CoinRank

Europe’s leading blockchain festival expands in 2026 with a larger Warsaw venue, hundreds of speakers, dozens of projects, and deeper coverage across Web3, DeFi, RWA.

NBX 2026 delivers insights on Trading, Investing, AI, TradFi, Cybersecurity, Gaming, Legal, and Compliance, while enabling efficient networking through a new app with matchmaking features.

As flagship of Polish Blockchain Week, Next Block Expo hosts awards, workshops, and panels, spotlighting CEE founders, developers, investors, and innovators shaping global blockchain adoption trends worldwide.

Next Block Expo 2026 returns to Warsaw with a bigger venue, global Web3 leaders, expanded AI, RWA and TradFi tracks, massive networking, and NBX Awards.

Get ready for the biggest edition yet of Europe’s premier Blockchain Festival! Next Block Expo (NBX) returns in 2026, moving to a larger venue in Warsaw and bringing together a record-breaking crowd of Web3 enthusiasts, founders, investors, and innovators. With hundreds of speakers and dozens of leading projects, NBX is the ultimate place to learn, grow network, and explore the future of blockchain and Web3.

The Main Sponsor of the event is zondacrypto.

 

Why You Should Attend

NBX is more than a conference- it’s a hub for the people shaping Web3.

Whether you’re an investor scouting the next big project, a developer seeking insights, or a founder looking for partners, NBX is designed to help you:

Discover trends and opportunities through keynote presentations, panels, and workshops.
Learn from global experts on DeFi, Trading & Investing, AI, Legal & Compliance, Industry Trends, TradFi, Cybersecurity, RWA, Web3 Gaming, and more.
Build meaningful connections using the all-new NBX app for chat, matchmaking, and 1:1 meetings

Global Leaders Shaping the Future of Web3

 

As the industry continues to evolve, NBX positions itself as a central hub in CEE for founders, builders, investors, creators, and innovators. This year’s program spans more stages, featuring keynote presentations, panel discussions, and workshops, covering the full spectrum of blockchain and beyond.

Attendees can expect deep dives into a wide range of topics, including DeFi & RWA, Gaming, Metaverse & NFTs, AI, Infrastructure, Web3, Trading & Investing, Startups, Legal & Compliance, Industry Trends. 

This year, NBX is expanding its program with new thematic areas, including AI, TradFi, and Cybersecurity, highlighting not only the latest trends and innovations but also potential risks and challenges in the Web3 ecosystem.

Networking at Scale

 

Connecting people has always been at the core of Next Block Expo. This year, attendees will enjoy even more opportunities to connect through the brand new NBX app, designed for chatting, matchmaking, scheduling 1:1 meetings, and much more.

Polish Blockchain Week

 

NBX 2026 will once again serve as a flagship event of Polish Blockchain Week, bringing together thousands of enthusiasts across multiple venues and events. Highlighting Poland’s growing reputation as a Web3 talent hub, the event showcases the country’s contributions to global blockchain innovation and promotes its skilled developers, startups, and emerging projects to the international community.

Recognition of Excellence: NBX Awards

The NBX Awards will honor outstanding initiatives, projects, communities, and leaders across 12 categories, showcasing the innovators shaping the future of Web3. Winners are determined by community voting, ensuring the industry itself recognizes excellence and talent.

About Next Block Expo

 

Next Block Expo (NBX) – The Blockchain Festival of Europe is one of the largest European Web3 events, hosted annually in Warsaw and Berlin. NBX gathers builders, experts, investors, regulators, and innovators to exchange ideas, forge partnerships, and showcase the future of blockchain technology.

More about partnership opportunities: https://bit.ly/NBX

 

Media Contact: media@nextblockexpo.com

〈Next Block Expo 2026: The Biggest Edition Yet〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

According to The Block, the Zcash Foundation announced that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (#SEC ) has concluded its years-long investigation and informed the foundation that it does not intend to pursue any enforcement action or other measures.
The foundation stated that in August 2023, it received a subpoena from the SEC related to an investigation titled “In the Matter of Certain Crypto Asset Securities (SF-04569).”
Over the past year, the SEC has dropped dozens of cases against major crypto companies, including Coinbase, and has also ended investigations into #DeFi protocols and other industry participants.
#Crypto #Zcash

#Trump urges Supreme Court: Look at our unprecedented economic success before making any major rulings
#FutureSwap suffers another attack; Arbitrum contract exploited, resulting in a loss of approximately $74,000
CZ @CZ : US crypto policy shifts towards a more friendly stance after Trump's election; Bitcoin may break through the "four-year cycle" framework
#MANTRA announces layoffs and restructuring to address market challenges
Spanish bank Bankinter discloses acquisition of minority stake in #Bit2Me
#CoinRank

This article focuses on the licensing compliance trends in the crypto industry in 2025, analyzes the core differences between STR and SAR, sorts out the regulatory key points in regions such as North America, the EU, Dubai, and Turkey, identifies the pain point of “defensive reporting”, and provides practical suggestions for building an efficient compliant reporting system from four aspects including “on-chain + off-chain” monitoring and dynamic threshold adjustment, helping institutions address anti-money laundering (AML) regulatory challenges.

Introduction

 

As the end of 2025 approaches, major players in the industry are still racing to secure “licenses”: from Zodia Custody (a custodial institution under Standard Chartered), to payment giant Stripe, and crypto-native enterprises such as Coinbase, Kraken, and Circle—all have successively obtained key permits, including MiCA licenses or U.S. banking licenses.

 

 

However, “obtaining a license to operate legally” is merely a starting point, by no means the finish line. A license brings not only market access qualification but also long-term compliance obligations. In today’s increasingly stringent regulatory environment, if a licensed institution fails to continuously fulfill its compliance duties, the license in its hand may instead become a “legitimate basis” for regulatory penalties.

 

Looking back at Binance’s $4.3 billion record settlement and the penalty imposed on Binance TR in Turkey, the core regulatory allegations all point to the same deficiency: failure to establish an effective suspicious transaction reporting mechanism. STR and SAR—these two abbreviations that keep compliance officers on edge—are far more than just filling out forms.

 

 

What kind of regulatory logic and practical risks lie behind them? Based on legal practice, this article will provide an in-depth analysis for you.

Concept Clarification: The Difference Between STR and SAR

These two terms are often used interchangeably in the industry, but they have distinct focuses under the legal and regulatory systems of different countries.

 

STR (Suspicious Transaction Report): Commonly adopted in regions influenced by common law, such as Hong Kong, Singapore, and Dubai. It primarily focuses on whether a completed transaction is suspicious.

Example: When the system detects that an account has frequent fund inflows and outflows within a short period, and the fund path involves high-risk addresses (e.g., mixers, darknets), an STR must be submitted for that specific transaction.

SAR (Suspicious Activity Report): Emphasized by some jurisdictions (e.g., the U.S. FinCEN framework) on the suspicious nature of the activity itself, even if no actual transaction occurs. This concept was involved in the previous Binance case.

Example: If a user repeatedly tests the boundaries of Know Your Customer (KYC) verification, frequently changes IP addresses to bypass regional restrictions, or tentatively asks customer service questions like “Can I remit money to a restricted region?”—such behaviors may trigger the obligation to file a SAR.

 

Mankun Note: Regulatory systems that adopt the STR concept do not mean they only focus on transaction records. In fact, all compliance systems emphasize “substance over form.” If an institution only monitors fund flows while ignoring user identities and behavioral patterns, it may still miss required reports and face compliance risks.

Regulatory Trends: Key Reporting Points Under Different License Frameworks

 

In the process of Web3 overseas expansion, choosing a license from a specific region means complying with that region’s core regulatory rules. The focus of supervision varies significantly across regions:

 

North America: FinCEN’s “Full-Dimension Monitoring”

 

Regulatory Core: Comply with the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and fulfill the obligation to report suspicious activities, following the principle of “report all that should be reported.”

Key Challenge: FinCEN’s system processes massive volumes of reports and enables cross-departmental data sharing, placing extremely high demands on institutions’ monitoring and reporting capabilities. Strict implementation is mandatory as long as the business involves U.S. users.

