The Cryptonomist

As traditional finance accelerates its move into digital assets, growing speculation around a potential bitgo acquisition is drawing fresh attention from Wall Street analysts.

Wall Street eyes BitGo as a strategic crypto gateway

Wall Street analysts argue that BitGo‘s expansion into full-service institutional crypto finance could unlock substantial long-term growth. Moreover, they believe the company is increasingly positioned as a prime acquisition candidate for large banks and brokers seeking a fast entry into digital assets.

Compass Point analyst Ed Engel, who maintains a buy rating on the stock, wrote that BitGo’s expanding services could prove highly attractive to traditional firms eager to offer crypto products to their clients. That said, he stressed that investors may be underestimating the firm’s broader strategic value.

“We … view BTGO as an ideal M&A target for Wall Street companies expanding into crypto. BitGo offers a full suite of services that could be integrated into traditional prime brokers and new entrants could acquire BitGo to provide these solutions to clients,” Engel wrote in a research note.

From custody specialist to full-service institutional platform

BitGo was among the first digital asset companies to go public in January, focusing on custody and security services primarily for institutional clients. The IPO gave public equity investors rare direct exposure to crypto infrastructure, effectively positioning BitGo as a bridge between traditional finance and digital assets.

The firm’s platform supports institutional-grade storage, security, and transaction services. However, analysts say the real upside lies in its ability to evolve into a more comprehensive institutional finance provider as more banks and brokers deepen their crypto strategies.

Engel highlighted that the market remains overly focused on BitGo’s core custody business, rather than its “opportunity to cross-sell prime services.” According to his analysis, investors may be overlooking how the company could bundle custody with trading, financing, and other capital markets functions for institutional clients.

Revenue upside from prime-style services

In his comparison, Engel pointed to prime brokerage-style offerings from rivals Galaxy (GLXY) and Coinbase (COIN). Moreover, he noted that Galaxy’s average revenue per trading counterparty is “~6x BitGo’s, implying significant upside” for BitGo if it can scale its own institutional trading and financing services.

This potential to cross sell services sits at the center of the bullish thesis. If BitGo can narrow the gap with these larger competitors in areas such as treasury management, execution, and lending, analysts believe its revenue base could expand meaningfully over time.

Furthermore, some market observers argue that the company’s early-mover status in regulated custody gives it an edge as institutional demand for integrated crypto prime solutions grows.

Analysts highlight BitGo’s competitive moat and M&A appeal

The company’s perceived edge and takeover potential are not limited to a single brokerage. Another Wall Street investment bank, Canaccord Genuity, echoed the view that BitGo’s positioning could be highly attractive to major financial institutions.

“We believe BitGo’s competitive moat is solid, but more importantly we believe the company could make an attractive time-to-market asset for major Tradfi players looking to enter this market in an expedited manner,” Canaccord wrote. The firm set a $15 price target along with a buy rating on the stock.

This view underscores why a potential bitgo acquisition is increasingly part of Wall Street’s discussion, especially as banks seek ready-made crypto platforms rather than building in-house systems from scratch.

History of deal talks and valuation reset

BitGo’s acquisition potential also has historical precedent. In May 2021, Galaxy Digital agreed to buy the company for $1.2 billion. However, Galaxy later walked away from the transaction, saying BitGo failed to provide required financial statements by a deadline at the end of July.

With BitGo now a public company, those transparency concerns may be less relevant. Moreover, its current valuation brings it closer to the level implied by the aborted Galaxy transaction, potentially making it more palatable for new suitors.

The January IPO priced shares at $18, valuing the firm at about $2 billion. After a sharp pullback, BitGo’s market capitalization has dropped to roughly $1.24 billion, much nearer to the earlier proposed deal value.

Share price under pressure amid broader crypto selloff

Since the IPO, BitGo’s stock has fallen more than 40%, sliding from the $18 offer price to around $10.26. The decline has outpaced the broader crypto sector, even as digital assets have faced a challenging year.

Over the same period, bitcoin has dropped about 24% year-to-date, Galaxy shares are down roughly 9%, and Coinbase has tumbled nearly 30%. However, analysts argue the steeper decline in BitGo reflects an overreaction rather than a fundamental deterioration in its business prospects.

Canaccord wrote that “BTGO shares… have reacted much more severely than any shorter term P&L trajectory weakness might warrant,” defending the name despite the recent volatility. That said, the bank believes the reset could create a more attractive entry point for long-term investors and potential corporate buyers.

Analyst consensus remains bullish

Despite the stock’s slide, coverage from Wall Street remains notably positive. According to FactSet data, BitGo currently has 10 analysts following the stock, with nine assigning buy ratings and just one rating it a hold.

Price targets range from $12 to $18 per share. Moreover, these estimates suggest potential upside of roughly 17% to 75% from recent trading levels, assuming the company can execute on its expansion strategy and capitalise on institutional demand.

Analysts also highlight BitGo’s strategic value for banks and brokers entering crypto. For these firms, acquiring an established infrastructure player could significantly accelerate time to market while reducing operational and regulatory complexity.

Outlook for BitGo and potential suitors

Looking ahead, BitGo’s trajectory will likely hinge on its success in scaling higher-margin institutional services alongside its core custody offering. However, the company’s established infrastructure, regulatory footprint, and institutional client base continue to underpin its appeal.

As traditional finance deepens its involvement in digital assets, BitGo’s role as a turnkey platform for banks, brokers, and asset managers may become even more valuable. Moreover, if crypto markets stabilise and capital flows return, both its earnings power and M&A profile could strengthen further.

In summary, analysts see BitGo as a rare listed crypto infrastructure play with a solid business foundation, meaningful revenue upside, and clear strategic relevance for would-be acquirers across Wall Street.

Building on an existing marketing partnership, nakamoto inc is moving to consolidate its position across Bitcoin media, asset management, and advisory services with a major all-stock transaction.

Details of the BTC Inc and UTXO acquisition

Nakamoto Inc. (NASDAQ: NAKA) has signed definitive merger agreements to acquire BTC Inc, a leading Bitcoin media and events group, and UTXO Management GP, LLC (“UTXO”), an investment firm focused on private and public Bitcoin companies. Together, these deals are referred to as the Transaction.

The Transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of this year, subject to customary closing conditions. Moreover, it will be financed entirely with Nakamoto common stock at a price of $1.12 per share, in line with the company’s call option under the existing Marketing Services Agreement (the “MSA”).

The option to acquire BTC Inc and UTXO, via BTC Inc’s call option with UTXO, had already been disclosed as part of Nakamoto’s proposed merger with Nakamoto Holdings, Inc. (“Nakamoto Holdings”) in earlier filings. That said, the current Transaction formalizes that strategic path.

Marketing Services Agreement and option exercise

The MSA governs the terms of the company’s option and was publicly filed and approved by shareholders in connection with the proposed merger with Nakamoto Holdings. Following that approval, Nakamoto, BTC Inc, and UTXO launched extensive joint marketing campaigns across BTC Inc’s media and events channels to build brand awareness.

As part of this process, Nakamoto exercised its call option with BTC Inc, and BTC Inc simultaneously exercised its call option with UTXO at the time of signing the merger agreements. However, completion of the Transaction still depends on the usual closing steps.

Strategic rationale and financial structure

The Transaction aims to position Nakamoto as a diversified Bitcoin operating company with a global brand, extensive distribution, and institutional-grade capabilities across media, asset management, and advisory services. BTC Inc and UTXO are expected to generate recurring earnings that reinforce the company’s balance sheet.

Moreover, this earnings base is intended to support further growth initiatives, including additional Bitcoin accumulation and potential strategic acquisitions. In the middle of this strategy, the leadership believes the combined platform of nakamoto inc can scale alongside Bitcoin’s long-term adoption curve.

The deal consideration will be paid fully in Nakamoto common stock, at $1.12 per share under the MSA terms. On a fully diluted basis, BTC Inc and UTXO securityholders are set to receive 363,589,816 Nakamoto shares, subject to customary purchase price adjustments at closing.

The combined value of this consideration is $107,295,354 before any such adjustments. This figure is derived from Nakamoto’s closing share price of $0.2951 on February 13, 2026, reflecting the market’s view of the company on that date.

Executive commentary on the Transaction

“Bringing BTC Inc and UTXO into Nakamoto has been a part of our vision since day one,” said David Bailey, Chairman and CEO of Nakamoto. “We intend to operate a portfolio of companies across media, asset management, and advisory services that can scale with Bitcoin’s long-term growth.”

Bailey added that BTC Inc and UTXO are “global leaders in Bitcoin media and asset management” and described the Transaction as “the first step of the company we intend to build.” However, he stressed that the organization is “just getting started” in executing this broader strategy.

BTC Inc: global Bitcoin media and events leader

BTC Inc, headquartered in Nashville, is one of the largest Bitcoin media companies worldwide, based on event attendance, online reach, and the breadth of its brand portfolio. Its holdings include 27 media brands, which collectively reach about 6 million people globally through aggregated social media channels.

The company organizes The Bitcoin Conference, described as the largest Bitcoin event series across the U.S., Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. In 2025, this flagship conference recorded more than 67,000 attendees, underscoring strong bitcoin conference attendance across multiple regions.

BTC Inc is also the parent of Bitcoin Magazine, first published in May 2012. This makes the title the longest-running dedicated source of Bitcoin news, analysis, and expert commentary in the sector, and a core asset in the group’s media franchise.

In addition, BTC Inc operates Bitcoin for Corporations, a membership-based platform designed for businesses adopting Bitcoin as a strategic treasury asset. The platform currently has over 40 member companies and benefits from a 5-year brand partnership with Strategy Inc. to host networking events and educational content for corporate participants.

“For more than a decade, BTC Inc has focused on informing, convening, and advancing the global Bitcoin community,” said Brandon Green, Chief Executive Officer of BTC. “Combining with Nakamoto represents a significant opportunity to scale our reach, deepen engagement, and support the next phase of Bitcoin’s growth across enterprises and investors.” That said, he emphasized that BTC Inc’s core mission will remain aligned with the broader ecosystem.

UTXO Management: focused Bitcoin investment platform

UTXO acts as adviser to 210k Capital, LP, a hedge fund concentrating on Bitcoin, Bitcoin-related securities, and derivatives. The investment team draws on deep experience across the Bitcoin ecosystem to deploy capital into both public and private market opportunities.

Moreover, this mandate positions UTXO as a specialized bitcoin investment firm within the broader Nakamoto ecosystem, complementing its media and advisory units. The integration is expected to strengthen group-wide capabilities in bitcoin asset management and institutional product development.

“UTXO was founded to back the builders and companies shaping the Bitcoin economy,” said Tyler Evans, Chief Investment Officer of Nakamoto and Chief Investment Officer of UTXO. “Leveraging Nakamoto’s public platform and robust treasury, we see a powerful opportunity to compound value across the Bitcoin ecosystem and reinforce Bitcoin’s role as a foundational asset in modern capital markets.”

About Nakamoto Inc

Nakamoto Inc. (NASDAQ: NAKA) is a Bitcoin company that owns and operates a global portfolio of Bitcoin-native businesses. Its activities span media and information, asset management, and advisory services for institutions and enterprises worldwide.

For more information about the company, its media brands, events, and financial strategy, please visit nakamoto.com. The closing of the BTC Inc and UTXO acquisitions will mark the next phase in Nakamoto’s expansion as it seeks to build a comprehensive Bitcoin operating platform.

In summary, the all-stock acquisition of BTC Inc and UTXO is designed to give Nakamoto a larger footprint across Bitcoin media, events, and investment management, providing recurring earnings, broader distribution, and a stronger base for future Bitcoin-focused growth.

Large financial institutions are accelerating experiments with generative AI, and Goldman Sachs is now scaling the anthropic claude platform across several back-office workflows.

Goldman Sachs moves generative AI into the back office

Goldman Sachs plans to deploy Anthropic’s Claude model in trade accounting and client onboarding, positioning the rollout as part of a broader push among large banks to use generative AI for efficiency gains. The initial emphasis is on operational processes that sit in the back office and historically relied on large teams handling document review, reconciliation, and compliance checks.

Several banks already apply generative AI to knowledge work. JPMorganChase gives employees access to a large language model suite for information retrieval and data analysis. Moreover, the Bank of America uses its Erica assistant to answer internal technology and human resources questions. Citi and Goldman both rely on AI tools to support developers with coding tasks, highlighting that early deployments focused more on research and software development than operations.

However, the American Banker report notes a newer trend: using generative AI for operational activities such as trade accounting and know-your-customer (KYC) checks. This marks a shift from purely analytical use cases toward automating transaction-heavy workflows that directly affect daily banking operations.

Automating the edge cases in KYC and reconciliation

Many automatable banking processes are rules-based, involving data collection, validation against internal and external databases, and the creation of required documentation. In theory, traditional software already handles much of this work. However, Marco Argenti, Goldman’s chief information officer, argues that even if a rules-based platform resolves most cases, a small percentage of transactions fall outside predefined parameters and create thousands of exceptions at scale.

He cites identity verification in KYC compliance as a typical example. Minor discrepancies in client records or documents close to their expiry date can generate edge cases requiring human judgment. Moreover, these exceptions tend to cluster in high-volume environments, making manual review expensive and slow.

Argenti says neural networks can tackle these micro-decisions because they apply contextual reasoning where fixed rules are missing or ambiguous. In this setup, generative AI augments existing rules engines rather than replacing them. Operational gains arise from shrinking the share of cases that require manual intervention, which in turn shortens the time needed to resolve exceptions and improves straight-through processing.

Lessons from AI-assisted software development

Goldman’s earlier work with Claude for internal software development informed its decision to extend AI into other operational domains. Developers at the bank use a version of Claude combined with Cognition’s Devin agent to support programming workflows. In this process, human engineers define specifications and regulatory constraints, the agent generates code, and developers then review and refine the output.

The Devin agent also runs code tests and validations. Argenti describes this setup as a structural change to developers’ workflows, with AI agents operating under clearly defined instructions. Moreover, the combination of specification-driven coding and automated testing has increased developer productivity and shortened project completion times.

This experience convinced Goldman that AI agents can safely handle tightly scoped tasks within a regulated environment, as long as responsibilities are clearly split between humans and systems. That said, the human review layer remains central, particularly when outputs have regulatory or risk implications.

From coding to document-heavy operational workflows

For trade accounting and client onboarding, Goldman and Anthropic project leaders first observed existing workflows with domain experts to locate bottlenecks. The implemented AI agents now review documents, extract entities, determine whether additional documentation is necessary, assess ownership structures, and trigger further compliance checks where appropriate. These tasks are typically document-heavy and require individual judgment, making them suitable for AI-assisted decision support.

By automating extraction and preliminary assessment, the agents cut the time analysts spend on manual comparison work. However, they do not replace final decision-making. Instead, they present structured data and suggested next steps, allowing specialists to focus on complex or high-risk cases rather than routine file handling.

Indranil Bandyopadhyay, principal analyst at Forrester, explains that reconciliation in trade accounting requires comparing fragmented data across internal ledgers, counterparty confirmations, and bank statements. A typical workflow depends on accurate extraction and matching of figures and text from multiple documents. Here, anthropic claude is positioned as a way to handle this document-intensive matching step at scale.

Why Claude fits reconciliation and onboarding use cases

Bandyopadhyay notes that Claude’s ability to process large context windows and follow detailed instructions makes it well suited to complex reconciliation workflows. For client onboarding, analysts must parse passports and corporate registration files, then cross-reference all sources. Moreover, the need to interpret unstructured documents adds complexity that traditional rules-based tools struggle to manage efficiently.

In this environment, AI’s capacity to extract structured data, highlight inconsistencies, and flag missing documents offers a strong fit. The result is reduced overall workload for analysts and a faster onboarding cycle for clients, while still maintaining the governance standards required in banking.

Crucially, Bandyopadhyay emphasizes that accounting and compliance platforms remain the canonical systems of record. Claude sits in the workflow layer, responsible for extraction and comparison, while human analysts handle the exceptions that the code surfaces. In his view, the operational value in heavily regulated sectors such as banking lies in this division of labor rather than in full automation.

