce proposition that prioritizes security, transparency, and AI-driven personalization for clients worldwide.

In summary, Perxi AI positions Loyyal at the intersection of AI, messaging, and loyalty, giving SMEs an accessible way to launch and scale sophisticated programs inside the channels their customers already use.

Analysts at Citigroup lowered expectations for Coinbase stock following a steep pullback in crypto markets and ongoing uncertainty around U.S. regulation.

Citi slashes Coinbase price target after crypto sell-off

Wall Street bank Citigroup has scaled back its bullish stance on Coinbase (COIN), cutting its price target to $400 from $505 amid a broad risk-off move across digital assets. However, the bank continues to see long-term upside despite the stock’s 65% decline from its record high near $450.

In a note to clients released on Friday, analysts cited weaker trading volumes, softer institutional activity and persistent uncertainty over when comprehensive U.S. crypto legislation will pass. Moreover, they described the recent crypto market turmoil as a key factor in dialing back near-term expectations for the exchange.

The new $400 price objective still implies more than a doubling from COIN’s most recent close of $146. The same analyst team had lifted its target to $505 in July 2025, when the Coinbase global stock price was surging toward all-time highs around $450.

Short-term reset but buy rating and high risk stance remain

Despite the downward revision, Citigroup reiterated its buy/high risk rating, describing Coinbase as the category leader among U.S. crypto exchanges. That said, the bank still sees regulatory clarity as the primary lever to reignite investor enthusiasm for the name.

Shares of COIN were up about 6% in pre-market trading on Friday, as crypto assets rebounded slightly from Thursday’s sharp sell-off. During that session, Bitcoin slid to around $60,000, intensifying concerns about volatility and liquidity across the sector.

Citigroup highlighted progress on the CLARITY market structure initiative as the main catalyst for restoring momentum in the stock. The bank’s analysts noted that, in their view, the path of U.S. policy remains more important for valuation than short-term swings in trading volumes or token prices.

Regulation delays weigh on sentiment

The bank now expects Senate negotiations on a comprehensive market structure bill to extend beyond 2026, a timeline that could slow the recovery in risk appetite. However, groundwork on the legislative framework continues, with staff-level discussions and draft proposals still in motion.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong recently disclosed that the company had withdrawn its backing for a sweeping digital assets bill after identifying provisions that might have harmed consumers and dampened competition. Moreover, he argued that any final framework must balance innovation with investor protection to be sustainable.

The legislative effort has repeatedly lost momentum as crypto and banking lobbyists clash over details such as stablecoin yield and custody rules. Lawmakers from both parties also remain divided on several other elements of the package, complicating the timeline for a decisive coinbase regulation update.

Revenue and earnings forecasts revised lower

Marking current token prices to market, Citigroup analysts led by Peter Christiansen cut their near-term projections for the exchange’s top and bottom line performance. In particular, they reduced Coinbase fourth-quarter 2025 net revenue expectations by roughly 10% to $1.69 billion, which sits about 4% below Wall Street consensus estimates.

The latest Coinbase revenue forecast reflects lower anticipated trading volumes, muted institutional engagement and thinner spreads, as well as a more conservative outlook for retail participation. However, the report also noted that diversification into subscription and services revenue offers some cushion against pure trading downturns.

After incorporating a $2.3 billion mark-to-market decline on crypto holdings and Coinbase’s equity stake in Circle (CRCL), the team now expects a fourth-quarter GAAP EPS loss of $2.64. This negative earnings profile underscores how sensitive results remain to asset prices and balance sheet revaluations.

Upcoming earnings catalyst and market implications

Coinbase is scheduled to publish its fourth quarter and full year 2025 financial results after the market close on February 12. The update on Coinbase fourth quarter performance will provide investors with fresh insight into trading trends, fee dynamics and the impact of recent volatility.

Many institutional investors will also scrutinize any commentary around the Citi Coinbase forecast assumptions, particularly regarding regulatory timing and market structure reforms. Moreover, management’s guidance on expense discipline and capital allocation could play a crucial role in shaping sentiment toward the broader Coinbase stock narrative.

Overall, Citigroup’s move to cut its Coinbase price target cut to $400 signals a more cautious stance on near-term performance, even as the bank maintains a constructive long-term view.

However, with regulation delays, earnings revisions and heightened volatility, investors will likely remain focused on policy progress and upcoming results to gauge the next phase of the stock’s trajectory.

As crypto equities slumped on Thursday, ARK Invest trades highlighted a sharp portfolio shift between leading digital asset companies.

ARK rotates out of Coinbase and into Bullish

Investment firm ARK Invest sold a significant block of Coinbase stock while purchasing a comparable position in Bullish, underscoring its active management approach to crypto-related equities.

The company offloaded 119,236 shares of COIN, a sale valued at $17.4 million based on Thursday’s closing price. COIN dropped 13.3% on the day, finishing the session at $146.12. However, this steeper decline appeared to open the door for rotation into another crypto exchange stock.

On the same day, ARK acquired 716,030 shares of Bullish, according to an emailed disclosure. The position is worth about $17.8 million, using BLSH‘s closing price of $24.90. That stock also slid, losing nearly 8.5% during the session, yet ARK used the weakness to rebalance exposure between the two trading platforms.

Market downturn and strategy behind the moves

It is common for ARK Invest to execute sizeable transactions in crypto-adjacent companies when valuations pull back. Moreover, such moves are often framed as opportunities to capture greater long-term value while adjusting fund allocations during broader risk-off phases in digital assets.

This latest round of ark invest trades came amid a sharp downturn in the wider cryptocurrency market. Bitcoin, which had recently traded around $65,998.81, dropped to as low as $60,000, marking its lowest level since November 2024. That said, the firm has historically treated similar drawdowns as entry points rather than exit signals.

Bullish, the exchange whose parent company owns CoinDesk, now sits more prominently within ARK’s portfolio following Thursday’s transactions. However, the pivot from COIN to BLSH does not necessarily signal a long-term negative view on Coinbase, but rather reflects ARK’s willingness to shift capital dynamically across correlated crypto equities as prices reset.

Overall, the repositioning between Coinbase and Bullish underlines ARK’s ongoing effort to navigate volatility across listed crypto assets. In the near term, further dislocations in prices could invite additional tactical moves as the manager continues to lean into weakness across the sector.

Yesterday, the price of Bitcoin experienced a significant crash.

Today, however, the crash seems to have temporarily halted, or at least its acute phase. 

To fully understand what is happening, it is advisable to first analyze the crash, and only then proceed to examine what is happening today.

The Bitcoin Crash

The recent crash in the price of Bitcoin actually began on Wednesday, when it fell below $75,000.

Initially, it didn’t seem to be anything significant, especially since the day before it had dropped to $73,000 only to bounce back to $76,000.

However, Wednesday’s decline was triggered by factors that continued to drive down the price of BTC the following day, namely yesterday. 

At one point, it dropped to $72,000, and after a brief failed rebound, it fell to $70,000. 

However, the real crash was yet to begin, and it arrived with the opening of the US stock markets.

Practically within just 14 hours, it plummeted from $71,000 to $60,000, marking one of the sharpest drops in recent years. 

In percentage terms (-16%), it is not one of the worst declines in BTC’s history, but it is certainly one of the worst in recent years. 

If during the acute phase, which lasted 14 hours, it lost 16%, from the start of the decline it has lost 21% in just over a day. Subsequently, it recorded a minor rebound with a +8% from the low, but for now, it is not sufficient. 

The Causes of Bitcoin’s Crash Today

The causes of this crash, however, are not to be found in any hypothetical issue with Bitcoin itself. 

In fact, the decline appears to have been triggered particularly by the general fear present in the American markets.

In fact, the VIX index, often used as a barometer of fear in the traditional American markets, had already marked an initial peak above 20 points on Monday, followed by a smaller peak on Tuesday and another even smaller one on Wednesday. 

In all three of these cases, the price of Bitcoin had fallen, but yesterday there was a slight spike in the VIX. Within a day and a half, it surged from under 19 points to nearly 22, causing panic particularly among high-risk assets.

The S&P 500 index ended up losing 3%, while the American private equity sector lost 4% during the same period. 

In other words, fear has focused on higher-risk assets, with significant but more contained losses on medium-risk assets, such as leading American equities. 

The fact is that Bitcoin is an asset with a significantly higher potential risk compared to equities or private equity, therefore it is the one that has been hit the hardest. 

It is noteworthy that since mid-January, private equity has been losing nearly 11%, while Bitcoin is down 32%. 

The Mini-Rebound

After yesterday’s crash, a mini-rebound was expected.

For now, it is actually just a very small technical rebound after marking a new local bottom, but there is a possibility that it could extend at least until Monday. 

Although no one knows if this technical rebound will last for a few more days or make way for further declines, the VIX index futures have slightly decreased today (below 21 points), so for now, fear seems to be subsiding. 

To be honest, the hypothesis of a rebound was already circulating yesterday, because Bitcoin’s crash was similar to that of November, which ended on the 21st at $80,000.

At the time, after 10 days of decline, there was then a 17% rebound from the local bottom, while yesterday marked the seventh day of decline. The parallelism is therefore imperfect, but the two trends appear very similar in terms of the extent of the drop, albeit with slightly different timings. 

For the current mini-bounce to turn into a real rebound, it is necessary for Bitcoin’s price to rise around $66,000 today after the reopening of the US markets, and for it to return to $70,000 by Monday. 

The Reasons for Fear

The reasons behind the rise in fear (VIX) yesterday are not certain and evident. 

However, since fear has concentrated on higher-risk assets, while also causing minor damage to medium-risk ones, it might be linked to future expectations.

It is possible that fear regarding the evolution of the economic/financial situation in the USA played a significant role, especially in light of recent political developments. 

Although at a superficial glance the economic outlook seems good in the short to medium term, when considering the geopolitical risks in the medium and long term, the situation appears far from rosy. 

The risk is that the situation in the USA could deteriorate in the coming months, especially with the mid-term elections in November approaching. 

At this moment, Trump’s Republicans appear to be at a significant disadvantage, with Trump himself potentially facing the risk of impeachment in the event of a strong Democratic victory. Unfortunately, from some recent statements by Trump, as well as Bannon, a potential risk emerges that the US government might use coercive methods to try to persuade, or even “force,” US voters to vote for the Republicans. 

If such a scenario, currently only hypothetical, were to materialize, fear would very likely turn into sheer terror, as it would signify the end of U.S. democracy (it should be noted that the USA is the world’s largest economic and military power).

In a major move for tokenized assets, a new tether gold investment in Gold.com is reshaping how physical bullion and on-chain liquidity intersect.

Tether backs Gold.com with $150 million

A reported $150 million strategic investment by Tether in Gold.com signals an aggressive push into tokenized and physical gold infrastructure. The deal underscores Tether’s ambition to connect traditional safe-haven markets with programmable finance, while also positioning Gold.com as a core piece of this emerging stack.

Moreover, the investment solidifies the role of tokenized bullion as an institutional-grade collateral layer. Tether can already mint gold tokens such as XAUT on chains like Ethereum or TON. However, shifting this value across distinct ecosystems usually requires wrapped assets or trusted bridges, which add both centralization and security risks.

The challenge of fragmented liquidity

Current blockchain infrastructure still suffers from liquidity fragmentation. Value becomes siloed on individual networks such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. As a result, moving tokenized gold or other assets between chains remains complex, costly, and often reliant on intermediaries.

That said, this fragmentation does more than slow transfers. It forces developers to commit to a single chain, limiting application design and restricting access to liquidity across broader ecosystems. Moreover, it weakens capital efficiency because similar pools of value must be rebuilt on every network separately.

LiquidChain and unified cross-chain execution

LiquidChain presents itself as a Layer 3 infrastructure protocol aiming to resolve these structural pain points. Its design focuses on delivering a unified execution environment that spans Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana, rather than competing with them. In practice, it seeks to make underlying chain differences largely invisible to developers.