Mankun Note: As long as a business reaches U.S. users, it must strictly implement suspicious activity monitoring and reporting as required. The Binance case serves as a lesson: if an institution internally knows about risks (e.g., transactions involving sanctioned regions) but fails to report them, it will be deemed intentional non-compliance with severe consequences.

 

EU Region: Deep Integration with the “Travel Rule”

 

Regulatory Core: STR requirements are closely linked to the Travel Rule, especially after the implementation of the MiCA Regulation.

Key Challenge: When a user transfers more than €1,000 to a non-custodial wallet, the platform must verify the wallet’s ownership. If verification fails or risks are identified, the transaction must be blocked and a suspicious report submitted.

Mankun Note: Balancing compliance with business operations requires addressing how to align suspicious transaction reporting requirements while implementing the Travel Rule and maintaining user experience.

 

Dubai Region: 48-Hour Timeliness and “Localization” Responsibilities

 

Regulatory Core: Emphasizes ultra-fast response (e.g., reporting within 48 hours) and the genuine local performance of duties by the Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO).

Key Challenge: If an MLRO is a “nominal” role with actual operations handled by an overseas team, the individual’s qualification may be revoked, and the licensed institution will be affected.

Mankun Note: While compliance work can be outsourced, the local MLRO must ultimately take responsibility, and institutions cannot shirk liability by citing “system issues.”

 

Turkey Region: Focus on Combating Fraud- and Gambling-Related Funds

 

Regulatory Core: Regulates crypto asset service providers strictly as financial institutions.

Key Challenge: Regulatory requirements may be dynamically updated based on the country’s key crackdown priorities (e.g., fraud, gambling). For instance, transactions involving such activities must be reported regardless of their amount.

Mankun Note: Within the established regulatory framework, institutions must proactively monitor regulatory updates, maintain communication with authorities, and strengthen targeted monitoring and reporting of relevant risks.

Industry Pain Point: Beware of “Defensive Reporting”

 

In handling specific cases, lawyers have found that many practitioners, in order to avoid liability, have formed the habit of “reporting more is better than reporting less”—filing reports for all system-triggered alerts without distinction. This practice, known as “defensive reporting,” carries significant risks.

 

Financial intelligence units (FIUs) and regulatory authorities are also staffed with professionals who need to process information efficiently. If an institution submits a large number of low-quality reports without providing valuable investigation clues, it may instead trigger regulatory scrutiny of its internal systems. Regulators will reasonably question: Are your risk control parameters improperly set, or do your compliance personnel lack basic judgment?

 

Therefore, the core of compliance reporting lies in quality rather than quantity. Blind reporting not only fails to prevent risks but may also expose deficiencies in the institution’s capabilities, attracting stricter regulatory attention.

Mankun’s Practical Recommendations: How to Build an Effective Reporting System?

 

To balance compliance costs and regulatory safety, compliance teams in the crypto industry should focus on the following four key points:

 

Integrate “On-Chain + Off-Chain” Monitoring

Avoid segregating the monitoring of a user’s on-chain behaviors and on-platform transactions due to cost considerations. This separation prevents models and personnel from gaining a comprehensive understanding of users, directly affecting the quality of STR/SAR reports. Data silos must be broken down to achieve a panoramic risk view.

Dynamically Adjust Monitoring Thresholds

Rigid rules lead to a large number of invalid alerts, causing “alert fatigue” and ultimately missing genuine high-risk cases. It is recommended to establish an internal sandbox mechanism, regularly review and optimize system parameters and rules based on regulatory updates and case feedback, and ensure alerts are accurate and effective.

Cultivate “Narrative” Reporting Capabilities

A high-quality report is not a mere pile of data but a coherent “story.” It should answer the 5W1H questions: Who (the involved party), What (the event), When (the timing), Where (the location), Why (why it is suspicious), and How (how the activity was conducted). Among these, “why it is suspicious” is the core—it requires logical consistency, alignment with regulatory bottom lines and the institution’s risk appetite, and serves as proof of fulfilling the “reasonable prudence” obligation.

Establish a Documentation Mechanism for “Non-Reporting” Decisions

Sometimes, “not reporting” requires more documentation than “reporting.” When an alert is verified manually and a decision is made not to file a report, the reasons for exclusion must be detailed in the system and supporting evidence preserved. This is critical evidence to respond to future regulatory audits and protect both the enterprise and compliance personnel.

 

By implementing the above four points, institutions can build a solid, effective, and self-verifiable compliance reporting system while controlling costs.

Conclusion

 

There are no shortcuts to anti-money laundering (AML) compliance, nor is there room for the luck of “the law does not punish the majority.”

 

From a global regulatory perspective, inspections in the cryptocurrency sector have become so in-depth that institutions are required to provide full transaction data, which is then subject to in-depth analysis using regulators’ self-developed models. Regulators’ focus on STR/SAR no longer stops at the quantity and timeliness of reports, but extends to the accuracy of judgments on “whether a report should be filed” and “why a report was not filed” for each specific transaction.

 

Understanding the difference between STR and SAR is only the starting point. The real key is to build a monitoring and reporting system that can both meet regulatory intelligence needs and support the smooth operation of the business—this has become a mandatory course for every institution.

 

If you are building an internal AML compliance system or facing practical challenges with STR/SAR in specific jurisdictions, please feel free to contact Mankun Law Firm for further discussions.

〈Still struggling with anti-money laundering (AML) reporting violations? How to build a compliant and efficient risk management system?〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

RWA in Web3 faces a critical global regulatory challenge: traditional financial hubs often classify it as a security, restricting liquidity and financing. However, Dubai’s VARA breaks this mold by regulating RWA as a Virtual Asset, creating a dedicated compliance pathway that balances strict standards with the potential for public offering-grade circulation. Drawing from real project experience, this article analyzes why Dubai has become the optimal solution for global RWA compliance, its unique advantages, and potential risks, serving as a key reference for project teams.

Introduction

 

To call RWA (Real World Assets) the “nuclear bomb” of Web3 is hardly an overstatement. It has detonated three battlefronts almost simultaneously: the asset side, the financing side, and most crucially, the regulatory side. Over the past two years, all the lively market discussions about “tokenizing everything” and “all assets can be RWA” have ultimately circled back to the same existential question: Legally speaking, what exactly is this thing?

 

Many have turned their attention to traditional financial hubs like Hong Kong, Singapore, and Europe. While this is not inherently wrong, those who have actually tried to launch projects often hit a very familiar wall midway. It is against this backdrop that Dubai is being taken seriously by a growing number of frontline projects, exchanges, and institutions. Not because it is “lenient,” but because at the institutional level, it has truly cleared a separate runway specifically for assets like RWA.

 

In this article, I don’t want to talk about visions or hype. I just want to clarify a few things I witnessed during the actual advancement of real projects.

Many RWAs Fail Not Due to Technology, But the Moment They Are Labeled “Securities”

 

Let me start with a scenario that almost every RWA project team has experienced.

 

The project team says:

 

“Ours is a functional RWA, not a security.”

 

The regulator retorts:

 

“Then prove it.”

 

The project team begins to explain:

 

“We have underlying assets, cash flow, profit distribution, buyback arrangements, and even price anchoring mechanisms.”

 

After listening, the regulator often replies with just one sentence:

 

“If anything, that makes you sound more like a security.”

 

This is not a joke; it is a real conversation that has played out repeatedly across different jurisdictions in recent years.

 

If you look at the realistic paths in major global legal regions, you will find a commonality: As soon as an RWA starts “promising returns,” the regulator’s first instinct is almost always to drag it into the securities framework.

 

The United States is the most 典型 example. The only reason INX and Securitize are still viable is that they admitted they were securities from the very beginning, following the mature but extremely costly path of Reg D, Reg S, and ATS.

 

Singapore is similar. As long as an RWA exhibits characteristics of asset mapping, profit distribution, or collective investment, the MAS rarely hesitates to bring it directly under the regulatory framework of Capital Markets Products (CMP).