Risk management, uncertainty and human oversight

Jonathan Pelosi, head of financial services at Anthropic, says Claude is trained to surface uncertainty and provide source attribution, creating an audit trail that reduces the effect of hallucinations. Moreover, these design choices aim to make AI behavior more transparent to risk teams and regulators by linking outputs to their supporting evidence.

Bandyopadhyay also highlights the importance of human oversight and validation, urging institutions to design systems so that errors are detected early in the workflow. That said, he acknowledges that when properly monitored, AI agents can handle a large share of repetitive checks and comparisons far more quickly than human staff.

Goldman’s Marco Argenti rejects the idea that AI systems are inherently easier to deceive than humans. He argues that social engineering attacks primarily exploit human vulnerabilities, whereas AI models can detect subtle anomalies at scale. However, he reiterates that the optimal setup combines human judgment with automated scrutiny in integrated teams.

Implications for banking operations

According to Argenti, this combination implies a significant increase in operational capacity without proportional increases in staffing, even given the known issues around AI deployment. Moreover, it allows banks to manage growing regulatory and documentation burdens while keeping headcount growth under control.

Across the banking sector, generative AI is emerging as a tool to improve operational performance by accelerating document processing, reducing exception-handling times, and increasing throughput in high-volume workflows. However, the continued need for human oversight means institutions must retain their existing systems of record and governance structures, using AI primarily to streamline the layers that sit on top of them.

In summary, Goldman’s work with Claude and related agents suggests a pragmatic model for generative AI in finance: automate document-heavy, rules-adjacent tasks; surface exceptions clearly; and keep human experts ultimately responsible for critical decisions and regulatory compliance.

After four straight weekly losses, market focus is on Bitcoin price today as it trades just below key short-term averages and near a fragile support area.

BTC/USDT — daily chart with candlesticks, EMA20/EMA50 and volume.

Daily Chart (D1): Primary Bias – Bearish, but Late in the Move

Trend Structure: EMAs

Data:
– Price (close): $67,874
– EMA 20: $72,785
– EMA 50: $80,211
– EMA 200: $94,063
– Regime flag: bearish

All the key EMAs are stacked above spot price and fanned out bearishly (20 < 50 < 200, with price below all of them). That is a classic, established downtrend structure, not the beginning of one. The gap between spot and the short EMA (about $5k under the 20-day) also shows we are stretched from mean reversion already.

Translation: The trend is down, but we are not early shorts anymore. This is the middle-to-late stage of a corrective leg where chasing fresh downside gets progressively riskier unless momentum re-accelerates.

Momentum and Exhaustion: RSI (14)

Data: RSI 14 on D1: 34.8

Daily RSI has pushed into the low 30s but has not hit textbook oversold yet. It is clearly below the midline, so bears still control momentum. However, the indicator is now in the zone where prior selloffs have often started to lose steam or at least move into choppy consolidation.

Translation: Sellers still have the upper hand, but the risk/reward of new aggressive shorts on the daily is getting worse. This is where trend followers are usually patient and wait for either a bounce to sell or a capitulation flush to fade, rather than selling blindly.

Trend Momentum: MACD

Data:
– MACD line: -4,729.8
– Signal: -5,084.3
– Histogram: +354.5

MACD is deep in negative territory, which is what you expect after a large drawdown, but the histogram has turned positive as the MACD line starts to curl back toward the signal line. That does not mean the trend is bullish. Instead, it means the rate of downside is slowing and the downtrend is aging.

Translation: The dominant trend is still down, but the selling wave is no longer accelerating. Bears are in control, but they are not hitting with the same intensity. This opens the door to a relief rally or sideways base if buyers show up.

Volatility and Range: Bollinger Bands & ATR

Bollinger Bands (20):
– Mid band: $72,101
– Upper band: $83,571
– Lower band: $60,631
– Price: near the lower half of the band set

Price is trading well below the mid-band and in the lower half of the Bollinger range, but not hugging the lower band itself. That is consistent with a downtrend that has already made a significant move and is now oscillating near the lower side rather than freshly breaking.

Translation: The market is still priced pessimistically but not in outright panic at this moment. There is room both to tag the lower band closer to $60.6k in a final flush or to mean-revert toward the mid-band around $72k if fear cools off.

ATR (14): $4,365 on the daily chart.

Daily ATR north of $4k signals elevated realized volatility. This is not the quiet, grinding bull market type of tape. Instead, it is a heavier, two-sided arena where intraday swings of several thousand dollars are normal.

Translation: Position sizing and leverage matter a lot here. Even if you are directionally right, being oversized into a $4k daily trading range can knock you out before the move plays out.

Daily Pivots: Near-Term Battle Lines

Data:
– Pivot point (PP): $68,269
– Resistance 1 (R1): $68,847
– Support 1 (S1): $67,296
– Price: $67,874

Bitcoin is trading just beneath the daily pivot, sandwiched between PP and S1. That pins us in a delicate balance area: slightly below the center of gravity for the session, but not yet at the first support.

Translation: Bears have a marginal intraday edge on the daily map, but we are not in breakdown territory. A push back above the PP and then R1 would be the first sign that buyers are willing to contest this downtrend, at least in the short run.

Hourly Chart (H1): Short-Term Flow – Bearish but Tightening

Trend and Structure: EMAs on H1

Data:
– Price: $67,872
– EMA 20: $68,344
– EMA 50: $68,588
– EMA 200: $68,849
– Regime flag: bearish

On the 1-hour, price is trading just below all three EMAs, and those averages are tightly clustered. The regime flag is bearish, but with EMAs so compressed, it looks more like a short-term downtrend that is entering a consolidation band than an explosive new leg lower.

Translation: Momentum sellers still control the intraday direction, but the market is starting to move sideways under resistance rather than cascading lower. That is usually a prelude to either a breakdown continuation or a squeeze higher. The EMAs themselves are not telling us which yet, only that the tape is coiling.

H1 Momentum: RSI & MACD

RSI 14 (H1): 40.3

RSI on the hourly is below the midline but not oversold. Selling pressure exists, but it is controlled, not panicky. There is room for one more push lower before we hit levels where intraday dip buyers tend to show up.

MACD (H1):
– MACD line: -171.97
– Signal: -118.25
– Histogram: -53.72

MACD is negative and the histogram is also mildly negative, pointing to ongoing bearish intraday momentum. However, the magnitude here is modest. We are not seeing the kind of large, expanding negative bars that accompany liquidation-style moves.

Translation: Intraday, bears are in charge but they are walking, not sprinting. This is the kind of environment where trend-following shorts still work, but they are more vulnerable to sudden squeezes if news or flows flip.

H1 Volatility and Levels: Bollinger Bands, ATR, Pivots

Bollinger Bands (H1):
– Mid: $68,342
– Upper: $69,070
– Lower: $67,614
– Price: just above the lower band

Price is skimming the lower band on the hourly, but not in a sustained band-walk. That often aligns with a controlled drift lower rather than capitulation.

ATR 14 (H1): $419

Hourly ATR around $400 points to decent intraday trading ranges, but not chaos. That lines up with the picture of a steady grind down rather than a vertical crash.

Pivots (H1):
– PP: $67,832
– R1: $67,975
– S1: $67,729
– Price: $67,872

On the 1-hour grid, BTC is sitting almost exactly at the pivot, slightly above it. R1 and S1 are tight, reflecting a compressed intraday range.

Translation: The market is in a short-term decision zone. If price holds above the H1 pivot and pushes through R1, we can easily see a squeeze back toward the compressed EMAs around $68.3–68.8k. Lose S1, and the drift lower likely resumes toward the lower Bollinger band region.

Translation: The market is in a short-term decision zone. If price holds above the H1 pivot and pushes through R1, we can easily see a squeeze back toward the compressed EMAs around $68.3–68.8k. Lose S1, and the drift lower likely resumes toward the lower Bollinger band region.

15-Minute Chart (M15): Execution Context – Micro Bear Bias, Very Close to Levels

Short-Term Trend: EMAs and Regime

Data:
– Price: $67,872
– EMA 20: $68,087
– EMA 50: $68,283
– EMA 200: $68,692
– Regime: bearish

On 15 minutes, the EMAs are again stacked above price and aligned bearishly, but distances are tight. This is a local downtrend grinding just under short-term resistance, not a freefall.

Translation: For active traders, rallies back into the 20/50 EMA band on M15 are still getting sold, but we are close enough that a minor push can flip the very short term from clean trend to chop.

Micro Momentum: RSI & MACD

RSI 14 (M15): 35.6

RSI on the 15-minute sits in the mid-30s: weak but not fully washed out. It confirms that the very short-term tape favors the downside, yet still has room for a brief spike lower before intraday exhaustion kicks in.

MACD (M15):
– MACD line: -155.21
– Signal: -138.15
– Histogram: -17.06

MACD remains negative with a small negative histogram: the micro-trend is still down, but there is no strong acceleration.

Translation: On the execution layer, bears still have the initiative, but they are not pressing hard. That typically favors tactical fades at resistance rather than momentum breakout trades unless something external changes.

Short-Term Volatility and Levels: Bands, ATR, Pivots

Bollinger Bands (M15):
– Mid: $68,125
– Upper: $68,526
– Lower: $67,725
– Price: between lower band and mid-band

Price is leaning to the lower half of the band set on 15m, consistent with a gentle, ongoing sell bias.

ATR 14 (M15): $169

Around $170 of expected 15-minute range keeps things tradable intraday but not frantic. You can be wrong by a few dozen dollars without instantly getting stopped out, but tight stops will still be vulnerable.

Pivots (M15):
– PP: $67,886
– R1: $67,902
– S1: $67,855
– Price: $67,872

We are essentially sitting right at the 15-minute pivot, inside a very narrow intraday band.

Translation: Very short term, BTC is coiling. The next $100 move will likely decide whether we get a local pop toward the short EMAs or another leg down toward the lower Bollinger band.

Macro Context: Dominance, Market Breadth, and Sentiment

Bitcoin dominance stands at ~56.4%, elevated by recent standards. When BTC dominance climbs while total crypto market cap falls (~-0.8% over 24h and volumes down ~12%), it usually means capital is hiding in Bitcoin relative to alts, even as it exits the space overall. This is classic defensive rotation.

The Fear & Greed Index reading of 10 (Extreme Fear) captures the mood: the market is scared, positioning is cautious, and narratives are focused on downside risk. For example, we see headlines about $60k liquidation triggers and historical drawdowns possibly extending. Historically, extreme fear levels often coincide with late-stage down moves or consolidation zones, but they do not guarantee an immediate reversal, because fear can persist.

DeFi fee revenue dropping sharply across major DEXs confirms that on-chain speculative activity is cooling. Fewer trades, smaller bets, and lower leverage appetite typically weigh on altcoins more than BTC, which fits with the rising dominance story.

Putting It Together: Conflicting Signals and Core Scenarios

Timeframes are broadly aligned: daily, hourly, and 15-minute all show a bearish regime. The conflict is not between timeframes, it is between trend vs. exhaustion:

The trend is clearly down: price below all key EMAs on all frames, negative MACD across the board, RSI below 50 everywhere.

Exhaustion signs are emerging: daily RSI in the mid-30s, MACD histogram improving on D1, price not hugging lower Bollinger bands, and sentiment deeply fearful.

So the main scenario right now is still bearish on the daily, but it is not a fresh, high-conviction short environment. It is a market where the downside thesis is increasingly dependent on either a new catalyst or a break of well-known support levels, notably the widely watched $60k zone.

Clear Bullish Scenario

For a proper bullish case to develop from here, we would need to see trend repair rather than just a dead-cat bounce.

Key steps for the bull side:

Hold above the lower Bollinger band on D1 (roughly >$60.6k) and avoid a panic wick that closes deep below it. That would confirm that the current leg lower is losing energy.

Reclaim and hold above the daily pivot (>$68.3k) and then flip the $72k mid-Bollinger/EMA-20 zone from resistance into support. A daily close above ~$72k would be the first serious sign of a shift from pure trend-following sell pressure to mean-reversion buyers taking control.

On intraday frames, price must reclaim and ride above the 20/50 EMAs on H1 and M15, turning those from capping resistance into dynamic support.

RSI on D1 pushing back above 50 and MACD closing in on a bullish crossover would confirm not just a bounce, but a transition toward a neutral-to-bullish momentum regime.

If this plays out: A constructive upside path would be a move from todays ~$68k toward the $72–75k band, which is the daily mid-band and short EMA cluster, followed by a battle there. If bulls manage to establish a base above that zone, a medium-term target toward the upper Bollinger band (~$83k) comes back into view.

What invalidates the bullish scenario?
A decisive break and daily close below ~$60k, especially if it comes with a spike in ATR and 15m/1h candles hugging or piercing the lower Bollinger bands. That would signal renewed, aggressive liquidation and reset the bullish timeline entirely, opening the door to a deeper corrective phase.

Clear Bearish Scenario

The bearish scenario is an extension of the current downtrend, with the market shifting from controlled grind to renewed acceleration.

What bears want to see:

Failure at or below the daily pivot and EMA-20 zone. If price repeatedly gets rejected in the $68–72k band and cannot close above it, that keeps the trend structure firmly bearish.

On H1 and M15, retests of the 20/50 EMAs that roll over, with local highs making lower highs, reinforcing that every bounce is being sold.

Daily RSI staying pinned below 40 and turning back down, while the MACD histogram stalls in its recovery and starts expanding negative again. That would show that the slowdown in selling was just a pause.

A break below the lower Bollinger band zone toward $60–61k, ideally accompanied by a spike in ATR (volatility expansion), marking a capitulation-like extension of the downtrend.

If this plays out: The first obvious downside magnet is the $60k region, which news flow is already framing as a key liquidation trigger. A clean break there risks a liquidation cascade that could easily push price into the mid-to-high $50ks, where longer-term participants would have to reassess their risk.

What invalidates the bearish scenario?
A sustained reclaim of $72k+ on a daily closing basis, with price holding above the daily 20 EMA and turning it into support. If that is accompanied by daily RSI back above 50 and H1 EMAs flipping into a bullish alignment (price > 20 > 50 > 200), the current bearish thesis starts to break down.

Positioning, Risk, and How to Think About This Tape

Bitcoin price today is in a late-stage downtrend with extreme fear and rising, but not frantic, volatility. Trend followers are still in control of the higher timeframe, but they are no longer early. The easy part of the move is likely behind us. Mean-reversion traders, on the other hand, are starting to watch closely for signs of seller exhaustion, but they have not been fully rewarded yet.

If you are thinking about positioning, the key is recognizing that uncertainty is high on both sides:

Chasing downside here relies on a bet that the $60k area will fail and unleash fresh liquidations, despite already stretched sentiment and distance from long-term averages.

Fading the trend relies on a bet that fear has overshot and that buyers will defend the current zone, even though the daily structure is still unambiguously bearish.

Whichever side you lean toward, the combination of a daily ATR around $4,365 and intraday ATRs of several hundred dollars demands tighter risk controls, smaller sizing, and a willingness to accept being early or wrong. The market can stay fearful longer than most traders can stay solvent, and strong trends do not reverse cleanly on the first attempt.

For now, the scoreboard is simple: bears still lead on structure, bulls are only just starting to show up on exhaustion signals. Until one side pushes price decisively out of this $60–72k band, expect volatility, noise, and plenty of trap potential for anyone overconfident in a single outcome.

After weeks of heavy downside, Ethereum crypto is showing early signs of seller fatigue even as the broader structure stays clearly bearish.

ETH/USDT — daily chart with candlesticks, EMA20/EMA50 and volume.

Market Thesis: Macro Still Down, But Pressure Is Easing

Ethereum crypto (ETHUSDT) is trading around $1,970, firmly below all key daily moving averages and well under the midline of its Bollinger Bands. The higher timeframe structure is clearly bearish: this is a market that has been sold hard and is still stuck in a downtrend.

But this is not fresh, impulsive downside anymore. Daily RSI has sunk into the low 30s, MACD is deeply negative but starting to curl, and the price is hovering around the daily pivot after a broad market pullback with Bitcoin dominance up at ~56% and the overall crypto market in Extreme Fear. The dominant force right now is defensive positioning: capital hiding in BTC and stablecoins, while ETH behaves like a risk asset in a risk-off environment. The key question for traders is whether this is the last leg of a medium-term downtrend or the early staging area for a larger base.

