The Cryptonomist

Traders are navigating a tactically bullish tape against a structurally weak backdrop, as Bitcoin price today attempts a recovery within a still-damaged broader trend.

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

Core Bias by Timeframe

Daily (D1) – Main Scenario: Bearish
The daily trend is clearly down. Price is trading below all key EMAs, MACD is negative, and RSI sits in the low 40s. That keeps the main scenario bearish until proven otherwise.

1H – Countertrend Recovery
On the hourly chart, Bitcoin has pushed back above short-term EMAs with a strong, overbought RSI. That is a classic recipe for a countertrend rally inside a larger down move – strong enough to hurt late shorts, but not yet strong enough to flip the macro trend.

15m – Local Upswing, Momentum Fading
The 15-minute structure is bullish but already losing momentum. This is more execution context than a signal: the short-term push is maturing right at resistance bands.

Daily Chart (D1): Structure Still Points Down

Trend & EMAs (Daily)

Data:
Price: $68,180.76
EMA 20: $71,329.06
EMA 50: $78,730.88
EMA 200: $93,253.97
Regime flag: bearish

Reading: Price is below the 20, 50, and 200-day EMAs, and the shorter EMAs (20/50) are well under the 200. That is a textbook bearish alignment and signals a dominant downtrend on the daily. The distance to the 200-day also tells you how far we have already slid from the prior cycle highs. This is not just a shallow pullback anymore; it is a proper trend deterioration.

In practical terms, rallies toward the 20-day EMA around $71k are, for now, more likely to be sold than chased unless we see a clean reclaim and hold above it.

RSI (Daily)

RSI 14 (D1): 37.76

This is weak but not yet oversold. The market is leaning bearish, but it has not washed out. There is still room for another leg lower before the kind of panic-driven capitulation that often marks durable bottoms. For swing traders, this means the downside is not exhausted yet, even if short-term bounces can occur.

MACD (Daily)

MACD line: -4,261.67
Signal line: -4,782.75
Histogram: +521.08

MACD is well below zero, confirming a bearish momentum backdrop. However, the line is slightly above the signal (positive histogram), which signals that the downside momentum is starting to cool off. In plain language: the downtrend is still the main story, but the aggressive phase of selling has eased. That is exactly the kind of backdrop where bear market rallies can be sharp and deceptive.

Bollinger Bands (Daily)

Middle band (20-day basis): $69,781.88
Upper band: $77,228.43
Lower band: $62,335.34
Close: $68,180.76

Price is hovering just below the middle band and well above the lower band. We have bounced off the lower-volatility edge and are now trying to stabilize in the lower half of the range. It is a consolidation inside a downtrend rather than a clean trend reversal. A decisive close back above the middle band (~$69.8k) would be an early sign that the market is trying to mean-revert higher toward the upper band in the coming sessions.

ATR (Daily)

ATR 14 (D1): 2,858.27

Daily volatility is elevated but not extreme by Bitcoin standards. A typical daily swing is roughly $2.8k, which means tests of nearby levels can be hit or missed very quickly. Position sizing and leverage need to respect the fact that a 4–5% day is normal here, not an outlier.

Daily Pivot Levels

Pivot Point (PP): $67,816.19
Resistance 1 (R1): $68,682.96
Support 1 (S1): $67,313.98
Close: $68,180.76

BTC is trading above the daily pivot and closer to R1 than S1. Intraday buyers have the upper hand versus today's reference levels, but the upside is bumping into the first resistance band. The pivot structure matches the story: a bounce within a still-bearish higher timeframe.

Hourly Chart (H1): Countertrend Push, Short Squeeze Potential

Trend & EMAs (H1)

Price: $68,175
EMA 20: $67,439.14
EMA 50: $67,287.52
EMA 200: $67,937.79
Regime flag: neutral

On the hourly, price has reclaimed all the key EMAs. The 20 and 50 are now stacked under price and are close to crossing above the 200 again. That is what you usually see in a short-term recovery phase after an aggressive drop. It does not overturn the daily downtrend, but it does tell you that intraday sellers are losing control.

RSI (H1)

RSI 14 (H1): 69.94

Hourly RSI is flirting with overbought. The move up has been strong and fast, which fits the idea of a short-covering rally. Near-term, this makes chasing longs less attractive unless you see continued strength. It also means any pullback from here could be sharp as fast longs and late shorts rebalance.

MACD (H1)

MACD line: 316.64
Signal line: 195.69
Histogram: 120.95

MACD is above zero and widening away from the signal line. Momentum on this timeframe is clearly bullish. Buyers have taken intraday control and are still pressing, which supports the idea that dips on very short timeframes can be bought tactically, as long as the hourly structure holds above the EMAs.

Bollinger Bands (H1)

Middle band: $67,262.26
Upper band: $68,356.08
Lower band: $66,168.44
Close: $68,175

Price is riding the upper band on the hourly. That is what you see in a strong short-term impulse. As long as BTC hugs or stays near the upper band, intraday bulls are in control. However, if price starts to slip back toward the middle band, it would signal that this thrust is cooling off and the market is moving back into consolidation mode.

ATR (H1)

ATR 14 (H1): 306.9

Average hourly swings are about $300. That is enough noise to run through tight stops repeatedly. For short-term strategies, entries too close to obvious intraday levels can easily be wicked out.

Hourly Pivot Levels

Pivot Point (PP): $68,198.81
R1: $68,294.58
S1: $68,079.23
Close: $68,175

Price is pinned almost exactly at the hourly pivot zone and just below R1. That shows a tug-of-war right at a key intraday decision area. A clean break and hold above R1 would open the door toward higher intraday resistance. Repeated failures or wicks above R1 that close back under PP would hint that the countertrend move is stalling.

15-Minute Chart (M15): Execution Context, Not a New Trend

Trend & EMAs (M15)

Price: $68,175
EMA 20: $67,887.16
EMA 50: $67,549.27
EMA 200: $67,228.78
Regime flag: bullish

The 15-minute chart is in a clean local uptrend. Price sits above all short-term EMAs, with a proper bullish stack (20 > 50 > 200). For execution, this means intraday pullbacks toward the 20/50 EMAs are the first zones where short-term traders are likely to probe longs, in line with the hourly push.

RSI (M15)

RSI 14 (M15): 66.68

RSI on this timeframe is elevated but not extreme. The immediate momentum is still up, but the easy part of the move is likely behind us. Short-term, this favors scaling into strength with caution rather than initiating fresh, aggressive longs at market.

MACD (M15)

MACD line: 205.62
Signal line: 190.08
Histogram: 15.54

MACD is positive but the histogram has shrunk. The trend is up, but the momentum burst is fading. On this timeframe, that often precedes either a sideways consolidation or a shallow pullback before the market decides on the next leg.

Bollinger Bands (M15)

Middle band: $67,901.91
Upper band: $68,280.81
Lower band: $67,523.01
Close: $68,175

Price is pressed against the upper band again. The short-term push is extended, so chasing up here carries a higher risk of buying into a local top. For scalpers, it is a spot to tighten risk, not relax it.

ATR (M15)

ATR 14 (M15): 145.52

Average 15-minute ranges are about $145. Micro-level stops inside that noise band will be tested frequently. This is a choppy environment for very tight risk parameters.

15-Minute Pivot Levels

(Same intraday pivot set as the hourly, given the provided data.)
PP: $68,198.81
R1: $68,294.58
S1: $68,079.23

On the 15-minute, price is oscillating right around the pivot. This reinforces the idea that the immediate battle is happening here; it is the intraday line between continuation higher and a fade back into the prior range.

Macro Context: Fear Is High, Bitcoin Still Dominates

Bitcoin is trading around $68,175 against USDT, stuck in the lower half of its recent range but showing a sharp intraday rebound. The bigger picture is still a downtrend on the daily chart, while intraday timeframes are trying to squeeze higher. In other words, the market is tactically bid, but structurally damaged.

This moment matters because positioning is extremely cautious. The crypto fear & greed index is printing 7 – Extreme Fear while BTC dominance sits near 56.6%. Capital is hiding in Bitcoin and stables, and yet price is pressing back toward short-term resistance. That combination of fearful sentiment, heavy BTC dominance, and a short-term push higher is fertile ground for violent short-covering rallies inside a broader bearish regime.

The broader crypto market cap is about $2.41T, up roughly 1.45% over 24 hours, while BTC dominance stands near 56.65%. That tells us two things:

First, capital is flowing into crypto cautiously, not in a euphoric rush. Second, the flow is concentrated in Bitcoin and stables, not in high-beta altcoins. This is classic defensive risk-on: participants want exposure to the space, but they are not ready to go far out the risk curve.

The Extreme Fear sentiment reading (7/100) lines up well with the technicals: a damaged higher timeframe trend, but with enough pessimism baked in that sharp squeezes are entirely on the table. Fearful markets do not move in straight lines; they spike both ways as positioning gets cleaned up.

Scenario Map: Bullish vs. Bearish Paths for Bitcoin

Bullish Scenario (Countertrend Rally Grows Legs)

For the bullish side to take control beyond a simple short squeeze, we would need:

1. Daily reclaim of the 20-day EMA (~$71,300) with a close above it.
2. Hourly structure holding above the 200 EMA (~$67,900), turning pullbacks into higher lows instead of lower highs.
3. RSI on the daily pushing back toward the mid-40s/50s without immediate rejection, confirming that sellers are losing dominance.

If those conditions play out, price could rotate toward the daily middle Bollinger band and upper band, that is roughly the $70k–$77k zone over the next leg. That would still be a move within a broader corrective structure, but it would be meaningful enough to punish late shorts and stabilize sentiment out of Extreme Fear.

What invalidates the bullish scenario?
A decisive rejection below the daily pivot and loss of the hourly 200 EMA, for example a clean break back under $67k that sticks, would show the bounce was just a one-off squeeze. If that happens while daily RSI remains sub-40, the path of least resistance opens again toward the lower Bollinger band near $62k.

Bearish Scenario (Downtrend Resumes)

The main daily bias is still bearish, so this remains the default until flipped. In the bearish continuation case:

1. Price fails to close above the $69.5k–$71k band (daily mid-band and 20 EMA).
2. Intraday momentum on H1 and M15 rolls over from overbought levels, with hourly RSI dropping back through 50 and MACD crossing down.
3. BTC loses the $67k area and starts closing daily candles back toward the lower band.

In that environment, the market would be targeting a retest of the $62k–$63k region (daily lower Bollinger band) as the next logical demand zone. With daily ATR around $2.8k, that move could happen in only a couple of strong sessions once acceleration resumes.