 

Hong Kong is relatively flexible, but the premise is clear: it is basically limited to professional investors. You can do fund-type, STO-type, or security-type RWAs, but opening them up to retail investors is extremely difficult in reality.

 

The EU provides space for functional tokens under MiCA, but once an RWA has obvious yield attributes, securities laws remain an insurmountable barrier.

 

So the conclusion is very clear: Doing RWA in traditional financial jurisdictions essentially means spinning your wheels within the securities regulatory system.

 

This leads to a series of real-world consequences—retail investors are basically excluded, liquidity is restricted, exchanges are cautious, financing targets are highly institutionalized, project cycles are infinitely lengthened, and compliance costs skyrocket. This is why you see so many so-called RWA projects that end up being nothing more than “private fund shares on-chain,” lacking true circulation and impossible to offer publicly. The problem is not on the chain; it lies in the regulatory logic itself.

Dubai’s VARA Did Something Very “Counter-Intuitive to Traditional Finance”

 

The real turning point came with the emergence of Dubai’s VARA. The first key thing VARA did was not lower standards, but change the way of understanding the problem. Within VARA’s system, RWA was not presumptuously stuffed into the securities law framework, but directly brought under the regulatory category of Virtual Assets. The first question from the regulator is no longer “Are you a security?” but rather—”Are you a virtual asset project that can be regulated by VARA and subject to continuous auditing?”

 

This logical difference is crucial. It means that for the first time, RWA might not have to take the securities route first to enter a clear, systematic regulatory framework; it can apply for licenses following VASP logic; it can target retail investors under compliance prerequisites; and it finally has the institutional basis for “public offering-grade RWA.” Globally, this is a very rare institutional choice.

Why Dubai is the “Optimal Solution,” Not the “Most Lenient Solution”

 

It must be made clear: Understanding Dubai as “unregulated” is a very dangerous miscalculation. In terms of document complexity, AML/KYC intensity, technical compliance, custody requirements, and risk control standards, VARA is no less stringent than Hong Kong or Singapore.

 

The real difference lies in only one place—Dubai did not try to force-fit new assets into the logic of old finance, but designed a separate operable regulatory structure specifically for RWA.

 

The traditional path is:

 

Asset → Security → Licensed → Professional Investors → Limited Circulation.

 

The VARA path is more like:

 

Asset → Virtual Asset → VARA Compliance → Retail Accessible → Public Offering-Grade Circulation.

 

This is a difference at the level of regulatory paradigm, not a difference in the degree of strictness.

Why Dubai Will Become the Core Hub for RWA in the Next Few Years

 

If we ignore the slogans and only look at real-world driving forces, the answer is not complicated. What asset owners truly want boils down to a few things: the ability to raise capital, the ability to circulate, listing on compliant exchanges, access to retail investors, and legal validity. Looking at current global jurisdictions, there are very few places where these five conditions are met simultaneously, and Dubai is the clearest one.

 

You will also notice an increasingly obvious trend: In the past, Middle Eastern capital allocated to Western assets; now it is the opposite—more and more RWA projects with European and American backgrounds are actively moving their compliance hubs to Dubai. It is not that money is chasing projects, but that the regulatory structure is attracting projects.

 

In Hong Kong and Singapore, attitudes toward RWA are generally cautious; in the US, the risks of security-type RWA are almost explicit; but in Dubai, as long as you operate within the VARA framework, public offering-grade RWA is at least institutionally allowed to be discussed and implemented.

Dubai is Not a Panacea; You Can Still Fail Miserably

 

Having said that, a reality check is necessary. Dubai is not a tool to evade regulation, nor is it a “get-out-of-jail-free card.” In real projects, problems most often 集中 on several clichéd but easily overlooked points: unclear asset ownership, improper design of profit mechanisms, being deemed a collective investment scheme, conducting public offerings without a license, and triggering the securities laws of other countries through cross-border sales. These landmines do not automatically disappear just because you are in Dubai.

 

So a phrase I repeatedly emphasize in projects is: The value of Dubai is not in escaping regulation, but in providing a more suitable runway for RWA to run on.

If You Still Want to Do “Global Public Offering-Grade RWA” Now, the Realistic Options Are Few

 

I will make a cautious conclusion: Under the premise that the four conditions—”legally accessible to retail, listable on compliant exchanges, capable of true asset mapping, and having global expansion potential”—are met simultaneously, it is currently difficult to find a more realistic RWA compliance solution globally than Dubai’s VARA. It is not perfect, but in terms of risk controllability, cost predictability, regulatory matching, and commercial efficiency, it is indeed in the first tier.

Conclusion

 

Many people still simplify RWA as “Assets + Tokens,” but in the real world, what truly determines the life or death of a project is almost always legal structure and the ability to understand regulation.

 

Dubai’s greatest value is not its tax rates or freedom, but that it has, for the first time, given RWA an institutional answer that allows it to be open, compliant, institutional, and accessible to retail. This is why I say: Dubai RWA is indeed not a gimmick, but a reality that is being repeatedly verified.

〈Is the global optimal solution for RWA compliance actually in Dubai?〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

At the end of 2025, China’s digital currency regulation presents a “one cold, one hot” scenario: The November 28 meeting clarified that stablecoins are illegal virtual currencies, blocking foreign exchange loopholes; Digital RMB 2.0 has evolved into an interest-bearing deposit currency, absorbing smart contract technology. This article analyzes the regulatory logic and points out that Web3 practitioners need to achieve strategic breakthroughs through compliant overseas expansion, decoupling technology from finance, and embracing official channels (such as the m-CBDC Bridge).

Introduction

 

Recently, many friends have been asking: What exactly has been upgraded in Digital RMB 2.0? Will it affect the crypto assets we hold?

 

However, if we only focus on Digital RMB, we may easily overlook another more critical clue—on November 28, the regulatory authorities made a clear statement on stablecoins, which is simultaneously reshaping the legal boundaries of the entire digital currency sector.

 

These two events are not independent of each other. When viewed under the same regulatory logic, we can see: one side is clarifying what can no longer be done, while the other is telling the market which direction is permitted.

 

The purpose of this article is not to simply judge whether it is a “positive or negative development”, but to explain three key points by combining the November 28 meeting and the launch of Digital RMB 2.0:

 

To what extent has stablecoin regulation in Mainland China been “implemented”?

What financial logic has truly been changed by Digital RMB 2.0?

After the red line for illegal financial activities has been redefined, what paths can Web3 practitioners choose?

“Cold and Hot” at the End of 2025

 

At the end of 2025, China’s Web3 industry stands at a crucial juncture. If we say that Hong Kong, to the south, is steadily advancing institutional experiments on stablecoins within a legal framework, what is happening in Mainland China is not exploration, but a reconfirmation of boundaries. Within just one month, practitioners have clearly felt that a more definite and rigid regulatory paradigm is being put in place.

 

On one hand, industry expectations have cooled rapidly: On November 28, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) and other departments held a coordination mechanism meeting on anti-money laundering risks and beneficial owner management, and made a clear regulatory classification of “stablecoins”. Previously, the market had hoped that “Hong Kong’s legislation might force adjustments to Mainland policies”, but after the red line of “illegal financial activities” was re-emphasized, this optimistic judgment was quickly revised—the regulatory stance has not loosened, but has become even clearer.

 

 

On the other hand, policy signals have heated up simultaneously: At the end of December, Digital RMB 2.0 was officially unveiled. According to currently disclosed information, Digital RMB in this new phase has evolved from a simple “digital cash” form to a “digital deposit currency” that supports interest accrual, complex smart contracts, and has the liability attribute of commercial banks. Its institutional positioning and application boundaries have been significantly expanded.

 

 

Amid the coexistence of “cold” and “hot”, the regulatory intent has shifted from implicit to explicit. This is not an accidental combination of policies, but a well-organized “cage replacement”—by continuously clearing out stablecoins owned by non-public entities, it makes room for a clear and controllable market space for the officially led digital currency system.