Daily Chart (D1) – Macro Bias: Bearish

Trend Structure: EMAs

Values
Price: $1,969.99
EMA 20: $2,201.06
EMA 50: $2,558.76
EMA 200: $3,055.96

What it means
ETH is trading well below its 20, 50, and 200-day EMAs. The shorter EMAs are stacked under the longer one, and the gap between price and the EMA cluster is wide. This is a textbook downtrend regime, with the 20-day acting as the first major dynamic resistance. Any bounce towards $2,200–$2,250 is, by default, a rally into resistance, not a confirmed trend reversal.

Momentum: RSI (14)

Value
RSI 14 (D1): 33.89

What it means
RSI is sitting in a bearish but not fully oversold zone. Sellers are clearly in control, but the market is not in full capitulation territory yet. This is the kind of reading where:

The downside trend is intact.

Each new low has slightly less momentum behind it.

Bounces can appear abruptly if shorts get crowded.

Put simply, the path of least resistance is still down, but the risk of a sharp counter-trend spike is rising.

Momentum & Trend Quality: MACD

Values
MACD line: -224.56
Signal line: -242.03
Histogram: +17.47

What it means
MACD is deeply negative, confirming prolonged bearish momentum. However, the line is now crossing up toward the signal, with the histogram turning positive. That is the first sign that the selling wave is losing strength, even though the trend is still down.

In trading terms, the bear trend is mature. Traders do not chase shorts blindly here; new shorts need either a clear breakdown or a weak bounce into resistance.

Volatility & Range: Bollinger Bands

Values
Mid (basis): $2,156.75
Upper band: $2,654.58
Lower band: $1,658.93
Price: $1,969.99

What it means
Price is sitting below the midline, in the lower half of the band structure, but not hugging the lower band. This points to a down-biased range rather than a full volatility squeeze or panic selloff. Sellers have the upper hand, but they are not pressing ETH to extremes on a daily basis.

As long as ETH stays trapped under the mid-band (around $2,150–2,200), rallies are suspect and more likely to be mean reversion toward resistance than a clean trend reversal.

Volatility & Risk: ATR (14)

Value
ATR 14 (D1): $154.67

What it means
Daily volatility is elevated but not explosive. A typical daily move of about $150 on a $1,970 asset is substantial, but not capitulation-level. This is the kind of tape where swings are meaningful and risk needs to be sized carefully. Entries can be right directionally but still get shaken out by normal noise.

Short-Term Reference Levels: Daily Pivot

Values
Pivot Point: $1,980.09
First Resistance (R1): $1,998.48
First Support (S1): $1,951.61

What it means
ETH is trading just below the daily pivot, in a narrow band between S1 and the pivot. That is classic indecision territory after a selloff: bears have the structural edge, but intraday pricing is balanced enough that either a push back to R1 or a slip toward S1 can happen quickly.

For intraday traders, losing S1 with momentum would confirm that the daily downtrend is reasserting itself. Regaining and holding above the pivot opens the door for a squeeze toward $2,000–2,050, still within a bearish context.

1-Hour Chart (H1) – Short-Term Still Heavy, But Not Collapsing

Trend Structure: EMAs

Values
Price: $1,970.04
EMA 20: $1,981.02
EMA 50: $1,990.59
EMA 200: $2,015.26

What it means
On the 1-hour chart, ETH is trading under all key EMAs, but the gap between price and the 20 and 50 EMAs is relatively small. The regime is still bent downward, yet the market is closer to a short-term equilibrium than to a waterfall.

In practice, this means rallies back into $1,985–2,000 are still sell zones for short-term traders unless price can reclaim and hold above the 200 EMA near $2,015.

Momentum: RSI (14)

Value
RSI 14 (H1): 44.03

What it means
Hourly RSI is in a neutral to mildly bearish area. Selling pressure has cooled off from any extreme. There is room in both directions intraday. ETH can easily push up toward the hourly EMAs before the next decision point, or roll over from here without any signal of exhaustion.

Momentum & Trend Quality: MACD

Values
MACD line: -3.45
Signal line: -1.76
Histogram: -1.69

What it means
On H1, MACD is slightly negative with a negative histogram, so bearish momentum persists but it is not aggressive. This supports the idea of a grinding, corrective tape rather than a fresh impulse down. Short sellers are in control, but they are not steamrolling the market right now.

Volatility & Range: Bollinger Bands

Values
Mid (basis): $1,983.67
Upper band: $2,004.67
Lower band: $1,962.67

What it means
Price is trading just under the mid-band, in the lower half of a fairly tight hourly range. That is consistent with short-term consolidation inside a downtrend. Breaks outside this band, particularly a close below around $1,960 or above about $2,005, would likely bring a pickup in momentum in that direction.

Volatility & Risk: ATR (14)

Value
ATR 14 (H1): $16

What it means
Typical hourly swings of about $16 show that intraday volatility is manageable but non-trivial. Traders cannot rely on ultra-tight stops unless they are willing to be shaken out by routine fluctuations.

Short-Term Reference Levels: Hourly Pivot

Values
Pivot Point: $1,968.94
First Resistance (R1): $1,973.60
First Support (S1): $1,965.38

What it means
ETH is trading almost exactly on top of the hourly pivot. That signals a very short-term balance after prior weakness. Control is up for grabs intraday. A move and hold above R1 favors a push into the $1,980–1,990 resistance belt, while a drop below S1 puts the $1,955–1,950 area in play.

15-Minute Chart (M15) – Execution Context Only

Trend Structure: EMAs

Values
Price: $1,970.04
EMA 20: $1,974.49
EMA 50: $1,979.88
EMA 200: $1,994.79

What it means
On M15, ETH is just below the fast EMAs, which are in turn below the 200 EMA. The microstructure is still bearish, but very close to short-term mean levels. For execution, that means:

A rejection from the 15-minute 20 and 50 EMAs (around $1,975–1,980) aligns with the broader downtrend and favors short entries.

A clean reclaim of the 200 EMA (near $1,995) would be the first sign of a more serious intraday squeeze.

Momentum: RSI (14)

Value
RSI 14 (M15): 41.87

What it means
Lower-timeframe RSI is modestly bearish, with plenty of room to move either way. It confirms that short-term selling is present but not extreme, which is a good setup for tactical trades inside the larger trend.

Momentum & Trend Quality: MACD

Values
MACD line: -4.30
Signal line: -4.14
Histogram: -0.16

What it means
M15 MACD is negative but nearly flat. Micro momentum is fading, which often precedes either a minor relief bounce or a volatility contraction before the next move. It does not give a strong directional edge on its own; context from the higher timeframes matters more.

Volatility & Range: Bollinger Bands

Values
Mid (basis): $1,975.31
Upper band: $1,988.04
Lower band: $1,962.58

What it means
ETH is sitting slightly below the mid-band on a reasonably tight 15-minute range. That is classic short-term consolidation. Breaks above $1,985 or below $1,963 on this timeframe will likely set the tone for the next few hours but will not, on their own, change the bigger daily picture.

Volatility & Risk: ATR (14)

Value
ATR 14 (M15): $6.33

What it means
Average 15-minute candles are moving about $6–7. That is enough to punish overleveraged, ultra-tight trades, especially around intraday pivots and EMAs.

Short-Term Reference Levels: 15-Minute Pivot

Values
Pivot Point: $1,970.51
First Resistance (R1): $1,971.14
First Support (S1): $1,969.41

What it means
Price is effectively glued to the 15-minute pivot, with R1 and S1 less than $2 away. This is micro-congestion, the kind of noise band where breakout attempts can quickly fake out. For entries, it is usually better to wait for a move away from this tight cluster.

Market & Sentiment Backdrop

Bitcoin dominance up at ~56.4%, total crypto market cap down about 0.8% in 24 hours, and a Fear & Greed Index at 10 (Extreme Fear) tell the same story: capital is defensive, and altcoins like ETH are not being favored. ETF flows into BTC and ETH have cooled, and volumes are down roughly 12% across the market. This environment tends to cap aggressive upside attempts in ETH unless there is a clear shift back into risk-on behavior.

Main Scenario Based on D1: Bearish Bias With Late-Stage Downtrend Dynamics

Putting it all together, the primary scenario is bearish on the daily timeframe:

Price is far below the 20, 50, and 200 EMAs.

RSI is weak but not in full capitulation.

MACD is deeply negative yet starting to improve.

Price trades in the lower half of the Bollinger Bands, with moderate but not extreme volatility.

Market-wide sentiment is deeply fearful and skewed toward BTC dominance.

This combination typically characterizes a mature downtrend. Sellers still have the structural advantage, but the risk of countertrend rallies is non-trivial, especially if shorts become overconfident or macro news improves.

Scenarios

Bullish Scenario – Short Squeeze & Mean Reversion

For the bullish path, think in terms of mean reversion inside a bearish regime, not an instant full reversal.

What bulls need to do

Defend the $1,950–1,930 zone (around D1 S1 and just above the lower Bollinger Band trajectory). Holding this area signals that sellers are running out of fuel on each dip.

Reclaim and hold above the daily pivot at around $1,980, then push through $2,000–2,020, where H1 resistance and the 1-hour 200 EMA sit.

Trigger a follow-through move toward the daily mid-Bollinger and EMA20 zone, roughly $2,150–2,250. That is the key mean-reversion target.

Indicator backdrop supporting a bullish bounce

Daily RSI in the low 30s with room to move higher if selling pauses.

Daily MACD histogram turning positive, hinting at fading downside momentum.

Price oscillating around intraday pivots instead of collapsing through them.

What would invalidate the bullish scenario

A decisive daily close below around $1,930–1,900 with expanding ATR and RSI breaking toward the 20s. That would indicate fresh selling rather than exhaustion.

Failure of any bounce to even test the EMA20 on D1, with repeated rejections below around $2,050, would signal that buyers have no real strength.

Bearish Scenario – Trend Resumption & New Lows

The base case, given the D1 regime, is still that rallies are selling opportunities until proven otherwise.

What bears want to see

Failure to reclaim the EMA20 on D1. As long as ETH remains pinned under roughly $2,200, the broader downtrend is intact.

Intraday bounces stalling near $1,985–2,020, where the 1-hour EMAs and hourly R1 zones cluster, followed by renewed selling.

A clean breakdown below $1,950 (D1 S1), opening the door toward the lower Bollinger Band region near $1,700–1,680 if volatility expands.

Indicator backdrop for a bearish continuation

Daily EMAs remaining steeply downward sloped with price failing to close above the 20-day.

RSI staying below 40 and rolling lower on each failed bounce.

MACD failing to complete a bullish cross and instead turning back down, with the histogram flipping negative again.

ATR starting to rise further as breakdowns occur, indicating stronger directional conviction.

What would invalidate the bearish scenario

A decisive daily close above the EMA20 (roughly $2,200+) with follow-through buying the next day.

RSI reclaiming and holding above 50, signaling a regime change from persistent weakness to balanced or bullish momentum.

MACD crossing bullish on D1 with a sustained positive histogram while price holds above prior resistance levels.

Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

This is not a fresh, clean short entry environment, nor is it a high-confidence bottom. It is a late-stage downtrend under macro pressure, with signs of seller fatigue but no confirmed reversal yet:

Directional bias: bearish on D1, mildly bearish on H1, and choppy on M15.

Upside moves are currently more likely to be countertrend rallies rather than the start of a new bull leg.

Downside breaks can still be sharp, especially in an Extreme Fear market that is heavily BTC-centric.

In this kind of environment, traders typically focus less on calling the exact bottom and more on respecting levels and volatility:

Daily EMAs, especially the 20-day around about $2,200, define whether ETH is just bouncing in a bear trend or transitioning toward a recovery.

Pivots and ATR on H1 and M15 define how much intraday noise a position has to endure.

Market-wide fear and BTC dominance tell you that Ethereum crypto is still playing second fiddle to Bitcoin in the current risk-off regime.

As long as ETHUSDT remains below its daily EMA20 and caught in the lower half of its Bollinger Bands, the burden of proof is firmly on the bulls. Any shift out of this structure, with convincing volume and a clear reclaim of key moving averages, would mark a new phase in the tape and warrant a reassessment of the bias.

The broader crypto market remains under pressure, and within this backdrop Monero price is trying to stage a counter-trend bounce against a still-dominant bearish structure.

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

Monero price: where we stand now

Monero (XMRUSDT) is trading around $118.7, sitting below all the key daily moving averages and well under the midline of its Bollinger Bands. Structurally, this is still a bears-in-charge market on the daily chart, but with a clear attempt at a short-term rebound on intraday timeframes.

This moment matters because we are in a classic tension zone: the daily trend is down, yet the 1-hour and 15-minute charts show active buying pressure. In other words, Monero price is bouncing inside a broader downtrend. The dominant force for now is trend-following sellers on the daily, while shorter-term traders are probing for a bottom.

Add to this a crypto-wide backdrop of extreme fear (Fear & Greed at 10) and slightly negative total market cap over 24 hours, and you get a market more inclined to sell strength than to chase breakouts.

Primary bias from D1: Bearish. Any bullish idea has to be framed as a counter-trend move until the daily structure actually shifts.

Daily chart (D1) – primary trend and structure

Trend and moving averages (EMA20, EMA50, EMA200)

Price: $118.7

EMA20: $130.53

EMA50: $143.65

EMA200: $154.49

Regime: Bearish

Monero price is trading below all three EMAs, with a clear bearish stack (price < EMA20 < EMA50 < EMA200). That is textbook downtrend structure: rallies into the 20-day or 50-day zones are statistically more likely to be sold than to turn into full trend reversals.

Short take: Dips are not being bought aggressively enough to reclaim trend levels; the path of least resistance is still down until at least the 20-day EMA is reclaimed and held.

RSI (14)

RSI14 (D1): 38.32

RSI is below 50 but above 30, which lines up with a weak, but not yet oversold market. Sellers have control, but we are not at a capitulation extreme.

Interpretation: Downtrend with room to fall. There is space for further downside before a classic oversold bounce is forced. Any bounce from here is more likely positioning and short-covering than a clear signal that the trend has turned.

MACD

MACD line: -9.66

Signal line: -8.97

Histogram: -0.69

MACD is negative and the line is below its signal, with a modestly negative histogram. Momentum is bearish but not accelerating.

Interpretation: The strong sell momentum phase is behind us for now, but the market has not flipped to bullish. It is more of a grinding downtrend than a waterfall.

Bollinger Bands

Middle band (20-period): $133.10

Upper band: $173.11

Lower band: $93.10

Price vs mid: Price at $118.7 is below the middle band

Price is trading in the lower half of the band range but well above the lower band. Volatility is wide enough to allow big swings, but we are not hugging the lower band, which would signal sustained downside pressure.

Interpretation: XMR is weak within a broad volatility envelope. It has room to move both ways, but the positioning in the lower half keeps the bias pointed down unless price can re-attack the middle band around $133.

ATR (14) – Daily volatility

ATR14 (D1): $10.34

An ATR around $10 on a $118 asset implies daily ranges close to 8–9% of price are normal right now.

Interpretation: Volatility is elevated but not extreme. Moves of $10 up or down in a day are normal noise, so any levels you care about need some breathing room.

Daily pivot levels

Pivot (PP): $116.23

Resistance 1 (R1): $122.07

Support 1 (S1): $112.87

Price at $118.7 is trading above the daily pivot but below R1.

Interpretation: On the daily, XMR is trying to stabilize slightly above its short-term equilibrium at $116. A push through $122 and then toward the 20-day EMA near $130 would be the first sign that buyers are doing more than just defending support.

1-hour chart (H1) – intraday bias

On the 1-hour chart, the regime is marked as neutral, but the intraday structure is trying to turn up.

Trend and EMAs (H1)

Price: $118.7

EMA20: $115.86

EMA50: $118.31

EMA200: $122.02

Regime: Neutral

Price is trading above the 20-hour and very slightly above the 50-hour EMA, but still below the 200-hour.

Interpretation: Short-term, buyers have regained control of the last day or two, but the broader intraday trend, defined by the 200 EMA, is not yet broken. This is a counter-trend bounce inside a larger downtrend.