What invalidates the bearish scenario?
A sustained daily close and follow-through above the 20-day EMA (~$71.3k), accompanied by a clear MACD upturn toward the zero line, would undermine the bear case. At that point, the downtrend would be transitioning into at least a medium-term range or early uptrend, and using rallies as short entries would become much more dangerous.

How to Think About Positioning Right Now

From a trading perspective, the key tension is straightforward:

– Daily: Downtrend, bearish regime, sentiment in extreme fear.
– Intraday (H1/M15): Strong countertrend bounce, overbought short-term, momentum still pointing up.

That mix usually favors tactical, short-term strategies over big directional bets. Swing traders looking for higher conviction will likely want to see either:

– A clean rejection of this bounce from the $69k–$71k region (for trend-following shorts), or
– A firm reclaim and hold above the 20-day EMA (for the first medium-term long bias in a while).

Volatility, as measured by ATR across timeframes, is high enough that intraday mis-timing can be expensive, especially with leverage. The current tape rewards patience and clear levels rather than constant reaction to every tick. Until the daily chart proves otherwise, Bitcoin price today is best viewed as a countertrend recovery within a larger corrective phase, not yet a fresh bull leg.

ETH is attempting to stabilize after a sharp selloff, and the current Ethereum crypto bounce is testing whether this is simple relief or something more durable.

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

Main Scenario from the Daily Chart (D1)

The daily timeframe points to a bearish main scenario. ETH is trading well below all major moving averages, momentum remains negative, and price is sitting in the lower half of its recent volatility band. Until ETH can reclaim key moving averages, any upside is a counter-trend move.

Daily Chart (D1) – Structure and Key Levels

Trend & EMAs

Close: $1,968.79

EMA 20: $2,139.64

EMA 50: $2,491.58

EMA 200: $3,024.77

Regime: Bearish

Price is below the 20, 50, and 200 EMAs, with the 20 < 50 < 200 stack. That is a classic downtrend configuration: the market has been selling ETH for weeks, and every rally has stalled before reaching the faster averages. With spot sitting roughly 8% under the 20 EMA and far below the 200 EMA, we are in a downtrend with room for mean reversion, but no technical confirmation of a larger reversal.

RSI (Daily)

RSI 14: 34.56

Daily RSI is just above oversold, hovering in the low 30s. That usually signals bearish momentum with early signs of downside exhaustion. Sellers are still in control, but the aggressive phase of the selloff is likely behind us. From here, bounces are likely; whether they last is another question.

MACD (Daily)

MACD line: -198.28

Signal line: -224.30

Histogram: 26.02 (positive)

The MACD is deeply negative, confirming a mature downtrend, but the histogram has flipped positive as the MACD line crosses up toward the signal. That is consistent with a bearish trend losing momentum. The selling wave is slowing, allowing room for a bounce or range, but it is not yet signaling a full bull phase.

Bollinger Bands (Daily)

Middle band (20 SMA proxy): $2,052.43

Upper band: $2,296.96

Lower band: $1,807.90

Price: $1,968.79 (between mid and lower band)

ETH is trading in the lower half of the band, closer to the lower band than the upper. Recently hugging the lower band often marks a trending selloff. Pulling back inside, as we see now, usually means the trend is cooling and shifting into a consolidation or corrective bounce. Until price can push through the mid-band near $2,050 and hold, the move is better viewed as relief within a broader downtrend.

ATR (Daily)

ATR 14: $107.86

Daily ATR around $108 indicates elevated but not extreme volatility. The market is moving roughly 5–6% ranges on an average day. That is wide enough for meaningful intraday swings but not full capitulation. Traders should expect swift reversals around levels, especially when liquidity thins out.

Daily Pivots

Pivot (PP): $1,957.89

R1: $1,984.76

S1: $1,941.91

Spot is sitting essentially on top of the daily pivot, slightly above at $1,968–1,969. That puts ETH at a decision point. Holding above the pivot opens the door to tests of R1 and the mid-BB area, while slipping back below increases the probability of another leg lower toward the lower band and new supports.

Hourly Chart (H1) – Short-Term Relief Within a Downtrend

Trend & EMAs (H1)

Close: $1,968.67

EMA 20: $1,955.11

EMA 50: $1,959.84

EMA 200: $1,989.72

Regime: Neutral

On the 1H chart, price has reclaimed the 20 and 50 EMAs, but still trades below the 200 EMA. Short term, that is a tactical bullish reversal inside a larger downtrend. Intraday participants have flipped from selling every uptick to cautiously buying dips, but the bigger trend cap is near the 200 EMA around $1,990–$2,000.

RSI (H1)

RSI 14: 57.92

Hourly RSI is in the bullish but not overbought zone. Momentum favors the upside on this timeframe, but it is not stretched. That fits a controlled grind higher rather than a blow-off squeeze, which often means rallies can continue a bit longer until they collide with higher timeframe resistance.

MACD (H1)

MACD line: 2.29

Signal line: -1.04

Histogram: 3.33 (positive)

MACD has turned positive on the hourly and the histogram is firmly above zero. Short term, buyers control the tape. However, the magnitude of the move is still modest relative to the deep negative MACD on the daily chart, reinforcing the idea that this is a counter-trend rally, not a new primary uptrend.

Bollinger Bands (H1)

Middle band: $1,948.44

Upper band: $1,975.18

Lower band: $1,921.70

Price: $1,968.67 (near upper band)

ETH is trading near the upper hourly band, reflecting a short-term push higher. Price walking the upper band tends to accompany intraday trend moves, but in the context of a daily downtrend it often ends in mean reversion back toward the mid-band rather than a full breakout.

ATR & Pivots (H1)

ATR 14 (H1): $13

Hourly Pivot (PP): $1,969.38

R1: $1,973.15

S1: $1,964.89

With an hourly ATR of about $13, the typical short-term swing spans the whole pivot ladder. Price is glued to the hourly pivot and just under R1, signaling a balanced but slightly bullish intraday tape. As long as ETH holds above S1, intraday traders will likely lean long. A sustained break below S1 shifts the bias back to selling rallies.

15-Minute Chart (M15) – Execution Context

Trend & EMAs (M15)

Close: $1,968.68

EMA 20: $1,961.47

EMA 50: $1,955.66

EMA 200: $1,959.06

Regime: Neutral

On the 15-minute chart, price is above all the key EMAs, which are tightly clustered and sloping gently higher. That is a short-term bullish micro-trend, the typical structure you see in a grindy relief rally. For execution, this favors dip-buying within the hour, but only while the 20 EMA on this timeframe holds.

RSI (M15)

RSI 14: 60.97

RSI in the low 60s on 15m confirms a firm but not euphoric bullish tone. It leaves enough room for one more push higher before intraday overbought conditions start to bite.

MACD (M15)

MACD line: 4.43

Signal line: 3.74

Histogram: 0.69 (slightly positive)

MACD on 15m is positive but the histogram is small, showing a waning short-term impulse. Bulls still have the ball, but momentum is no longer accelerating. That is usually when you start seeing fake breakouts and choppy price action around intraday resistance.

Bollinger Bands, ATR & Pivots (M15)

Middle band: $1,960.87

Upper band: $1,972.89

Lower band: $1,948.84

ATR 14 (M15): $6.02

Pivot (PP): $1,969.38

R1: $1,973.16

S1: $1,964.90

ETH is trading near the upper 15m band and just under R1. With an ATR of about $6, a single 15-minute candle can sweep from pivot to R1 or S1 quickly. This is a short-term resistance zone where mean reversion trades often appear unless higher timeframes break in the same direction.

Macro & Sentiment Backdrop

Macro context matters here. Bitcoin dominance has pushed above 56%, which signals a flight to relative safety within crypto. Altcoins, including ETH, tend to underperform in that regime. Moreover, the overall crypto market cap is up about 1.4% on the day, so the market is not in full capitulation, more like an anxious bounce.

The Extreme Fear reading at 7 confirms that many participants are underweight risk. In these environments, even positive headlines, like Harvard reportedly selling Bitcoin and buying Ethereum, often get faded because traders focus on balance sheet protection rather than new exposure. News can spark short squeezes, but the chart still decides if they stick.

Putting It All Together: Scenarios

Baseline View

The daily chart calls the shots: bearish structure with a developing relief rally. Hourly and 15m timeframes are tactically bullish, but they are moving against a higher timeframe downtrend. Until ETH regains and holds above the daily 20 EMA, this looks more like a dead-cat bounce than the start of a sustainable bull leg.

Bullish Scenario (Counter-Trend Rally Extends)

In the bullish case, the intraday bid persists and ETH starts to climb through the nearby resistance layers.

First step: Hold above the daily pivot around $1,958 and intraday support around $1,950–1,960, while maintaining price above the 1H 20/50 EMAs.

Upside targets:

Near term: hourly 200 EMA around $1,990–2,000, which also aligns psychologically with the round number.

Next: daily Bollinger mid-band near $2,050, then the 20 EMA at about $2,140.

Momentum confirmation: Daily RSI needs to lift decisively above 40, and the daily MACD should continue shrinking its negative value with the histogram staying positive. That would mark a transition from sharp downtrend to broader range.

If ETH can reclaim the 20 EMA on the daily and consolidate above it, not just wick through intraday, the narrative shifts from dead-cat bounce to a credible base-building phase. In that world, pullbacks toward $2,050–2,100 could become buying opportunities rather than rally-selling zones.

What invalidates the bullish scenario? A clean break back below $1,940–1,950 with daily RSI rolling back toward 30 and the hourly EMAs flipping back into a bearish stack, with price under 20, 50, and 200, would suggest the bounce has failed and sellers are back in charge.

Bearish Scenario (Downtrend Resumes)

The bearish scenario assumes the current uptick is only a pause before another leg lower.

Trigger zone: Failure to hold above the daily and hourly pivots around $1,958–1,969, followed by a break under S1 levels at $1,942 on D1 and $1,965 then $1,960 on intraday charts.

Downside path:

Re-test of the daily lower Bollinger Band near $1,808 as the next major volatility reference.

Below that, the market would likely start searching for fresh structural support, potentially setting new local lows with ATR-sized daily candles, roughly $100 each way.

Momentum confirmation: Daily RSI failing to recover above 35 and sliding back toward or under 30, coupled with the daily MACD histogram turning negative again, would show that the selling wave has re-accelerated.

What invalidates the bearish scenario? A decisive reclaim of $2,050–2,140, which is the mid-BB and 20 EMA on D1, with daily closes above those levels for several sessions. That would indicate that bears are losing control of the higher timeframe tape and the downtrend is transitioning to at least a neutral regime.

Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

From a positioning standpoint, Ethereum crypto sits in an awkward middle ground: too beaten up to be a clean short, but not yet repaired enough to be a confident long on the higher timeframe. Intraday, there is a case for trading the upside as long as price respects the short-term EMAs and pivots, but the daily chart demands respect for the broader downtrend.