“Old Wine in New Bottles”: The Logic of Regulation

 

When interpreting the regulations announced on November 28, 2025, many people tried to find new regulatory rules. However, we believe this is just a reaffirmation of the “September 24 Notice” issued in 2021.

 

1. The “Missing Splash”: The Market Has Long Developed Immunity

 

The most intuitive indicator is: When the “September 24 Notice” was released in 2021, Bitcoin (BTC) plummeted sharply, and the industry was in a state of despair; yet after the 2025 meeting, the market did not even stir a ripple. This sense of apathy in the market stems from the repetition of logic.

 

As early as four years ago, the regulatory authorities had clearly classified “Tether (USDT)” as an illegal virtual currency. Even if this meeting highlighted the so-called key point that “stablecoins also belong to virtual currencies”, there is no substantive new content in terms of legal principles.

 

2. The “Comeback” of Judicial Decisions: From Lenience Back to Rigor

 

The real “killer move” of this meeting lies not in “classification”, but in the mandatory adjustment of judicial trends. We need to observe a subtle judicial change:

 

2021-2022: All crypto-related contracts were deemed invalid, with risks borne by the parties involved, and courts basically refused to provide remedies.

Early 2023-2025: Judges began to understand Web3 and no longer simply rejected everything on the grounds of “public order and good customs”. For civil disputes involving the purchase of crypto assets with real money, some courts began to rule on “proportionate return of legal tender”.

After the end of 2025 (post-November 28): A “cold winter” has returned. This meeting released a clear signal, requiring judicial adjudication to align with administrative supervision—for Web3 civil disputes, an invalid contract remains invalid, and risks must be borne by the parties involved.

 

3. The Real Anchor of Regulation: Blocking the “Underground Pipeline” of Foreign Exchange

 

Why did the administrative authorities reaffirm the “old rules” at this time? Because stablecoins have touched the most sensitive nerve—foreign exchange control. Today, USDT and USDC have evolved from Web3 trading tools into a “parallel highway” for large-scale cross-border fund transfers. From children’s overseas tuition fees to complex money laundering chains, stablecoins have essentially undermined the annual $50,000 foreign exchange quota per person.

 

The November 28 meeting was essentially not about discussing technology, but about addressing foreign exchange issues. The reason why the regulatory authorities reaffirmed the rules is that they found that even under strict prevention and control, due to the real-time settlement nature of stablecoins, there are still loopholes in the foreign exchange control “gate”.

 

4. Prudent Risks and Outlook

 

It should be noted that under the current regulatory thinking, security is given absolute priority. This helps to quickly control risks, but it may also bring a practical impact: in the short term, there will be a certain degree of disconnection between the Mainland’s financial system and the globally advancing programmable financial system, thereby reducing the space for institutional exploration in the public chain environment.

Digital RMB: From Exploration in 1.0 to “Logical Reconstruction” in 2.0

 

Why was it necessary to classify stablecoins at this specific time?

 

Because Digital RMB 2.0 undertakes the mission of “incorporating technological logic into the sovereign framework”.

 

Digital RMB 1.0 Era

 

From the user’s perspective: With the attribute of M0 (cash), it did not accrue interest, making it difficult to compete with highly mature third-party payment tools in the existing market.

From the banks’ perspective: In the 1.0 era, commercial banks only served as “distribution windows”, bearing heavy anti-money laundering and system maintenance costs, but unable to generate loans or earn interest spreads through Digital RMB, resulting in a lack of inherent commercial driving force.

 

Digital RMB 2.0 Era

 

According to current promotional information, the following changes have been observed:

 

In terms of attributes: It has shifted from “digital cash” to “digital deposit currency”, with interest accrued on the balance of real-name wallets.

In terms of technology: Version 2.0 emphasizes compatibility with distributed ledgers and smart contracts. In the eyes of the industry, this is a form of absorption of some Web3 technologies, but it has not adopted the core of decentralization.

 

The launch of Digital RMB 2.0 proves that programmability, real-time settlement, and on-chain logic are indeed the inevitable forms of future currency. However, within the Mainland, this form is required to operate within a centralized, traceable, and sovereign-backed closed loop. This centralized attempt is an intermediate product of the game between technological evolution and governance logic.

Legal Red Line: Defining the Boundaries of “Illegal Financial Activities”

 

As a lawyer who has long practiced on the frontlines of Web3, I must remind all practitioners: After 2025, the risk landscape has shifted from “compliance flaws” to “criminal bottom lines”. This judgment includes but is not limited to the following aspects:

 

Accelerated Classification of Behaviors

 

Large-scale trading of virtual currencies such as USDT is rapidly transitioning from administrative violations to criminal charges such as illegal business operations. Especially after the “classification of stablecoins” was clarified, the space for technical defense in judicial practice has been greatly reduced for any business activities involving the two-way exchange of Mainland legal tender and stablecoins, or the use of stablecoins as a payment medium or acceptance service.

 

Regulatory Upgrade

 

The redefinition of this boundary has essentially further restricted the possibility of non-public entities participating in the innovation of financial infrastructure. Within the Mainland, if a non-public entity attempts to build a non-official value transfer network, regardless of the technology adopted, after in-depth penetration and review by relevant departments, it is highly likely to be legally classified as “illegal settlement”. In other words, “technological neutrality” is no longer a universal shield—when a business involves fund aggregation, redemption, or cross-border transfer, regulatory penetration will directly break through the complex protocol layer and trace back to the operating entity behind it.

Survival Strategies and Breakthrough Suggestions for Web3 Practitioners

 

The “wall” is indeed getting higher, but the logic has not been interrupted.

 

The absorption of smart contracts by Digital RMB 2.0 itself shows that technology has not been rejected, but has been re-incorporated into a controllable institutional framework. This also leaves a practical and feasible adjustment space for Web3 practitioners who truly understand technology and business logic.

 

In the current regulatory environment, a more secure choice is to adopt a “strategic diversion” approach.

 

1. Overseas Expansion and Compliance at the Business Level

 

If the goal is to build an unrestricted, decentralized financial application, it should be completely moved overseas both physically and legally. In jurisdictions such as Hong Kong, making full use of licensed frameworks like the Stablecoin Ordinance to carry out global business is an inevitable choice under the premise of respecting rules, rather than a stopgap measure.

 

2. Conscious “Decoupling” of Technology and Finance

 

Within the Mainland, any modules with fund-bearing, settlement, or redemption attributes should be firmly avoided. Since the authorities are promoting the Digital RMB 2.0 ecosystem based on a licensed system and supporting smart contracts, shifting focus to underlying architecture, security audits, and compliance technology research and development—becoming a technical service provider for official financial infrastructure—is instead the most stable and sustainable transformation path for current technical teams.

 

3. Focus on New Opportunities in Official Channels

 

Cross-border payment systems, including the Multi-Central Bank Digital Currency Bridge (m-CBDC Bridge), are becoming one of the few areas within the compliance framework that still have room for expansion. Finding entry points for technological innovation in existing institutional facilities may be the truly feasible opportunity window in this round of regulatory reshaping.

 

Law has never been a static set of rules, but the result of negotiations and games.

 

The rules may seem strict, but understanding the rules is inherently for the purpose of making better choices. In the context of “cage replacement”, blind resistance will only amplify risks; what truly matters is, after the red line is redefined, helping the most valuable technological forces find an anchor point to survive and expand outward.

〈“Implementation” of Stablecoin Regulation in Mainland China and “Take-off” of Digital RMB 2.0〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

According to CoinDesk, crypto data giant #CoinGecko is exploring a potential sale and has reportedly hired Moelis as advisor. Sources say talks began late last year, so valuation is still fluid—but ~$500M is on the table.
📉 Traffic to crypto data sites is falling as users turn to AI chatbots for information. CoinGecko’s monthly visits dropped from 43.5M (2024) to 18.5M (Dec 2025)—with #CoinMarketCap seeing similar trends.
#CryptoTrading #Cryptodata

Polymarket’s integration into Dow Jones platforms signals institutional recognition of prediction markets as serious information tools, not just speculative entertainment.