Central to this approach is LiquidChain’s so-called “Deploy-Once” model, powered by a Cross-Chain Virtual Machine. The system abstracts away chain-specific complexities so that developers can write code once while still accessing users and liquidity across all connected networks. However, it still aims to preserve verifiable settlement guarantees provided by each base chain.

For end users, LiquidChain targets single step cross chain execution, where complex multi-bridge flows are compressed into a single action. Moreover, by removing visible friction at the user level, the protocol could make moving XAUT or other tokenized assets between chains feel closer to a simple wallet transfer than a multi-stage DeFi operation.

Presale momentum and $LIQUID token economics

The reported tether gold investment aligns with growing interest in the protocol’s native token. According to official presale data, LiquidChain has already raised over $529,000, highlighting early market confidence in its infrastructure vision and its role in tokenized bullion flows.

The native token $LIQUID is currently priced at $0.01355 in the presale. Moreover, the team positions $LIQUID as a core settlement and incentive asset within the network’s architecture, supporting validators, liquidity providers, and cross-chain execution. That said, the long-term sustainability of this design will depend on actual usage once the platform goes live.

Outlook for tokenized gold and DeFi

In strategic terms, the tether gold investment in Gold.com, coupled with LiquidChain’s infrastructure, points toward a tighter integration between physical bullion markets and decentralized finance. If successful, the stack could allow XAUT and similar assets to circulate more freely across major chains without relying on traditional wrapped-token bridges.

However, execution risks remain. Developers must validate that cross-chain tooling delivers promised security and transparency, while regulators continue refining their stance on tokenized commodities. Overall, the combination of institutional capital, tokenized gold infrastructure, and cross-chain technology marks a notable step in the evolution of on-chain gold markets.

In summary, Tether’s $150 million backing of Gold.com and the momentum around LiquidChain’s $LIQUID presale underscore a broader shift: physical gold is being wired into multi-chain DeFi rails, with liquidity and security at the forefront.

In a new show of confidence during recent volatility, Binance has expanded its safu bitcoin position with another major acquisition from the open market.

Binance injects $233 million in BTC into SAFU

The Secure Asset Fund for Users (SAFU) at Binance has received a fresh capital injection, as the exchange allocated $233 million to purchase 3,600 BTC. This latest move lifts the fund’s total stash to 6,230 BTC, currently valued at roughly $404 million. Moreover, the transaction is the third sizeable buy in just a few days, pushing cumulative purchases to almost $430 million.

According to Binance, these allocations reinforce the insurance-style pool designed to protect users in extreme scenarios. However, the decision to add more Bitcoin instead of stablecoins also highlights a strategic shift in how the platform manages its cryptocurrency exchange reserves during market stress.

From stablecoins to BTC as a long-term reserve

The exchange first outlined this new approach on January 30, when it announced that SAFU would gradually transition a portion of its holdings away from stable assets. The plan, described as a safu stablecoin conversion into BTC, aims to capitalize on price weakness while positioning the fund for potential upside over a longer horizon.

This adjustment underscores Binance’s view of Bitcoin as a durable store of value and a bitcoin reserve asset within its internal safety net. That said, the company continues to present SAFU as fully funded and separate from its operating balance sheet, in an effort to maintain transparency and user trust.

Buying the dip to strengthen user protection

By targeting market pullbacks for its latest purchases, Binance is effectively applying a buy the dip strategy to the SAFU portfolio. The recent acquisition of 3,600 BTC adds to the fund’s capacity to absorb potential shocks, while also signaling the exchange’s conviction that current prices remain attractive relative to long-term expectations.

Within this framework, the binance safu fund becomes more exposed to Bitcoin‘s volatility yet potentially more rewarding over time. However, the increased allocation to BTC also means SAFU’s value will fluctuate more sharply with the broader crypto market, rather than remaining mostly flat in stablecoins.

Implications of larger BTC share in SAFU

Binance’s latest move illustrates how major exchanges are evolving their approach to user protection frameworks. As SAFU’s composition tilts further toward BTC, the fund’s performance will increasingly mirror the leading cryptocurrency’s price cycles. That said, Binance stresses that safu bitcoin allocations are designed with a long-term perspective, not short-term trading gains.

Overall, the series of BTC additions, totaling close to $430 million in just days, signals that the world’s largest exchange by volume is prepared to lean into Bitcoin’s role within its safety mechanisms. Moreover, this strategy aligns the fund more closely with the asset many in the market already view as crypto’s primary reserve.

In summary, Binance’s decision to raise SAFU holdings to 6,230 BTC and shift further away from stablecoins reinforces both its trust in Bitcoin’s long-term trajectory and its commitment to bolstering user safeguards during periods of market stress.

During a turbulent week for digital assets, Strategy executives argued that the companys reliance on microstrategy bitcoin holdings remains sustainable even under extreme downside scenarios.

Balance sheet stress test and bitcoin downside scenario

Strategy CEO Phong Le told investors on the fourth-quarter 2024 financial results webinar that the companys balance sheet can absorb heavy volatility in Bitcoin. However, he warned that a truly severe drawdown would eventually strain its ability to service existing obligations.

Le explained that bitcoin would need to fall to $8,000 and stay there for five to six years before the firm faced a genuine risk to servicing its convertible debt. In that extreme case, the value of the companys bitcoin reserve would roughly match its net debt, limiting its capacity to repay bondholders using crypto holdings alone.

In his words, a roughly 90% decline in the bitcoin price to $8,000 would mark the point where the reserve equals net debt and Strategy could no longer retire its convertibles purely with its Bitcoin reserve. At that stage, the firm would likely explore options such as restructuring, issuing new equity, or raising additional debt to manage its capital structure.

The comments came during Strategy's fourth-quarter earnings call on Thursday, where leadership fielded questions about the impact of the recent crypto market downturn on the companys finances. Moreover, executives emphasized that their capital planning already incorporates these stress-test assumptions.

Fourth-quarter loss and long-term strategy

Strategy, widely recognized as the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin, reported a net loss of $12.6 billion for the quarter. The result was driven largely by unrealized losses on its digital asset portfolio as bitcoins price slid below the firms average acquisition cost.

Strategy CFO Andrew Kang said the figures were “obviously driven by the quarter-end decline in bitcoins for value under our mark-to-market accounting.” However, Kang underscored that the firm remains committed to a long-horizon accumulation strategy and continues to execute despite sharp market moves.

Executive Chairman Michael Saylor echoed that focus on duration. He noted that quarter-to-quarter swings “can be sharp” and “unsettling,” yet argued that the companys approach is built to withstand short-term price volatility. Moreover, he framed the current environment as consistent with Strategy's historical willingness to hold through “short-term extreme conditions.”

The call took place on a day of heavy selling across crypto markets. On Thursday, bitcoin traded down about 9% over 24 hours to roughly $64,833. At the same time, Strategy's MSTR stock fell 17.12% to close near $106.9, erasing much of its prior rally. It is down 72% over the past six months, highlighting the equitys leverage to the underlying asset.

Despite the sell-off, Saylor urged investors to focus on supportive fundamentals, including what he described as constructive shifts in U.S. regulation around digital assets. That said, he acknowledged that equity performance will remain tightly linked to swings in the Bitcoin market.

Quantum computing risks, FUD, and bitcoin resilience

The discussion also addressed long-running microstrategy bitcoin quantum concerns, which have circulated among critics of the network's long-term security. During the call, Saylor pushed back strongly on the narrative that quantum breakthroughs pose an imminent existential risk.

He characterized many of the claims as part of a “parade of horrible FUD” targeting bitcoin. According to Saylor, the consensus among experts is that it will likely take 10 or more years before quantum computers could mount a realistic threat to the cryptographic primitives used by today's financial and security systems. Moreover, he described quantum as a “promising” but still “nascent” technology.

Saylor stressed that any future quantum-capable machines would endanger not just Bitcoin, but also the broader finance and defense sectors that rely on similar cryptography. However, he noted that large-scale investment is already flowing into quantum-resistant protocols, and that Bitcoin's open-source design allows for upgrades through global consensus when needed.

“Bitcoin is upgradable, and bitcoin can be upgraded to be stronger,” Saylor said, arguing that developers and institutions will respond to credible threats in a coordinated way. He added that he is optimistic humanity will confront such challenges rationally and improve critical infrastructure ahead of any widespread disruption.

Bitcoin Security program and future outlook

To help coordinate work on future defenses, Saylor announced that Strategy plans to launch a new Bitcoin Security program. The initiative aims to connect with global cybersecurity, crypto, and bitcoin security communities in order to support appropriate consensus and technical solutions for potential quantum-resistance upgrades.

Strategy aims for the program to serve as a hub for information-sharing among researchers, protocol developers, and institutional holders. Moreover, Saylor suggested that collaborative efforts of this kind will be essential as digital assets become increasingly integrated into mainstream financial infrastructure over the coming years.

Summarizing the companys position, Saylor said Strategy is “well managed, well collateralized, and responsibly structured” to endure difficult months or even multi-year cycles. He argued that the firm has already demonstrated its ability to weather previous downturns and remains prepared to do so again if the market faces further stress.

In essence, Strategy's leadership used the earnings call to reassure investors that the company can handle severe price shocks, drawn-out volatility, and emerging technological risks while maintaining its core bitcoin-focused strategy.

Market conditions across crypto are fragile and fearful, and within this backdrop the XRP value setup is technically stretched but still pointing lower on the higher timeframes.

XRPUSDTchart-2-scaled.png”
alt=”XRP/USDT daily chart with EMA20, EMA50 and volume”
loading=”lazy” />XRP/USDT — daily chart with candlesticks, EMA20/EMA50 and volume.

Market Thesis: Panic, Not Capitulation (Yet)

XRPUSDT is trading around 1.29 with the daily regime clearly marked as bearish, while the broader crypto market is under heavy pressure: total market cap is down about 7.5% in 24h, BTC dominance is elevated at ~56%, and the Fear & Greed Index sits in Extreme Fear (9). In other words, this is not just an XRP story – it is a risk-off tape across crypto, and capital is crowding defensively into Bitcoin.

At the same time, XRP’s daily RSI is deeply oversold, price sits pinned near the lower Bollinger Band, and it is trading well below all major EMAs. That combination usually does not mark the start of a fresh downtrend – it more often appears either late in a selloff or during an acceleration phase before a reflex bounce. The key question now is whether this is the beginning of a longer distribution cycle or a near-term washout that can fuel a counter-trend rally in XRP value.

Daily Timeframe (D1): Primary Bias – Bearish, But Stretched

Trend Structure: EMA Stack

On the daily chart, XRP closes at 1.29 against:

EMA 20: 1.70

EMA 50: 1.87

EMA 200: 2.23

Price is sharply below all three EMAs, with the shorter EMAs also below the longer one. That is a clean bearish alignment. It tells you trend followers have been in control, and any rallies into the 1.70–1.90 region are, for now, structurally just bounces into resistance. From a trend perspective, XRP value is in a downtrend, not a range.

RSI (Daily): Oversold, Signaling Exhaustion Risk

RSI 14 (D1): 24.02

Daily RSI in the low 20s is genuine oversold territory. Sellers have been pressing hard enough that momentum is stretched. Historically, readings under 30 often precede at least a pause or a relief bounce, but they do not guarantee a reversal. It tells us the immediate downside reward is shrinking unless fresh negative catalysts appear. The next big move is increasingly likely to be a volatility spike up rather than another straight leg down.

MACD (Daily): Bearish Momentum Still Dominant

MACD line: -0.16

Signal: -0.11

Histogram: -0.06

MACD stays below the signal line and below zero, confirming the downtrend in momentum. The histogram is negative but not massive, which often corresponds to a mature, ongoing down leg rather than the very beginning of one. In plain terms, the bears are still driving, but the acceleration pedal is not being pressed harder right now. It is more of a sustained push lower than a fresh breakdown.