Volatility is high enough that being wrong carries a real cost. With daily ATR over $100, entries that are even slightly mistimed can see 3–5% swings against them in a matter of hours. In this tape, sizing and risk limits matter more than usual, especially with sentiment buried in Extreme Fear and macro narratives shifting quickly.

The key is to stay honest about the regime: the daily trend is still down. Until Ethereum can regain its 20-day EMA and defend it, rallies are guilty until proven innocent. Traders operating on lower timeframes can lean into the bounce, but they are trading against the main Ethereum crypto trend, and that always comes with a shorter leash.

After five years tracking DeFi and NFT activity, the parsec shutdown underscores how fast the crypto analytics landscape can change when on-chain behavior shifts.

Parsec closes after five years of shifting DeFi cycles

Parsec has ended operations after a five-year run, as evolving market trends eroded demand for its once popular analytics tools. The team confirmed the decision following significant changes in crypto trading behavior and data patterns that reshaped the sector. Moreover, the shutdown comes during a phase of declining usage across several on-chain systems and analytics platforms.

The firm operated through multiple market cycles, but recent conditions weakened its original business model. It built its core product around DeFi activity and protocol-level flows. However, post-FTX market structure changes reduced leverage across major lending and derivatives platforms, cutting into the rich on-chain data Parsec had previously tracked with consistency.

Parsec launched in early 2021, starting as a small project focused on early Uniswap trading dynamics before expanding into a full analytics terminal. During the strong bull cycle that followed, activity surged across networks and protocols, fueling rapid expansion of its toolkit. That said, industry behavior shifted sharply after 2022, as user flows changed across several chains and on-chain leverage normalized at lower levels.

NFT slowdown and volume drop pressure analytics platforms

While DeFi flows cooled, NFT markets also lost momentum, creating a second drag on on-chain data platforms. NFT demand weakened meaningfully, and sales fell to $5.63 billion in 2025 as average prices declined further across major collections. Consequently, these lower volumes reduced the intensity of trading and minting activity that Parsec and similar tools monitored.

The combination of fewer leveraged positions, slower protocol usage, and a softer NFT market put structural pressure on data-focused businesses. Furthermore, as casual users pulled back and professional traders concentrated on fewer venues, the value of broad, retail-oriented dashboards diminished. This shift left Parsec increasingly misaligned with how users interacted with on-chain markets.

Industry transition and emerging consolidation trend

Parsec is now one of several analytics and infrastructure firms shutting down as the crypto sector adjusts to new conditions. Entropy also announced its closure recently, pointing to difficulties achieving long-term product alignment in a more demanding environment. Together, these exits highlight a market segment moving toward fewer active platforms and stronger competitive pressures.

Executives and investors across the industry increasingly expect crypto analytics platform consolidation as both capital and user attention concentrate around a smaller group of providers. Larger entities may purchase or hire smaller teams to integrate their technology stacks, reshaping how data services are structured and delivered. However, the pace of consolidation remains uncertain as new entrants continue to experiment with niche analytics models.

Broader market conditions have added to the strain. Bitcoin has faced renewed volatility, with the asset trading near $67,246 after falling sharply from its record high. Although activity levels remain uneven, search and engagement data indicate rising interest in long-term stability and risk management rather than short-term speculative leverage.

Why the parsec shutdown reflects changing on-chain dynamics

Parsec built a strong analytics presence as it navigated the rapid growth of decentralized finance and collectibles. The platform supported users through intense market surges and sharp contractions, while maintaining active feature development and integrations. However, as user behavior evolved, the relevance of its original focus on lending, trading, and NFT flows diminished across several core networks.

The team acknowledged that on-chain flows no longer resembled their earlier structure, making it difficult to align with new patterns. Competing products adapted toward narrower or more institutional use cases, while Parsec’s broad approach became harder to sustain. Moreover, as rival dashboards optimized for different user needs, differentiation through coverage alone was no longer enough.

In its final messages to the community, Parsec emphasized that the long-term path had grown increasingly unclear. The company struggled to justify continued investment in its legacy model as activity concentrated elsewhere and the on chain data platform decline accelerated. Ultimately, it chose to close operations while recognizing its impact during one of crypto’s most active and experimental periods.

What Parsec’s closure signals for future DeFi analytics

The end of Parsec marks another phase in a sector defined by rapid, sometimes abrupt, structural change. Market conditions continue to evolve with new activity models, from restaking and modular infrastructure to more regulated trading environments. That said, demand for high-quality on-chain data has not disappeared; it has instead become more selective and specialized.

Looking ahead, firms providing analytics for decentralized finance and NFTs may face further pressure as they adapt to a less fragmented ecosystem. Business models that thrived in the 2020–2022 expansion now require deeper product-market fit and clearer monetization. As DeFi participants focus on risk-adjusted returns rather than pure growth, only the most adaptable platforms are likely to survive another full market cycle.

In summary, Parsec’s exit illustrates how quickly assumptions about usage, leverage, and NFT volumes can become outdated. Its shutdown encapsulates a broader realignment in crypto data services, where consolidation, specialization, and tighter alignment with user behavior are becoming defining features of the next stage.

Institutional demand for regulated crypto exposure is driving new products such as the stablecoin etf, which now has a dedicated money market vehicle tied to U.S. legislation.

ProShares rolls out GENIUS Act-compliant money market ETF

ProShares has listed a new money market fund on NYSE Arca under the ticker IQMM, designed specifically for stablecoin reserve management. The ProShares GENIUS Money Market ETF is the first exchange-traded fund structured under the GENIUS Act, the U.S. stablecoin law signed last July, and it targets issuers seeking fully compliant reserve strategies.

The GENIUS Act requires that stablecoin tokens be backed 1:1 with safe, liquid assets. Those reserves must be short-term U.S. Treasury bills or similar government securities. Moreover, the statute specifies strict maturity limits, which directly shape IQMM’s portfolio construction and risk profile.

IQMM invests only in instruments that qualify as eligible reserves under the law, holding securities with a maximum maturity of 93 days. This cap mirrors the GENIUS Act’s exact requirement. That said, the tight maturity window also positions the fund as a conservative cash management tool for institutions that prioritize liquidity.

ProShares says the ETF follows a cautious approach, emphasizing transparency and daily liquidity. The strategy focuses exclusively on short-term U.S. government paper rather than credit instruments, which may appeal to issuers that want to simplify compliance and reduce operational complexity in managing their reserves.

Target users and role in stablecoin reserve management

The fund is built for institutional participants, primarily treasury and risk managers at stablecoin issuers. Companies such as Ripple, Circle, and Tether are cited as potential users, since they must maintain large pools of highly liquid assets to back their tokens and satisfy regulatory expectations.

With this structure, issuers can use a single vehicle instead of managing rolling purchases of short-term Treasuries in-house. However, they still retain exposure to U.S. government debt markets, just via an ETF wrapper. This may streamline reporting and oversight, which are critical for large, systemically visible stablecoin operators.

The ETF’s tight maturity profile is designed to support daily redemption needs. Holding only shorter-dated bonds helps reduce interest rate risk and the chance of realizing losses when selling in stressed markets. Moreover, this setup may limit mark-to-market volatility, which is important when reserves must track token liabilities closely.

The global stablecoin market currently stands at just under $300 billion in circulation, with USDT and USDC dominating issuance. Tether recently rolled out its USAT stablecoin, while Circle continues to expand the footprint of USDC across multiple blockchains and regions, reinforcing the need for scalable reserve frameworks.

Regulated products that focus on stablecoin reserve management could grow in importance as more issuers emerge. While the new ETF is primarily aimed at institutions rather than retail traders asking “is there a stablecoin etf” on forums, its structure may still shape how future offerings are built and regulated.

How IQMM fits into the regulatory and market landscape

The stablecoin etf concept behind IQMM is tightly linked to the GENIUS Act, which formalizes reserve standards in U.S. law. By aligning directly with that framework, the ETF offers a straightforward way for issuers to demonstrate that their backing assets meet statutory criteria, rather than assembling bespoke portfolios that regulators must review case by case.

Because IQMM invests solely in short-term Treasury instruments with maturities of 93 days or less, it operates similarly to a traditional government money market fund. However, its marketing and design focus explicitly on stablecoin issuers, rather than on corporate treasuries or retail cash managers, which sets it apart from broader money market Treasury bills vehicles.

From a risk perspective, the conservative mandate is intended to prioritize capital preservation and immediate liquidity. Moreover, by concentrating on government paper instead of commercial paper or bank deposits, the fund aligns with policymakers’ push to keep stablecoin reserves in instruments that are unlikely to freeze or become impaired during crises.

Institutional investors evaluating how to invest in stablecoin etf exposure will likely view IQMM as a niche product. It is not positioned as a speculative crypto play, but rather as infrastructure supporting a specific corner of the digital asset ecosystem, particularly those managing large pools of dollar-pegged tokens.

Market growth forecasts and institutional interest

Analysts expect the stablecoin sector to expand significantly over the rest of this decade. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said the market could reach $2 trillion by 2028 and $3 trillion by 2030. Moreover, these projections assume continued integration of tokenized dollars into payments, trading, and on-chain finance.

Citi has outlined a base-case projection of $1.9 trillion in stablecoin circulation by 2030, with a bull-case scenario of $4 trillion. Standard Chartered has issued a similar forecast of around $2 trillion by the end of the decade. However, the bank also warned that as much as $500 billion could migrate from U.S. bank deposits into stablecoins by 2028, reshaping funding flows.

Since the GENIUS Act became law last July, several large financial institutions have stepped into the market. Fidelity recently launched its FIDD stablecoin, while Citi and Bank of America are reportedly exploring their own tokenized dollar products. Moreover, this wave of entrants indicates that stablecoins are no longer confined to crypto-native issuers.

As more banks and asset managers roll out products, demand for standardized, GENIUS Act-aligned reserve vehicles could increase. Funds built strictly around short term treasury bills may become core tools for institutional stablecoin custody teams, treasury desks, and risk officers seeking predictable structures rather than bespoke portfolios.

Implications for investors and the wider digital asset ecosystem

For investors, IQMM highlights how the intersection between traditional finance and digital assets is moving toward regulated, low-risk structures. It is not designed to compete with volatile crypto tokens, but to underpin them. That said, the growing ecosystem of reserve-focused ETFs may indirectly influence how comfortably institutions adopt stablecoins in trading and payment workflows.

Because the fund operates like a government money market ETF, its return profile should track prevailing short-term U.S. interest rates rather than crypto market cycles. Moreover, if forecasts for stablecoin supply reaching into the trillions by 2030 prove accurate, the scale of reserves parked in vehicles like IQMM could become a significant feature of global fixed income markets.