 

Strong performance in 2025 and accurate election forecasting helped prediction markets prove their value through capital-backed “crowd wisdom.”

 

Despite growing media adoption, regulatory uncertainty remains, meaning prediction markets have not yet fully transitioned into established financial instruments.

Polymarket’s exclusive partnership with Dow Jones marks a turning point as prediction markets enter mainstream financial media, reshaping how probability, news, and collective intelligence intersect.

 

Recently, the prediction market platform Polymarket reached an exclusive partnership with Dow Jones. Under the agreement, Polymarket’s real-time probability data will become the sole prediction market data source across Dow Jones’ consumer-facing platforms, including dedicated data modules, event pages, and customized economic and earnings calendars.

 

Dow Jones’ media portfolio includes leading financial publications such as The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, and MarketWatch. With The Wall Street Journal widely regarded as one of the most authoritative voices in global financial journalism, this partnership means that readers will increasingly encounter not only traditional expert commentary or opinion polls, but also probability-based forecasts driven by “crowd wisdom” — spanning elections, economic trends, and even cultural topics.

 

More importantly, the collaboration signals a potential shift in how news is presented. Prediction markets, as a complementary lens on “truth,” offer probability outcomes shaped by real capital at risk, providing the public with a more dynamic, real-time, and multi-dimensional way to assess emerging trends.

DOW JONES: AN UNUSUAL FORM OF MAINSTREAM ENDORSEMENT

 

Unlike typical media partnerships, the significance of the Dow Jones deal goes far beyond traffic or exposure. As one of the world’s most influential financial news institutions, Dow Jones primarily serves institutional investors, professional traders, high-net-worth individuals, and policy or business decision-makers—not the general public. This audience profile has shaped an editorial culture known for caution, conservatism, and verifiability, with exceptionally strict standards for information sources.

 

Viewed from this perspective, the systematic integration of Polymarket’s probability data into The Wall Street Journal represents more than a product-level collaboration. It functions as a form of institutional validation: prediction markets are no longer treated merely as entertainment or speculative tools, but as information sources with genuine reference value. Within the Dow Jones editorial framework, they have effectively been placed in the context of “serious news,” rather than gambling or fringe platforms.

 

In fact, Polymarket is not the first prediction market to attract mainstream media attention. In early December, Kalshi announced partnerships with CNN and CNBC. CNN analysts have cited Kalshi’s real-time probabilities in political and public-affairs coverage, while CNBC has displayed Kalshi’s brand ticker on select programs and integrated related content into its digital platforms. These collaborations helped bring prediction markets into public view, but they remained fragmented, multi-party arrangements.

 

By contrast, Polymarket’s agreement with Dow Jones is a fully integrated, exclusive partnership. Across the entire Dow Jones media group, Polymarket will serve as the sole prediction market data provider, embedded consistently across print and digital products. This exclusivity gives the partnership greater coherence—and significantly amplifies its impact.

WHY NOW? PREDICTION MARKETS PROVED THEMSELVES IN 2025

 

Prediction markets have existed for years, but it was not until 2025 that they experienced truly explosive growth. Data shows that Polymarket and Kalshi both delivered record-breaking performance in 2025, with combined cumulative trading volume approaching $40 billion and valuations reaching multi-billion-dollar levels. This step-change in scale pushed prediction markets beyond entertainment or speculative niches and closer to becoming a form of financial infrastructure.

 

More importantly, Polymarket had already demonstrated its value during the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Its forecasts—particularly in swing states—outperformed traditional polling. Polymarket priced Donald Trump’s winning probability above 95% early on, while many polls continued to show a tight race. Over the past year, prediction markets have further shown how financial incentives filter out noise: participants must stake real capital to back their views, making incorrect judgments costly. This “skin-in-the-game” mechanism is precisely what has allowed prediction markets to earn a place in mainstream information systems. They are no longer viewed simply as “betting,” but as efficient aggregators of collective intelligence.

REMOVING THE ‘GAMBLING’ LABEL IS NOT THE SAME AS INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION

 

That said, acceptance by mainstream media does not mean prediction markets have completed their transition from a gambling-like form to a fully recognized financial instrument.

 

Regulatory uncertainty remains significant. Take Kalshi as an example: despite holding approval from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), some state-level regulators continue to classify prediction contracts as gambling. In Nevada, in particular, disputes over legality are ongoing. Recently, Kalshi lost a preliminary injunction that had temporarily blocked enforcement actions by Nevada regulators and is now seeking to halt state action while its appeal proceeds. The lifting of the injunction means Kalshi could face legal risks if it continues operating in Nevada, including potential prosecution as an illegal gambling platform. Nevada regulators argue that Kalshi has been “continuously engaging in unlawful activity” without a state gaming license, noting that platforms such as Crypto.com and Robinhood agreed to suspend local operations during their own appeals.

 

Polymarket faces a different kind of scrutiny. Its recent accurate prediction of U.S. actions toward Venezuela sparked allegations of insider trading, reigniting debate over regulatory blind spots in prediction markets. While insider trading is illegal in traditional financial markets, behavior of this kind is not clearly regulated on platforms like Polymarket. At present, there is no unified or explicit framework defining whether such conduct constitutes a violation.

CONCLUSION

 

The partnership between Polymarket and Dow Jones does not imply that regulatory challenges facing prediction markets have been resolved. It does, however, send a clear signal: prediction markets are increasingly being treated by mainstream media as a legitimate information tool, gradually shedding their association with gambling and fringe platforms. When probability forecasts begin appearing in The Wall Street Journal, the transformation of prediction markets into part of serious news discourse can no longer be ignored.

 

 

▶ Read the original article

 

 

ꚰ CoinRank x Bitget – Sign up & Trade!

Looking for the latest scoop and cool insights from CoinRank? Hit up our Twitter and stay in the loop with all our fresh stories!

〈Polymarket Enters Dow Jones: Prediction Markets Go Mainstream〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

Metaplanet represents a new wave of Bitcoin treasury companies in Asia, using capital markets to accumulate BTC on its balance sheet.

 

Investors evaluate Metaplanet through BTC-centric metrics such as BTC per share, BTC Yield, mNAV, and leverage exposure.

 

Metaplanet’s future performance depends on Bitcoin price cycles, regulatory developments in Japan, and disciplined capital management.

Metaplanet is a Japanese public company adopting a Bitcoin treasury strategy. This guide explains its business shift, core metrics, risks, and how it compares to MicroStrategy.

 

WHAT IS METAPLANET?

 

Over the past 2 years, the crypto market narrative has expanded beyond token prices alone. Traditional equity markets have begun to absorb crypto-related themes, giving rise to a new category of stocks often referred to as “Bitcoin proxy stocks.”

 

In the United States, the most well-known example is MicroStrategy. In Japan, however, Metaplanet has emerged as a comparable case. Due to its active and public accumulation of Bitcoin, Metaplanet is widely labeled as the “Japanese version of MicroStrategy,” and its stock has, at times, become a focal point for retail investors.

 

 

Metaplanet (Tokyo Stock Exchange ticker: 3350; U.S. OTCQX ticker: MTPLF) is a publicly listed Japanese company. Historically, its core businesses were centered on hotels, entertainment, and consulting services—firmly within the realm of traditional industries. That changed in 2024, when Metaplanet announced a strategic pivot, formally adopting Bitcoin as a core component of its asset allocation. This move positioned the company among a small group of Asian public firms that have openly embraced crypto assets at the balance-sheet level.

 

Following this transition, Metaplanet is no longer viewed purely as an operating company in legacy sectors. Instead, it has increasingly been framed as a Bitcoin Treasury Company. Its operating logic can be broadly summarized in three steps.

 

First, Metaplanet raises capital through equity issuance or debt financing.
Second, the proceeds are converted into Bitcoin and held on the company’s balance sheet.
Third, performance is communicated using a defined set of metrics, including BTC per share, BTC Yield, mNAV, and indicators related to leverage and financial obligations.