Bollinger Bands & Volatility (Daily): Riding the Lower Rail

BB mid: 1.76

BB upper: 2.20

BB lower: 1.31

Close: 1.29 (just under the lower band)

Price is pressed against and slightly below the lower band. That is classic band riding in a downtrend. When price hugs the lower band with oversold RSI, it often means the selloff is mature but still happening. You can get sharp but short-lived mean reversion rallies from here. It is not a buy signal by itself; it is a warning that fresh shorts are late and need tight risk management.

ATR (Daily): Volatility Elevated, Not Extreme

ATR 14 (D1): 0.14

An ATR around 0.14, relative to the 1.3 price area, indicates decent intraday swings but not blowout panic. The market is nervous, not chaotic. That fits with the broader crypto backdrop: heavy drawdown in market cap and volume up sharply (volume +64% in 24h). Participants are active, forced moves are happening, but liquidity has not vanished.

Daily Pivot Levels: Where the Battle Lines Are

Pivot Point (PP): 1.25

Resistance R1: 1.38

Support S1: 1.16

Current price at 1.29 sits just above the daily pivot at 1.25. That makes the 1.25–1.30 band the immediate tug-of-war zone. Bulls need to hold above 1.25 to keep the door open for a bounce toward 1.38. If 1.25 fails decisively, the next natural downside magnet becomes the 1.16 S1 area, which is where late sellers might start getting trapped.

Bottom line on D1: The main scenario is still bearish because the trend structure is firmly down. However, oversold momentum, a touch of band riding, and a heavily fearful macro tape point to elevated odds of a reflex rally rather than clean continuation straight down.

1-Hour Timeframe (H1): Short-Term Stabilization Inside a Downtrend

Trend vs. Bounce

On H1, XRP trades at 1.30 with:

EMA 20: 1.30 (price sitting right on it)

EMA 50: 1.38

EMA 200: 1.58

Here the picture is slightly different. Price has managed to climb back to the 20 EMA after being below it, while still trading below the 50 and 200 EMAs. That combination shows a short-term attempt to stabilize or bounce inside a larger downtrend. Intraday sellers are no longer in full control, but the bigger players still are.

RSI (H1): Neutralizing from Oversold

RSI 14 (H1): 46.31

Hourly RSI around 46 is neutral. Momentum has cooled off from any extreme reading and is now balanced. That fits a consolidation or early bounce phase after a hard dump. It implies the next impulse move, up or down, will likely be meaningful because the indicator has room in both directions.

MACD (H1): Early Signs of an Intraday Turn

MACD line: -0.03

Signal: -0.05

Histogram: +0.02

The MACD line has crossed above the signal line while still slightly below zero. That is a modest intraday bullish shift: momentum is trying to turn up from negative territory. For execution, this argues for short-covering and tactical longs on dips rather than chasing breakdowns at current levels.

Bollinger Bands & ATR (H1): Controlled, Two-Sided Trade

BB mid: 1.27

BB upper: 1.38

BB lower: 1.16

ATR 14 (H1): 0.06

Price sits slightly above the mid-band, in the upper half of the H1 envelope. Combined with a moderate ATR, this marks a controlled intraday environment. Volatility is present but no longer expanding aggressively. That is consistent with a market digesting a prior selloff and setting up for the next move, not one currently in freefall.

Hourly Pivot Levels: Micro Lines in the Sand

Pivot Point (PP): 1.30

Resistance R1: 1.31

Support S1: 1.28

Price is effectively at the hourly pivot. That puts 1.28–1.31 as the intraday balance area. A sustained push above 1.31 intraday would open the way toward the upper band and the 1.38 region. Losing 1.28, on the other hand, would argue the short-term bounce is failing and that sellers are reasserting themselves.

15-Minute Timeframe (M15): Execution Context Only

Short-Term Structure

M15 shows XRP near 1.30 with:

EMA 20: 1.29

EMA 50: 1.28

EMA 200: 1.38

Regime: Neutral

On this timeframe, price is riding along the 20 EMA and slightly above the 50, while still far below the 200 EMA. That is classic short-term bullish bias inside a larger bearish frame. Scalpers are leaning to the long side, but the higher-timeframe cap is still heavy overhead.

RSI & MACD (M15): Mild, Not Explosive

RSI 14 (M15): 54.12 is a mildly positive but not overbought reading. Short-term momentum favours buyers, but there is no sign of euphoria or blow-off. The MACD line is essentially flat with the signal and a near-zero histogram, signaling a market that is pausing and grinding rather than trending hard.

Bollinger Bands & ATR (M15): Tight Range

BB mid: 1.29

BB upper: 1.33

BB lower: 1.26

ATR 14 (M15): 0.02

Bands are relatively narrow on M15 with a low ATR around 0.02. This points to a short-term range environment. It is good for fades and mean reversion trades, and less friendly to breakout chasers at this exact moment.

15-Minute Pivot Levels

Pivot Point (PP): 1.30

Resistance R1: 1.31

Support S1: 1.29

Yet again, price is pinned at the pivot. On this timeframe, 1.29–1.31 is essentially the scalping battlefield. Breaks outside this micro-zone are what intraday traders will use to time entries into the broader daily and hourly views.

Multi-Timeframe Picture: How It All Fits Together

There is a clear tension between timeframes:

Daily: Bearish trend, deeply oversold, hugging lower Bollinger Band.

Hourly: Bearish regime but attempting to stabilize; early bullish signs in MACD.

15-Min: Neutral regime with a slight bullish intraday bias, range-bound.

This is textbook downtrend with a developing relief bounce structure. The higher timeframe still points down, but lower timeframes are no longer aligned with fresh selling. They are showing digestion and a possible turn. The XRP value setup is in a zone where trend traders are cautious about opening new shorts, while opportunistic traders are starting to probe the long side with tight risk.

Scenario Planning for XRP Value

Bullish Scenario: Relief Rally Out of Extreme Fear

In the bullish path, the oversold daily RSI and lower-band pressure act as fuel for a short-covering rally. The hourly MACD’s nascent crossover gains follow-through, and price holds above the key 1.25 daily pivot. From there, XRP pushes through the near-term intraday cap around 1.31 and builds a base above it.

If buyers can then reclaim the 1.38 zone (H1 R1 and near upper band area) and convert it into support, the recovery has room to extend toward the daily mid-Bollinger and EMA20 cluster in the 1.70–1.80 region over time. That would still be a move within a broader downtrend, but a substantial improvement in XRP’s short- to medium-term value.

This bullish scenario is invalidated if XRP loses the 1.25 pivot decisively on a daily closing basis, especially if accompanied by RSI failing to exit oversold, staying pinned under 30, and hourly momentum rolling back over. A break below 1.16 (S1) with expanding ATR would tell you the bounce failed and the market chose trend continuation instead.

Bearish Scenario: Trend Resumes After a Weak Bounce

In the bearish continuation, the current stabilization on H1 and M15 proves to be just a pause for breath. Price fails repeatedly at 1.31–1.38, with hourly RSI stalling under 60 and MACD rolling back below its signal line. The broader crypto market remains under risk-off pressure, with BTC dominance staying high and total market cap continuing to contract.

Once the intraday supports at 1.28–1.25 give way, sellers push XRP down toward 1.16 and potentially below, keeping daily RSI suppressed in oversold territory for longer. That would be a classic grind-down in a strong trend, where oversold conditions persist and value continues to leak lower as participants de-risk.

This bearish scenario is invalidated if XRP can regain and hold above 1.38 and start closing daily candles back toward the mid-BB and EMA20 zone. A sustained daily close back above the 20 EMA around 1.70 would strongly argue that the prevailing downtrend is over, or at least that a larger corrective phase higher is underway.

Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

XRP is in a difficult but tactically interesting spot. Macro crypto conditions are fragile, with extreme fear, broad market cap drawdown, and BTC dominance elevated, yet XRP itself is already heavily sold and showing the early mechanics of a short-term stabilization.

For traders, this means:

Trend-followers have the wind at their backs on higher timeframes, but are entering late in the move and need to be disciplined about adding fresh shorts into an oversold tape.

Counter-trend traders can justify probing the long side, but only if they respect the dominant daily bear trend and structure risk around levels like 1.25 and 1.16.

Volatility is elevated but not extreme – enough to offer opportunity, but also enough to punish slow reactions when levels break.

The key for reading XRP’s value from here is to watch how price behaves around 1.25–1.31 in the next sessions. Hold and build above that band, and the odds of a relief rally improve. Lose it cleanly with expanding volume and ATR, and the market is signaling that the downtrend still has more work to do.

The market is showing clear stress, and Solana price is now trading in a zone where forced selling, extreme fear, and short-term reflex bounces can all collide.

SOL/USDT daily chart with EMA20, EMA50 and volume”
loading=”lazy” />SOL/USDT — daily chart with candlesticks, EMA20/EMA50 and volume.

Solana price: daily trend is broken, market trades like forced selling

Solana price against USDT is trading around $79–80, deep below its prior range and well under all key daily moving averages. This is not a mild correction; it looks like a full-blown liquidation phase in a crypto market that just saw a ~7.5% drop in total market cap and a spike in volume. BTC dominance near 56% and a fear & greed index at 9 (Extreme Fear) show what is driving flows: de-risking and forced selling, not patient rotation.

At this moment, the dominant force for Solana price is trend unwinding. The daily structure is firmly bearish, but intraday time frames are starting to stabilize, hinting at a possible short-term bounce inside a still-damaged macro trend. That tension between washed-out daily momentum and neutral intraday tone is the core of the current setup.

Daily chart (D1): macro bias clearly bearish

Price & EMAs
Solana price on the daily close is $79.79 with:

EMA 20: $110.07

EMA 50: $123.37

EMA 200: $149.74

Regime flag: bearish

Price is trading roughly 27% below the 20‑day EMA and even further below the 50 and 200. When an asset lives this far beneath its short and long EMAs, it signals a broken uptrend and aggressive trend-following selling. Any bounce from here is, by default, a rally into overhead supply until price can reclaim at least the 20‑day EMA.

RSI (14): 21.45
Daily RSI is deep in oversold territory. This is the kind of reading you typically see during capitulation or late-stage liquidations. It shows that the selloff has been both fast and one-sided. However, oversold does not automatically mean a bottom; in strong bear phases, RSI can stay depressed while price grinds lower. What it does say is that downside reward is compressing while short-term squeeze risk is rising.

MACD: line -12.38, signal -7.98, histogram -4.40
MACD is firmly negative with the line below the signal and a solid negative histogram. Momentum on the daily is still pointed down. There is no confirmed daily momentum reversal yet. This backs the idea that any near-term bounce would still be countertrend on this time frame.

Bollinger Bands: mid $114.99, upper $149.19, lower $80.80
Price is pinned right at the lower band (~$80.8) with a close at $79.79. Trading at or slightly outside the lower band after a strong drop usually marks exhaustion or panic. It is where short-term sellers start to run out of ammo and where mean-reversion traders begin probing. Still, as long as the band is sliding down and price cannot retake the middle band (~$115), the larger structure stays bearish.

ATR (14): $9.60
The daily ATR near $9.6 signals elevated volatility. Swings of 10–12% in a single day are fully on the table. This level of volatility usually coincides with liquidations and forced repositioning. It means both sides, longs and shorts, have to accept larger intraday ranges and greater slippage risk.

Daily Pivot Levels (reference from the system):
Pivot point (PP): $76.31
Resistance R1: $85.13
Support S1: $70.98

With Solana price at $79.79, it is trading just above the main daily pivot. The first resistance band is around $85. That is the nearest level where short-term profit taking by dip buyers and new shorts can reasonably appear. On the downside, the first support band is ~$71. If that breaks, it confirms that sellers are still firmly in control and that the capitulation phase is not done.

Daily takeaway: The D1 time frame is decisively bearish. Trend is broken, momentum is down, but conditions are stretched enough to justify a short-term relief rally. Macro bias: bearish until price at least reclaims the 20‑day EMA and holds above it.