Ultimately, the launch of IQMM marks a step toward more formalized infrastructure for stablecoin reserves. As regulation such as the GENIUS Act is implemented and more institutions, from Fidelity to major banks, enter the space, specialized money market products are likely to play a growing role in bridging traditional capital markets with on-chain finance.

As the Solana vs Base blockchain debate intensifies, the evolving base presale token landscape is redefining how traders evaluate memecoins and utility-focused projects across both ecosystems.

Solana vs Base blockchain as memecoins evolve

The rivalry between Solana and Base has sharpened as memecoins transform both networks. Solana initially dominated fast and cheap token launches, helped by platforms such as Pump.Fun. However, the same infrastructure that enabled rapid growth also produced daily rug pull stories and eroding user trust.

Base is now charting a different course. Instead of prioritizing hype and instant token creation, it leans toward more structured presale cryptocurrency models and utility-driven assets. This shift ties directly into market conversations about the best crypto presales and the emerging top 2026 ICO lists that spotlight longer-term projects.

Moreover, traders exploring crypto coins on presale are paying close attention. The market focus is moving beyond speed alone toward sustainability, function, and transparent token economics.

From fast memecoin launches to structured presales

Solana became a preferred venue for launching thousands of memecoins at high speed. Through Pump.Fun, almost anyone could create a token within minutes. This ease of use brought strong attention to SOL, yet it also encouraged a culture where traders cycled in and out of tokens within hours, treating many projects as temporary bets.

However, Base blockchain is positioning itself differently. Rather than simply enabling rapid launches, it is promoting structured presale tokens with defined roadmaps, audits, and clearer token allocations. This approach aligns with growing demand for transparency among investors scanning each new presale crypto list.

As SOL liquidity flows through quick meme cycles, Base is trying to anchor itself around top presale crypto opportunities that provide public documentation and more organized fundraising. That said, this model does not eliminate risk, but it does change how presale coins are rolled out to users.

Based Eggman and the rise of Base presale structures

Within this narrative, Based Eggman, powered by the $GGs token, presents itself as a presale cryptocurrency native to the Base ecosystem. The project has already raised over 300,000 dollars during its presale phase and is currently in Stage 3 with a token price of 0.010838 dollars. These figures place it among active coins on presale that favor structured fundraising over instant, unvetted launches.

Unlike many fast-tracked memecoins, Based Eggman emphasizes transparency and verifiability. The team states that its smart contract has been fully audited by leading blockchain security firms. Moreover, public audits and open documentation are becoming key criteria for participants reviewing the best crypto presales 2026 and comparing entries across any broad presale crypto list.

That said, the project also aims to stand out through its design. It combines meme identity with defined utility, integrating gaming, streaming, and token interaction in a single ecosystem. This approach echoes a wider movement among presale ICO crypto initiatives that seek to merge entertainment with on-chain functionality.

How a base presale token like Based Eggman works

For those asking how to engage with a base presale token, participation in Based Eggman and similar projects usually starts with connecting a Web3 wallet such as MetaMask to the official website. Users then purchase tokens using supported cryptocurrencies and receive allocation details tied to the current presale stage.

This step-by-step participation pattern mirrors the structure of many presale offerings and organized token listings often featured in a top 2026 ICO overview. However, the process still requires due diligence from users, especially when evaluating tokenomics, vesting schedules, and roadmap feasibility.

While Based Eggman is positioned within the broader memecoin category, it illustrates how Base can support more methodical launches. In the broader Solana vs Base conversation, projects like this underscore how Base leans toward presale coin frameworks rather than pure instant token creation tools.

Streaming, gaming and token utility in the $GGs ecosystem

The $GGs token ecosystem connects streaming and gaming within one platform. Users can watch content, earn rewards, and interact with creators through token-based engagement mechanisms. Moreover, this turns presale participation into ongoing platform use instead of simply holding a speculative asset.

The streaming platform allows creators to reach audiences while integrating token rewards into their content strategies. Viewers can support channels, unlock benefits, and participate directly, moving beyond the passive spectator role common on traditional platforms.

Based Eggman Gaming adds another functional layer by linking gameplay to token incentives. This structure reflects how some of the best presales crypto projects aim to blend digital entertainment with blockchain-based utility. It shows how presale tokens can evolve beyond pure speculation and move into day-to-day interaction.

Roadmap and phased development strategy

The Based Eggman roadmap is divided into four phases designed to guide development and adoption. Phase 1 focuses on launch, including the presale with bonus tiers, community-building on X and Telegram, completion of the smart contract audit, and publication of the whitepaper.

Phase 2 centers on exchange presence. The team plans a DEX launch within the Base ecosystem, listings on CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap, first CEX partnership announcements, and the staking platform going live. Moreover, these steps are intended to create liquidity and visibility for $GGs.

Phase 3 highlights broader ecosystem growth. It includes a streaming platform beta release, the first gaming title launch, an NFT collection drop, and major influencer partnerships designed to attract new users.

Phase 4 describes long-term expansion goals such as top-tier CEX listings, deployment of a full DeFi suite, cross-chain bridge integration, and stronger positioning inside the Base blockchain narrative. That said, execution against these milestones will be a key metric for future investor confidence.

Different philosophies behind Solana and Base

The Solana vs Base comparison now captures more than raw transaction throughput. It points to different philosophies around memecoins and token issuance. Solana’s rapid token creation culture drove massive activity, yet it also contributed to a high incidence of rug pulls and ultra-short token lifecycles.

Base, by contrast, appears to favor more structured presale cryptocurrency models that include audits, clear roadmaps, and defined ecosystems. Moreover, projects like Based Eggman demonstrate how presale-focused tokens can combine meme branding with real platform utility and ongoing user engagement.

In summary, the shift from instant launches toward more organized presale structures on Base signals a maturing segment of the market. While risks remain, the emphasis on audits, documentation, and functional ecosystems could help distinguish future projects in an increasingly crowded presale landscape.

The sentiment in the crypto markets is decidedly very low at the moment. 

Among the various causes underlying this issue, are there also geopolitical factors?

Although there may not be direct links between geopolitical tensions and the sentiment of the crypto market, it seems that there is at least a direct connection, which is quite evident.

The VIX

The VIX, or the CBOE Volatility Index, is known as the “fear index”.

This is an index calculated based on the price of options on the S&P 500, which measures its expected annualized volatility. 

In simple terms, it is a gauge that measures how turbulent investors expect the U.S. stock market to be in the near future. 

By the end of 2025, the VIX index value was below 14 points, which is considered a medium-low level. 

By early 2026, however, it had already climbed back to 15, and before the end of January, it had risen again to around 20, which is also approximately the current level. 

Although historically it has reached much higher peaks, such as in April of last year when it marked a peak above 50 points following Trump’s announcement of so-called “reciprocal” tariffs, the current level cannot be considered low at all. Furthermore, since September 2024, the annual average has been on the rise, as it has increased from 15 to over 18 points. 

Fear

All this can be interpreted as a sign that there is some widespread fear in the American stock markets, although it is not significant, at least for now. 

This fear is certainly partly due to concerns about the performance of the Trump administration, but it is also undoubtedly influenced by geopolitical tensions, which closely affect the USA, and the disruptive innovations brought about by AI. 

This fear inevitably spills over into the crypto markets as well, in addition to traditional ones, and even amplifies. 

Since Trump won the elections in November 2024, for example, the trend of Bitcoin’s price has sometimes tended to be inversely correlated with the VIX. 

Specifically, starting from October 10th, the VIX left the 15 mark to climb first to 20 in November, then a second time at the end of January, and a third time in recent days. In all three instances, the price of Bitcoin fell. 

Therefore, there appears to be a direct, albeit inverse, correlation at least between the price of Bitcoin and the fear index, which ultimately impacts the rest of the crypto market. 

The Crypto Market

The price trend of Bitcoin has been very similar to that of Ethereum as well as Total3 at least since August 2025. 

Total3 is the overall market capitalization of altcoins excluding Bitcoin, Ethereum, and stablecoins, thus, along with BTCUSD and ETHUSD, it allows for measuring the performance of the crypto market as a whole. 

The fact that these three metrics have shown an extremely similar trend since August 2025 speaks volumes about how much Bitcoin is impacting the entire crypto market. 

In other words, the price trend of BTC in dollars is inversely correlated with the fear index, and that of altcoins, including ETH, is in turn correlated with that of BTC. 

At this moment, the fear that the USA might trigger a war against Iran is also keeping the VIX elevated, so much so that it can be said that geopolitical tensions are having an indirect effect on the crypto market. 

The Liquidity Problem

To be honest, there is another issue underlying this problem. 

This is an issue directly related to the liquidity available in the markets.

It must be noted that the trend of Bitcoin’s price in dollars is closely correlated with the fluctuations in dollar liquidity present in the financial markets. 

However, it’s not just about the absolute amount of liquidity that exists, but more importantly, how much of it is specifically present in the financial markets, and how it circulates. 

Out of approximately 22 trillion dollars existing in the form of M2 money supply, only a minority portion is present in financial markets, as the majority is used in consumer markets or B2B markets. 

The fact is that the US government has been holding nearly a trillion dollars in its bank accounts for weeks, effectively withdrawing them from the markets. 

The primary one to bear the brunt is Bitcoin, as it is the only asset whose market value primarily depends on liquidity. Other assets, such as equities, depend only partially on liquidity, and therefore suffer less. 

For example, gold and silver are near their highs, precisely because gold is the ultimate safe haven asset during times of fear. 

Therefore, it is not only geopolitical tensions causing issues for the crypto market, but also the excessive liquidity drain from the markets by the U.S. government.

In a move that could reshape prediction market infrastructure, Polymarket acquisition of Dome signals a deeper push into developer tools and cross-platform market access.

Polymarket confirms takeover of YC-backed Dome

Polymarket has acquired Dome, a Y Combinator-backed startup building a unified API for prediction markets, in a deal confirmed by both companies on Feb. 19 in coordinated posts on X. However, neither side disclosed the financial terms or clarified how Dome’s team or product will be integrated into Polymarket’s broader platform.

According to information published by Y Combinator, Dome was part of its Fall 2025 cohort and focuses on delivering a single integration layer for prediction venues where developers can access live and historical market data. Moreover, the project aims to streamline connectivity across fragmented venues, lowering the technical barrier for new applications.

Dome’s unified API and funding history

In its YC profile, Dome describes its core product as a unified API that lets users trade, embed market data into products, and deploy strategies over multiple platforms through a single interface. That said, this architecture is designed to reduce complexity for developers who would otherwise need to maintain several separate integrations.