 

This structure—treating Bitcoin as a strategic treasury asset and reporting progress through standardized, Bitcoin-centric metrics—closely mirrors the approach taken by MicroStrategy. As a result, Metaplanet is frequently compared to its U.S. counterpart and has come to be widely recognized as “Japan’s MicroStrategy” within both equity and crypto investment circles.

 

>>> More to read: Who is Michael Saylor? Founder of MicroStrategy

METAPLANET’S 4 CORE METRICS EXPLAINED

 

To understand how Metaplanet positions itself as a Bitcoin treasury company, investors typically focus on 4 key indicators. Together, these metrics help translate balance-sheet Bitcoin exposure into something equity investors can actually track.

 

✅BTC per Share

 

▶ Definition: The amount of Bitcoin backing each outstanding share.

▶Why it matters: A higher figure indicates that Metaplanet has been more effective at converting corporate capital into Bitcoin on behalf of shareholders.

▶ What to watch: Issuing new shares can dilute this metric. That means investors should look not only at how fast Metaplanet is acquiring BTC, but also at changes in total shares outstanding.

✅BTC Yield

 

▶ Definition: How efficiently the company converts raised capital into Bitcoin.

▶ Why it matters:

High BTC Yield = strong capital conversion efficiency

Low BTC Yield = value leakage during the conversion process

 

▶ Example: If Metaplanet issues JPY 100 million in equity but only ends up holding BTC worth JPY 70 million, the BTC Yield would be 70%.

✅mNAV (Market Net Asset Value)

 

▶ Definition: The market valuation of the company divided by the net value of its Bitcoin holdings.

▶ How to read it:

> 1 → the market is assigning a premium

< 1 → the market is applying a discount

 

▶ Recent context: In July 2025, Metaplanet’s mNAV briefly surged to around 12x before compressing to roughly 1.6x, highlighting how dramatically market sentiment toward Bitcoin-linked equities can swing.

✅Leverage and Obligations

 

▶ Definition: Financial commitments beyond common equity, such as debt or outstanding warrants.

▶ Current data: As of August 2025, Metaplanet’s outstanding obligations were approximately USD 30.4 million.

▶ Why it matters: While this level is modest relative to its Bitcoin asset base, leverage still affects cash flow, balance-sheet flexibility, and potential shareholder dilution.

 

Taken together, these 4 metrics form the analytical backbone for evaluating Metaplanet. Rather than focusing solely on its stock price or headline Bitcoin purchases, they provide a clearer framework for assessing how effectively the company translates capital markets activity into long-term Bitcoin exposure.

 

>>> More to read: Banks x Blockchain｜Faster. Safer. Smarter.

METAPLANET VS. MICROSTRATEGY

 

Because of their similar Bitcoin-focused strategies, Metaplanet is often compared with MicroStrategy. While the comparison is directionally valid, a closer look shows both clear overlaps and meaningful differences.

 

📌Key Similarities

 

At a structural level, Metaplanet and MicroStrategy share a common playbook.

 

Both are publicly listed companies that tap equity and debt markets to raise capital, then convert those funds into Bitcoin held on their balance sheets. In both cases, Bitcoin is treated not as a short-term trade, but as a long-term treasury asset. Their corporate narratives emphasize capital preservation and accumulation over time, rather than active trading or frequent rotation.

 

This “Bitcoin-first treasury” positioning is the foundation for why Metaplanet is frequently labeled as “Japan’s MicroStrategy.”

📌 Key Differences

 

Despite these similarities, the two companies operate in very different contexts.

 

1️⃣Geography and regulation
Metaplanet operates within the Japanese market, where local policies and investor behavior matter. Japan’s NISA (tax-advantaged investment accounts) and its distinct tax treatment of crypto-related assets influence how retail and institutional investors engage with Bitcoin-linked equities—a dynamic that differs materially from the U.S. environment MicroStrategy operates in.

 

2️⃣Asset composition
Unlike MicroStrategy, which is almost entirely centered on Bitcoin and software legacy operations, Metaplanet still retains exposure to non-Bitcoin businesses, including hotel and media-related assets. This results in a more diversified—but also more complex—balance-sheet structure.

 

3️⃣Scale and maturity
MicroStrategy is the global incumbent and the largest corporate Bitcoin holder by a wide margin. Metaplanet, by contrast, is still in an early and fast-expanding phase. Its absolute scale is much smaller, but its growth rate and narrative momentum reflect a company actively building its Bitcoin treasury identity.

METAPLANET: RISKS AND CHALLENGES

 

For newer readers and first-time investors, understanding the downside risks is just as important as following the upside narrative. While Metaplanet offers a clear Bitcoin-focused treasury story, it also comes with a set of structural and market-driven challenges.

 

❗Market volatility
Because Bitcoin is a core balance-sheet asset, fluctuations in BTC price directly translate into changes in Metaplanet’s asset value. Sharp drawdowns in Bitcoin can quickly compress net asset value and weigh on investor sentiment, even if the company’s long-term strategy remains unchanged.

 

❗Dilution risk
Metaplanet relies on equity issuance as one of its primary funding tools. Frequent share issuance may dilute existing shareholders, potentially reducing BTC per share. As a result, investors need to track not only total BTC holdings, but also changes in share count over time.

 

❗Leverage pressure
Although Metaplanet’s current obligations are relatively modest, leverage remains a variable risk. If the company increases debt to accelerate Bitcoin accumulation, interest costs and repayment obligations could place additional strain on cash flow and financial flexibility.

 

❗Regulatory uncertainty
Both Japan and the United States are still refining their regulatory approaches to crypto-related assets. Shifts in tax policy, disclosure rules, or capital market regulations could affect how Metaplanet operates, raises funds, or is valued by the market.

 

❗Counterparty risk
Bitcoin custody arrangements and partnerships with financial institutions introduce additional layers of risk. Custodians, exchanges, or banking partners represent potential points of failure, and any disruption could have operational or reputational consequences for Metaplanet.

CONCLUSION

 

By 2026, Metaplanet has become one of the most closely watched Bitcoin-themed stocks in Asia and is widely described as “Japan’s MicroStrategy.” Its rise reflects more than just company-specific speculation—it captures a broader shift in how public companies are beginning to integrate Bitcoin into their balance sheets.

 

For new readers, understanding Metaplanet is not only about analyzing a single stock. It is about recognizing a structural trend: how traditional listed companies incorporate Bitcoin as a treasury asset, and how that decision reshapes corporate valuation, investor perception, and market positioning.

 

Looking ahead, Metaplanet’s trajectory will remain closely tied to Bitcoin’s price cycle and the evolving regulatory environment in Japan. In my view, regardless of how the market ultimately plays out, Metaplanet has already secured a meaningful place in the history of the crypto industry—as an early and visible example of Asia’s public markets converging with Bitcoin-based corporate finance.

 

 

 

 

 

ꚰ CoinRank x Bitget – Sign up & Trade!

Looking for the latest scoop and cool insights from CoinRank? Hit up our Twitter and stay in the loop with all our fresh stories!

〈What is Metaplanet? Why It’s Called Japan’s MicroStrategy〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

Pakistan Central Bank will partner with the #Trump family's crypto project #WLFI to explore cross-border payments using $USD1 .
Animoca Brands has completed its acquisition of digital collectibles and gaming company SOMO.
Visa and BVNK have partnered to launch a stablecoin payment service.
#Bitget collaborates with World Cup champion Julian Álvarez to release a promotional video outlining the strategic vision of UEX.
#Google requests the dismissal of its antitrust lawsuit against media AI search summary services.
#CoinRank

Kalshi Prediction Market lets users trade real-world event outcomes through simple Yes/No contracts priced between USD 0 and USD 1.

 

As a CFTC-regulated platform, Kalshi Prediction Market offers legal U.S. access, strong transparency, and institutional-grade trading tools.

 

By aggregating collective intelligence, Kalshi Prediction Market turns uncertainty into market-driven probability signals across finance, politics, sports, and more.