1‑hour chart (H1): still bearish, but the bleeding is slowing

Price & EMAs
On H1, Solana price is $79.75 with:

EMA 20: $81.53

EMA 50: $87.19

EMA 200: $101.52

Regime flag: bearish

Price is still below the 20‑hour EMA, but only by a small margin, and far below the 50 and 200. That says the short-term downtrend is losing speed, even if it is not yet reversed. The 20‑hour EMA around $81.5 is the first intraday inflection: regain and hold it, and you start building a base; reject it, and the trend resumes lower.

RSI (14): 41.4
On the hourly, RSI has climbed from deeply oversold readings back toward neutral, but it is still below 50. This is what you usually see in a pause inside a downtrend. Selling pressure has eased, but buyers have not seized momentum. It opens the door to either a grindy base-building phase or another leg down if macro pressure returns.

MACD: line -3.01, signal -3.43, histogram +0.42
The MACD line is still negative, but the histogram has turned slightly positive. That is the first sign of a short-term momentum inflection: bears are no longer in complete control on this time frame. If this positive histogram persists and the MACD line crosses back above the signal, you would have confirmation of a short-term relief move inside the broader downtrend.

Bollinger Bands: mid $81.35, upper $89.39, lower $73.31
Price is trading just under the middle band on H1. After hugging the lower band during the drop, moving back toward the midline reflects a shift from panic selling to more balanced two-way trade. To talk about a proper intraday recovery, Solana price needs to establish itself above the mid-band (~$81–82) and start using it as support rather than resistance.

ATR (14): $3.52
Hourly ATR around $3.5 means the typical bar range is roughly 4–5%. Volatility remains elevated but has calmed down compared to the daily shock. For intraday traders, this still means wider stops and careful position sizing are necessary.

Hourly Pivot Levels:
Pivot point (PP): $79.71
Resistance R1: $80.65
Support S1: $78.80

Current price is hovering right at the hourly pivot. This is a classic decision zone after a selloff. A steady hold above $79.7–80.7 would support the case for a push toward the hourly upper band and daily R1 (~$85). Failure and sustained trade below $78.8 would signal that the pause was just a breather before another leg down.

Hourly takeaway: H1 remains bearishly aligned with the daily, but intraday momentum is stabilizing. It is early-stage repair, not a trend change.

15‑minute chart (M15): neutral, short-covering bounce territory

Price & EMAs
On M15, Solana price is $79.76 with:

EMA 20: $79.11

EMA 50: $79.75

EMA 200: $87.19

Regime flag: neutral

Price is above the 20‑EMA and sitting right on the 50‑EMA. Very short term, that is what a stabilizing or base-building pattern looks like after a flush. However, the 200‑EMA at $87 remains far above, so this is still just a bounce inside a bigger downtrend. The neutral regime tag fits: neither bulls nor bears are in full control on the execution time frame.

RSI (14): 54.66
RSI on M15 is slightly above 50, which lines up with a short-term relief rally or short covering rather than aggressive new buying. Momentum is mildly positive here, providing some breathing room for intraday longs, but it is not strong enough on its own to argue for a trend reversal.

MACD: line 0.44, signal 0.30, histogram 0.14
MACD has crossed into positive territory with a small positive histogram. Short-term momentum has flipped up. Typically, this type of profile appears after the heaviest part of the selling is done, as scalpers and short-term traders step in to fade the extremes. It is constructive for very short time frames but fragile if higher time frames reassert their downtrend.

Bollinger Bands: mid $78.67, upper $81.80, lower $75.55
Price is holding slightly above the mid-band on M15. The band structure shows reversion toward the mean rather than fresh trending behavior. For intraday execution, dips into the mid-band (~$78.5–79) that hold could serve as bounce zones, while rejection near the upper band (~$81.8) would mark the edge of this small relief move.

ATR (14): $1.01
With a 15‑minute ATR around $1, short-term swings of about 1–1.5% per bar are common. That is still noisy, but much more manageable than the daily shock. Execution-wise, this supports tactical trades with defined levels, provided one respects the broader bearish daily context.

15‑minute Pivot Levels:
Pivot point (PP): $79.76
Resistance R1: $80.23
Support S1: $79.28

Price is resting right at the M15 pivot, with a tight micro range between S1 (~$79.3) and R1 (~$80.2). This is short-term balance after stress. A clean break above R1 that holds would support a push back toward the hourly resistance band; a drop below S1 that sticks would show that the bounce is running out of steam.

15‑minute takeaway: Execution time frame is neutral to mildly constructive, showing the first leg of a potential short-covering bounce, but it exists entirely inside a much larger bearish framework.

Main scenario for Solana price: bearish with room for a reflex rally

The daily trend sets the tone: main scenario is bearish for Solana price. The asset is trading in a clear downtrend below all major EMAs, and daily MACD is still decisively negative. That is your structural backdrop.

At the same time, daily RSI in the low 20s, price pressed against the lower Bollinger Band, and stabilizing signals on H1 and M15 all point to conditions ripe for a short-term relief rally or at least a consolidation phase. So the dominant narrative is:

Macro: bearish trend, driven by risk-off sentiment, heavy crypto-wide deleveraging, and extreme fear.

Micro: short-term stabilization, with intraday traders probing for bounces and shorts beginning to manage risk.

These two forces can coexist: price can bounce hard inside a bear trend and still be structurally weak.

Clear bullish and bearish paths for Solana price

Bullish scenario (countertrend rally / bottoming attempt)

In the bullish path, the short-term stabilization on H1 and M15 turns into a stronger mean-reversion move.

What bulls need to see:

On M15/H1, Solana price holds above the local pivots (~$79.7) and stops making new intraday lows.

H1 RSI pushes above 50 and MACD completes a clean bullish cross with a widening positive histogram.

Price reclaims and holds above the H1 20‑EMA (~$81.5), then attacks the $85 region (daily R1 and H1 resistance zone).

On D1, price closes back inside the Bollinger Bands and starts moving toward the mid-band (~$115) over time.

Upside scope in this scenario:Initially, the realistic target is the $85–90 band (prior intraday resistance plus hourly upper band area). If the broader market stabilizes and Solana price can build higher lows above ~$80, an extended mean reversion toward the daily 20‑EMA around $110 becomes technically plausible. That move would still be a bear-market rally unless the 20‑day EMA is reclaimed and defended.

What would invalidate the bullish case:A decisive break and daily close below $71 (daily S1), especially on rising volume, would signal that the selling wave is not done. That would undercut the entire mean-reversion thesis and reset the downside, likely triggering another leg of forced liquidations.

Bearish scenario (continuation of the downtrend)

In the bearish path, current stabilization is just a pause before another drop.

What bears want to see:

H1 and M15 fail to hold the local pivots, with Solana price slipping back below $78.8 (H1 S1) and $79.3 (M15 S1) and staying there.

H1 RSI rolls back down from the low‑40s toward oversold without making a higher high, confirming trend continuation rather than repair.

Daily MACD stays negative and the histogram does not significantly contract, keeping macro momentum pointed down.

Price continues to ride or close below the daily lower Bollinger Band, indicating that forced selling remains in play.

Downside scope in this scenario:First, a test and potential break of the $71 area (daily S1). If that goes, the market will be trading in an air pocket where historical support is thin, and volatility, already high, could spike again. With daily ATR around $9.6, another $10–15 extension lower in a stress event is not out of the question.

What would invalidate the bearish case:If Solana price can reclaim and hold above the H1 50‑EMA (~$87), then later close the day back above the daily 20‑EMA (~$110), the character of this move changes. That would mark a structural improvement, suggesting that the selloff was a shakeout rather than the start of a deeper bear phase. Bears lose their clear trend-following edge in that environment.

How to think about positioning, risk, and uncertainty

Solana price is sitting in a zone where trend traders and mean‑reversion traders see very different pictures:

Trend and swing traders looking at the daily chart see a clear broken uptrend, with price below all major EMAs, negative MACD, and heavy market-wide risk-off.

Short-term traders on H1 and M15 see oversold conditions stabilizing, with the potential for a sharp squeeze if shorts become too crowded or if the broader market bounces.

Both can be right over their respective horizons. The key variables now are:

Volatility: Daily ATR near $10 and hourly ATR near $3.5 mean position sizing and stop placement need to assume wide swings. Small misjudgments in entry and exit can be amplified.

Market regime: A total crypto market cap drop of ~7.5% and an Extreme Fear reading of 9 are textbook deleveraging conditions. Liquidity can vanish quickly both ways, down on forced selling and up on sudden short squeezes.

Time frame alignment: The daily remains bearish while intraday is merely stabilizing. Until those time frames align on the upside, Solana price rallies are statistically more likely to be countertrend bounces within a broader downtrend.

In this environment, clarity comes from respecting the dominant daily bear trend while acknowledging that short, violent rallies are increasingly likely as the market becomes more oversold. Traders who ignore the volatility and the regime risk are effectively betting on clean, linear moves in a market that is anything but calm right now.

In a tense week for crypto markets, marathon digital has drawn attention after a sizable bitcoin transfer raised fresh questions about miner positioning.

Details of MARA’s latest BTC transfers

Over a 10 hour window, Marathon Digital (MARA) moved 1,318 BTC, worth about $86.9 million, to a mix of counterparties and custody venues, according to onchain data from Arkham. The activity has sharpened focus on how major miners are managing liquidity as volatility returns.

The largest flows went to credit and trading firm Two Prime, which received more than 660 BTC. Moreover, additional tranches were directed to a BitGo tagged address and a newly created wallet, underlining the diversity of destinations involved in the operation.

The timing of the transfers is drawing scrutiny from traders wary of forced miner selling in a volatile, thin market. However, the transactions could also reflect routine miner treasury management, collateral posting, or broader balance sheet optimization rather than imminent spot exchange sales.

Two Prime, BitGo and fresh wallet destinations

On a granular level, the biggest slice of the MARA BTC flow went to Two Prime. One transaction sent 653.773 BTC, around $42.01 million, to a Two Prime tagged address, followed just minutes later by a smaller 8.999 BTC top up worth about $578,000. Together, these transfers concentrated the bulk of the volume with a single trading and credit counterparty.

Separate outbound deals sent 200 BTC and 99.999 BTC to a BitGo tagged address, together totaling about $20.4 million at the time of transfer. Moreover, another 305 BTC, worth roughly $20.72 million, went to a fresh wallet, suggesting either a new custody arrangement or preparation for a specific transaction pipeline.

The Two Prime BTC transfer is likely to attract the most analysis because the firm operates as a credit and trading counterparty. If the bitcoin is being posted as collateral or rotated into a structured strategy, it does not necessarily imply immediate spot selling pressure on exchanges. That said, traders often watch such moves closely in fragile conditions.

Market context and miner stress

The flow matters mainly because of timing. Crypto markets have been swinging sharply since this week’s liquidation driven selloff, and participants remain on edge for any sign that miners are turning into forced sellers. In such an environment, large miner related onchain shifts can rapidly influence sentiment.

Large marathon bitcoin transfers or similar moves by peers can be routine treasury operations, custody reshuffling, collateral adjustments, or preparation for over the counter deals. However, in a thin market they are frequently interpreted as a signal of future supply, even when the underlying purpose is more neutral or hedging related.

The transfers come amid a difficult period for miners, with Bitcoin trading nearly 50% below peak prices above $126,000 reached last year. Moreover, on Thursday CoinDesk highlighted that the network’s economics have deteriorated, compounding pressure on balance sheets across the sector.

Bitcoin production cost and pricing pressure

Bitcoin is now approximately 20% below its estimated average production cost, increasing financial stress for operators like MARA. The average bitcoin production cost sits around $87,000 per coin, according to data from Checkonchain, while the spot price has slid toward a weekly low near $60,000. Historically, trading below production cost has been a hallmark of bear market phases.