RSI (14, H1)

RSI14 (H1): 56.78

RSI above 50 shows intraday momentum on the buy side, but it is not stretched.

Interpretation: On the 1-hour, the market is leaning bullish but still balanced. There is room for further upside before overbought concerns kick in.

MACD (H1)

MACD line: -1.71

Signal line: -2.00

Histogram: 0.29

MACD is still below zero but has crossed above its signal, giving a positive histogram.

Interpretation: Momentum is recovering from a previously bearish phase. Buyers are stepping in, but they are still working from a negative-momentum base. It fits the idea of a relief rally, not a confirmed trend reversal.

Bollinger Bands (H1)

Middle band: $116.28

Upper band: $124.46

Lower band: $108.10

Price vs mid: Price at $118.7 is above the middle band

Price is hovering in the upper half of the band range and above the midline.

Interpretation: Intraday control is with buyers, but price is not yet testing the upper band. The 1-hour chart supports further upside attempts as long as XMR holds above the mid-band region, around $116–117.

ATR (14, H1) – Intraday volatility

ATR14 (H1): $3.77

Hourly ranges around $3–4 are common right now.

Interpretation: Intraday volatility is healthy but not chaotic. Moves from $118 to $122 or back to $115 can happen within a session without changing the bigger picture.

Hourly pivot levels

Pivot (PP): $117.40

Resistance 1 (R1): $120.90

Support 1 (S1): $115.20

With price at $118.7, XMR is above the intraday pivot and between PP and R1.

Interpretation: For short-term traders, the market is in a buy-the-dip mode above $117–115 on this timeframe, with $120.9 as the next obvious intraday test.

15-minute chart (M15) – execution and very short-term tone

The 15-minute chart is for timing, not for big-picture bias, but it adds useful color.

Trend and EMAs (M15)

Price: $118.7

EMA20: $114.02

EMA50: $114.50

EMA200: $118.12

Regime: Neutral

Price is trading above all three EMAs on the 15-minute, including the 200 EMA.

Interpretation: Very short-term, bulls have the upper hand. In this timeframe, any dip back toward the 200 EMA, around $118.1, is a decision point intraday traders will watch closely.

RSI (14, M15)

RSI14 (M15): 71.14

RSI is into overbought territory on the 15-minute chart.

Interpretation: The very short-term move is hot. That does not mean a macro top, but it does raise the risk of a local pullback or sideways digestion before any further leg higher intraday.

MACD (M15)

MACD line: 0.71

Signal line: 0.11

Histogram: 0.60

MACD is positive and above its signal, with a clearly positive histogram.

Interpretation: Short-term momentum is firmly bullish. Combined with the overbought RSI, this looks like a strong intraday push that may need a pause or small correction to reset.

Bollinger Bands (M15)

Middle band: $113.61

Upper band: $116.71

Lower band: $110.52

Price vs bands: Price at $118.7 is trading above the upper band

Price has pushed beyond the upper Bollinger Band on this timeframe.

Interpretation: The 15-minute chart is showing a short-term breakout or overextension. That often resolves either with a quick mean reversion back inside the band or a consolidation while the band catches up.

ATR (14, M15)

ATR14 (M15): $2.06

Interpretation: Swings of $2 within a few 15-minute candles are within normal noise, so tight stops can easily be whipsawed at these horizons.

15-minute pivot levels

Pivot (PP): $117.77

Resistance 1 (R1): $120.53

Support 1 (S1): $115.93

XMR is trading above the pivot and between PP and R1.

Interpretation: Very short-term bias is up, but with price already extended above the upper band, chasing near $118–119 carries poor immediate reward-to-risk unless you are targeting a quick move into the R1 region around $120.5.

Putting it together: where Monero price stands

We have a classic multi-timeframe conflict:

Daily (D1): Bearish trend, below all major EMAs, weak momentum but not oversold.

1-hour (H1): Neutral-to-bullish intraday, recovering momentum, price above short EMAs but below the 200 EMA.

15-minute (M15): Strong short-term bullish impulse, overbought and extended above the upper band.

In plain language, the bigger picture is still down, but we are in the middle of a bounce. Short-term traders are pushing Monero price higher inside a broader downtrend, in a macro environment defined by extreme fear and risk aversion.

Key scenarios for XMRUSDT

Bullish scenario (counter-trend for now)

For the bullish side to gain traction, the market needs to turn this intraday rebound into something more structural.

What bulls want to see:

Hold above $116–115 (H1 pivot and support zone). That keeps the 1-hour structure constructive.

A sustained push through $120.9 (H1 R1) and then a test of the H1 200 EMA around $122.

From there, the bigger test is the daily pivot or R1 confluence and especially the EMA20 near $130.5. Reclaiming and holding above the 20-day EMA would be the first serious sign of a trend repair on the daily.

If buyers manage to hold above the 20-day EMA after a breakout, the narrative shifts from a dead cat bounce toward potential base-building, with the next logical magnets near the daily Bollinger midline at $133 and then the EMA50 around $143–145.

What invalidates the bullish scenario:

A clean break back below $115 (H1 S1) that holds on a closing basis.

Daily RSI slipping back toward low-30s while price stays under the 20-day EMA, confirming that this rebound was just another selling opportunity.

If that happens, the bullish case reverts to just another bounce in a downtrend, and shorts regain the upper hand.

Bearish scenario (trend-following)

The bearish case aligns with the current daily regime and the macro environment of extreme fear.

What bears want to see:

Failure to sustain above the $120–122 area (H1 R1 and 200 EMA), followed by a roll-over of intraday momentum.

A drop back under the daily pivot at $116.23, turning it into resistance.

Continuation lower toward daily S1 at $112.87 and then a potential test deeper into the lower half of the daily Bollinger range, psychological zone $100–105, with the lower band down at $93.10.

With daily RSI at 38, there is still room for price to grind down toward that lower band zone before hitting an oversold wall.

What invalidates the bearish scenario:

XMR reclaiming and holding above the daily EMA20 ($130.5) for several sessions.

Daily RSI pushing back above 50 while MACD flattens and starts to rise, signaling a shift from controlled downtrend to neutral or early uptrend.

As long as price is pinned under the 20-day EMA and the daily regime remains bearish, sellers retain the structural advantage.

How to think about positioning, risk, and uncertainty

Context matters. The wider crypto market is under pressure, BTC dominance is high, and the sentiment gauge is flashing Extreme Fear. In this backdrop, Monero price rallies are more likely to be treated as liquidity to sell into rather than the start of a broad risk-on phase.

From a market-logic standpoint:

Trend traders will naturally side with the daily downtrend and look to fade strength into EMA20 and EMA50 zones.

Mean-reversion traders will focus on the intraday long side, but with tight expectations: they are riding a bounce, not a confirmed new bull market.

Volatility is high enough, with daily ATR above $10, that position sizing and stop placement matter more than usual. Being right on direction but wrong on size can still hurt.

The real risk here is overconfidence in either direction. The daily trend says do not fall in love with longs, while the intraday charts show that shorts entered too late can be squeezed by fast bounces like the one we see on the 15-minute and 1-hour charts.

In practical terms, the cleanest area of agreement across timeframes is the $115–122 band. How price behaves around that zone over the next couple of sessions will tell you whether this is just another blip in a downtrend or the start of something more constructive for Monero price.

Market conditions are fragile as Solana price trades in a late-stage downtrend with extreme fear, stretched sentiment, and growing scope for sharp countertrend squeezes.

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

Main Scenario from the Daily Chart: Bearish Bias

The daily timeframe (D1) sets the tone, and here the message is straightforward: the primary regime is bearish.

Daily close: $85.01

Regime flag: bearish

Market backdrop: BTC dominance ~56%, total market cap down ~0.8% 24h, volumes down more than 12%, and sentiment at Extreme Fear.

In plain terms: capital is clustering in Bitcoin, risk appetite is thin, and altcoins like Solana are still in the “sell rallies, not buy dips” bucket on the higher timeframe. Until SOL can reclaim and hold above its key daily moving averages, the path of least resistance remains down or sideways-to-down.

Daily Timeframe (D1): Structure, Momentum, and Volatility

Exponential Moving Averages (EMA) – Trend Still Firmly Down

EMA 20: $93.44

EMA 50: $109.81

EMA 200: $144.20

Price: $85.01

Price is trading well below the 20, 50, and 200-day EMAs, with a clean bearish stack (price < EMA20 < EMA50 < EMA200). This defines a mature downtrend. Every rally towards the 20-day EMA around the low-90s is, by default, a potential selling zone until that structure is broken.

In human terms: the big money is still positioned on the short and defensive side on the daily. Solana is in “bounce inside a downtrend” territory, not yet in “bottomed and reversing” territory.

RSI (14) – Weak, But Not Yet Washed Out

RSI 14 (D1): 35.48

Daily RSI is sitting in the low-to-mid 30s, below neutral but not deeply oversold. That tells us momentum is still bearish, but the most aggressive phase of selling may be easing.

Translation: there is room for one more leg down before you hit true capitulation readings, but we are already in a zone where fresh shorts have to be more careful. The downside energy is there, but it is no longer limitless.

MACD – Bearish Phase, Early Signs of Stabilisation

MACD line: -9.82

Signal line: -10.94

Histogram: +1.13

Both MACD line and signal are negative, which is consistent with a downtrend. However, the MACD line is now slightly above the signal line (positive histogram). That usually points to losing downside momentum inside a broader bearish structure.

In other words: the trend is still down, but the selloff is not accelerating anymore. Conditions are ripe for either a consolidation phase or a corrective bounce, not necessarily an immediate trend reversal.

Bollinger Bands – Trading in the Lower Half

Middle band (20-day basis): $91.71

Upper band: $114.81

Lower band: $68.61

Price: $85.01

Solana is trading below the mid-band and comfortably above the lower band. Prior touches of the lower band (around the high 60s) look like a volatility extreme, and we are now rebounding inside the lower half of the band structure.

Practically: the market has already punished late longs, but it has not yet rewarded dip buyers in a big way. Price is in the repair zone, where you usually either grind sideways or stage a countertrend move back towards the mid-band in the low 90s.

ATR (14) – Elevated but Not Explosive Volatility

ATR 14 (D1): $7.63

An average true range of about $7.6 against an $85 price tag implies roughly 9% daily swings are normal right now. Volatility is clearly elevated compared with quiet uptrends, but we are not in full capitulation mode.

In plain terms: traders should be prepared for wide intraday ranges and deeper wicks on both sides. Stops that worked in calmer conditions are likely too tight here.

Daily Pivot Levels – Short-Term Map Inside the Downtrend

Pivot point (PP): $85.82

Resistance 1 (R1): $86.88

Support 1 (S1): $83.94

Price is currently sitting slightly below the daily pivot (around $85.8), leaning towards the support side. If SOL keeps trading under the pivot, the intraday bias leans bearish. A push through the pivot and a hold above R1 would hint at a short-term attempt to squeeze higher within the larger downtrend.

For active traders: the pivot gives a nearby line in the sand for intraday sentiment, but it does not override the overall bearish daily structure.

Hourly Timeframe (H1): Neutral Regime, Compressed Around Value

Close: $85.00

Regime: neutral

EMAs on H1 – Flat Cluster, No Clear Intraday Trend

EMA 20: $85.81

EMA 50: $85.85

EMA 200: $85.29

On the 1-hour chart, all three EMAs are tightly clustered around the mid-85s, with price only a bit below them. This is classic range behaviour, not a strong intraday trend.

In practice: the market has stopped trending hard down on the hourly and is instead oscillating around a short-term fair value area. It is a digestion phase after the prior drop, and it often precedes a larger move in either direction.

RSI and MACD on H1 – Mildly Weak, Not Broken

RSI 14 (H1): 42.56

MACD line: -0.02, Signal: 0.08, Histogram: -0.09

Hourly RSI is slightly below neutral, hinting at a mild bearish lean but nothing extreme. MACD is hovering near zero with a slightly negative histogram, again showing a modest downward bias inside a mostly sideways environment.

Human translation: bears still have the edge on the hourly, but they are not pressing it. It is more of a slow drift lower than an active liquidation wave.

Bollinger Bands and ATR on H1 – Tightish Range

Bollinger mid: $85.76, upper: $87.48, lower: $84.05

ATR 14 (H1): $0.90

The bands are not extremely narrow, but they are also not flaring aggressively. Combined with a roughly $0.90 hourly ATR, we are dealing with contained intraday volatility around the mid-80s.

For intraday traders, this is a fade-the-edges environment more than a chase-breakouts one, at least until we see a clear expansion in volatility or a decisive break out of this band structure.

Hourly Pivot – Micro Bias Gauge

Pivot point (PP): $85.02

R1: $85.30

S1: $84.73

Price is sitting almost exactly on the hourly pivot around $85. That reinforces the idea of a neutral, balanced intraday tape. A sustained move below S1 would tilt the short-term flow back to the downside, while reclaiming R1 and holding above it would give bulls some tactical room to push towards the high-80s.

15-Minute Timeframe (M15): Short-Term Weakness for Execution Timing

Close: $85.00

Regime: bearish

EMAs on M15 – Micro Downtrend Against a Flat Hourly

EMA 20: $85.65

EMA 50: $85.89

EMA 200: $86.07

On the 15-minute chart, price is clearly below the short, medium, and long intraday EMAs, all sloping down. That is a micro downtrend nested inside a neutral hourly range and a bearish daily trend.

Execution-wise: this favours short entries on bounces into the M15 EMAs if you are trading with the broader daily bias, but it does so within an environment where the hourly is not in strong trend mode. That raises whipsaw risk for overly aggressive intraday traders.

RSI and MACD on M15 – Near-Term Oversold Lean

RSI 14 (M15): 30.9

MACD line: -0.34, Signal: -0.24, Histogram: -0.10

RSI on 15 minutes is hovering just above the oversold threshold, and MACD is negative with a negative histogram. Short-term momentum is clearly pointing down.

In simple terms: the very short-term window is weak and stretched. Chasing new shorts at these levels on a 15-minute basis is late; the better entry is usually after a bounce back towards the intraday moving averages.

Bollinger Bands and ATR on M15 – Micro Volatility Pockets

Bollinger mid: $85.81, upper: $86.88, lower: $84.74

ATR 14 (M15): $0.35

Price is trading closer to the lower band, in line with the short-term oversold reading. With a modest $0.35 ATR, the market is allowing for small but frequent flicks within the tighter band. Expect quick intraday reversions rather than smooth trends on this timeframe.

15-Minute Pivot – Very Tight Intraday Levels

Pivot point (PP): $85.04

R1: $85.10

S1: $84.95

Price is sitting just under the 15-minute pivot, and the R1 and S1 range is extremely tight. This reflects a short-term battle at the margin. For execution, these levels are more noise than structure, but they can matter for very short-term scalps.

Macro and On-Chain Context for Solana

Solana’s share of total crypto market cap is around 2.0%, with SOL-related DeFi venues like Raydium, Orca, Meteora, and BisonFi all showing pullbacks in fee generation over the last 7–30 days, with a couple of exceptions on BisonFi and Orca on a 30-day basis. Fee compression on major Solana DeFi protocols usually lines up with lower on-chain activity and less speculative leverage, consistent with the current risk-off sentiment.

In combination with Extreme Fear readings, this tells you participation is low and traders are defensive. That is exactly the kind of backdrop where big moves can emerge from relatively small flows, both to the downside, if liquidity thins out, and to the upside, if short positioning is crowded.

Solana Price Scenarios

Bullish Scenario for SOLUSDT

The bullish case is a countertrend rally inside a broader downtrend, not a full-blown reversal, at least not yet.

For bulls to gain traction:

Hold above or reclaim the daily pivot around $85.8 and avoid a clean break of S1 at $83.9.

Hourly EMAs flip to support, price needs to get back above the H1 20, 50, and 200 cluster around $85.8–$86 and stay there.

Push towards the daily Bollinger mid-band at about $91.7, ideally turning that into a consolidation zone rather than immediate rejection.

RSI on the daily climbs back above the 45–50 zone, showing momentum is shifting from weak downtrend to more balanced conditions.

In this scenario, Solana price could stage a squeeze towards the low-to-mid 90s first, and if the broader market stabilises, potentially extend towards the psychological $100 area where the declining 50-day EMA, near $110, would be the next big test.