Kalshi Prediction Market is the first federally regulated U.S. prediction market, enabling transparent Yes/No trading on real-world events with CFTC oversight and probability-based pricing.

 

WHAT IS KALSHI PREDICTION MARKET?

 

Kalshi Prediction Market is the first federally regulated prediction market in the United States, operating as a centralized platform that allows users to take positions on the outcomes of real-world events. Rather than trading traditional financial assets, Kalshi enables markets to directly price whether a specific event will occur.

 

The scope of events available on Kalshi Prediction Market is broad and spans multiple real-world domains, including weather, politics, economics, finance, and certain public or entertainment-related topics. Examples include whether a particular policy will pass, whether a company will enter bankruptcy, or whether a predefined economic indicator will reach a certain level. As long as an event has a clearly defined and verifiable outcome, it can potentially be listed on Kalshi.

 

 

➤ Official website: https://kalshi.com/

🔍 How Do Event Contracts Work?

 

At the core of Kalshi Prediction Market is its use of event contracts. Each event is structured around two opposing outcomes:

 

Traders who believe the event will occur can buy a Yes contract

 

Traders who believe the event will not occur can buy a No contract

 

Each contract is priced between USD 0 and USD 1. This price reflects the market’s real-time assessment of the probability that the event will occur. For example, if a Yes contract is trading at USD 0.70, the market is effectively assigning a 70% probability to that outcome.

 

Once the event’s result is officially determined, Kalshi Prediction Market settles all open positions according to predefined rules. Contracts tied to the correct outcome are settled at USD 1 per contract, while contracts tied to the incorrect outcome expire worthless. The payoff structure is binary, transparent, and directly linked to the final result of the event.

 

Overall, Kalshi Prediction Market transforms real-world uncertainty into a structured, tradeable market. By allowing participants to express views on concrete outcomes—within a federally regulated framework—Kalshi turns collective judgment into probability-based pricing, offering a unique way to engage with risk, information, and expectations surrounding real-world events.

 

>>> More to read: What is Polymarket? Web3 Prediction Market

KEY FEATURES OF KALSHI

 

Kalshi Prediction Market is best known for its simple and intuitive Yes/No contract structure, allowing participants to take clear positions on event outcomes without complex payoff formulas. This design lowers the learning curve while keeping market signals transparent and easy to interpret.

 

 

✅ The platform supports a broad range of event categories, covering both traditional and emerging markets, including:

 

Finance: Federal Reserve interest rate decisions, recession probabilities

Politics: election-related and policy-driven outcomes

Sports: match winners and tournament results

Entertainment: major awards such as the Oscars and the Grammy Awards

Crypto: crypto-related events tied to market or protocol outcomes

Real-World Assets (RWA): real-economy–linked event contracts

 

✅ Beyond market diversity, Kalshi Prediction Market differentiates itself through a combination of regulatory clarity and trader-focused features. Its key advantages include:

 

Full legal availability across the United States

Interest on cash balances, offering up to 4% annualized yield

Relatively high liquidity with tight bid–ask spreads, reducing execution friction

 

From a trading infrastructure perspective, Kalshi Prediction Market provides tools typically seen in mature financial venues rather than casual prediction platforms:

 

Support for limit orders and a live order book

Mobile trading functionality for managing positions on the go

Competitive fee structure with low per-contract maximum exposure, lowering entry barriers

 

✅ In late 2025, Kalshi further expanded its ecosystem with the launch of Kalshi Research, an initiative dedicated to academic analysis of prediction market accuracy. According to published findings, Kalshi’s markets have often demonstrated stronger predictive accuracy during highly volatile events when compared with traditional forecasting approaches—highlighting the informational value embedded in Kalshi Prediction Market pricing.

 

>>> More to read: What Is a Prediction Market: How Markets Turn Uncertainty Into Usable Knowledge

KEY CONSIDERATIONS BEFORE USING KALSHI

 

While Kalshi Prediction Market offers a regulated and accessible way to trade outcomes of real-world events, users should carefully consider several important factors before getting started.

 

1️⃣Regulatory Compliance and U.S. Focus

Under the oversight of the CFTC, Kalshi Prediction Market is fully legal and available across the United States. However, access may be restricted or unavailable in many international jurisdictions. Before registering, users should verify local regulations based on their location and confirm their eligibility to participate.

2️⃣Market Volatility

Event contract prices can fluctuate rapidly between USD 0.01 and USD 0.99 in response to breaking news and shifts in market sentiment. While this volatility can create attractive profit opportunities, it also introduces the risk of significant losses—especially during fast-moving events such as elections or major economic announcements.

3️⃣Liquidity Differences Across Markets

Highly followed markets—such as Federal Reserve rate decisions, major elections, or high-profile tournament outcomes—typically benefit from deep liquidity and tight bid–ask spreads. In contrast, niche or less popular events on Kalshi Prediction Market may experience lower trading volume, which can reduce execution efficiency when entering or exiting positions.

4️⃣Settlement and Verification Risk

Event outcomes are settled using trusted public sources, such as official government data or designated authorities like NCAA.com. Kalshi’s regulated structure minimizes dispute risk, but rare delays or clarification periods may still occur. As a result, users should carefully review the settlement rules for each market before trading.

5️⃣Research and Informed Decision-Making

Although prices on Kalshi Prediction Market aggregate collective intelligence and have often proven highly accurate, they can occasionally diverge from underlying fundamentals. Conducting independent research on the event itself remains essential for improving decision quality and achieving long-term success.

 

>>> More to read: What is Oracle in Crypto?

 

The year of prediction markets

Thank you for a historic 2025 pic.twitter.com/VaGqw3bvC0

— Kalshi (@Kalshi) December 31, 2025

CONCLUSION

 

By 2026, Kalshi Prediction Market has successfully transformed prediction markets from a niche, experimental concept into a mainstream and federally regulated asset class. Supported by the regulatory safeguards of the CFTC framework, Kalshi enables users to trade real-world event outcomes in a compliant and transparent manner, with trading volumes in several key categories surpassing those of competing platforms.

 

Whether used to hedge macroeconomic risk, trade the outcomes of major sporting events, or forecast cultural and public-interest developments, Kalshi Prediction Market provides a clear, efficient, and verifiable set of tools that convert collective market intelligence directly into price signals.

 

As the platform continues to expand its partnerships—such as integrations with CNBC ticker symbols—and as academic research increasingly validates the superior accuracy of prediction markets, Kalshi Prediction Market is redefining how markets express uncertainty. Viewed more broadly, Kalshi’s evolution reflects a deeper shift toward the democratization of finance, where prediction itself is becoming an asset that can be rationally priced and openly accessed.

 

 

 

 

ꚰ CoinRank x Bitget – Sign up & Trade!

Looking for the latest scoop and cool insights from CoinRank? Hit up our Twitter and stay in the loop with all our fresh stories!

〈What is Kalshi Prediction Market? How Does It Work〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

Binance Life surged over 60% as exchange exposure, liquidity constraints, and derivatives liquidations combined, turning a Chinese meme coin into a short-term market focal point.

On-chain data shows concentrated supply and rising leverage, suggesting price gains are driven more by positioning and momentum than by fundamental valuation or adoption.

While sentiment remains euphoric, key price levels around 0.25 and 0.20 dollars now define whether the rally sustains or transitions into rapid unwinding.

Binance Life, a Chinese meme coin on BNB Chain, surged over 60% as exchange exposure, liquidity constraints, and short squeezes combined to fuel a market frenzy.

BINANCE LIFE MEME COIN RALLIES AS MARKET ATTENTION SURGES

 

In the past 24 hours, Binance Life, a Chinese meme coin launched on BNB Chain, has rapidly moved into the spotlight of the crypto market. The token recorded an intraday gain exceeding 60 percent and briefly traded near the 0.265 dollar level, driven by a sharp rise in trading activity and community discussion.

 

While meme coin rallies are not new, the speed and scale of this move drew particular attention. Social media channels in the Chinese-speaking crypto community saw a noticeable surge in engagement, while derivatives markets recorded a spike in liquidations, placing Binance Life among the most actively traded speculative assets of the day.