In that context, marathon digital moves of this size naturally prompt speculation over whether more miners may be forced to liquidate holdings or seek new financing structures. However, until the ultimate use of the BTC at Two Prime, BitGo and the fresh wallet becomes clearer, the transfers remain an important but ambiguous signal in an already stressed market.

Overall, the latest MARA transactions underscore how onchain mining flows can quickly become focal points for traders when prices undercut costs, liquidity thins, and market confidence wavers.

Institutional access to DeFi-linked products took a step forward as Bitwise advanced its uniswap etf plans with U.S. regulators.

Bitwise files for first spot Uniswap ETF in the U.S.

Bitwise Asset Management has submitted a Form S-1 registration statement to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seeking approval for a spot Uniswap ETF directly backed by the UNI token. The move underscores growing institutional interest in decentralized finance, even as broader altcoin markets remain under pressure.

The proposed product, named the “Bitwise Uniswap ETF”, would be structured as a trust that holds Uniswap tokens as its primary asset. Moreover, the ETF is designed to give traditional brokerage clients regulated access to UNI price dynamics without interacting with on-chain infrastructure.

According to the filing, submitted on February 5, 2026, the trust would issue shares intended to trade on a U.S. exchange under a ticker that has not yet been announced. However, the registration makes clear that each share will represent a fractional, undivided beneficial interest in the Uniswap token holdings of the trust.

Structure, custody and management of the proposed trust

Bitwise Investment Advisers will act as sponsor and manager of the trust, overseeing operations, fees and reporting. Moreover, the structure is meant to mirror other spot crypto products that provide direct exposure to a single asset, while operating within the existing securities framework.

Coinbase Custody has been named as the custodian responsible for safeguarding the Uniswap tokens held by the trust. This arrangement aims to let investors benefit from Uniswap token exposure without managing wallets, seed phrases or private keys. That said, on-chain risks linked to the underlying protocol and token will still influence performance.

The SEC registration notes that the ETF will hold UNI directly, rather than using derivatives or synthetic exposure. However, the document also highlights typical risks associated with digital assets, including regulatory uncertainty, market volatility and potential technological vulnerabilities within the Ethereum ecosystem.

Market reaction and UNI price performance

Despite the high-profile filing, Uniswap (UNI) saw muted price action in the immediate aftermath. At press time, UNI was trading at $3.22, down 14.5% over the previous 24 hours. The decline suggests that traders remain cautious toward altcoins, even as new regulated vehicles emerge.

Moreover, the negative short-term move underscores a broader risk-off tone in smaller-cap tokens relative to assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum. The spot uniswap etf proposal did little to offset selling pressure, indicating that investors may be waiting for clearer regulatory signals or renewed momentum across the DeFi sector.

However, if approved, the Bitwise Uniswap ETF could still influence liquidity and depth for UNI over the longer term by making the asset accessible through traditional brokerage channels. Increased institutional participation has historically affected trading volumes and price discovery in other listed crypto products.

First regulated ETF centered on a DeFi governance token

If the SEC signs off, the Bitwise Uniswap ETF would become the first regulated exchange-traded fund in the U.S. focused specifically on a DeFi protocol’s native governance token. Uniswap’s UNI token underpins one of the largest decentralized exchanges built on Ethereum, where users trade cryptocurrencies through automated liquidity pools.

Moreover, UNI holders participate in protocol governance, voting on proposals that can adjust fees, incentives and treasury allocations. A spot ETF wrapped around this token would effectively introduce mainstream investors to the governance layer of decentralized finance, even if those investors do not vote directly on-chain.

That said, the filing emphasizes that the ETF’s performance will track UNI price movements, not Uniswap trading activity or protocol revenues. Investors will therefore be exposed to market sentiment, regulatory developments and broader crypto cycles rather than cash flows or dividends.

Evolving landscape for crypto and altcoin-linked ETFs

Bitwise’s application arrives amid a wave of altcoin etf filings seeking to expand beyond large-cap assets. In recent months, Bitwise and rival issuers have proposed products linked to tokens such as AAVE and Chainlink, reflecting efforts to package leading DeFi and Web3 assets into compliant investment vehicles.

However, the SEC has taken a cautious stance toward products that move beyond established assets and into decentralized protocol tokens. Market participants are therefore watching closely to see whether this Uniswap-focused trust can clear regulatory hurdles and set a precedent for future decentralized finance etf proposals.

For now, the Bitwise Uniswap ETF filing highlights the ongoing convergence between on-chain protocols and traditional capital markets. Whether or not it gains approval, the move signals persistent demand for regulated access to DeFi-native assets from both retail and institutional investors.

In summary, Bitwise’s bid to list a spot Uniswap ETF with direct UNI holdings underscores how regulated structures are evolving to meet interest in decentralized finance, even as short-term market sentiment toward altcoins remains fragile.

NEAR Protocol is advancing the role of near ai agents in decentralized finance by launching a new marketplace for autonomous economic transactions.

NEAR AI Agent Market introduces autonomous on-chain commerce

The newly unveiled NEAR AI Agent Market is a decentralized platform where artificial intelligence agents can transact with full economic autonomy. These NEAR-based systems bid on tasks, execute work, and receive direct settlement in NEAR tokens, without any human intervention at the transaction layer.

Moreover, the marketplace is designed as user-owned commerce infrastructure. It removes centralized intermediaries while maintaining verifiable on-chain records. This structure supports ai agent economic autonomy across a growing range of digital services and on-chain operations.

Built on NEAR Intents technology, the platform extends NEAR’s previous work in capital markets into a broader, intent-driven economy. However, instead of limiting use to structured trading, the system now interprets natural language instructions for many sectors.

How the three-step agent transaction model works

The NEAR AI Agent Market runs a three-step transaction process that eliminates traditional intermediaries. First, users post tasks on the platform with clear budgets and requirements. Then, AI agents scan the open marketplace and submit competitive proposals for those assignments.

Once an agent is selected, funds are moved into escrow on the protocol. That said, the chosen agent then performs the requested work autonomously. Upon successful completion, payment settlement occurs in NEAR tokens, creating a recurring cycle in which autonomous agents can both earn and spend directly.

This design supports a circular economy of decentralized ai marketplace services. Available categories include code reviews, data analysis, translation services, and API credit trading. Physical services and on-chain asset transactions also fall within the scope of supported use cases.

The protocol handles technical complexity such as RPC endpoints management and cross-chain routing. Users only need to describe desired outcomes in natural language, while the underlying infrastructure translates those intents into executable transactions.

From NEAR Intents to natural language agent workflows

NEAR has expanded NEAR Intents beyond its original focus on capital markets and structured trading strategies. Now, the system processes near intents natural language requests, transforming human-readable instructions into machine-executable actions in multiple sectors.

Moreover, this architecture is built to support autonomous agent workflows over time. Agents can run continuous strategies for portfolio management, content creation, or supply chain coordination. They can also interact with each other, forming multi-agent systems where one entity hires another to complete specialized tasks.

In this model, near ai agents gain genuine economic agency. They can request services, compete for contracts, and execute complex transaction sequences with minimal human oversight. However, users still maintain control over their deployed agents and overall strategy parameters.

Multi-framework integration for high-performance AI agents

Agent compatibility within the marketplace spans several prominent AI frameworks. According to NEAR, the platform supports multi framework agent integration, including OpenClaw, Claude, and Codex. This diversity enables teams to plug existing agents into the protocol without rebuilding core models.

These integrations are designed for continuous operation and high-performance intelligence deployment. Moreover, they let developers choose the best tools for each task, while the NEAR infrastructure manages execution, routing, and final settlement on-chain.

Over time, the goal is to support a wide range of strategies, from automated investment management to industrial logistics. The combination of smart contracts, NEAR Intents, and framework-agnostic agents aims to build what could be viewed as the smarter ai powered decentralized marketplace for on-chain services.

Agentic dispute resolution replaces legal contracts

When there are quality concerns or task conflicts, the marketplace does not rely on traditional legal frameworks. Instead, it introduces agentic dispute resolution managed by specialized AI agents. These dispute agents review transaction histories and submissions from all involved parties.

The system can request additional information or clarifications before issuing a binding decision. However, this process avoids courts and conventional legal contracts, potentially lowering transaction friction. It also allows disputes to be handled at the same machine speed as the underlying economic activity.

NEAR positions this framework as a cost-reduction tool for businesses. Automated coordination between agents may reduce operating expenses, accelerate market response times, and help lower prices for end users over time.

User-owned infrastructure and on-chain settlement

The protocol emphasizes user-owned infrastructure with no corporate gatekeeper controlling access or terms. That said, the architecture still offers verifiable settlement and transparency, thanks to its use of onchain agent payments and open protocols.

The convergence of NEAR AI and NEAR Intents underpins this model of autonomy. Agents can orchestrate multi-step strategies, allocate budgets, and engage in complex trade routes while remaining within a decentralized environment.

This unified commerce infrastructure combines asset liquidity with transaction capabilities for autonomous agents. Moreover, it links blockchain networks to emerging agent-driven markets, using open standards and cryptographic proofs rather than centralized APIs.

NEAR’s vision for autonomous commerce

The marketplace showcases NEAR’s broader vision for a unified, agent-led commerce stack. The protocol integrates transaction execution, liquidity access, and coordination tools so that agents can operate as independent participants in digital markets.

In this environment, near ai agents collaborate, compete, and contract with each other for specialized work. However, human users still define goals and configure permissions, ensuring that autonomous systems remain aligned with user interests.

Overall, the NEAR AI Agent Market marks a significant step in connecting blockchain infrastructure with agentic economic systems. It offers a template for how decentralized coordination, AI frameworks, and programmable money can merge into scalable, autonomous digital markets.

As the UK tightens oversight of digital asset platforms, the planned gemini uk exit is emerging as a key test of the country’s new regulatory approach.

Gemini confirms withdrawal from the UK market

Cryptocurrency exchange Gemini has notified customers that it will cease operations in the United Kingdom, in a move that highlights pressure on crypto businesses from evolving rules. In its client communication, the platform said that UK operations will formally end on 6 April 2026, setting a clear timetable for users to offboard.

Moreover, the company confirmed that all UK customer accounts will move into withdrawal-only mode from 5 March 2026. From that date, users will be unable to trade or make new deposits, marking a hard cut-off for routine platform activity in the market. This staged approach is designed to give customers time to plan.

Accounts move to withdrawal-only from March

Under the transition plan, Gemini stated that customers must complete any trading or new deposit activity before 5 March 2026. However, users who want to convert crypto holdings into fiat will need to do so prior to that date, as trading functionality will be disabled once withdrawal-only status takes effect.

All crypto and fiat withdrawals must then be completed by 6 April 2026, when UK operations formally close. The exchange has urged clients to transfer assets to an external wallet or move funds via a partner platform before those deadlines, to avoid any last-minute congestion or operational risks.

Offboarding via eToro and customer safeguards

As part of the offboarding process, Gemini has entered into an arrangement with eToro, giving customers the option to open an eToro account to support asset transfers. That said, users are not obliged to use the partner and can instead choose self-custody or another regulated venue for their holdings.

In addition, Gemini has advised customers to cancel all recurring orders and to begin unstaking any staked assets well ahead of the shutdown dates. This guidance reflects the operational steps many crypto investors must take to ensure that rewards, staking cycles, and automated purchases are wound down in an orderly way.

The exchange has also warned clients to remain alert to scams during the transition. According to the notice, Gemini representatives will not contact users directly by phone or text to request information or initiate transfers. Moreover, the firm has stressed that any legitimate updates will come through its official channels.

Regulatory pressure and the UK’s evolving framework

Gemini’s decision coincides with a decisive shift in UK crypto regulation. The country is moving from an interim crypto registration regime to full authorisation under the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA), a framework that raises the bar for governance, operational resilience, and senior management oversight.