What invalidates the bullish scenario?

A decisive daily close below $84 that is followed by continued weakness into the low 80s would undercut the idea of an immediate relief rally. A rollover of the hourly chart back into a clean downtrend, with price pinned under all H1 EMAs with RSI sub-40 and expanding negative MACD, would also signal that bears have reasserted control.

Bearish Scenario for SOLUSDT

The bearish case is a continuation of the higher timeframe downtrend, with the current pause resolving lower.

For bears to stay in charge:

Maintain price under the daily 20 EMA, near $93.4. Every push into the low 90s that gets sold is a confirmation that the longer-term trend is still down.

Break and close below daily S1 around $83.9, converting that area into resistance on retests.

See RSI stuck in the 30–40 band on the daily, showing persistent downside bias without a strong mean reversion.

MACD on daily rolls back with a growing negative histogram, the current mild improvement fades and the lines diverge again.

Under this path, Solana price can revisit the lower Bollinger area in the low 70s and potentially probe towards the prior extremes near the high 60s, around the lower band at about $68.6. In an environment of extreme fear and falling volumes, slippage and air pockets lower are very possible if bids thin out.

What invalidates the bearish scenario?

A clean daily close back above $95, comfortably over the 20-day EMA, followed by continuation rather than immediate rejection would weaken the bearish narrative. If that move comes with daily RSI reclaiming 50 and MACD crossing into positive territory, the character of the trend shifts from downtrend to at least sideways, if not early accumulation.

Neutral and Indecision Scenario

There is a real risk that neither side wins quickly and Solana simply ranges between roughly $80 and $95, digesting the prior selloff.

In that case:

The daily trend stays technically bearish, with EMAs above price, but momentum indicators remain mixed and non-committal.

Hourly EMAs keep clustering around mid-range and act as a mean-reversion magnet.

Bollinger Bands slowly contract, signalling volatility compression ahead of the next large move.

This is the kind of environment where swing traders often get chopped up, and where patience usually pays more than aggressive positioning.

Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

Right now, Solana is caught between structural bearishness on the daily and early signs of selling fatigue on the lower timeframes. The tape is not screaming capitulation bottom, but it is far from a clean, orderly downtrend as well.

For participants thinking in terms of risk:

Volatility is elevated, with daily ATR around $7.6, so position sizing has to account for wide swings.

Sentiment is extreme, and fear at these levels can fuel both panic flushes and violent short squeezes.

Timeframe conflict matters: daily says respect the downtrend, hourly says we are consolidating, and 15-minute data says near-term stretched. Entries and exits that ignore this hierarchy are more exposed to whipsaws.

In short, Solana price is still in a downtrend, but that downtrend is aging. Bears remain in control on the higher timeframe, yet they are no longer unchallenged. Traders need to decide whether they are playing the macro trend, fading rallies, or the micro exhaustion, fading extremes within the range, and then size their risk accordingly in a market that is fearful, thin, and volatile.

Investor caution is growing across digital asset venues as the binance stablecoin trend highlights weakening crypto market liquidity and a shift away from risk.

Three straight months of negative stablecoin netflows

Binance has logged three consecutive months of negative stablecoin netflows, according to fresh CryptoQuant data, pointing to a sustained contraction in exchange liquidity. The current sequence is the longest comparable stretch since the 2023 downturn, suggesting market participants are increasingly reluctant to keep idle capital on centralized platforms.

Moreover, the outflow trend has accelerated. December recorded about $1.8 billion in net stablecoin withdrawals, while January saw nearly $2.9 billion leave the exchange, the data showed. That said, February has already approached roughly $3 billion in outflows, even though the month is only halfway through, signaling persistent caution.

From $50.9B to $41.8B in reserves

Binance’s overall stablecoin reserves have fallen sharply, dropping from approximately $50.9 billion in November to around $41.8 billion, a contraction of nearly $9 billion. However, this decline does not necessarily signal forced selling of crypto assets; instead, it points to capital exiting the exchange environment and moving to self-custody or traditional finance.

Stablecoins function as readily deployable dry powder for traders, allowing quick rotation into Bitcoin, altcoins or derivatives. When balances shrink on a venue of Binance’s scale, the exchange’s capacity for exchange volatility absorption falls, potentially amplifying price swings during sudden market moves or liquidations.

What negative netflows say about market sentiment

Market analysts typically interpret sustained stablecoin outflows from major exchanges as a sign that capital is leaving the centralized trading ecosystem rather than being recycled into other tokens. Moreover, this pattern can weaken crypto market liquidity, as fewer dollars are available on order books to meet aggressive buying or selling.

That said, some traders view lower exchange balances as a sign of increasing risk management, with investors preferring cold storage or off-exchange venues. In this context, detailed stablecoin netflows data helps distinguish between simple rotation among platforms and genuine capital flight from the sector.

Macro backdrop and defensive positioning

The stablecoin withdrawal trend is unfolding against a backdrop of elevated global uncertainty and rising geopolitical tensions. Market observers suggest these macro forces are encouraging crypto investor defensive positioning, with many choosing to hold cash or reduce leverage rather than chase short-term rallies.

Moreover, global geopolitical market uncertainty often pushes institutional and retail traders to reassess counterparty risk on centralized exchanges. As a result, consistent stablecoin outflows exchanges like Binance can become both a reflection of this caution and a mechanism that further tightens available on-chain liquidity.

Ongoing trend with no clear stabilization

According to the latest available figures from CryptoQuant, the pattern of negative netflows and shrinking reserves has persisted without clear signs of stabilization. While the primary_keyword binance stablecoin metrics remain under pressure, the coming months will show whether this is a temporary response to macro risk or a longer-term structural shift in how traders allocate capital.

In summary, Binance’s roughly $9 billion drawdown in stablecoin reserves since November, coupled with three straight months of accelerating net outflows, underscores a more cautious phase for digital asset markets, with thinner liquidity and reduced capacity to buffer sharp price volatility.

U.S. banks are being told the competitive dynamics around regulated stablecoins have shifted sharply since the GENIUS Act rewrote the ground rules in 2025.

Paxos challenges long-held banking assumptions

Paxos, the regulated blockchain and tokenization platform, has issued a blunt warning to traditional lenders: the old stablecoin playbook is obsolete. In a post shared on X, the company listed four common industry beliefs about stablecoins and argued that each one is now out of date.

The immediate catalyst is the GENIUS Act, signed into law by President Trump in July 2025. The legislation introduced clear federal rules for stablecoin issuance in the United States, reshaping how banks should think about this fast-growing market. Moreover, Paxos stressed that the opportunity set is already large.

“Stablecoins are already a multi-trillion-dollar market and banks that can accept them into their business stand to benefit greatly,” the firm stated, highlighting the potential revenue and efficiency upside for early adopters.

From unregulated perception to formal oversight

The first myth Paxos targets is the idea that stablecoins operate outside the regulatory perimeter. According to the company, that assumption no longer holds. Under the GENIUS Act, issuers must maintain 1:1 reserve backing with liquid assets such as U.S. Treasuries, provide monthly public disclosures, and obtain explicit approval to operate in the U.S. market.

Outside the United States, regulators have moved in a similar direction. Singapore’s MAS framework and the European Union’s MiCA rules establish comparable standards, creating a more consistent global stablecoin regulatory framework. Paxos said it already complies with these regimes, arguing that the robust oversight banks once claimed was missing is now firmly in place.

That said, the company implied that banks which cling to outdated assumptions about oversight risk misjudging both the risks and the upside of working with these digital instruments.

Do stablecoins really threaten bank deposits?

Banks have long feared that stablecoins might drain deposits and weaken their capacity to lend, but Paxos disputes this narrative. “Stablecoins serve as rails for payments, settlement and capital efficiency in ways that deposit accounts cannot,” the company stated, drawing a sharp line between traditional deposits and on-chain payment infrastructure.

Moreover, Paxos argued that lenders can choose to issue or custody stablecoins themselves, turning what they view as a competitive threat into a fresh line of products and services. The firm compared the current shift to the arrival of electronic payments, which initially alarmed banks but ultimately became a core part of their business models.

In Paxos’s view, stablecoins will follow a similar trajectory, moving from perceived disruption to embedded financial plumbing for both retail and institutional clients.

From crypto niche to global payments and markets

Stablecoins initially emerged as liquidity tools for crypto exchanges, facilitating rapid trading between tokens without touching fiat rails. However, Paxos stressed that this early chapter is now only a small part of the story. Global companies already rely on these assets to move millions of dollars in minutes across borders, bypassing slower legacy systems.

Use cases now span cross-border payments, on-chain capital markets, and tokenized asset settlement. Furthermore, Paxos highlighted that on-chain stablecoin transactions can be publicly audited in real time, offering a level of transparency that traditional payment networks typically cannot match.

The firm added that reserves held in short-term U.S. Treasuries are, in its view, “safer than many bank assets,” underlining its argument that the core backing of these digital dollars can be highly conservative.

Strategic risk for banks that choose to wait

Paxos closed its message with a clear warning for financial institutions that remain on the sidelines. The company said that banks willing to integrate regulated stablecoins into their operations could unlock faster settlement cycles, improved liquidity management, and entirely new product categories for clients.

However, it cautioned that institutions that continue to reject these instruments are likely to cede market share to fintech firms, blockchain-native platforms, and more forward-thinking banking peers. In other words, the risk for incumbents may now lie more in inaction than experimentation.

In summary, Paxos argues that the GENIUS Act and parallel global rules have transformed the landscape for stablecoins, moving them from a loosely governed crypto tool to a tightly defined financial infrastructure layer that banks can no longer afford to ignore.

On CryptoQuant, there is a metric called the Bull-Bear Market Cycle Indicator. 

This is an indicator that measures the momentum of Bitcoin’s bull/bear market cycle.

Technically, it is calculated as the difference between the P&L index and its 365-day moving average.

In turn, the P&L index of CryptoQuant uses the MVRV ratio, NUPL, and LTH/STH SOPR to create a single price valuation indicator for Bitcoin.

The P&L index measures whether the price of Bitcoin at a given moment is overvalued, neutral, or undervalued, while the Bull-Bear Market Cycle Indicator assesses whether it is currently within a bull cycle or a bear cycle. 

The P&L Index

Until early October 2025, the P&L index of CryptoQuant was in positive territory. 

This is an index that has historically fluctuated between -3.2 points and +1.6 points, but throughout 2025 it never managed to rise above 1.2. 

During the previous bull runs, however, it had reached a peak above 1.6 points in November 2023, and one above 1.4 points in December 2017. 

In 2021, it had managed to briefly surpass 1.3 points, but throughout 2025, it never managed to exceed the 1 mark. 

Practically since March 2021, it hasn’t exceeded 1.2 points, which CryptoQuant considers the threshold beyond which it can be deemed overvalued. To be honest, this threshold seems set a bit too low, so much so that during 2025 it barely managed to surpass 0.9 points. 

It is worth noting, however, that in November 2022 it fell below -1.8 points, although the historical low was reached in 2015 at -3.2.

At the beginning of February this year, it dropped to -0.8, which is a low level but not extremely low, while now it is still in negative territory (-0.5) but, to be honest, not very low. According to CryptoQuant, therefore, the current price of BTC should not be considered undervalued. 

The Bull-Bear Market Cycle Indicator

The real news is that the current value of CryptoQuant’s Bull-Bear Market Cycle Indicator is at its lowest since the FTX bottom of 2022. 

In fact, the current level of the P&L index is below -0.5, while its 365-day moving average is approximately +0.4.

Since the Bull-Bear Market Cycle Indicator measures the difference between the P&L index and its 365-day moving average, it is currently very low, below -0.9 points. In fact, on February 5th, it reached a local low of -1.2 points, aligning with the minimum peak recorded in March 2020 at the onset of the pandemic.

To be honest, though, in 2022 the lowest point was reached at nearly -2 points, which is significantly lower than where it is now. However, not only had it never fallen below -0.8 since January 2023, but until November 2025, it had never dropped below -0.3.

Therefore, the current situation is not similar to that of November 2022, but it is still decidedly negative. In fact, it closely resembles the early months of 2022, before the May crash caused by the implosion of the Terra-Luna crypto ecosystem. 

The Forecasts

In theory, this indicator is not used for making predictions. 

However, the comparison with the past indeed suggests similarities with that 2022, which was the last year of a major bear-market for Bitcoin’s price. 

That said, from this perspective, 2025 does not seem at all similar to 2021.

In 2020, this index returned to positive in May, then surged in July, corrected slightly in September, and surged again in October. The peak was reached in January 2021, and it remained at high levels until April. 

It fell below zero in May, then climbed back above zero in October, and dropped below again in November. 

This time, however, during 2025, it was above zero for only a few months and never exceeded 0.3 points. 

Furthermore, it had already returned above zero in January 2023, remaining there uninterruptedly until August 2024. 

In other words, although the early months of 2026 resemble the early months of 2022, 2025 appears very different from 2021, just as 2024 was very different from 2020 and 2023 from 2019. 

This chart clearly shows us how it cannot be used to project past performance into the future, as it often ends up behaving differently. 

The bear market

What is certain, however, is that the price of Bitcoin is currently in a bear market. 

What remains entirely unclear is how long this bear-market will last, and how far the price will go. 

In the past, major bear markets have always lasted at least 12 months, but there’s no guarantee that history will repeat itself. Just as 2025 was different from 2021, and 2021 was different from 2017, there’s no reason to assume that 2026 will necessarily resemble 2022 or 2018. 

In fact, since 2023, the cycle seems to be progressing ahead of schedule, in some cases even by several months. 

In theory, therefore, it cannot be completely ruled out that in this February 2026 local lows similar to those of May or June 2022 may have been reached, even though in the second half of that year a further decline occurred.

The TON Foundation has announced a significant collaboration with Banxa, a company within the OSL group, to bring the power of the TON blockchain and stablecoin payments to thousands of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region.

This initiative marks a decisive step towards the large-scale adoption of blockchain-based payment solutions in the real world, particularly in one of the most dynamic regions for trade and digital innovation.

TON, Banxa, and OSL: A Synergy for Digital Transformation

Thanks to the integration between the network of merchants and institutions of OSL, Banxa’s global payment infrastructure, and the speed of the TON blockchain, the partnership aims to meet the growing demand for fast and efficient cross-border payments.

SMEs in the APAC region will thus be able to leverage TON technology to settle payments in stablecoin, manage B2B transactions, cross-border operations, and consumer-to-business (C2B) payments, benefiting from a platform already widely used for peer-to-peer transfers in the region.

TON Pay: the New Frontier of On-Chain Payments

This collaboration follows the recent launch of TON Pay, the new on-chain payment layer designed to bring cryptocurrency payments to the consumer scale, starting with TON’s native applications on Telegram.

These developments highlight the strategy of the TON Foundation: to make the TON blockchain a benchmark infrastructure for efficiency in digital payments, both for in-app merchants and large international companies.

Real and Regulated Adoption: The Case of OSL and Banxa

While many entities in the digital sector are still looking towards future adoption, TON and its partners are already enabling concrete use cases.

OSL, a leading platform for trading and stablecoin payments in Asia, solidified its position with a $300 million funding round in 2025, the largest ever announced in the Asian digital asset sector, followed by an additional $200 million round to expand its global payments and stablecoin infrastructure.

The strength of this alliance also lies in regulatory coverage: Banxa boasts a network of licenses that spans the United States, Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, and APAC, ensuring compliance and security for all operations.

An Infrastructure Ready for the Real Economy

Nikola Plecas, Vice President of Payments at TON Foundation, emphasized how this collaboration is aimed at generating concrete use cases based on TON, providing long-term commercial utility for developers and businesses. “Our infrastructure actively supports stablecoin payment flows used in daily operations, reinforcing its role as a settlement layer ready for enterprises,” stated Plecas.

The agreement with Banxa is part of an enterprise adoption path for TON already initiated by companies like Bloxcross and Shift4, which use the blockchain to process and settle payments.

Sean Moynihan, COO of Banxa, highlighted how the combination of TON’s scalability and Banxa’s ability to manage on and off ramps between fiat and digital currencies allows any company to benefit from stablecoin payments, eliminating the complexities of currency conversions. “Together with OSL Group and TON, we are building the compliant technological layer for global commerce,” added Moynihan.