Dome raised $500,000 from Y Combinator and subsequently secured an additional $4.7 million in seed funding, according to details shared on X by co-founder Kunal Roy. Alongside fellow co-founder Kurush Dubash, Roy previously served as a founding engineer at Alchemy, underscoring the team’s background in high-scale infrastructure.

Commenting on the deal, Dubash wrote on X that the team is “obsessed with prediction markets and want to have the biggest impact in the space.” Moreover, he added that there is “no better place” to pursue that ambition than Polymarket, suggesting Dome will be tightly aligned with Polymarket’s long-term product roadmap.

Strategic context for Polymarket and its acquisitions

This transaction marks Polymarket’s first official acquisition centered explicitly on developer infrastructure, following its earlier purchase of QCEX, a derivatives exchange and clearinghouse licensed by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The QCEX deal was part of Polymarket’s broader strategy to re-enter the U.S. market under a compliant, intermediated structure.

By adding Dome, Polymarket strengthens its position across the prediction markets api landscape while also broadening the tools available to third-party developers. However, specific details on how Dome’s unified stack will surface within Polymarket’s user-facing products, or whether it will remain a standalone service, have not yet been revealed.

In this context, the polymarket acquisition of Dome could help standardize how developers connect to multiple venues, potentially making it easier for media outlets, fintech platforms, and retail apps to embed real-time market expectations into their products.

Expanding partnerships and ecosystem reach

Since receiving approval from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to operate an intermediated trading platform, Polymarket has struck several high-profile partnerships. These include integrations with major financial media brands such as Yahoo Finance and Google Finance, as well as collaborations with leading sports organizations like Major League Soccer and the National Hockey League.

More recently, Polymarket partnered with Parcl to launch a market tied to real estate trends, extending prediction trading into property-linked themes. Moreover, the platform expanded onto the Solana blockchain via an integration with Jupiter and was added to the MetaMask mobile app, significantly widening its potential retail distribution footprint.

Outlook for Polymarket and Dome

While Polymarket and Dome have not yet published a joint roadmap, the acquisition suggests a clear focus on turning prediction markets into a plug-and-play layer for applications across finance, media, and sports. That said, how quickly Dome’s technology is rolled into Polymarket’s stack, and whether external developers gain direct access, remains to be seen.

Overall, the combination of Polymarket’s growing network of partners with Dome’s API-centric approach positions the company to deepen its role as core infrastructure for real-money event markets.

At a high-profile gathering in Florida, the presence of changpeng zhao underscored how deeply digital assets are now embedded in U.S. political and financial circles.

Zhao returns to the U.S. for first time since 2024 release

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao quietly returned to the United States in February 2026, marking his first appearance there since his 2024 release. The trip centered on a major crypto summit hosted at Mar-a-Lago, the Palm Beach resort closely associated with Donald Trump.

The event was organized by World Liberty Financial, a Trump-linked venture that has been positioning itself at the intersection of politics, finance, and blockchain. Moreover, Zhao’s attendance signaled that leading industry figures remain keen to engage with U.S. power brokers despite ongoing regulatory scrutiny.

Engagement with the Trump family and political allies

During the summit, Zhao was seen engaging directly with Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., underscoring the Trump family’s growing interest in the digital asset space. The interactions highlighted how crypto policy and business strategy are increasingly discussed in overtly political settings.

After the gathering, Zhao posted on X that he had “learned a lot” from the event, without disclosing specific details. However, his brief public comment suggested that conversations extended beyond simple networking, likely touching on regulation, market structure, and campaign-adjacent fundraising dynamics.

Wall Street and crypto leaders converge at Mar-a-Lago

The Mar-a-Lago summit drew an unusually broad mix of traditional finance executives, crypto entrepreneurs, and cultural figures. Among the most notable attendees were Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, NYSE President Lynn Martin, investor Kevin O’Leary, and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong.

Also present were Senator Bernie Moreno and artist Nicki Minaj, illustrating how digital asset debates now span politics, capital markets, and entertainment. That said, this convergence of interests at a Trump-linked venue is likely to intensify scrutiny of how policy discussions and fundraising overlap in the evolving crypto ecosystem.

Symbolic moment for U.S. crypto dialogue

For many observers, the gathering functioned as more than just another trump linked crypto summit; it symbolized the normalization of high-level crypto conversations within mainstream Republican circles. The setting at Mar-a-Lago, combined with the presence of top Wall Street and exchange executives, reinforced that message.

That said, the reappearance of changpeng zhao on U.S. soil will also refocus attention on his legal history and the broader regulatory challenges facing global exchanges. Nonetheless, the summit showcased how crypto has become a central talking point across finance, politics, and culture heading into the second half of the decade.

In summary, Zhao’s February 2026 visit, his interactions with the Trump family, and the attendance of figures like David Solomon, Lynn Martin, Kevin O’Leary, Brian Armstrong, Bernie Moreno, and Nicki Minaj all underline a single trend: the accelerating convergence of digital assets with U.S. political and economic power centers.

After years of retreat from newspapers, a fresh Warren Buffett investment in The New York Times signals a striking reversal for one of America’s most influential media skeptics.

Berkshire Hathaway returns to the newsroom with a $351.7 million stake

Just five years after Berkshire Hathaway sold all 31 of its newspapers and Warren Buffett famously called the industry “toast,” the conglomerate has quietly come back to legacy media. A quarterly update filed with the SEC revealed that Berkshire committed $351.7 million to shares of The New York Times, rejoining a small club of billionaire-backed news institutions.

Buffett, the legendary “Oracle of Omaha,” purchased 5.07 million shares in the 175-year-old paper at the end of 2025. The move coincided with his decision to step down as CEO of Berkshire after leading the company for nearly six decades. Moreover, the purchase marks a clear shift from his previous skepticism about newspapers’ long-term prospects.

“It is a full circle moment for Berkshire Hathaway in reinvesting in news and a huge vote of confidence by Berkshire in the business strategy of The New York Times,” said Tim Franklin, professor and chair of local news at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism. His comments highlight how Buffett’s change in stance could be interpreted as an endorsement of the paper’s subscription-first digital model.

Billionaires deepen their footprint in traditional media

The 95-year-old investor, whose fortune stands at an eye-watering $149 billion, is far from alone in putting serious money into journalism. He joins a legion of ultra-wealthy businessmen who are pouring millions into legacy outlets to retain influence in a rapidly digitizing information economy. However, the financial outcomes of these ventures have been mixed over the past decade.

Whether it is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’s takeover of The Washington Post for $250 million, or Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff and his purchase of Time magazine, the pattern is clear. The rich are willing to carve off slices of their fortunes to secure a foothold in national and global news. In this context, the New York Times investment sits squarely within a broader trend of billionaire media patronage.

High-profile takeovers from Bezos to Murdoch

Bezos famously bought The Washington Post in 2013 for a quarter of a billion dollars, reshaping the strategy of the 148-year-old newspaper. Yet, after a decade marked by both strong digital growth and recent turbulence, the Post endured a major setback earlier this month, cutting roughly a third of its staff. That said, its owner has so far continued to back the organization amid financial pressure.

Just days after Bezos entered the industry, another billionaire stepped in: John Henry, principal owner of the Boston Red Sox, acquired The Boston Globe for $70 million. Around the same era, media tycoon Rupert Murdoch continued to expand his extensive news empire. The former CEO of 21st Century Fox, whose family fortune is estimated at nearly $19 billion, controls influential TV channel Fox News through his media holdings.

Murdoch’s reach extends deep into print and digital publishing as well. His son, Lachlan Murdoch, chairs News Corp, which owns The Wall Street Journal alongside outlets including The Times of London and the New York Post. Moreover, this complex network underscores how legacy brands often rely on billionaire patrons to navigate audience fragmentation and advertising declines.

Carlos Slim and another deep-pocketed Times backer

Alongside Buffett, The New York Times has long had another prominent billionaire supporter: telecom magnate Carlos Slim Helú, the richest man in Mexico. He has invested millions of dollars into the publication over the years. In early 2015, his position peaked when he became the paper’s largest single investor, holding nearly 17% of the brand at that time.

That stake made Slim a critical financial backer during a period when the Times was rapidly shifting from print-heavy revenues to a digital subscription model. However, his involvement also illustrated how strategic capital from ultra-wealthy individuals can help shield heritage news organizations while they overhaul their business structures.

From “toast” to turnaround: Buffett’s changing view on newspapers

The new position in The New York Times is especially striking because it reverses Buffett’s well-documented retreat from newspapers. His latest move, interpreted by some as a fresh berkshire hathaway investment endorsement of news, contrasts sharply with his exit from the sector just a few years earlier. Moreover, it raises questions about how he now assesses the digital-era prospects of leading media brands.

In 2020, Berkshire Hathaway sold all of its newspaper holdings to Lee Enterprises for $140 million. The deal included 31 papers across 10 states, such as the Omaha World-Herald and The Buffalo News. At the time, Buffett acknowledged a longstanding affection for the industry but emphasized that he had grown wary of structural decline in print advertising and local circulation.

He observed that falling ad revenue had transformed the newspaper business “from monopoly to franchise to competitive,” a trajectory he believed would leave many publications “toast.” Despite that harsh assessment, he noted that Berkshire had acquired its papers at what he considered “reasonable” prices, softening the financial impact of the sale. However, for many observers, his exit seemed to signal the end of an era.

Investors who closely track his holdings treated the 2020 sale as a grim omen for legacy print. Analysts concluded that Buffett doubted the traditional newspaper model could ever fully recover its former profitability or dominance. Yet the latest Warren Buffett investment in The New York Times, coming as the media world becomes even more digital and subscription-driven, suggests that at least some elite investors still see upside in storied news brands.

Overall, the growing list of billionaires behind major outlets—from Bezos and Henry to Murdoch, Slim, and now Buffett—indicates that heritage publications remain strategically valuable, even in a fractured information market. While the economics of print may never return to their peak, sustained capital and evolving digital strategies could ensure that influential newspapers continue to shape public debate for years to come.

World Liberty Financial is moving deeper into blockchain-based finance as it launches the trump maldives tokenization initiative for an ultra-luxury resort development in the Indian Ocean.

World Liberty Financial partners with DarGlobal and Securitize

World Liberty Financial (“WLFI“) announced on Feb. 19, 2026 that it will tokenize loan revenue interests tied to the Trump International Hotel & Resort, Maldives. The move comes in partnership with Securitize, Inc., a platform focused on real world assets tokenization, and DarGlobal PLC (LSE: DAR), an international real estate developer.

The Maldives resort is a flagship project by DarGlobal, developed in collaboration with The Trump Organization. The hotel and resort complex is scheduled for completion in 2030 and will include about 100 ultra-luxury beachfront and overwater villas. Moreover, it is positioned as a showcase for how tokenized capital structures can support high-end property development.