Under this new structure, digital asset firms face deeper regulatory scrutiny and ongoing supervisory engagement. However, policymakers in London continue to present the UK as open to financial innovation, signalling that authorities want well-run firms to operate domestically, but under more demanding conditions.

For many companies, the shift from registration to full FSMA authorisation is far from procedural. It introduces heightened expectations around systems, controls, and risk management, alongside more intensive reviews of leadership teams and decision-making processes. These requirements can be costly to meet, especially for global groups balancing obligations across multiple jurisdictions.

A more selective regime for global exchanges

Against this backdrop, the gemini uk exit is being viewed by industry observers as a sign that the UK is embracing a more selective regime for digital asset firms. One commentator described the move as raising the question of what genuine participation will look like once full FSMA authorisation becomes the norm rather than the exception.

They argued that the transition is not simply about ticking compliance boxes, but about sustained oversight, historical scrutiny, and personal accountability at the senior management level. Moreover, global exchanges must assess whether the commercial opportunity in the UK justifies operating under this level of exposure, particularly as other jurisdictions compete for crypto investment.

Some firms are likely to conclude that the trade-off is worthwhile, especially if they see the UK as a strategic hub. Others may decide to scale back or avoid the market, reflecting different risk appetites and business models. In that context, Gemini’s departure may be part of a broader pattern rather than an isolated event.

Implications for the UK crypto landscape

Gemini’s exit does not necessarily indicate that the UK’s approach has failed. Instead, it suggests that the regime is designed to be intentionally selective, favouring operators with the resources and experience to manage intensive supervision. However, it also raises questions about how many major platforms will ultimately choose to maintain a presence.

As FSMA authorisation moves from policy documents into day-to-day regulatory practice, success may depend less on headline scale and more on regulatory experience, sound judgement, and willingness to operate under continuous oversight. Moreover, the outcome will help define the UK’s position within global digital asset markets over the coming years.

Gemini was contacted for comment at press time but did not respond, leaving open whether the firm might revisit the UK market at a later stage if conditions or its strategic priorities change.

In summary, Gemini’s planned withdrawal from the UK reflects both the country’s determination to impose higher standards on digital asset firms and the tough calculations global exchanges must now make when assessing their presence in one of the world’s most closely watched financial centres.

Across global finance, accelerating stablecoin adoption is reviving debates about private money, monetary competition, and the future architecture of the dollar system.

From early crypto chaos to the rise of USDT

In 2014, when the digital asset market was still nascent, Giancarlo Devasini launched USDT and Tether. At the time, a few exchanges—Kraken, Bitfinex, Coinbase, Poloniex, and Bitstamp—dominated trading in a lightly regulated, fragile crypto ecosystem. However, the collapse of Mt. Gox in February 2014, then the largest bitcoin (BTC) exchange, exposed severe structural weaknesses.

Back then, these platforms operated across different jurisdictions and traded what was effectively the only meaningful token: Bitcoin. Arbitrageurs tried to exploit price gaps, yet they could not move dollars between banks, brokers, and countries fast enough. For example, when bitcoin traded at $115 on Kraken and $112 on Poloniex, a trader should have sold one BTC at the higher price and wired USD to buy back at the lower price. In practice, settlement took one to two days, eroding opportunities.

Thanks to Giancarlo and Paolo Ardoino, USDT emerged as a solution, moving dollar equivalents at internet speed. Launched in July 2014 as “Realcoin,” Tether initially built USDT on the Omni Layer atop Bitcoin, because Ethereum and other smart contract networks did not yet exist. However, in November 2014, the founders rebranded the project “Tether” and introduced three fiat-pegged tokens: USDT (US dollar), EURT (euro), and JPYT (Japanese yen).

In 2015, Bitfinex, then one of the largest exchanges, adopted USDT and created its first deep liquidity pool. Between 2017 and 2019, Tether expanded beyond Omni to Ethereum and subsequently to Tron, Solana, Avalanche, and other chains. Moreover, this multichain strategy boosted transaction speed, reduced fees, and enhanced interoperability. By 2019, USDT had become the most traded crypto asset by volume, with daily turnover surpassing even that of bitcoin.

By late 2019, as competitors advertised that their tokens were backed 100% by cash or cash equivalents, Tether disclosed a different mix. Its reserves included A1- and A2-rated commercial paper, and the company signaled plans to shift gradually toward short-term U.S. Treasuries and cash. This disclosure set the stage for debates about usdt reserve composition and risk management standards across the industry.

Pandemic stress and the shift to emerging markets

COVID was the inflection point for USDT. In the two years to March 2022, during a period of extreme global financial stress, USDT supply soared 25-fold from $3.3 billion to $80 billion. That growth came primarily from emerging markets. Moreover, the token’s main use case shifted from speculative trading and arbitrage to a defensive tool against domestic currency crises.

Between 2020 and 2023, households in Venezuela, Lebanon, Argentina, and other emerging markets facing deep devaluations against the US dollar increasingly turned to USDT. In many of these countries, USDT served simultaneously as a savings account, a means of payment, and a store of value. When physical access to black-market dollars dried up under lockdowns, younger users introduced parents and grandparents to “digital dollars,” demonstrating how they could preserve wealth from home.

From living rooms in Caracas and Beirut to Buenos Aires, users discovered faster and safer ways to hold dollar value without relying on unstable banks or weak local currencies. However, this was not just a story about technology; it was also about monetary competition and trust. For many, USDT became a parallel financial rail, standing in for bank deposits, cash, and cross-border remittances.

Tether’s current position and regulatory context

Today, Tether stands at the center of the digital asset economy. With $187 billion in circulating supply and roughly 60% market share, it is the largest stablecoin issuer, rivaled only by Circle’s USDC at $75 billion. With more than 450 million users worldwide and an estimated ~30 million new users added every quarter, USDT has become a systemic player. Tether is headquartered and regulated in El Salvador, while its reserves are custodied by Cantor Fitzgerald.

The US government has developed a strategic interest in Tether’s balance sheet. Composed largely of U.S. Treasury bills, its asset portfolio rivals those of some developed nations. As a result, Tether has become one of the largest and fastest-growing sources of demand for US sovereign debt. Moreover, this intertwining of digital assets and traditional bond markets highlights why genius act regulation and similar frameworks are drawing attention in policymaking circles.

Including corporate bonds, gold, bitcoin, and secured loans, Tether reported more than $5 billion in surplus collateral relative to USDT liabilities as of January 2026. On the back of ongoing supply growth, dominance in emerging markets, and the landmark passage of the GENIUS Act in 2025, some analysts have compared the present landscape to the so-called free banking era before 1913. Critics also invoke that period when warning about the dangers of privately issued money.

Lessons from free banking and private money

In a recent ARK Bitcoin Brainstorm podcast, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino joined economist Dr. Arthur Laffer and ARK CEO/CIO Cathie Wood to unpack these historical parallels. During the discussion, Dr. Laffer argued that modern stablecoins could usher in a more efficient form of free banking in the United States and that fears of 19th-century “wildcat banking” are often overstated. However, he acknowledged that concerns about credit risk and redemption were central to that earlier era.

In the 1800s, private entities issued banknotes that frequently traded at discounts to par as users evaluated issuer solvency. Crucially, the US government did not guarantee these notes; they were liabilities of individual banks, redeemable in specie—gold or silver—only if the banks remained solvent. Both Dr. Laffer and historian Brian Domitrovic noted that currencies competed domestically until the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 and given a monopoly on note issuance.

Dr. Laffer further explained that in 1834 the US government established a gold peg by fixing the price at $20.67 per ounce. Yet Washington did not stand behind each banknote in circulation. Redemption depended entirely on the issuing bank’s balance sheet and reputation, violating the “no-questions-asked” principle under which money is accepted at face value without doubts about its backing. That said, from 1776 to 1913, cumulative inflation in the United States was effectively zero, even as prices fluctuated around a stable long-term benchmark.

Outside the US, some free banking systems fared even better. In Scotland (1716–1845) and Canada (1817–1914), inflation remained low, bank failures were relatively scarce, and banknotes usually traded at par. Mechanisms like competitive redemption and clearinghouses imposed strong market discipline. In contrast, the American experience from 1837 to 1861 was hampered by restrictive state rules, including bans on bank branching and requirements to hold risky state bonds as collateral. After a tumultuous stretch in the early 1840s, “busted bank notes” settled at less than 2% on average—a figure echoing today’s 2% Federal Reserve inflation target.

From historical free banking to blockchain-based dollars

The mid-19th century turmoil did not prevent growth. During this period, the US economy expanded strongly, laying the financial foundations for the industrial revolution that accelerated after the Civil War ended in 1865. However, the free banking era ultimately closed as the Civil War and the National Banking Acts centralized currency issuance under federal authority.

During the war years from 1861 to 1865, the US suspended the gold standard. States helped create demand for their bonds by requiring banks to hold state debt as reserves. Later, the Federal government taxed all bank-issued currency not backed by a robust reserve of federal bonds, effectively eliminating free-bank notes. In 1879, the country resumed the gold standard, and the 1870s and 1880s became some of the strongest decades for economic growth in American history.

Requiring banks to hold large quantities of federal bonds as reserves became problematic as the private economy outpaced government borrowing. With too few bonds relative to demand, banks often curtailed currency issuance, contributing to deflation and periodic bank panics. These constraints encouraged Congress to pass the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and nationalize the reserve system. Since then, the Consumer Price Index has risen more than 30-fold, while the prior century of mixed gold and bimetallic standards plus currency competition produced zero cumulative inflation.

Modern stablecoins share important features with those earlier currencies: they are privately issued liabilities backed by reserves. Yet technology, transparency, and regulation mitigate many past weaknesses. Stablecoin issuers are not constrained by branch rules, because their tokens are natively digital and global. Moreover, clearinghouse-like roles are now performed by liquid secondary markets, centralized and decentralized exchanges, and algorithmic arbitrage that keeps pegs tight.

Collateral quality has also improved. Under the GENIUS framework, regulated issuers typically hold cash and short-term Treasuries, while some unregulated issuers such as Tether also prioritize highly liquid assets. Compared with the illiquid state bonds of 19th-century American banks, these portfolios look far more resilient. Fraud risk is further reduced for the largest players through regular audits, on-chain visibility, and federal oversight. This combination of innovation and safeguards is central to the renewed debate around private money history.

Technology rails and the new monetary infrastructure

Historically, free banking thrived where central banks were weak or absent—Scotland, Canada, and pre-Civil War America. In similar fashion, stablecoins have emerged where traditional banking and payment systems are slow, restrictive, or expensive. Just as railroads, telegraphs, and advanced printing underpinned earlier experiments, blockchains and global internet infrastructure now support tokenized dollars.

Stablecoins like Tether and Circle do not actively manage pegs via discretionary issuance or redemption in open markets. Only whitelisted, KYC-compliant institutions can mint new USDT by depositing cash or redeem tokens by returning them to the issuer. Institutions, not Tether or Circle, maintain the peg through arbitrage, while the companies guarantee one US dollar for each USDT or USDC in circulation. This structure allows regulators and market participants to track flows with increasing precision.

Dr. Laffer believes this model is particularly powerful in emerging and inflation-prone economies but argues that a more advanced design is required for broad usage in developed markets. He envisions a stable token that maintains a dollar peg yet also appreciates in line with inflation, preserving purchasing power against goods and services. However, implementing such a design within existing securities law raises significant challenges.

According to Paolo Ardoino, and based on the GENIUS Act, any stablecoin that passes yield directly to users would likely be treated as a security and fall under U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission scrutiny. For now, yield-bearing “tokenized money markets” remain largely restricted to accredited investors and qualified purchasers. Over time, Dr. Laffer expects some stable currencies to track an index of goods and services while being backed by long-term assets like bitcoin or gold.