OSL Group: A Global Network Serving Businesses

OSL Group operates with licenses in all major regions of the world, including Asia Pacific, United States, United Kingdom, Europe, Latin America, and Africa. Xavier Xiang, Director of Payments at OSL Group, stated that enabling stablecoin payments for Asian companies is just the first step in a broader strategic partnership. “We are ready to bring our payment solutions, supported by OSL’s liquidity and global network, to all developers and businesses in the expanding TON ecosystem,” Xiang declared.

TON Foundation: A Community at the Heart of Innovation

The TON Foundation is a non-profit organization founded in Switzerland in 2023, supported by a community of contributors working on protocol development, ecosystem growth, and platform definition.

While promoting TON’s mission, the foundation does not exert any central control over the blockchain, which remains open-source and open to contributions from everyone.

Banxa: Integrated and Global Crypto Infrastructure

Banxa has established itself as a leading provider of integrated crypto infrastructure, facilitating access to cryptocurrencies and stablecoins for over 400 companies and millions of users worldwide. With offices in the United States, Europe, and Asia-Pacific, Banxa aims to revolutionize the movement of money globally, combining speed, efficiency, and regulatory security.

OSL Group: Leader in Digital Financial Services

OSL Group (HKEX: 863) is the leading platform in Asia for trading and payments in stablecoins, committed to providing efficient and globally compliant digital financial services. With values of openness, security, and transparency, OSL aims to build an ecosystem capable of connecting global markets and enabling instant and secure value transfers between fiat and digital currencies.

A Future of Borderless Digital Payments

The partnership between TON Foundation, Banxa, and OSL Group marks a pivotal moment for the adoption of stablecoin payments in Asian businesses. By integrating regulated infrastructures, cutting-edge technologies, and a global network of partners, this alliance lays the groundwork for a future where digital payments will be increasingly fast, secure, and accessible to companies of all sizes.

A new BVNK report shows how stablecoin adoption is rapidly evolving from a niche crypto experiment into an everyday payments tool used across global markets.

Stablecoins move from trading tool to everyday money

According to BVNK’s Stablecoin Utility Report, released on February 17, 2026, stablecoins are increasingly used for practical financial needs rather than speculative trading. The study, conducted by YouGov for BVNK in partnership with Coinbase and Artemis, surveyed more than 4,600 early adopters and crypto-natives in 15 countries.

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies pegged 1:1 to the US Dollar, designed to offer price stability and enable fast, secure transactions. Moreover, the report focused on respondents who currently hold crypto, held it in the last 12 months, or intend to acquire it in the coming year. This provides a detailed snapshot of how active users are integrating digital dollars into daily life.

The data shows that these users no longer view stablecoins as a niche remittance or trading tool. Instead, they deploy them for real-world money movement, prioritizing speed, cost, and security. That said, the shift is not uniform, with notable differences between emerging and high-income markets.

Stablecoins increasingly used for salaries and income

One of the most striking findings is how people are getting paid in stablecoins. 39% of surveyed respondents said they receive payments in stablecoins, either from family and friends or in a professional context. Among this group, such payments account for around 35% of their annual earnings.

Three-quarters of those paid in stablecoins said it improved their ability to do business internationally. In addition, 76% of marketplace sellers reported better sales volumes when using digital dollars. According to the report, these users also enjoy an average fee saving of 40% compared with traditional remittance channels, underlining strong stablecoin remittance savings incentives.

Everyday spending and merchant acceptance trends

Stablecoins are also functioning as everyday money. 27% of holders now use them for routine purchases, from goods to services. They keep an average balance of $200 in their wallets, treating these assets as spendable currency instead of long-term savings. Moreover, this behavioral shift signals that digital dollars are beginning to compete directly with local fiat in some markets.

More than half (52%) of crypto holders reported buying something specifically because a merchant accepted stablecoins. That share rises to 60% in emerging markets, highlighting how stablecoin merchant acceptance can directly influence consumer behavior. However, the report also indicates that current acceptance does not fully match user demand.

The demand-supply gap is clear: 42% of respondents said they want to spend crypto and stablecoins on major or lifestyle purchases, while only 28% actually do so today. This suggests that consumer interest is running ahead of merchant and platform integration, especially outside crypto-native businesses.

Why users prefer paying with stablecoins

The top reasons people choose stablecoins are practical rather than ideological. 30% cited lower fees as their main motivation, while 28% pointed to security and 27% to global access. Moreover, these operational benefits mirror the pain points of legacy payment rails, particularly for cross-border transactions and small businesses.

Crucially, users want better integration with existing financial services. 77% of consumers surveyed said they would open a stablecoin wallet if their personal bank or fintech app offered one. Almost three-quarters (71%) are interested in a linked debit card to spend their holdings frictionlessly. This underscores growing expectations around stablecoin banking integration within traditional financial platforms.

These attitudes suggest that future growth in stablecoin usage may depend as much on banks and fintechs as on crypto-native wallets. However, that requires interoperable infrastructure, clear compliance frameworks, and user-friendly interfaces that hide blockchain complexity.

Regional patterns in stablecoin use

The report highlights clear regional differences in how stablecoins are used. The trend towards everyday payments has been led by South America, Asia, and Africa, where conventional money transfers can be slow, expensive, or tightly restricted. Across these emerging markets, 60% of crypto-native respondents hold stablecoins, rising to a remarkable 79% in Africa.

In many of these economies, moving money abroad is difficult, and local currencies can be highly volatile. As a result, stablecoins have become an important tool for stability and financial inclusion. Moreover, they offer a parallel rail for savings, trade, and remittances that bypasses fragile banking systems and capital controls.

Yet the report also shows that high-income countries are catching up. In the US, the UK, and across Europe, awareness of stablecoins as a way to modernize payments and accelerate global transfers is growing quickly. 45% of crypto users in these economies now hold stablecoins, and their average balances are substantially higher, at around $1,000 compared with $85 in emerging markets.

Regulation and the path to mainstream adoption

The authors note that regulatory frameworks in major jurisdictions are evolving rapidly to support greater use of digital dollars in everyday commerce. As rules take shape across the US, UK, and Europe, policymakers are increasingly treating these assets as a potential upgrade to payment infrastructure rather than only a speculative instrument. This regulatory momentum is a key driver of broader stablecoin market mainstream adoption.

One paragraph of the report explicitly frames this shift as a structural change in stablecoin adoption, not just a temporary spike in usage. That said, significant questions remain around consumer protection, reserve transparency, and interoperability between issuers. Clearer standards could further unlock institutional engagement and payment-industry integration.

Industry perspectives on a tipping point

Commenting on the findings, Chris Harmse, co-founder of BVNK, contrasted headline market statistics with everyday experience in cities like London and New York. He noted that while macro numbers point to hundreds of billions in market capitalization and trillions in annual transaction volume, many consumers still rarely see a ‘pay with stablecoins’ button at checkout.

“That’s what we’ve set out to answer with this report,” Harmse said. “Stablecoins are being used in the real world because they solve real-world problems. People are already getting paid and spending stablecoins, especially where traditional payments are slow, expensive, or unreliable. They’re using them like everyday money, and asking for greater integration into their existing financial tools so they can continue to benefit from this revolution in money movement.”

John Turner, Group Product Manager for stablecoins at Coinbase, emphasized the role of necessity in emerging markets. “In many emerging economies, people have adopted stablecoins out of necessity,” he said. “What’s changing now is that people in developed markets are starting to feel the same frustrations with money movement. They want payments that are instant, global, and low-cost.” Moreover, Turner argued that as regulation develops, stablecoins will be seen less as a niche crypto product and more as a practical enhancement to established systems.

Anthony Yim, Co-Founder & CEO at crypto research firm Artemis, described a “significant behavioral shift” in usage patterns. He pointed out that stablecoin supply has grown 500% over the past five years, alongside multiple legislative initiatives in numerous countries. According to Yim, crypto-natives and early adopters are already fully onboard, using these assets to pay and be paid, which is now driving mainstream global uptake.

Methodology and ecosystem context

The Stablecoin Utility Report is based on an online survey of 4,658 adults aged 18 and over, conducted by YouGov between September and October 2025. All respondents either currently hold cryptocurrency (including stablecoins), held it within the last 12 months, or intend to acquire it in the next 12 months. The sample was drawn from YouGov’s panel of preferred suppliers.

BVNK positions itself as a stablecoin-powered financial stack for enterprises, enabling clients to build financial products, unlock new markets, and move money in seconds across more than 130 countries. The company says it processes billions annually and is trusted by partners including Worldpay, Deel, and Flywire. The report is available for download at BVNK.com/Utility.

Artemis describes itself as a leading analytics platform for blockchain data, used by industry names such as Visa, Grayscale, Pantera, VanEck, and Circle. Coinbase (NASDAQ: COIN) continues its mission to expand economic freedom globally by providing a trusted platform for trading, staking, safekeeping, spending, and global transfers of crypto assets. Moreover, Coinbase supports builders focused on onchain innovation and advocates for responsible regulation worldwide.

Overall, the BVNK study suggests that stablecoins are transitioning from a specialist crypto tool to a core component of digital finance, with growing usage in salaries, remittances, and everyday spending across both emerging and developed markets.

As traditional markets flash warning signs, the latest views on robert kiyosaki bitcoin strategy and privacy in crypto payments are drawing renewed attention from investors.

Market volatility and Kiyosaki’s crash call

The crypto market remains highly volatile, with the Bitcoin price once again failing to convincingly clear the $70,000 threshold. Moreover, several analysts argue that the leading digital asset could face further downside, despite the strong institutional inflows recorded last year.

Against this backdrop, Robert Kiyosaki, the author of the bestseller Rich Dad, Poor Dad, is doubling down on his warning of an imminent market crash. He maintains that many investors still hope for a lower entry level in Bitcoin, which he believes could add pressure to the asset in the short term.

“The upcoming crash may make you richer beyond your wildest dreams,” Kiyosaki said, underlining his view that deep corrections often precede substantial wealth creation for prepared investors. However, he stresses that only those willing to act during moments of fear tend to benefit.

Kiyosaki’s investment approach in a potential downturn

Kiyosaki has been warning about major downturns for years, frequently attracting criticism from skeptics who accuse him of alarmism. That said, he continues to argue that market crashes are periods when high-quality assets can be acquired at significantly discounted valuations.

His current approach focuses on steadily accumulating Bitcoin, gold, silver, and Ethereum as sentiment weakens. According to Kiyosaki, this diversified basket combines the scarcity of digital assets with the historical role of precious metals as stores of value.

Despite his gloomy near-term outlook, he urges investors to remain composed rather than panic selling into volatility. Moreover, he highlights the fixed supply of Bitcoin, capped algorithmically at 21 million units, as a fundamental characteristic that differentiates it from fiat currencies and many traditional assets.

In his view, that hard cap is central to his thesis on robert kiyosaki bitcoin positioning, since it introduces digital scarcity comparable to, and potentially more powerful than, that of physical gold.

Kiyosaki has also reiterated his belief that the long-term value of Bitcoin could eventually exceed that of gold. However, he cautions that the path to that outcome is unlikely to be linear and will almost certainly involve sharp corrections and periods of extreme volatility.

CZ highlights the privacy gap in crypto payments

While Kiyosaki focuses on macro risk and asset accumulation, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), founder of Binance, is directing attention to another structural challenge for digital assets. According to CZ, privacy remains the missing piece preventing true mass adoption of crypto payments in everyday life.

“Privacy is critical for the success of crypto as a mainstream payment system,” CZ stated, arguing that many potential users remain reluctant as long as transactions can be easily tracked on public blockchains. Moreover, he notes that businesses are also cautious when financial flows are fully transparent to competitors and counterparties.

Today, the inherent transparency of most blockchain networks allows addresses and flows to be scrutinized, which can be positive for compliance but problematic for user confidentiality. However, CZ believes that strengthening privacy features, while respecting regulatory requirements, is essential to making cryptocurrencies more attractive for daily spending.

Binance initiatives and broader industry challenges

Binance is working on enhanced privacy and security tools designed to give users greater control over what information is visible on-chain. The exchange sees these developments as a prerequisite for broader crypto payment adoption, especially in retail and cross-border commerce.

That said, CZ emphasizes that this is not an issue any single platform can solve in isolation. He argues that the entire crypto industry must prioritize privacy-focused innovation if it wants to compete with mature payment systems that already offer users a high level of discretion and ease of use.

The sector still faces multiple obstacles, including regulatory uncertainty, user education gaps, and ongoing concerns around market manipulation. However, CZ is convinced that addressing privacy concerns in a responsible way could unlock new use cases and accelerate the shift from speculative trading to real-world payments.

Outlook for investors and the crypto sector

For investors, the combination of Kiyosaki’s crash warnings and CZ’s focus on privacy highlights both risk and opportunity. On one hand, sharp corrections could deliver the lower entry points that long-term buyers seek in volatile assets like Bitcoin. On the other, structural improvements in privacy and usability may support broader adoption over time.

As of 2024, Kiyosaki continues to add Bitcoin, gold, silver, and Ethereum to his portfolio, positioning for what he sees as a historic re-pricing of financial assets. Meanwhile, CZ and Binance are betting that better privacy solutions will be a decisive factor in the next phase of the crypto market‘s evolution.

Ultimately, both perspectives converge on a single point: despite short-term uncertainty and the threat of a market crash, the intersection of scarcity-driven assets and improving crypto infrastructure may define the next chapter of digital finance.

Investors are reassessing metaplanet stock after the latest earnings showed booming revenue but a huge crypto-driven net loss that deepened an already steep share price decline.

Metaplanet shares under pressure despite brief post-earnings bounce

The Tokyo-listed company saw its Metaplanet shares edge up about 3% on the daily chart following the latest earnings release. However, the broader trend remains negative, with the stock still down roughly 37% over the past month, signaling persistent investor caution toward its crypto-heavy balance sheet.

According to the most recent monthly chart, Metaplanet stock has fallen from around ¥540–¥550 to approximately ¥338. This sharp decline reflects market unease over the firm's aggressive Bitcoin exposure and the potential for further volatility tied to digital asset prices.

Moreover, the near-38% monthly drop underscores how closely the equity now trades in step with crypto market sentiment. That said, a portion of the slide also stems from reactions to the latest fiscal year results and the scale of the reported net loss.

Metaplanet earnings highlight strong growth but huge Bitcoin valuation loss

For the year ending December 31, 2025, the company reported revenue of ¥8.905 billion (about $58 million), marking a steep 738% increase year-over-year. It also delivered an operating profit of ¥6.287 billion (around $41 million), up nearly 1,700% from the prior year, signaling substantial underlying business expansion.

However, despite this strong operational improvement, Metaplanet posted a net loss of roughly ¥95 billion (about $619 million). The loss was driven largely by a non-cash valuation hit of approximately ¥102.2 billion (about $660 million) on its Bitcoin holdings as prices declined during the reporting period.

As current accounting rules require digital asset positions to reflect changes in market value, swings in BTC prices can heavily distort reported bottom-line results. Consequently, headline profitability metrics at firms with substantial crypto holdings can diverge sharply from their operational performance.

Bitcoin-heavy balance sheet reshapes risk profile

Metaplanet has rapidly expanded its crypto treasury, ending 2025 with 35,102 Bitcoin, up from just 1,762 BTC a year earlier. This roughly 1,892% increase positions the firm among the largest corporate holders of the asset globally and the largest in Japan, transforming its financial profile in the process.

Moreover, that Bitcoin stack now represents a core pillar of its balance sheet and revenue model. Much of the company's income is increasingly linked to Bitcoin-related trading, yield strategies and associated financial activities that magnify its exposure to crypto market cycles.

However, the recent sharp correction in Bitcoin prices has flipped earlier unrealized gains into deep paper losses. These valuation swings have eroded investor confidence, contributing to the ongoing pressure on the share price even as reported revenue and operating profit expand sharply.

Metaplanet stock as a leveraged play on Bitcoin volatility

Metaplanet's approach effectively turns its equity into a leveraged proxy for Bitcoin itself, amplifying both upside and downside moves. In practice, metaplanet stock now reacts not only to company-specific news but also to broader crypto sentiment, regulatory headlines and macro-driven shifts in digital asset risk appetite.