 

WHAT IS BINANCE LIFE AND WHY THE CHINESE MEME COIN NARRATIVE MATTERS

 

Binance Life is a meme coin deployed on BNB Chain, positioned primarily around Chinese community identity rather than technical innovation. Like many meme tokens, it does not rely on protocol utility, revenue generation, or a long-term development roadmap.

 

Instead, its appeal lies in symbolic association. The name, narrative framing, and timing align closely with Chinese retail sentiment and the broader visibility of the Binance ecosystem. This combination allowed Binance Life to stand out in a crowded meme coin market once attention began to concentrate.

 

BINANCE LIFE PRICE ACTION SHOWS A TYPICAL MEME COIN ACCELERATION PHASE

 

From a structural standpoint, the recent price movement reflects a classic acceleration phase rather than early-stage price discovery. Rapid upward moves were accompanied by sharp intraday volatility, suggesting thin spot liquidity and aggressive market participation.

 

Rather than gradual accumulation, price gains appeared to be driven by urgency and momentum. In such conditions, relatively small changes in order flow can have an outsized impact on price, amplifying both rallies and pullbacks within short time frames.

 

EXCHANGE EXPOSURE AND LIQUIDITY CONSTRAINTS ON BNB CHAIN

 

A key factor behind the surge was increased exposure through centralized exchanges and related trading products. The introduction of leveraged ETF-style products expanded access to the token beyond on-chain users, drawing in additional speculative capital.

 

At the same time, spot market liquidity remained constrained. In certain periods, limited token availability and operational restrictions reduced effective circulating supply. As demand increased faster than supply, prices reacted sharply, reinforcing upward momentum.

 

ON-CHAIN DATA SHOWS CONCENTRATED SUPPLY AND RISING LEVERAGE

 

On-chain data indicates that Binance Life’s token distribution remains relatively concentrated. The largest holder controls approximately 1.85 percent of total supply and currently sits on significant unrealized gains. While this structure can support rapid price appreciation during rallies, it also increases downside risk once selling pressure emerges.

 

Derivatives data further shows a rise in open interest without a proportionate increase in opposing liquidity. This imbalance resulted in repeated short liquidations, placing Binance Life among the most liquidated assets of the day, behind only major cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum.

 

MARKET SENTIMENT SHIFTS FROM EXCITEMENT TO FOMO

 

Sentiment across the Chinese crypto community shifted quickly from curiosity to strong conviction. Discussion increasingly framed Binance Life as a leading Chinese meme coin, reflecting a growing consensus rather than a divided market.

 

However, this phase also coincided with reports of some market influencers taking profits. Such behavior often signals a transition point where momentum remains strong, but risk begins to rise as early participants reduce exposure.

 

WHY BINANCE LIFE IS A LIQUIDITY STORY RATHER THAN A FUNDAMENTAL REPRICING

 

Despite the magnitude of the rally, Binance Life’s price action does not reflect a change in underlying fundamentals. The token does not introduce new technology, protocol adoption, or measurable economic output.

 

Instead, valuation is driven almost entirely by attention, liquidity flow, and short-term consensus. As with many meme coins, sustainability depends on continued inflows rather than intrinsic value, making price behavior highly sensitive to shifts in sentiment.

 

KEY PRICE LEVELS SHAPING BINANCE LIFE TRADING BEHAVIOR

 

From a market structure perspective, the 0.25 dollar level has emerged as an important reference point. Sustained trading above this area suggests that speculative momentum remains dominant.

 

Conversely, the 0.20 dollar level serves as a critical threshold for sentiment. A sustained move below this range would indicate that the acceleration phase has failed, potentially triggering rapid unwinding as liquidity dynamics reverse.

 

WHO BENEFITS MOST FROM THE CURRENT BINANCE LIFE MARKET

 

Current conditions favor disciplined short-term traders capable of managing volatility and executing timely exits. The environment is less suited to long-term holders seeking stability or fundamental-driven exposure.

 

Without structural anchors, price movements remain reflexive. Gains and losses are driven by positioning rather than conviction, making risk management essential.

 

WHAT BINANCE LIFE REPRESENTS FOR THE BROADER MEME COIN MARKET

 

Beyond the token itself, Binance Life illustrates how quickly narrative-driven assets can dominate market attention when community identity, exchange infrastructure, and leverage align. Meme coins, by design, amplify these dynamics by removing traditional valuation frameworks.

 

As a result, Binance Life’s rally serves as a case study in how liquidity and sentiment interact in modern crypto markets.

 

CONCLUSION: A SHORT-TERM FOCAL POINT IN A VOLATILE MARKET

 

Binance Life’s surge was fueled by Chinese community enthusiasm, increased exchange exposure, constrained spot liquidity, and derivatives-driven short squeezes. It was not driven by long-term fundamentals or protocol adoption.

 

As long as attention and liquidity persist, volatility will remain elevated. Once either factor fades, price behavior may change just as quickly, underscoring the speculative nature of the current move.

 

Read More:

Why Gold Is Surging: Central Banks, Sanctions, and Trust-1

Gold Front-Runs QE as Bitcoin Waits for Liquidity-2

〈Binance Life Soars on BNB Chain as Meme Coin Mania Accelerates〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

Liquidity 2026 focuses on the convergence of traditional finance and digital markets, with deep discussions on institutional liquidity, market structure, clearing, settlement, and on-chain finance.

 

The summit attracts senior decision-makers from global banks, asset managers, crypto exchanges, custodians, and regulatory bodies, offering a highly institutional and execution-oriented perspective.

 

As an official Media Partner, a limited-time 20% ticket discount gives attendees early access to high-level networking and forward-looking insights into capital allocation and financial infrastructure.

As one of the summit’s official Media Partners, we bring a SPECIAL OFFER for our followers! 💕

 

🎟 Use code:LTPCRK26 to enjoy 20% off Standard Tickets

 

 ⏰ Valid for one week only — limited allocation available

 

🎟️ Reigester Here (https://luma.com/ykvpk50b)! Limited-time offer on a flash sale. DON’T MISS OUT on this exceptional opportunity. 🎟️

 

Why Liquidity 2026?

 

Liquidity 2026 brings together global leaders shaping how capital, trading, custody, and settlement converge across traditional and digital markets.

 

 

You’ll gain insights into:

 

Institutional-grade market structure & liquidity

 

Cross-asset trading, margining & clearing

 

Tokenization, stablecoins & on-chain finance

 

Regulatory & compliance frameworks

 

The future of institutional capital allocation

 

Who You’ll Meet

 

Senior decision-makers from:

 

 🏦 Global banks & prime brokers

 

💰 Asset managers, hedge funds & allocators

 

 📊 Crypto exchanges & trading venues

 

📜 Custody, clearing & settlement platforms

 

💡 Tokenization & stablecoin innovators

 

 🔗 Market infrastructure & technology providers

 

 ⚖️ Regulatory, legal & compliance leaders

 

For more details, please check here:

 

📍 JW Marriott Hong Kong | Feb 9th | 8:00 AM – 10:00 PM

 

 📩 Speaking/sponsorship inquiries: https://summit.liquiditytech.com/en#contact.

 

 🌐 More info: summit.liquiditytech.com

〈The Flagship Institutional Summit of 2026 — LIQUIDITY 2026 — is coming to Hong Kong〉這篇文章最早發佈於《CoinRank》。

US Senator Calls for Suspension of Trust Bank Applications Related to #WLFI , Citing Conflict of Interest Due to Trump's Failure to Separate Interests
Arthur Hayes @CryptoHayes : The Core Trading Strategy for This Quarter is to Go Long on #MSTR and #Metaplanet
Chairman of the Russian State Duma Financial Markets Committee: Cryptocurrencies Have the Potential to Become Everyday Tools for Russian Residents;
The Senate Agriculture Committee Postpones Hearing on the Crypto Market Structure Bill to January 27;
Malicious Chrome Extension Disguised as Trading Tool Steals Users' MEXC API Keys
#CoinRank #GM