Alloy, XAUT, and collateralized stable value

Already, Tether is experimenting with new structures. It has launched Alloy (AUSDT), a gold-backed stablecoin, and XAUT, a tokenized representation of gold. As Ardoino emphasized, these designs enable users to be long bitcoin or gold while transacting in a stable-value unit that appreciates with the underlying collateral. Moreover, they can expand borrowing capacity in collateralized debt position (CDP) systems, echoing designs popularized in decentralized finance.

In a CDP, users lock crypto assets as collateral on-chain and borrow stablecoins against them, with automatic liquidation if collateral values fall below safety thresholds. Notably, this is not a new idea in crypto. One of the earliest and most durable DeFi protocols—Sky, previously known as MakerDao—pioneered crypto-collateralized stablecoins. Sky functions like a decentralized bank, issuing the USDS stablecoin to users who deposit assets such as ETH into smart contracts and borrow against that collateral.

To ensure solvency, loans on Sky are overcollateralized and subject to liquidation if collateral values drop too far. Today, USDS is backed by diversified collateral designed to optimize efficiency and yield while managing risk. The basket includes major stablecoins like USDC and USDT, on-chain overcollateralized crypto lending, AAA corporate debt, short-duration U.S. Treasury bills, over-the-counter crypto lending to vetted counterparties, and other assets or operational buffers.

To stabilize its peg further, Sky deploys a Peg Stability Module (PSM) that allows direct swaps between USDC and USDS. This mechanism gives arbitrageurs a straightforward way to keep USDS trading near $1 and enhances liquidity beyond the more volatile crypto collateral. In addition, Sky offers sUSDS, a savings instrument backed by revenue from borrower interest, tokenized money market funds, U.S. Treasuries, and DeFi allocations. In effect, USDS acts as both a transactional medium and a global savings vehicle.

Commodity settlement and the next phase of stablecoin adoption

The passage of the GENIUS Act in 2025 has intensified questions about how Tether will enter the US market. In Ardoino’s view, one of the fastest-growing applications lies in commodity settlement. Increasingly, commodity traders are realizing that stablecoins offer a more efficient way to close trades than legacy correspondent banking. Last year, Tether began facilitating oil transactions, triggering a surge in global demand for USDT from broad-based commodity markets.

Ardoino notes that if a token is not integrated into local economies, it typically serves only as a temporary settlement layer before conversion back into domestic currency. In contrast, in emerging markets with unstable monetary regimes, USDT functions as means of payment, savings vehicle, and store of value. Consequently, it circulates locally and remains in use, deepening the foothold of digital dollar payments in daily life.

Strategy’s research suggests that stablecoin adoption is segmenting by region. The US, Latin America, and Africa are evolving along distinct paths. In developed economies, electronic dollars are already easily accessible via platforms like Venmo, Cash App, and Zelle, reducing the immediacy of demand. However, cross-border trade, wholesale settlements, and on-chain finance are creating new niches even in markets with mature banking systems.

Within this context, the phrase stablecoin adoption encapsulates more than simple user counts. For some countries, especially in Latin America and parts of Africa, demand is driven by capital preservation and escape from inflation. For others, including advanced economies, the draw is programmability, 24/7 settlement, and composability with DeFi. Understanding these divergent drivers will be crucial for regulators and investors assessing systemic risk and opportunity.

USAT and the US market outlook

Tether recognizes that the United States is different from typical emerging market strongholds. Domestic users already have multiple low-cost options for instant payments and transfers. Nevertheless, the company sees space for new instruments that integrate with banks, fintech platforms, and institutional settlement rails.

To that end, Tether plans to launch USAT, a new stablecoin tailored specifically for developed markets, in the coming months. While detailed design parameters remain to be disclosed, USAT will debut in the world’s largest financial system and under the scrutiny of US regulators and institutional investors. Moreover, its launch will test whether the world’s biggest stablecoin issuer can translate its dominance in emerging markets into a durable presence in the US.

As commodity settlement, DeFi, and savings products evolve, the future of stablecoins now hinges on policy decisions, user trust, and continued innovation. The coming years will show whether privately issued digital dollars become a peripheral tool or the backbone of a new monetary order.

Market participants are facing a sharp volatility spike as the Bitcoin price reacts to aggressive deleveraging across the crypto space.

BTC/USDT daily chart with EMA20, EMA50 and volume”
loading=”lazy” />BTC/USDT — daily chart with candlesticks, EMA20/EMA50 and volume.

Daily Structure: Clear Downtrend, Early Signs of Capitulation

Trend & EMAs (D1)

– Price: $69,882.91
– EMA 20: $82,859.92
– EMA 50: $87,498.27
– EMA 200: $96,861.46

Bitcoin is trading far below all key EMAs. The 20-day is more than $13k above spot, the 50-day almost $18k above, and the 200-day over $25k higher. That is not just a pullback; it is a full-blown bearish macro regime where momentum has broken and trend followers are exiting or shorting rallies. The distance from the 20-day EMA also means the market is stretched to the downside; sharp snapback rallies are entirely possible, but they would be corrections within a broader downtrend until at least the 20-day starts flattening and price reclaims it.

Main scenario from D1: Bearish. The higher-timeframe trend is down. Any bullish stance here is tactical and counter-trend, not a confirmed reversal.

RSI (D1)

– RSI 14: 20.03

Daily RSI around 20 is deeply oversold, in classic capitulation territory. This level of compression typically does not last long; it often marks either the tail end of a drop or the start of a volatile consolidation where bounces are violent but not necessarily durable. In plain terms, the market is heavily one-sided short or hedged, so it is vulnerable to a face-ripping squeeze, but from a structurally weak base.

MACD (D1)

– MACD line: -4,589.18
– Signal line: -2,780.01
– Histogram: -1,809.17

The MACD is deeply negative with the line well below the signal and a large negative histogram. Momentum remains decisively bearish; sellers are still in control on the daily chart. There is no visible sign yet of a momentum crossover or flattening, so while price is oversold, the underlying impulse of the move is still down.

Bollinger Bands (D1)

– Mid-band (20 SMA): $85,173.23
– Upper band: $99,138.17
– Lower band: $71,208.28
– Price: $69,882.91 (below lower band)

Bitcoin is trading below the lower daily Bollinger Band. That is classic overshoot behavior: price has broken out of the recent volatility envelope to the downside. Two implications:

1) The current move is statistically extreme relative to the last 20 days.
2) Mean reversion odds increase, not necessarily a full trend reversal, but at least a move back toward the band or the mid-line over time.

In practice, this setup often leads to one of two things: a fast bounce back inside the bands, or a “walking the band” phase where price grinds lower hugging the lower band. Given how far below the EMAs the market is, a short, sharp relief rally would not be surprising, but it would still be swimming against a strong current.

ATR & Volatility (D1)

– ATR 14: $3,938.39

An ATR near $4,000 on the daily means volatility is elevated. Day-to-day ranges of $4k or more are normal in this environment, which amplifies both downside air pockets and upside squeezes. Position sizing and leverage tolerance need to reflect this; a “normal” stop can easily be run in a single 4-hour candle.

Daily Pivot Levels (D1)

– Pivot point (PP): $70,795.70
– Resistance 1 (R1): $72,428.39
– Support 1 (S1): $68,250.21

Price is currently just below the daily pivot and hovering closer to S1. That sets up a very simple local battle: as long as BTC stays below $70.8k, intraday traders will treat bounces as opportunities to sell into. Moreover, a sustained reclaim of the pivot and a push toward $72k (R1) would be the first sign that selling pressure is relaxing. Conversely, a clean break below $68.2k opens the door to another leg down, with no strong daily support from this model until the market gets well into the mid-60s.

Hourly Context: Bearish, But Selling Pressure Is Easing

Trend & EMAs (H1)

– Price: $69,816.59
– EMA 20: $71,469.19
– EMA 50: $73,558.05
– EMA 200: $79,013.92

On the 1H chart, Bitcoin is below the 20, 50, and 200 EMA, so the intraday trend is in line with the daily: bearish. The gap to the 20 EMA (~$1.6k) is sizeable but not outrageous in this volatility regime, and it tells you short-term traders are still selling rallies rather than buying dips.

RSI (H1)

– RSI 14: 30.16

Hourly RSI sitting near 30 is weak but not yet fully washed out. The last leg of selling has eased; the market is no longer at sub-20 panic levels on this timeframe. That supports the idea that downside momentum is cooling short term, potentially setting up either a consolidation range or a corrective bounce back toward the 20 EMA around $71k and above.

MACD (H1)

– MACD line: -1,258.54
– Signal line: -1,222.34
– Histogram: -36.20

The MACD remains negative on the hour, but the histogram is only slightly below zero. Bearish momentum is still there but has largely flattened. Sellers are no longer accelerating; the trend is down, but the push lower is less aggressive than it was. If this histogram flips positive over the next few candles, that would confirm a short-term relief structure against the prevailing daily downtrend.

Bollinger Bands (H1)

– Mid-band: $71,504.77
– Upper band: $74,033.75
– Lower band: $68,975.80
– Price: $69,816.59

On the hourly, price has re-entered the bands and is sitting slightly above the lower band. That is a classic “stabilizing after a flush” posture: the market is no longer in full breakdown mode but has not reclaimed the middle of the range either. It supports the idea of a fragile base forming between roughly $69k and $72k where short-term bulls and bears can both play, but where the higher-timeframe bears still own the narrative.

ATR & Pivot (H1)

– ATR 14: $967.49
– Pivot point (PP): $69,939.38
– R1: $70,189.83
– S1: $69,566.14

The hourly ATR just under $1,000 lines up with the daily volatility picture: swings of $1k per hour are entirely normal here. Intraday, BTC is basically clinging to the hourly pivot area ($69.9k) with S1 just a few hundred dollars below. This marks a short-term decision zone: sustained trading above $70k tips the scale toward a bounce into $71–72k; repeated rejections here likely see another push toward and below $69.5k.

15-Minute Execution Layer: Micro Bearish, But Compressing

Trend & EMAs (M15)

– Price: $69,816.59
– EMA 20: $70,167.27
– EMA 50: $70,996.54
– EMA 200: $73,742.70

On the 15-minute chart, BTC is below the 20, 50, and 200 EMAs, so the microstructure is still bearish. However, the distance to the 20 EMA is now only a few hundred dollars. That is a sign of price compression, usually a prelude to a short-lived breakout move in either direction. Given the broader context, the default expectation is one of two things: a quick squeeze into $70.5–71k that sellers fade, or a minor breakdown toward $69k that either extends or gets bought for a scalp reversal.

RSI & MACD (M15)

– RSI 14: 41.41
– MACD line: -482.91
– Signal line: -445.72
– Histogram: -37.19

RSI on the 15-minute is around 41: weak, but not oversold. The short-term MACD remains negative with a small bearish histogram. This configuration usually appears in sideways-to-down consolidations, where bounces are shallow and sellers are patiently leaning in overhead. There is no clear intraday reversal signal on this timeframe yet.

Bollinger Bands & Pivot (M15)

– Mid-band: $70,402.36
– Upper band: $72,141.84
– Lower band: $68,662.89
– Price: $69,816.59
– Pivot point (PP): $69,939.38
– R1: $70,189.83
– S1: $69,566.14

On the 15-minute, price is inside the bands and sitting between the lower band and the mid-band. Combined with the nearby pivot cluster around $69.9–70.2k, this looks like a short-term equilibrium zone where liquidity is building. That is typically where larger players decide the next impulse: absorb remaining sell pressure and squeeze higher, or reload shorts and push for fresh lows.

Sentiment & Market Context

The broader crypto market has shed over 5% of its total market cap in a day, while volume is up more than 23%. That is classic high-volume liquidation behavior rather than a gentle rotation. BTC dominance near 57% reinforces that Bitcoin is leading the move; altcoins are passengers, not drivers.

The Extreme Fear reading on the fear and greed index (value: 12) tells you positioning has flipped from euphoria to panic. Historically, those readings are associated with attractive longer-term entries but are uncomfortable to live through, because they often coincide with headlines like “crisis of faith” and “freefall” – exactly what the news flow is saying now. It does not guarantee the low is in, but it does suggest most late buyers have either been shaken out or are seriously questioning their thesis.