For traders and longer-term shareholders, this dynamic presents a double-edged sword. On one hand, strong bull phases in Bitcoin could rapidly repair paper losses and boost reported earnings. On the other, extended downturns leave the company vulnerable to further valuation hits that overshadow operational gains.

That said, the recent near-38% monthly drop serves as a stark reminder of the risks involved in tightly coupling equity valuation to a volatile crypto asset. Until Bitcoin prices stabilize and market participants gain more clarity on digital asset accounting and regulation, Metaplanet's share performance will likely continue to mirror wider crypto market swings.

In summary, Metaplanet enters the next fiscal period with surging revenue, a powerful but risky Bitcoin treasury and a share price that remains highly sensitive to crypto volatility, leaving investors to weigh growth prospects against substantial balance sheet risk.

After months of preparation, Shiba Inu recovery efforts have moved from planning to execution with the launch of a live SOU NFT claim system on Ethereum.

SOU claim system goes live on Ethereum

The Shiba Inu team has activated its long-discussed SOU recovery framework, allowing users hit by the Shibarium bridge exploit to file claims tied to last year’s incident. Moreover, these claims are being issued as transferable, on-chain NFTs on Ethereum, giving affected users both transparent balances and new liquidity options.

The launch marks a shift from a purely promised Shiba compensation program to a functioning system with visible mechanics. That said, the design also introduces a secondary market, where users who prefer immediate liquidity can sell their claims at a discount to buyers willing to wait for future payouts.

Origins of the SOU concept

The SOU framework is not a sudden invention. In a year-end letter dated Dec. 29, 2025, Shibarium developer Kaal Dhairya presented the idea under the name “SOU: Shib Owes You,” explicitly warning that it was “Not live yet, beware of scammers.” However, he framed SOU as a system in which “every affected user has an SOU NFT — an on-chain, verifiable record of exactly what the ecosystem owes them.”

That early description stressed verifiability and on-chain enforcement rather than private, off-chain tracking. Furthermore, it set expectations that each user would hold a distinct tokenized record representing the exact amount owed, establishing the basis for today’s implementation.

Official launch announcement and core messaging

The warning banner has now been replaced by a go-live message. On X, the official Shiba Inu account declared: “SOU is live. Introducing SOU (Shib Owes You) an onchain NFT built as a good-faith effort to support impacted users with payouts, donations, and occasional rewards. Transparent. Tradable. On-chain. You can transfer it, split it, merge it, or trade it on marketplaces. Claim your SOUs: https://shib.io/sou.”

This statement highlights several design priorities: transparency, tradability, and self-custody via Ethereum wallets. Moreover, it underscores that the tokens can be split, merged, or transferred, reinforcing the idea that SOUs are not static receipts but dynamic financial instruments that can be actively managed.

Design principles and transparency features

According to Shib’s documentation, the system is intended to make the entire recovery ledger public, auditable, and enforced by smart contracts rather than opaque databases. “SOU (Shib Owes You) is more than just a name; it is a commitment,” the docs state, positioning the mechanism as a formal pledge by the Shib ecosystem to make users whole.

The documentation adds that the system is “a transparent, audited, and on-chain recovery system” featuring real-time activity notifications. However, these notifications do more than inform; they create an observable feed of donations and payouts, allowing the community to track recovery progress as new funds arrive or distributions occur.

Original Principal vs Current Principal

The SOU mechanism centers on two distinct balances for each claim. “Original Principal” represents the immutable historical record of what a user lost in the incident, while “Current Principal” reflects the remaining amount owed after payouts or new contributions. Moreover, Current Principal declines as users receive compensation or as funds are applied.

Shib’s docs also draw a clear line between debt repayment and incentive mechanisms. A “Payout” reduces principal as direct compensation, whereas a “Reward” is treated as additive with “No Change” to the owed balance, effectively layering bonuses on top of core repayment rather than replacing it.

SOU NFTs as financial instruments

Beyond acting as receipts, SOU tokens are intentionally structured as tradable assets. Claims can be merged or split for position sizing, transferred across wallets, or sold on compatible marketplaces. That said, this structure effectively creates a shib recovery marketplace, where investors can buy discounted claims while original victims choose between holding or exiting early.

This flexibility is central to the design. Affected users are not forced into a single recovery path; instead, they can decide whether to wait for future payouts or monetize their position now by transferring or selling their transferable claim NFT to others.

Funding flows and community role

Shib’s documentation outlines a funding model that channels ecosystem revenues and community donations into a shared pool. Donations are applied proportionally across all affected claims, ensuring each eligible SOU holder receives a fair share of incoming support rather than ad hoc distribution.

Additionally, there is support for optional creator fees on secondary-market trades. However, instead of going to a central treasury, these fees can be directed back into payouts or rewards, aligning trading activity with ongoing recovery and effectively turning market volume into a supplementary community recovery fund.

Background: Shibarium bridge incident

The SOU rollout is rooted in the September 2025 Shibarium bridge incident. In a post-incident security update, Shib stated that “unauthorized validator signing power” had been used to push a malicious exit through the PoS bridge, enabling the withdrawal of multiple assets from the system.

This exploit highlighted vulnerabilities in the Shibarium infrastructure and triggered community demands for a clear, auditable path to restitution. Moreover, it set the stage for the eventual design of the onchain nft recovery framework now going live.

Market snapshot and outlook

At press time, Shiba Inu traded at $0.00000656, reflecting a market still digesting both the fallout from the exploit and the implications of the new recovery system. However, supporters hope that a transparent, enforced recovery process, including structured sou nft claims, can help rebuild trust and stabilize sentiment around the project.

In summary, the SOU launch shifts Shib’s response from promises to an operational, on-chain system, combining verifiable accounting, flexible claim management, and community-driven funding to address losses from the Shibarium bridge exploit.

The market around the HBAR Hedera crypto price is locked near $0.10 as broader sentiment turns defensive and volatility compresses across multiple timeframes.

HBAR/USDT — daily chart with candlesticks, EMA20/EMA50 and volume.

Daily (D1): Neutral Bias with Structural Overhang

Trend & EMAs

Data: Close $0.10; EMA20 ≈ $0.10; EMA50 ≈ $0.11; EMA200 ≈ $0.15.

Read: Price is glued to the 20-day EMA, but still decisively below the 50- and 200-day EMAs. That is not active bearish momentum, but it is a downtrend hangover. HBAR is trying to stabilize under older, heavier resistance. However, until price reclaims and holds above the 50-day EMA (~$0.11), this remains a recovery attempt inside a broader, damaged structure rather than a confirmed new uptrend.

RSI (Momentum)

Data: RSI14 ≈ 50.9.

Read: Momentum is dead-center neutral. There is no strong buying pressure, but also no clear exhaustion on the downside. In other words, the market is undecided here; both bulls and bears are on standby, waiting for a catalyst. In a fearful macro environment, a neutral RSI can quickly roll over if sellers reappear.

MACD (Trend Momentum)

Data: MACD line ≈ 0, signal ≈ 0, histogram ≈ 0.

Read: MACD is essentially flatlined. There is no real directional edge from trend momentum, with no strong bullish crossover and no active bearish expansion. This reinforces the idea that HBAR is in a pause phase, coiling for its next impulsive move rather than trending strongly in either direction right now.

Bollinger Bands (Volatility & Range)

Data: Mid-band ≈ $0.09; upper band ≈ $0.11; lower band ≈ $0.08. Close at $0.10, slightly above the mid-band.

Read: Price is in the upper half of the daily band range, but not hugging the top. That is a mild positive tilt: support holds, but there is no strong breakout pressure. Moreover, bands are relatively narrow, which usually means volatility has been compressed. The longer HBAR sits in this tight band, the higher the odds of a volatility expansion move ahead, either up or down.

ATR (Volatility)

Data: ATR14 ≈ $0.01.

Read: Daily swings of about 10% relative to a $0.10 price are moderate for an altcoin, not extreme. Volatility is contained but not dead. That is consistent with a market that is cautious rather than panicked in this specific name, even while broader sentiment is extremely fearful.

Daily Pivot Levels

Data: Pivot point ≈ $0.10; R1 ≈ $0.10; S1 ≈ $0.10 (compressed, reflecting a very tight recent range).

Read: With pivot, support, and resistance all clustering around the same level, the market is basically treating $0.10 as the battleground. There is no well-defined local ladder of supports and resistances on the daily, just a hard line in the sand. Sustained trading above this area would start to favor the bulls; a clean break and acceptance below it would give bears the upper hand.

Daily takeaway: The HBAR Hedera crypto price sits in a neutral zone, structurally capped by higher EMAs but not under aggressive selling. The chart is in wait-and-see mode, and the next significant expansion in volatility is likely to define the next leg.

1-Hour (H1): Neutral, But Leaning Soft

Trend & EMAs

Data: Close ≈ $0.10; EMA20 ≈ $0.10; EMA50 ≈ $0.10; EMA200 ≈ $0.10.

Read: All intraday EMAs are stacked on top of each other. That is classic short-term equilibrium, with no clean intraday trend. It usually follows a period of choppy mean reversion, where both breakouts and breakdowns have failed to follow through.

RSI

Data: RSI14 ≈ 41.9.

Read: RSI is slightly below neutral, hinting at a mild intraday bearish bias. Buyers are not aggressively stepping in on the lower time frame, but this is not oversold either. It is more like a soft drift downward rather than a sharp selloff.

MACD

Data: MACD line ≈ 0; signal ≈ 0; histogram ≈ 0.

Read: Again, there is no dominant intraday trend. Short-term momentum has been washed out, matching the flat EMAs. Any strong push in either direction from here will likely be the start of a fresh H1 move, not the continuation of an existing one.

Bollinger Bands & ATR

Data: Bands mid ≈ $0.10 with upper and lower bands effectively at $0.10; ATR14 ≈ 0 on H1.

Read: This is ultra-compression on the hourly chart, as volatility has temporarily collapsed. When you see ATR this low and bands pinched, it usually precedes a breakout from the range. Direction is unknown; however, traders should expect volatility to come back, not stay at this level.

H1 Pivot

Data: Pivot ≈ $0.10; R1 ≈ $0.10; S1 ≈ $0.10.

Read: The market is rotating exactly around the same level, reinforcing $0.10 as a major intraday decision point. Any sustained move away from this level on volume would be meaningful.

Hourly takeaway: Short-term action is neutral to slightly soft, with extreme compression. The next impulsive move on the 1H chart is likely to be sharp relative to current noise.

15-Minute (M15): Bearish Regime, But Inside a Tight Box

Trend & EMAs

Data: Close ≈ $0.10; EMA20, EMA50, EMA200 all ≈ $0.10; regime flagged as bearish.

Read: Structurally, the model classifies M15 as bearish, but the EMAs being on top of each other at the same price point indicate a micro-range, not an active dump. Most likely, there was a recent short-term selloff followed by sideways cooling, which keeps the bearish tag but without ongoing downside pressure yet.

RSI

Data: RSI14 ≈ 30.9.

Read: Here we see some real pressure. M15 RSI flirting with oversold indicates short-term sellers have been in control. In a broader neutral daily context, this kind of micro-oversold can either be the start of a deeper breakdown or the area where scalpers look for a bounce back toward the mean.

MACD, Bands & ATR

Data: MACD ≈ 0 flat; Bollinger Bands compressed around $0.10; ATR14 ≈ 0.

Read: Even with M15 marked bearish, there is no strong trend follow-through. Volatility is almost nonexistent, and MACD is flat. That usually means the move that created the oversold RSI has stalled, and the market is pausing before deciding whether to extend lower or revert higher.

15m takeaway: Execution context is short-term heavy but stuck in a box. Sellers have an edge on the smallest timeframe, but the move is not expanding yet.

Market Context: Risk-Off, Altcoins on the Back Foot

Macro data around Hedera is not friendly to altcoin outperformance right now:

Bitcoin dominance above 56% signals capital concentration in BTC, not in secondary names.

Total crypto market cap is down in the last 24 hours, with volume also shrinking, which is classic de-risking behavior.

Fear & Greed Index at 10 (Extreme Fear) reflects broad risk aversion; speculative flows into projects like Hedera typically dry up in these phases.

For HBAR specifically, this means even a technically clean setup will struggle without a shift in overall sentiment. Breakouts are more likely to be sold into unless the broader market stabilizes.

Scenarios for HBAR Hedera Crypto Price

Immediate Bias

Given the daily neutral regime, flat MACD, mid-range RSI, and price trapped under the 50- and 200-day EMAs, the primary scenario right now is neutral with a slight downside risk tilt, mostly because of the macro fear and short-term M15 bearish tone.

Bullish Scenario

For a constructive path, bulls need to turn this neutral base at $0.10 into a proper higher-low platform.

What the bullish path could look like:

HBAR defends the $0.10 zone on closing bases, with M15 and H1 RSI recovering back above 50, signaling buyers reclaiming short-term control.

Price pushes through and holds above the 20-day EMA, then makes a sustained move above the 50-day EMA around ~$0.11.

Daily RSI grinds from about 51 toward the 55–60 region, while MACD edges into a positive cross instead of flatlining.

Bollinger Bands start to widen to the upside, with price spending more time near the upper band (~$0.11+), indicating an early trend rather than range-bound noise.

In that scenario, the next logical upside technical targets would be:

First: upper daily band region around ~$0.11, essentially a test of the 50-day EMA cluster.

Next: a move toward the $0.13–$0.15 zone, where the 200-day EMA (~$0.15) becomes a key line separating a bear market rally from a genuine trend reversal.

What would invalidate the bullish case?

A decisive break and daily close below the $0.10 area, especially if accompanied by:

Daily RSI slipping below 45 and heading lower.

ATR starting to rise as red candles lengthen, showing sellers are not just winning but winning with force.

HBAR trading closer to the lower Bollinger Band around ~$0.08 and failing to bounce.

Bearish Scenario

The bearish story banks on the idea that this neutral consolidation is simply a pause before another leg down, in sync with a risk-off macro environment.

How the bearish path might unfold:

HBAR loses the $0.10 pivot on intraday timeframes, turns it from support into resistance, and fails on retests.

15m and 1h RSI remain suppressed, staying below 45, while daily RSI drifts from about 51 toward the low 40s.

Bands start expanding downward, with price walking along or near the lower daily Bollinger Band (~$0.08), rather than reverting back to the mid-band.

Daily MACD finally tips negative, no longer flat, supporting a fresh downside trend leg instead of range trading.

In that scenario, near-term support expectations would sit around the lower band region near ~$0.08. If fear intensifies or Bitcoin breaks lower, a deeper sweep below that band would not be surprising, effectively searching for a new value area.

What would invalidate the bearish case?

A convincing, high-volume reclaim of the 50-day EMA (~$0.11) would seriously damage the bearish narrative, especially if:

Daily RSI holds above 50 and pushes toward 60.

MACD turns slightly positive instead of deepening into the negative.

Price starts building intraday higher lows above $0.10–$0.11 rather than rejecting from that zone.

Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

HBAR’s chart right now is the opposite of a high-conviction trending setup. The daily structure is neutral, intraday volatility is compressed, and momentum is flat, all while the broader crypto market leans defensive. In environments like this, position size and patience usually matter more than clever entries, as the big move tends to come after periods like this, not during them.

Traders should keep three things in mind:

Volatility is likely to return. With ATR and intraday bands this tight, the next impulse is likely to be sharper than the current noise level implies.

Macro can override micro. Even if Hedera paints a decent local setup, a fresh leg lower in Bitcoin or a spike in market-wide fear can pull it down regardless of its standalone chart.

Key line is $0.10. On all timeframes, $0.10 is the pivot that keeps reappearing. Above it, the market can argue for a base; below it, the argument shifts toward continuation of the prior downtrend.

For now, the HBAR Hedera crypto price sits in a balancing act. The tape is quiet, but the context is not. The next break away from this $0.10 equilibrium is likely to define the next several weeks of trading for this asset.

European policymakers are stepping up efforts to defend monetary autonomy, with euro stablecoins increasingly seen as a central pillar of that strategy.