The initial offering will provide eligible accredited investors with exposure to the development’s loan revenue streams. According to WLFI, those tokenized positions are designed to generate a fixed return within a regulated securities framework. However, access remains restricted to qualified participants under U.S. securities rules and equivalent offshore standards.

Opening access to tokenized real estate

“We created World Liberty Financial to open decentralized finance to the world. With today’s announcement, we are broadening that access to tokenized real estate,” said Eric Trump, co-founder of WLFI. He emphasized that, for the first time, eligible participants can gain on-chain exposure to an iconic property such as the Trump International Hotel & Resort, Maldives.

Eric Trump added that WLFI is “excited about future projects” as it plans to onboard more world-class assets onto the blockchain. That said, he underlined that the structure aims to keep traditional investor protections in place while leveraging distributed ledger technology for efficiency and access.

“Real estate has been one of the most difficult asset classes to tokenize effectively,” said Carlos Domingo, co-founder and CEO of Securitize. He argued that scalable on-chain real estate products, issued with regulatory compliance, governance and market structure in mind, will be demanded globally. This, he said, is what the partnership with WLFI and the trump maldives tokenization plan seeks to deliver.

Structure of the private token offering

DarGlobal CEO Ziad El Chaar described the initiative as “a major step forward for real estate investing.” Together with WLFI and Securitize, DarGlobal aims to rethink how qualified investors can access, trade and ultimately achieve liquidity in loan revenue interests in high-quality real estate development. Moreover, the partners see the deal as a template for future token-based capital raises.

The tokens will be offered through a private placement conducted under Rule 506(c) of Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. They will be sold only to verified accredited investors in the United States, or to non-U.S. persons in offshore transactions under Regulation S. However, the tokens will not be registered under U.S. federal or state securities laws and will therefore be subject to transfer restrictions.

According to the announcement, it is expected that the offering will be issued on compatible public blockchains, subject to applicable requirements. The parties did not specify which chains will be used, but stressed that compliance and governance remain central to the token design and distribution.

Trump Organization’s role and branding

The announcement makes clear that neither The Trump Organization nor its affiliates will issue or promote the tokens directly. Instead, related entities only hold indirect economic interests in the development. Furthermore, the Trump name is used under license and does not represent an endorsement of the offering or its structure.

The structure allows Strategy, DarGlobal and Securitize to align a high-profile hospitality project with on-chain financing tools while maintaining separation from the branded operating company. However, the Trump International Hotel & Resort, Maldives branding is expected to remain a key marketing element for the underlying destination itself.

In summary, the WLFI initiative with DarGlobal and Securitize brings blockchain-based securities into a prominent hospitality development, combining private regulation d offering rules, securitize tokenization platform technology and darglobal real estate expertise in a single cross-border structure.

In a pivotal governance phase, Uniswap unification is emerging as the framework for routing protocol revenues and tightening the link between usage and token economics.

New fee plan extends to eight additional networks

On Feb. 19, 2026, the team behind the dominant decentralized exchange Uniswap unveiled a proposal to expand its fee-collection system beyond Ethereum and current coverage. The governance measure seeks community approval to turn on protocol fees for all remaining version 3 liquidity pools on Ethereum, as well as on eight other blockchains.

Specifically, the proposal would activate fees on Arbitrum, Base, Celo, OP Mainnet, Soneium, X Layer, Worldchain, and Zora. Moreover, this change would substantially broaden Uniswap’s revenue footprint across multiple ecosystems that already host high-volume trading activity.

The plan introduces a new tier-based protocol fee adapter that automatically assigns fee rates to each pool. Instead of separate governance votes per pool, rates would be mapped to the existing liquidity provider fee tiers, simplifying operations and reducing governance overhead for token holders.

Layer 2 revenue routed back to Ethereum for UNI burns

Under the proposal, all protocol fees accrued on the eight layer 2 and alternative networks would be bridged back to Ethereum mainnet. There, the funds would be used for automated UNI purchases and permanent removal of those tokens from circulation, tightening the token’s supply over time.

However, the design does more than simply add another burn lever. It formalizes cross chain revenue routing into a unified system, ensuring that value generated on scaling networks ultimately supports Ethereum-based token holders through structured ethereum uni burns.

The mechanism mirrors infrastructure already used for Unichain sequencer revenue, aligning the broader protocol with the same usage-linked burn model. That said, this proposal applies the template to a much wider set of markets and liquidity pools.

UNIfication framework and streamlined governance path

The current measure is the first major test for the UNIfication governance overhaul, which restructured how Uniswap processes fee-related changes. The new model allows certain proposals to skip the traditional request for comment stage and move more quickly through the decision pipeline.

Under this framework, the initiative first goes to a five day Snapshot poll. If it secures sufficient support in that off-chain vote, it then progresses to a binding on-chain ratification, where final approval or rejection is recorded directly on Ethereum.

Within this context, the ongoing unification governance vote on the Uniswap unification framework could set precedent for future monetization changes. Moreover, it may define expectations for how rapidly the community can adapt fee structures as markets evolve.

Implications for Uniswap tokenomics and market position

If adopted, the uniswap fee expansion would significantly increase the share of protocol activity that generates revenue for UNI-linked mechanisms. It would also further entrench a deflationary design where more trading volume and liquidity translate into more UNI removed from circulation.

However, the vote is also a signal on governance appetite for more active monetization, especially across layer 2 fee routing environments. Community support would confirm backing for a model in which cross-network usage flows back to Ethereum and the UNI supply.

Ultimately, the outcome of the current process will reveal how far the community is prepared to push the Uniswap protocol toward coordinated revenues and burns under the evolving UNIfication architecture.

In summary, the proposal combines a broader on-chain fee switch, automated cross-network routing, and a burn-centric incentive design, potentially reshaping both Uniswap’s revenue profile and UNI’s long-term scarcity.

Global payment platform Payoneer is deepening its focus on digital assets, announcing a new Payoneer stablecoin solution in partnership with infrastructure provider Bridge to streamline cross-border business payments.

Payoneer and Bridge expand stablecoin use for global SMBs

On February 19, 2026, Payoneer revealed a strategic collaboration with Bridge, a Stripe company, to integrate end-to-end stablecoin workflows directly into its platform. The initiative aims to deliver faster and more secure cross-border settlement for small and medium-sized businesses.

Under the partnership, SMBs will be able to hold, receive and send stablecoins from within Payoneer’s interface. Moreover, the company intends to move stablecoins firmly beyond speculative trading and into everyday, regulated financial operations.

These assets can be used for routine transactions, including supplier payments and contractor invoices, within a framework that prioritizes compliance and risk controls. That said, Payoneer is positioning stable-value digital currencies as a working capital tool rather than a volatile investment product.

Bridging the digital divide in cross-border finance

The announcement comes as adoption of stablecoins accelerates, particularly for what the industry describes as “always-on” money movement. However, despite faster settlement and 24/7 availability, real-world usage still faces structural hurdles, especially in emerging markets.

Payoneer points to the persistent challenge of converting stablecoins into local currency as a key friction point. Moreover, slower-than-expected regulatory reform in many jurisdictions has compounded these issues, limiting stablecoin uptake where traditional banking access is already constrained.

The new collaboration uses Bridge’s infrastructure to mask blockchain complexity from end users. By embedding on-chain and off-chain workflows, Payoneer aims to tackle the conversion and compliance bottlenecks that have historically hampered adoption in markets that need innovative payment rails most.

As a result, stablecoin cross border settlement processes are expected to feel similar to conventional fintech experiences, while still benefiting from near-instant clearing and lower operational overheads.

Embedded stablecoin workflows inside the Payoneer platform

End-to-end digital asset workflows will be natively integrated into the Payoneer platform, rather than offered as a standalone product. However, the company stresses that regulatory oversight and customer protection will remain central to the rollout.

For cross-border businesses, the practical applications are straightforward. A wholesaler could accept customer payments in a stablecoin, while a marketing agency might use the same instruments to pay international freelancers. Moreover, these funds can either be held in digital form or withdrawn to a linked local bank account.

In this context, the payoneer stablecoin stack is presented as one more option in a broader multi-currency environment, designed to coexist with fiat accounts instead of replacing them outright.

Commenting on the initiative, John Caplan, CEO of Payoneer, emphasized the operational benefits of instant settlement. “No-friction money movement is essential for global business,” he said, adding that integrating stablecoins into Payoneer’s trusted financial stack is meant to optimize compliance, speed, security and simplicity.

Caplan framed the move as a shift from experimentation to production-grade usage, arguing that this is about “rethinking how money moves across borders for real businesses, not as an experiment, but as a scalable financial capability.” That said, scaling will depend on how quickly local regulations adapt.

Simplifying global workflows for nearly two million customers

With almost two million customers, Payoneer is positioning itself as a primary interface for SMBs seeking continuous, global access to funds. By handling the compliance checks and technical integration, the company allows clients to avoid many of the delays linked to legacy correspondent banking networks.

The new features will debut in selected markets in Q2 2026, following a phased rollout strategy. Moreover, functionality will expand throughout 2026 as Payoneer navigates differing regulatory regimes and market-specific requirements around digital assets and financial licensing.

According to Zach Abrams, Co-Founder and CEO of Bridge, the platform was “built to abstract away the hardest parts of blockchain infrastructure.” He said this lets partners like Payoneer focus on delivering better financial experiences rather than managing nodes, keys, and settlement rails.

Abrams added that, together, the companies are making stablecoins a “practical and secure option for everyday cross-border money movement” for businesses that might otherwise lack access to sophisticated treasury tools.

Bridge, Stripe and the stablecoin infrastructure push

The partnership builds on the bridge stripe acquisition completed in February 2025, when Stripe acquired Bridge for approximately US$1.1bn. However, the strategic fit was clear from the outset, given Stripe’s long-standing interest in alternative payment methods.

At the time of the deal, Abrams recalled being surprised by the focus of discussions. “It was shocking to me. We spent 90-plus per cent of the meeting talking about stablecoins 6ven though we were the only stablecoin company in the room,” he said, underscoring how central the technology was to Stripe’s roadmap.

Since acquiring Bridge, Stripe has rolled out stablecoin accounts in 101 countries to widen access to the global digital economy. Moreover, in July 2025, the company launched a Bridge-Visa card, enabling customers to spend stablecoins for everyday purchases via Visa’s merchant network.

The card initiative aligns with Stripe’s objective of enhancing financial inclusion by making programmable money usable at traditional points of sale. That said, regulatory clarity and consumer education will play a decisive role in determining adoption speed.

Viewed together, the Payoneer and Bridge collaboration, the Bridge-Visa card, and Stripe’s global account offering signal a push toward stablecoin compliance workflow models that blend fintech convenience with robust oversight.