Bullish Scenario for Bitcoin Price

For the bullish camp, the core idea is mean reversion after capitulation. The current Bitcoin price structure is stretched, but that alone does not confirm a durable bottom.

1. Hold and build above $68k (daily S1): As long as BTC defends the $68,000 region on daily closes, the market can argue the worst of the liquidation is done. A series of higher lows on intraday charts above this zone would reinforce that view.
2. Reclaim the $70.8k pivot and $72k area: On the daily, getting back above the pivot ($70,795) and then holding above $72k (R1 and recent breakdown area) would signal that sellers are running out of ammunition. Hourly RSI would likely drift back toward neutral, and the MACD histogram might flip positive on that push.
3. Drive back inside or toward the daily lower Bollinger Band: A daily close back inside the lower band (above roughly $71.2k) would mark the end of the Bollinger overshoot and confirm a short-term reversal attempt.
4. Target zone: In that case, a reasonable upside magnet would be the $75k–78k region, near the underside of short-term resistance zones and closer to the 20-day EMA, where the bigger-picture sellers are waiting.

What invalidates the bullish scenario?
A clean daily close below $68k with expanding volume and a still-negative MACD histogram would tell you the market is not done flushing. That would suggest the bounce was a bull trap and that the path of least resistance remains down toward the mid-60s or lower.

Bearish Scenario for Bitcoin Price

The bearish camp has the structural argument right now: trend is down, momentum is down, and rallies are for selling.

1. Fail to reclaim $72k–73k: As long as BTC remains pinned below the daily pivot zone and especially below $72k–73k, every push higher is just relief within a broader downtrend. Hourly and 15-minute EMAs overhead create a ceiling where short sellers can lean in.
2. Break $68k and “walk” the lower Bollinger Band down: A decisive move through $68k followed by price hugging the lower daily band would indicate ongoing distribution rather than capitulation. With RSI already at 20, this would be a “grind lower in pain” scenario rather than a waterfall, but it can still bleed out several thousand dollars.
3. Momentum stays negative: If the daily MACD line keeps diving away from the signal and the histogram remains strongly negative, you are looking at a persistent bearish impulse. Short-term bounces that fail to flip hourly MACD positive would be treated as reload points.
4. Target zone: Below $68k, the next logical zone is the mid-60ks, where prior consolidation took place. In more stressed conditions, a spike toward the low-60k area cannot be ruled out given current volatility.

What invalidates the bearish scenario?
The bear case weakens if BTC can reclaim and hold above the 20-day EMA (currently around $82.9k) on a closing basis, with daily RSI pushing back into the 40s and MACD flattening or crossing up. That would turn the recent move into a deep but successful retest rather than the start of a larger downtrend. More tactically, a series of higher highs and higher lows on the daily chart, closing back above $75k–78k, would already be a warning that the straightforward sell-the-rip playbook is failing.

How to Think About Positioning Here

The big picture is simple but uncomfortable: the daily trend is bearish, but the market is deeply oversold and highly emotional. That mix is where both sides regularly get punished, shorts by violent squeezes and dip-buyers by continuation selloffs.

Key points to keep in mind:

Trend vs. mean reversion: The dominant structure (EMAs and MACD) says trend-followers still have the upper hand. Mean reversion signals (RSI, Bollinger overshoot, fear and greed) argue a counter-trend bounce is increasingly likely. Any bullish positioning here is inherently fighting the higher timeframe trend and should respect that risk.

Timeframe alignment: All three timeframes, daily, hourly, and 15-minute, are technically bearish, but the shorter ones show slowing downside momentum. That supports short-term tactical trades in both directions, but it does not yet justify a confident long-term bullish stance.

Volatility and risk: With daily ATR near $4k and hourly around $1k, position sizing and leverage are critical. Levels like $68k and $72k may be “near” in percentage terms, but they can be breached and reclaimed multiple times in a day. Planning around that noise is more important than trying to guess the exact bottom.

In summary, the Bitcoin price sits in a bearish regime with oversold conditions. The next few sessions will decide whether this was an exhaustive capitulation that sets up a larger bounce, or just the first meaningful leg of a deeper correction. Either way, this is an environment where discipline and volatility awareness matter more than conviction.

After several weeks of volatility, bitcoin etfs are again in the spotlight as traders debate whether this is a normal correction or the prelude to a deeper reversal.

Large capital outflows from Bitcoin ETFs unsettle investors

Since the end of January, Bitcoin exchange-traded funds have seen significant net outflows, triggering renewed caution among market participants. Over just a few sessions, several hundred million dollars exited these products, increasing skepticism among institutional investors and adding fuel to existing concerns.

This persistent selling coincided with a clear rise in BTC supply on the market, pushing the price sharply below key psychological thresholds. However, ETF flow data tends to be volatile by nature and usually reacts quickly to price swings, which makes short-term readings more complex.

Moreover, part of the recent btc selling pressure likely comes from short-term traders exploiting arbitrage opportunities or reallocating capital toward other assets that appear briefly more attractive. A few isolated sessions of positive flows already suggest that some investors are selectively buying the dip.

Understanding flows and Bitcoin market structure

It is crucial to place these numbers within the broader bitcoin market structure. ETFs still represent only a portion of the total circulating supply, even if their role in price discovery has increased since their launch. That said, long-term ownership patterns continue to act as an important stabilizing force.

A substantial quantity of Bitcoin remains locked in the hands of long-term holders who historically react less to short-term volatility. As long as these actors avoid broad capitulation, it seems premature to speak of an imminent structural collapse based solely on ETF data.

In this context, the recent wave of bitcoin etf outflows should be interpreted more as a sentiment indicator than as a definitive signal of trend reversal. However, persistent and accelerating redemptions over several weeks would undeniably warrant closer monitoring by all market participants.

Price targets and support zones for a potential BTC bottom

The ongoing correction has reopened the question of possible btc price targets on the downside. After registering an all-time high at the end of 2025, BTC has already given back a significant portion of its gains, which naturally feeds the most pessimistic forecasts within the community.

From a technical perspective, several bitcoin support levels stand out. A first major zone sits between $70,000 and $75,000, corresponding to a previous accumulation range where substantial volumes changed hands. However, if this region were to break decisively, the market could search for liquidity lower.

In such a scenario, price could move toward the $60,000 area, which would still fit within a large-scale bull cycle, even if it would be psychologically painful for many new entrants. Moreover, corrections of this magnitude have already occurred in past bullish phases without invalidating the broader uptrend.

Longer-term indicators continue to show that Bitcoin trades well above its deepest structural supports. That said, current weakness appears more related to position rebalancing and profit-taking than to a profound loss of confidence in the asset itself.

Are bitcoin etfs signaling a new crash or a pause in the cycle?

For now, data suggests that the latest wave of turbulence in bitcoin etfs reflects a market that is digesting previous gains, re-evaluating risk, and adjusting exposure across different instruments. However, the persistence of outflows remains a key metric to watch in the coming weeks.

In conclusion, ETF redemptions are an important piece of information but do not, by themselves, confirm the start of a new crash. The balance between short-term speculative flows, long-term holders, and key price supports will determine whether this phase evolves into a deeper downturn or simply a healthy consolidation within an ongoing bull market.

Institutional and retail traders in the United States are gaining new access to crypto derivatives as tezos futures go live on a regulated venue.

Bitnomial lists first US regulated XTZ futures

Chicago-based Bitnomial has launched regulated futures tied to Tezos‘ XTZ token in the United States, establishing the first US-regulated futures market for XTZ on 2024. The contracts are already available to institutional traders and will extend to retail users through Bitnomial’s Botanical platform in a phased rollout.

The new XTZ futures contracts give market participants compliant price exposure across crypto markets. Traders can gain or hedge XTZ exposure without holding the token directly. They may post margin in cryptocurrency or US dollars, which supports both risk management and directional strategies under varying market conditions.

Moreover, regulated derivatives often deliver standardized pricing and clearer oversight. As a result, the launch embeds Tezos within established US derivatives infrastructure. The contracts operate under Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) supervision, aligning the product with existing commodity futures rules.

Strategy to expand regulated crypto derivatives in the US

The listing continues Bitnomial’s push to broaden regulated crypto derivatives US markets beyond Bitcoin and Ether. The move follows the exchange’s January rollout of Aptos futures, which similarly targeted institutional clients before expanding access.

Previously, Bitnomial introduced regulated futures tied to Cardano and XRP, as well as Aptos, building a multi-asset offering. Additionally, Bitnomial became the first exchange to offer spot crypto trading overseen by the CFTC. Consequently, the venue ranks among the few US platforms providing a mix of regulated derivatives and spot markets outside the largest tokens.

However, the expansion has not been smooth. In August 2024, Bitnomial sought to self-certify XRP futures, prompting an objection from the Securities and Exchange Commission. After subsequent legal steps and policy adjustments, Bitnomial finally launched XRP futures in March. That said, the successful listing of Tezos extends this trajectory of bringing new altcoin products into regulated US markets.

How tezos futures enhance access and price discovery

The new XTZ product is designed to support tezos price exposure for both hedgers and traders. By separating price exposure from token custody, institutional investors that face operational or compliance limits on spot holdings can still reference XTZ in portfolios. Moreover, standardized contracts may improve liquidity over time and provide a clearer reference price.

In effect, the introduction of tezos futures trading creates a regulated reference market in the United States. Such markets often precede broader institutional participation, because they enable transparent price discovery, margining, and risk transfer that align with traditional futures infrastructure.

Bitnomial’s listing of bitnomial tezos futures also broadens strategic options for existing holders. Long-term investors can hedge downside risk through the futures market, while trading firms can deploy arbitrage, basis, and spread strategies between spot and derivatives venues.

Tezos network evolution and market context

The Tezos network was first proposed in 2014 and launched mainnet in June 2018. The project raised roughly $232 million in its 2017 crowdsale, making it one of that cycle’s largest offerings. It combined proof-of-stake security with formal onchain governance from the outset, allowing token holders to approve protocol changes without contentious hard forks.

During the NFT surge in 2021 and 2022, Tezos attracted artists and game publishers, helped by lower transaction charges and higher energy efficiency than some rivals. Moreover, the ecosystem secured notable sports partnerships in that period, further increasing brand visibility and on-chain activity.

XTZ reached an all-time high near $9.12 in October 2021, yet the token has since fallen about 95%. It currently trades around $0.46 and has remained below $1 for over a year, with market capitalization near $514 million. That said, core development has continued despite the drawdown.

In January, Tezos implemented its Tallinn upgrade, the network’s twentieth onchain update. The change reduced base-layer block times to six seconds, aiming to improve responsiveness for applications and users. This steady cadence of upgrades underscores the project’s emphasis on governance-led evolution.

Institutional access and product roadmap

Regulated futures markets frequently act as a gateway for larger financial institutions entering new asset classes. They allow participants to manage risk with familiar tools while benefiting from clear margin and settlement rules. Accordingly, the launch of the new contracts positions Tezos within a framework already used for commodities and index futures.

Bitnomial has signaled plans to deepen its Tezos-linked offering. The exchange expects to introduce XTZ perpetual futures and options, complementing the standard contracts that are already live for institutions. Meanwhile, retail access will broaden through Botanical retail access, which is designed as Bitnomial’s front end for individual traders.

Alongside Tezos, Bitnomial continues reviewing additional tokens for potential listings in US regulated crypto futures markets. However, any new derivatives must navigate both CFTC oversight and potential interactions with the SEC, a process highlighted by the earlier XRP episode.

For Tezos, the arrival of tezos futures on a CFTC-supervised exchange adds a new layer of market infrastructure. It enhances regulated price discovery, expands access for institutions and retail users, and integrates XTZ more firmly into the evolving US crypto derivatives landscape.