Bundesbank steps up support for euro-denominated stable assets

Germany’s central bank, the Deutsche Bundesbank, has reinforced its backing for euro stablecoins as European authorities confront the growing dominance of dollar-linked digital tokens. Officials signaled that these instruments could help preserve eurozone monetary control while supporting innovation in payments.

The Bundesbank set out plans to advance the digital euro alongside strictly regulated private tokens. It argued that euro-based stable assets can boost cross-border payment efficiency and cut dependence on foreign payment networks. Consequently, policymakers framed these projects as components of a wider financial sovereignty agenda for the European Union.

Bundesbank President Joachim Nagel reiterated his support for both retail and wholesale central bank digital currency. He said a wholesale CBDC could enable programmable settlement in central bank money for financial institutions. Moreover, he linked privately issued euro-pegged tokens with stronger competitiveness in financial technology, clearing and settlement services across the bloc.

Nagel also highlighted ongoing exploratory work within the Eurosystem on wholesale CBDC architectures. Under these designs, banks and other financial institutions could process automated transactions in a secure and resilient environment. At the same time, he argued that well-regulated euro-based stable assets can offer cost-efficient payment and savings tools for companies and households.

ECB warns on dollar-linked dominance and policy transmission

The European Central Bank has raised the alarm over the expanding market share of dollar-backed stablecoins in global crypto markets. Officials cautioned that heavy reliance on such foreign-currency instruments may weaken the effectiveness of euro area monetary policy transmission. Therefore, they stressed the strategic value of domestically anchored solutions.

ECB representatives warned that what they described as digital dollarization could gradually erode financial autonomy in member states. They argued that a fully fledged digital euro CBDC initiative would bolster resilience in core payment infrastructure. In addition, they insisted that any privately issued euro-pegged tokens must be tightly integrated into the broader monetary and regulatory framework.

At the same time, the ECB underlined that unmanaged growth in dollar-pegged crypto assets might heighten currency substitution risks. This trend could complicate liquidity management for banks and central banks. However, officials suggested that a robust domestic framework for stable assets, including CBDC and compliant private tokens, could mitigate these challenges over the medium term.

German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil urged faster coordination within Europe on financial and capital market integration. He argued that the European Union needs to move beyond narrow national priorities to reinforce its sovereignty and strategic autonomy. Furthermore, he described the current period as decisive for advancing shared financial infrastructure and deepening the single market.

Market projections point to rapid euro stablecoin growth

S&P Global Ratings has projected significant expansion for euro-denominated digital assets in the coming years. The credit rating agency estimated that the euro stablecoin market could scale to about €1.1 trillion by 2030 under favorable regulatory and adoption conditions. However, its baseline forecast remains more conservative, at roughly €570 billion by the same date.

S&P noted that euro-based tokens represented only around €650 million at the end of last year, highlighting how early the market still is. It added that potential growth could eventually represent more than four percent of overnight bank deposits in the euro area. Moreover, such a shift would mark a structural change in how savings and transactional balances are held across the region.

By contrast, U.S. dollar-pegged stable assets had reached an aggregate valuation of about $310 billion by late 2025. This scale underscores the current dominance of greenback-linked tokens and reinforces ECB concerns about overreliance on foreign currency instruments. That said, analysts argue that clear rules and credible public-sector backing could narrow this gap for euro-linked alternatives.

In the United States, lawmakers advanced federal oversight for digital assets after President Donald Trump signed the GENIUS Act in July 2025. The law marked a milestone for stablecoin supervision, although disagreements over detailed market structure rules have since slowed additional progress in Congress. Meanwhile, European authorities continue to present euro stablecoins as a cornerstone of long-term monetary and financial sovereignty, aligning them with the EU’s broader regulatory and integration agenda.

Overall, the combined push from the Bundesbank, the ECB and EU policymakers signals a clear direction: develop a digital euro, promote regulated euro-linked stable assets and curb excessive dependence on foreign currency tokens, in order to strengthen the euro area’s financial resilience and strategic autonomy.

After three years of operation, the decentralized lending protocol zerolend shutdown underscores growing pressures on smaller multi-chain DeFi platforms.

ZeroLend confirms closure of lending operations

Decentralized lending protocol ZeroLend has confirmed it will shut down operations after three years, citing sustainability issues and rising operational risks across its deployed networks. The team described the move as a “difficult decision”, saying the protocol is no longer viable in its current structure and market context.

In a statement shared by team member Deadshot Ryker, ZeroLend explained that its existing business model could not withstand persistent liquidity pressures and infrastructure changes. Moreover, the team stressed that the priority now is to ensure an orderly wind-down and protect user assets during the transition.

The protocol highlighted several key challenges behind the closure. These include shrinking liquidity on supported chains, discontinued oracle services, and growing security threats that increased operational risk. Together, these factors made continued development and maintenance economically and technically unsustainable.

From multi-chain ambition to liquidity squeeze

ZeroLend initially launched as a multi-chain lending protocol, targeting emerging blockchain ecosystems rather than only established networks. It sought to offer decentralized borrowing and lending markets across a range of chains, including Manta, Zircuit, XLayer and Base, aiming to capture early DeFi activity.

However, over time, liquidity on several of these networks either dried up or became largely inactive. As a result, utilization ratios fell and revenues from lending markets weakened. This erosion of on-chain activity, combined with higher maintenance costs, ultimately undermined the project’s ability to operate sustainably.

The team noted that fragmented liquidity across smaller ecosystems amplified risk and made it harder to scale. That said, ZeroLend still emphasized that user protections would guide every step of the wind-down, despite the challenging market backdrop.

Withdrawal process and 0% LTV markets

ZeroLend stated that its immediate priority is giving users enough time and clear instructions to withdraw their assets safely. Most lending and borrowing markets on the protocol have already been set to 0% loan-to-value (LTV), effectively disabling new leveraged positions and signaling that users should unwind existing exposure.

Users are strongly urged to zerolend shutdown positions and remove any remaining funds as soon as possible, given the shift to capital preservation rather than growth. Moreover, the team has reiterated that prompt withdrawals will help reduce potential complications during later stages of the wind-down.

Despite the adjustment to 0% LTV, some assets remain trapped in illiquid or inactive environments. These include positions on lesser-used chains where secondary market depth has deteriorated, making normal exit paths more complicated for affected users.

Timelock smart contract upgrade to recover assets

To address funds tied up on illiquid networks, ZeroLend is preparing a timelock upgrade to its core smart contracts. This upgrade is designed to modify protocol logic and enable a controlled redistribution of stuck assets, with the goal of maximizing user recovery under current conditions.

The planned smart contract changes will be executed through a time-delayed governance mechanism, allowing the community and security experts to review the upgrade before it is finalized. However, the team warned that full recovery may not be possible in every case, given the constraints of underlying chain liquidity.

According to the announcement, the timelock upgrade will prioritize transparency and audibility. That said, users with positions on thinly traded or inactive chains should prepare for potential delays or partial outcomes as the technical process unfolds.

Addressing previous LBTC incident on Base

The ZeroLend team also referenced a previous issue involving LBTC users on the Base network. During that incident, specific suppliers were affected by market disruptions and could not fully exit their positions under normal conditions. This legacy problem is being incorporated into the current wind-down strategy.

With support from a LINEA airdrop allocation, the protocol plans to provide partial refunds to those impacted LBTC suppliers. Moreover, affected users are encouraged to reach out directly to moderators or submit formal support tickets to confirm eligibility and coordinate their refund process.

ZeroLend stressed that communication will be critical for resolving these historical issues. That said, the amount and timing of partial refunds will depend on available resources and the final outcomes of the timelock-driven asset recovery plan.

Broader implications for DeFi lending markets

For traders and liquidity providers, the closure of ZeroLend removes another DeFi lending venue from the market, particularly on smaller or experimental chains. This reduction in venues could further concentrate activity on a few dominant platforms, while leaving niche ecosystems with fewer borrowing and lending options.

The wind-down also highlights structural vulnerabilities in the multi-chain DeFi model. Fragmented liquidity, reliance on third-party oracle services, and thin operating margins can become critical weaknesses when market conditions deteriorate or infrastructure providers adjust their offerings.

Moreover, the ZeroLend case underlines how infrastructure dependencies, such as oracles and cross-chain bridges, can elevate risk profiles for both developers and users. When a protocol spans several emerging networks, each additional chain can introduce unique technical and security challenges.

Orderly and transparent wind-down ahead

ZeroLend has committed to focusing on an orderly and transparent wind-down process in the coming weeks, rather than an abrupt shutdown. The team intends to keep publishing updates as technical milestones are reached, including progress on contract upgrades and user reimbursements.

Users are advised to monitor official communication channels closely, verify announcements, and act promptly when withdrawal or support windows are announced. However, the core message from the team remains consistent: remove funds, review positions, and prepare for a final closure of protocol operations.

In summary, ZeroLend’s exit from the market reflects the pressures facing smaller, multi-chain lenders in a competitive DeFi landscape. The project now aims to conclude its operations while safeguarding users as much as possible under current liquidity constraints.

Institutional demand for blockchain-based commodities is accelerating, and Wintermute is moving to capture this momentum with a deeper focus on tokenized gold.

Wintermute launches institutional OTC trading for gold-backed tokens

Crypto market maker Wintermute has launched institutional over-the-counter trading for Pax Gold (PAXG) and Tether Gold (XAUT), the two largest gold-backed tokens by market capitalization. The firm announced the expansion on Monday, positioning the desk for professional investors seeking blockchain-based exposure to physical gold.

The new OTC service will provide algorithmically optimized spot execution in PAXG and XAUT, tailored for institutional clients. Moreover, Wintermute will act as a liquidity provider across multiple venues, aiming to tighten spreads and improve price discovery for large-size orders.

The initiative arrives as tokenized gold trading volume surges across digital asset markets. In the fourth quarter of 2025, trading volumes in on-chain gold products reached $126 billion, surpassing the combined activity of five major gold exchange-traded funds over the same period.

On-chain gold market outpaces traditional ETFs

The broader on-chain gold market has expanded rapidly alongside this volume spike. Over the past three months, the market capitalization of tokenized gold products climbed more than 80%, rising from $2.99 billion to $5.4 billion. That said, the segment still represents a small fraction of the global physical gold market.

Investors appear increasingly attracted to 24/7 liquidity and near-instant settlement compared with traditional gold ETFs that only trade during market hours. However, regulatory frameworks for tokenized commodities continue to evolve, and institutional participants remain focused on custody standards and counterparty risk.

Wintermute chief executive Evgeny Gaevoy argued that gold is now following the same infrastructure evolution seen in foreign exchange markets over the past two decades. According to the firm, the tokenized gold market could reach $15 billion by 2026, implying roughly a 2.8x increase from current capitalization levels.

What tokenized gold offers institutional investors

Tokenized gold represents digital tokens issued on a blockchain that are backed by physical gold reserves held with custodians. Each token typically corresponds to a fractional claim on a specific quantity of gold, allowing traders to move exposure across venues and wallets with minimal friction.

Unlike conventional ETFs, which settle through legacy market infrastructure, these assets settle on-chain. Moreover, they enable 24/7 trading across centralized exchanges, OTC desks, and decentralized platforms, which can be attractive for funds engaged in cross-asset arbitrage, collateral optimization, or intraday risk management.

Wintermute’s institutional desk will support PAXG and XAUT trading against multiple currencies and assets, including USDT, USDC, major fiat currencies, and leading cryptocurrencies. The firm says the service is designed to facilitate real-time hedging, improve collateral mobility, and integrate more seamlessly with digital asset treasury operations.

Macro backdrop: gold near record highs and de-dollarization themes

Wintermute reports that client interest has risen as spot gold prices trade near all-time highs. Current macro conditions feature persistent geopolitical uncertainty, elevated inflation concerns, and ongoing debates around de-dollarization. Together, these factors have supported demand for gold-backed digital instruments among hedge funds, trading firms, and sophisticated family offices.

Moreover, some institutions are exploring tokenized commodities as an alternative collateral layer for derivatives and lending markets. However, adoption still depends on the depth of secondary market liquidity, legal clarity on ownership rights, and the robustness of the underlying custody and audit processes.

Growth of tokenized real-world assets

The rapid rise of on-chain gold is part of a larger expansion in tokenized real-world assets (RWAs). Tokenized public-market RWAs tripled in 2025 to approximately $16.7 billion, according to industry data. This acceleration reflects growing institutional comfort with using blockchains to represent traditional securities and commodities.

Research from ARK Invest suggests tokenized assets could exceed $11 trillion by 2030, covering everything from government bonds to alternative credit. Meanwhile, Standard Chartered forecasts tokenized RWAs reaching $2 trillion by 2028. BlackRock executives have similarly described tokenization as a structural shift for global capital markets rather than a short-term trend.

The commodities segment has already seen notable experiments. Earlier this month, Billiton Diamond and Ctrl Alt tokenized over $280 million of certified polished diamonds in the UAE, bringing a traditionally opaque market onto blockchain rails. Silver has also drawn interest as a candidate for tokenization, with the broader silver market boasting an estimated capitalization of $4.21 trillion.

Institutional tokenization momentum and Wintermute’s role

BlackRock’s BUIDL fund has become one of the flagship institutional tokenization projects, with assets under management now above $2 billion. The asset manager recently disclosed plans to list its tokenized market fund on Uniswap, enabling qualified counterparties to trade the token directly via a decentralized exchange.

Against this backdrop, Wintermute aims to position itself as a core liquidity provider in the emerging market for tokenized commodities. Moreover, by offering institutional OTC execution in PAXG and XAUT against stablecoins, fiat, and major cryptocurrencies, the firm is betting that on-chain settlement will become a standard route for gaining and hedging gold exposure.

Overall, the firm’s launch underscores how institutional infrastructure for digital assets is converging with traditional commodity markets. If current growth trajectories hold, both tokenized gold and broader RWA markets could represent a significant slice of global capital flows by the end of this decade.

Wintermute Expands Into Tokenized Gold Market

According to news outlet, Wintermute has introduced institutional over-the-counter trading services for tokenized gold. This news came to light via a tweet from the official account of Coin Bureau. This tweet indicated that the crypto market maker expects the tokenized gold market to reach $15 billion in 2026.

The tweet highlighted the introduction of the institutional service in the trading market. The service was referred to as institution-grade OTC trading. Nevertheless, the tweet did not provide information on the operational timelines or product structures.

Wintermute is a leading liquidity provider in the digital asset market. The company has now entered the blockchain-based commodity market. This piece of trading news brings tokenized gold into the growing list of institutional trading products.

Institutional OTC Trading Model Detailed

The trading news update states that the new offering focuses on over-the-counter execution. OTC trading allows for large trades that are not executed through public order books. Traders commonly use OTC desks to minimize price impact for large trades.

The tweet called the service institutional-grade. This is an indicator of a service targeting hedge funds, institutional investors, and corporate investors. There was no mention of trade size requirements or custody requirements.

Tokenized gold usually represents actual gold held in vaults. Blockchain tokens represent claims on the gold. Traders can move or settle these tokens electronically. This is a combination of commodity investing and blockchain settlement infrastructure.

Wintermute’s foray into tokenized gold trading is consistent with trends in trading news. Trading companies continue to develop their offerings in the area of real-world asset tokenization.

Market Growth Projection to $15 Billion

The tweet also mentioned the market forecast by Wintermute. According to the tweet, the gold market that is tokenized could reach $15 billion by 2026. The tweet did not provide information on how the forecast was arrived at.

Tokenized commodities are part of the real-world assets category. The category is followed by analysts in the decentralized finance and institutional trading markets. Gold tokens are among the most developed commodity-linked digital assets.

The news comes at a time when there is growing institutional involvement in blockchain infrastructure. Companies are looking into tokenization as a way of simplifying settlement and increasing market access. Gold tokens provide market access without the need to move gold.

Industry analysts also remain focused on the growth of liquidity in tokenized asset markets. Trading infrastructure and custody services are also being developed in tandem. As companies continue to diversify their product lines, tokenized commodities also gain interest from the traditional finance community.

The latest development by Wintermute is another milestone in the evolution of digital commodity markets. The company is part of a growing list of trading-native companies that are developing institutional trading infrastructure. More information may become available regarding the scope of operations related to this launch.

At present, the trading community is focused on the company’s institutional approach and market growth.