Outlook for SMB-focused digital payment rails

For globally active SMBs, the bridge payments partnership represents another step toward modernizing treasury and payment operations. Stable-value digital assets could help these firms manage currency risk, reduce settlement delays and access new customer segments.

Moreover, as more platforms embed digital currency tools, small businesses may be able to adopt these technologies without having to master blockchain concepts. Instead, they can focus on core operations while platforms like Payoneer and Bridge manage the plumbing.

In summary, Payoneer’s integration of blockchain-enabled settlement with Bridge’s infrastructure, under Stripe’s ownership, illustrates how traditional fintech and digital assets are converging. If regulators keep pace, the approach could turn stablecoins into a mainstream instrument for day-to-day business finance rather than a niche speculative asset.

Investors reacted nervously to Bitdeer convertible notes news on Thursday, as fresh fundraising plans sparked concerns over future equity dilution and valuation pressure.

Bitdeer raises $300 million through new convertible notes

Bitdeer Technologies (BTDR) announced plans to raise $300 million via a private sale of convertible senior notes, deepening its capital stack as it pursues growth in bitcoin mining and AI data centers. However, the new financing structure immediately weighed on market sentiment.

The Singapore-based company said the notes will mature in 2032 and may be converted, at Bitdeer‘s election, into cash, Class A ordinary shares, or a combination of both. Moreover, the deal includes an underwriter greenshoe option for an additional $45 million in notes, potentially increasing the total size of the convertible issuance.

The miner and AI data center operator intends to use a portion of the proceeds to fund capped call transactions. These structures are meant to reduce potential share dilution if the notes are converted into equity, although they can introduce additional complexity and trading volatility around the transaction.

Registered direct share sale and note repurchase plan

Alongside the convertible debt, Bitdeer also outlined a separate registered direct offering of Class A shares. The offering will be made directly to certain existing holders of its 5.25% convertible notes due 2029, as part of a broader balance sheet management strategy.

Proceeds from the stock sale will help fund the repurchase of a portion of those 2029 notes through privately negotiated transactions. That said, the company has not disclosed how many Class A shares it plans to issue in this direct placement, leaving the full dilution impact uncertain for now.

The company stated that the registered direct offering will be contingent on the successful completion of the new convertible notes sale and the related repurchase of existing debt. However, the convertible note offering itself can proceed independently, even if the equity placement is not finalized.

Use of proceeds and growth ambitions

After funding the capped call transactions and repurchases of outstanding debt, Bitdeer plans to allocate any remaining capital to data center expansion and growth initiatives. These include scaling its high-performance computing and AI cloud operations, as well as further development of ASIC mining rigs tailored for bitcoin mining.

Moreover, the fundraising supports Bitdeer’s strategy to grow as both a bitcoin miner and infrastructure provider for AI workloads, positioning the firm within two capital-intensive technology segments. The decision to tap capital markets through convertible securities underlines the need to balance aggressive expansion with shareholder concerns over dilution.

Market reaction and share price impact

The announcement of the bitdeer convertible notes and associated share sale immediately hit the stock. Bitdeer stock tumble headlines followed as shares dropped 17% in early Thursday trading, slipping below $8 for the first time since April, marking a 10-month low for the Singapore-based miner.

Convertible debt frequently pressures equities because investors anticipate future share dilution fears. If the company’s share price rises meaningfully, noteholders may choose to convert their debt into stock, increasing the total share count and potentially capping upside in the near term.

Bitdeer’s use of capped calls hedging is intended to offset some of this dilutive effect by effectively limiting the number of shares issued upon conversion within a specified price range. However, such hedging strategies can also introduce short-term volatility in both the underlying stock and related derivatives as market participants adjust positions.

Conditions and outlook for investors

The company emphasized that the registered direct equity offering depends on closing the new note sale and the linked repurchases of 2029 convertible debt. By contrast, the note issuance can move forward on its own, giving Bitdeer flexibility to secure financing even if market appetite for new equity softens.

For investors, the deal structure highlights the trade-off between funding growth and protecting existing shareholders. On one hand, the capital raise could accelerate expansion in mining infrastructure and AI services. On the other, the prospect of additional shares from conversions keeps pressure on the current valuation.

In summary, Bitdeer’s latest financing package underscores its ambition to expand beyond core bitcoin mining into higher-margin computing services, while relying on complex convertible structures to fund that journey. How effectively the company manages dilution and executes on its expansion plan will remain central to the stock’s performance in the coming quarters.

Across industries, workers are confronting rapid change as ai fluency quietly emerges as a powerful differentiator in pay, promotions, and long-term career security.

Most employees still are not using AI at work

A new study from Google and Ipsos, shared with Fortune, shows that only two in five U.S. workers, or 40%, are even casually using AI in their jobs. Moreover, just 5% qualify as “AI fluent,” meaning they have significantly redesigned or reorganized key parts of their work using the technology.

That small fluent group is seeing outsized rewards. According to the report, these workers are 4.5x more likely to say they earn higher wages and 4x more likely to report a promotion specifically tied to their ability to use AI. However, most employees remain in the early, experimental phase of using these tools.

Among workers who are not using AI at all, the main obstacle is simple disbelief in its relevance. 53% of non-users say they do not think AI applies to the work they do. Adoption also trails off among small businesses, rural employees, and frontline staff—segments that could face the steepest challenge as AI-driven productivity expectations rise.

Training gap widens the divide

While dire predictions of near-term mass job loss have eased, Google’s data highlights another risk: workers being left behind due to inadequate training. Only 14% of employees say their employer offered any AI training in the past 12 months, and just 37% report that their organization provides formal guidance on how to use AI at work.

Fabien Curto Millet, Google‘s chief economist, acknowledged that embedding AI into daily workflows will take time. However, he warned that delay carries strategic costs. “Failing to invest in training means running the risk of losing ground to competitors who are already reaping these rewards,” Curto Millet told Fortune.

He added that employers should consider what happens when rivals are the first to achieve a meaningful jump in quality and efficiency through AI. That said, many organizations are still working out basic policies and ai workforce training strategies, leaving employees to experiment on their own or avoid the tools altogether.

The race to build competitive AI skills

The findings come more than three years after the arrival of ChatGPT and a wave of generative AI products, including Claude, Gemini, and Copilot. In that period, corporate pressure to boost productivity has only intensified, pushing many leaders to see AI proficiency as a core requirement rather than a nice-to-have skill.

Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, has urged employees to accelerate their use of AI, arguing that the current transition demands moving faster than in past tech cycles. He contrasted earlier eras of “extraordinary investment,” when companies responded by adding large numbers of staff, with today’s environment, where leaders expect technology itself to carry more of the load.

“In this AI moment, I think we have to accomplish more by taking advantage of this transition to drive higher productivity,” Pichai said. Moreover, the new expectations are reshaping what advancement looks like inside large organizations, as those comfortable with AI tools increasingly stand out.

Google bets on structured AI education

To close the skills gap, Google is rolling out a new Google AI Professional Certificate, an eight-hour program designed to teach practical applications of AI for research, content creation, and data analysis. The certificate aims to give workers repeatable workflows rather than one-off tricks.

Major employers, including Walmart, Colgate-Palmolive, and Deloitte, plan to offer the credential at no cost to their employees. That move signals that large companies increasingly view AI as a core competency across functions, not just a specialist skill clustered in IT or data science teams.

Donna Morris, Walmart’s chief people officer, told Fortune the retailer sees AI as a force that changes how work gets done, not as a tool for sidelining employees. “We all have to change. That’s an ongoing need, but we all have the opportunity to lean into what that new future is,” she said, emphasizing that the company wants its staff to grow with the technology.

Rethinking the future of work, not replacing humans

Morris expects AI to reshape roles and spawn new opportunities rather than simply erase jobs. “I think new jobs will be created. I think new businesses will be created. I think the way we will do things will change,” she said. However, she stressed that does not mean humans will be abandoned by employers or made obsolete.

Curto Millet echoed that view, arguing that ai impact on careers will be determined largely by how quickly workers and organizations adapt. In his view, the most successful companies will be those that blend human judgment and creativity with systematic use of AI to remove tedious tasks and free up time for higher-value work.

For now, the study suggests that ai fluency is still concentrated among a relatively small share of employees, creating an advantage for those who choose to experiment early. As more organizations embed AI into performance expectations, the gap between fluent users and non-users could widen.

How Gen Z can turn AI into an advantage

For young people navigating an uncertain job market—and an education system that is still catching up to employer needs—Curto Millet’s advice is direct: learn AI aggressively, but never treat it as a substitute for human judgment. Historically, he noted, younger workers have often gained the most from major technological shifts.

“I encourage young people to gain experience and accumulate judgment as fast as they can—leaning into human skills that will remain invaluable going forward,” he said. Moreover, Gen Z often starts with an edge as a tech-native generation, comfortable experimenting with new tools.

Matt Sigelman, president of the Burning Glass Institute, said younger workers should not neglect core abilities like critical thinking, empathy, and strategic decision-making as they build technical skills. The aim, he argued, is not to compete with AI but to use it as a “force multiplier” that amplifies human strengths.

Using AI to do higher-value work

Sigelman cautioned that superficially impressive uses of AI may not translate into real workplace impact. “While being able to vibe code some new spreadsheet tracker app is interesting and a good skills-building exercise, it’s unlikely to help you do your job bigger and better,” he told Fortune.

Instead, he argued, the most valuable ai skills for workers involve using the technology to generate new ideas, prototype concepts quickly, and automate routine tasks. That way, employees can redirect time and attention toward higher-value activities that matter more to employers, such as strategy, relationship-building, and complex problem-solving.

Even as some companies streamline or reduce entry-level roles, Curto Millet said leaders should not overlook what early-career hires can uniquely contribute. In his experience, younger workers often bring a deeper, more intuitive understanding of emerging AI tools than senior colleagues.

Reverse mentorship and the next generation of talent

Curto Millet said he is consistently struck by how well-versed many young people are in AI, from generative chatbots to image and code assistants. Organizations that recognize and harness that fluency, he argued, can accelerate their own AI learning curve across teams and functions.

He suggested that companies lean into “reverse mentorship,” where younger, AI-savvy employees help upskill more experienced staff in the most cutting-edge ways to use these tools. Moreover, pairing early talent with senior leaders can ensure that experimentation is grounded in business context, governance, and ethical standards.

As AI continues to spread through everyday workflows, the report implies that those who invest time in building structured skills now will be best positioned. The combination of technical know-how, human judgment, and a willingness to keep learning may prove the most durable career asset in an AI-supported workforce.

In summary, Google’s research indicates that AI proficiency is already reshaping wages, promotions, and opportunities, while uneven access to training risks leaving many workers behind as the technology becomes embedded in how modern organizations operate.

Markets are processing a controlled yet persistent selloff as Bitcoin price today trades in a zone where bearish momentum meets growing contrarian interest.

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

1. Market Thesis – Where We Stand Now

Bitcoin price today is trading around $66,100–66,200 (BTC/USDT) after several weeks of controlled but persistent selling. The daily trend is clearly bearish, but what matters here is how we are selling off: it has been steady, not panic-driven, and we are now entering levels where the market usually starts to argue with itself.

The dominant force right now is risk-off positioning from larger players after the Wall Street-driven ETF wave cooled and macro/geopolitical tension picked up. You see that in the headlines, but you also see it in structure: price is well below the major moving averages, RSI is depressed but not yet washed out, and the fear & greed index is sitting at Extreme Fear (9). This is the part of the cycle where trend followers are still short or flat, while contrarians are quietly starting to plan entries, not because things look good, but because things finally look uncomfortable.

2. Higher Timeframe Bias (Daily – D1)

On the daily chart, the system labels the regime as bearish. The burden of proof is on the bulls.

Price vs EMAs (Trend Structure)

Close: $66,139.49

EMA 20: $71,578.15

EMA 50: $79,127.61

EMA 200: $93,541.55

Price is trading well below all three EMAs. Short-term trend (20 EMA), medium-term trend (50 EMA), and long-term trend (200 EMA) are all above price and effectively acting as a stacked zone of overhead supply.

What it implies: Structurally, we are in a mature pullback within a larger-cycle bull market. You do not get price that far below a rising 200 EMA in the middle of a euphoric blow-off; you see it during deeper corrections where late longs are being cleaned out. The distance to the 20 and 50 EMAs means any bounce has room to run before it even threatens the broader down-leg.

RSI (Momentum / Exhaustion)

RSI 14 (Daily): 32.44

Daily RSI is sitting just above classical oversold territory.

What it implies: Momentum is bearish but not yet capitulative. Sellers are in control, but we are entering a zone where fresh shorts carry higher risk of getting squeezed. It is the kind of reading where the trend can push a bit lower, but the risk-reward starts shifting against newly established aggressive shorts unless we see another sharp leg down.

MACD (Trend Momentum & Inflection)

MACD line: -4,597.9

Signal line: -4,926.81

Histogram: +328.91

MACD is negative, in line with the downtrend, but the histogram is positive, meaning the MACD line is starting to creep back toward the signal line.

What it implies: Trend momentum is still down, yet the rate of downside is easing. Bears are no longer accelerating the move; they are pressing an existing advantage. This is often how bases or short-term relief rallies begin: not with instant reversals, but with a loss of downside momentum first.

Bollinger Bands (Volatility & Location)

Middle band (20 SMA proxy): $70,266.69

Upper band: $78,702.41

Lower band: $61,830.96

Price (close): $66,139.49

Bitcoin is trading in the lower half of the bands, but not pinned to the lower band.

What it implies: We are in a downside-biased volatility regime, but without a full volatility blowout. Price is not hugging the lower band, which tells you we are not in the straight-line liquidation phase. There is still room for a push toward the lower band near $61.8k if sentiment worsens, but also room for mean reversion back toward the mid-band around $70k if sellers lose focus.

ATR (Daily Volatility)

ATR 14: $3,599.87

Daily ATR is about $3.6k, which is elevated but not extreme by Bitcoin standards.

What it implies: We are in a high but manageable volatility environment. Daily ranges around 5–6% are on the table. Position sizing needs to assume that a $3–4k intraday swing is routine, not exceptional.

Daily Pivot Levels

Pivot Point (PP): $66,363.77

Resistance 1 (R1): $67,095.72

Support 1 (S1): $65,407.55

Price is sitting just under the daily pivot point.

What it implies: Short-term control is in the hands of sellers as long as price stays below $66.4k. The pivot acts as an intraday line in the sand: reclaiming it with momentum would hint at a short-covering day, while repeated rejections keep the path open toward $65.4k and below.

3. Intraday Context – H1 and M15

Hourly (H1) – Confirming the Downtrend

Close: $66,148

EMA 20: $66,716.85

EMA 50: $67,161.95

EMA 200: $68,157.46

RSI 14: 37.35

MACD line: -238.59

MACD signal: -190.63

MACD hist: -47.96

BB mid: $66,626.86 • upper: $67,322.41 • lower: $65,931.31

ATR 14: $395.62

Pivot PP: $66,000.12 • R1: $66,368.4 • S1: $65,779.71

On H1, price is also below all key EMAs, and the regime is flagged as bearish. RSI is weak but not oversold, and the MACD histogram is slightly negative.

What it implies: The hourly chart is aligned with the daily downtrend. Sellers are still leaning on intraday rallies, but momentum is not in free fall. The hourly ATR near $400 means intraday swings around 0.5–0.7% are typical, and the hourly pivot at $66k is acting as a gravitational point. Brief spikes above the pivot that fail near R1 around $66.37k are classic spots where short-term traders re-join the prevailing downtrend.

15-Min (M15) – Execution Layer

Close: $66,125.34

EMA 20: $66,423.36

EMA 50: $66,656.87

EMA 200: $67,192.10

RSI 14: 35.93

MACD line: -236.28

MACD signal: -178.2

MACD hist: -58.08

BB mid: $66,513.08 • upper: $67,212.48 • lower: $65,813.68

ATR 14: $256.4

Pivot PP: $65,992.56 • R1: $66,353.3 • S1: $65,764.61

M15 shows price grinding under its short EMAs with soft downside momentum. RSI is weak, and the MACD histogram is negative but not collapsing.

What it implies: The microstructure is controlled selling rather than panic. Dips are being sold, but bounces are not completely dead. For intraday traders, the band between the 15-minute pivot around $65,993 and R1 near $66,353 is a short-term battlefield: above R1 you start to see evidence of a squeeze; below the pivot the path of least resistance stays lower toward $65.7k and then the daily S1 region.

4. Market Context: Dominance, Sentiment, and DeFi

BTC dominance is high at 56.18%, while total crypto market cap is down about 1.7% in 24 hours. Fear & Greed sits at 9 (Extreme Fear).

What it implies: Money is not rotating into altcoins; it is either sitting in BTC, moving to stablecoins, or leaving the space entirely. Extreme fear at these levels usually appears in the later stages of a drawdown rather than the beginning. It does not guarantee a bottom, but it tells you that forced sellers and late bears are increasingly driving the tape. DeFi fee spikes on major DEXs, for example Uniswap v3 up sharply on the day, point to heightened on-chain activity, consistent with repositioning and de-risking.

5. Main Scenario for Bitcoin Price Today

Based on the daily trend structure and aligned lower timeframes, the main scenario is bearish. However, it is a late-stage bearish environment characterized by momentum loss and elevated fear, which is typically where inflection setups start to form.

Bearish Scenario (Primary)

In the active bearish path, Bitcoin fails to reclaim the daily pivot at about $66.4k with authority. Every test of that area and the nearby hourly resistance band around $67k is met with selling. H1 and M15 EMAs continue to cap price, and the market grinds lower in a stair-step pattern.

Under this scenario:

Intraday, the H1 S1 near $65.78k and daily S1 at about $65.41k levels get tested and potentially broken.

Volatility (ATR) keeps daily ranges large enough to threaten the lower Bollinger Band near $61.8k.

RSI can sink into the 25–30 zone on the daily if we see a clean leg toward or slightly through $60k, aligning with the recent news narrative about liquidation triggers around that level.

What strengthens this scenario today: staying pinned below the cluster of intraday EMAs, more negative MACD histograms on H1 and M15, and any pickup in daily ATR without positive reaction from buyers.

Bearish scenario invalidation:

A sustained move back above $70k, roughly the daily mid Bollinger and near the 20 EMA, would seriously damage the immediate bearish thesis.

On lower timeframes, a series of higher highs and higher lows on H1 above the $66.5–67k band, accompanied by MACD crossing firmly positive and RSI pushing through the mid-50s, would signal that sellers have lost control of the short-term tape.

Bullish / Mean-Reversion Scenario (Secondary)

The counter-scenario takes the view that extreme fear plus slowing downside momentum is setting up a relief rally rather than another waterfall. Here, Bitcoin defends the mid-$65k area and begins to grind higher intraday.

Under this path:

Price reclaims the daily pivot at $66.4k and holds above it on a closing basis.

The first upside magnet is the hourly mid-Bollinger and EMAs around $66.7–67.2k, followed by the daily mid-Bollinger near $70k.

Daily RSI moves back above 40, and the MACD histogram on D1 stays positive and grows, signaling a more convincing slowdown of the prior downtrend.

This scenario is not about calling a new macro bull leg; it is about pricing in a short-covering rally and perhaps a retest of broken support levels from above.

Bullish scenario invalidation:

A clean break and daily close below the lower Bollinger trajectory, around $61.8k, or a fast flush toward $60k without strong buying reaction would undercut the mean-reversion idea and reopen the door for a deeper correction.

If H1 repeatedly fails at the $66–67k zone and rolls over with rising volume, the bounce case weakens quickly.

Neutral / Range-Building Variant

There is a realistic middle path: Bitcoin could simply start building a range between roughly $62k and $70k, with volatility compressing over time. In that case, daily EMAs would gradually drift down while price chops sideways, and indicators like RSI would hover in the 40–50 area.

What would support this: declining ATR, flat-to-slightly positive MACD histogram, and a series of failed breakouts and breakdowns on both sides of the range.

6. Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

The current setup is one where trend followers still have the edge, but their edge is diminishing as momentum cools and sentiment hits extreme fear. The daily structure supports a bearish bias, yet the indicators are clear: this is not the start of the downtrend; it is the more mature phase where late shorts and forced liquidations tend to battle with early dip buyers.

For any active approach, the key is timeframe alignment:

If you lean into the bearish view, you want H1 and M15 to remain capped by their EMAs and pivots, with daily staying below $70k. Sharp squeezes into those moving averages are the high-risk zones to manage.

If you are watching for a bounce, your first confirmation is the ability of price to reclaim and hold above pivots, today around $66–66.5k, and then start closing candles above the short EMAs on H1.

Volatility is high enough that position sizing and liquidity choice matter more than usual. A move of $3–4k either way in a session is well within the normal range right now, so any plan built on tight stops or over-leverage is effectively a bet on noise, not direction.

Above all, this is an environment where narratives shift quickly. A move from extreme fear to reluctant optimism can happen in a handful of sessions if price bounces hard, just as another wave of macro risk-off could push BTC toward the $60k liquidation pocket. The only constant here is uncertainty, so any directional stance needs to be paired with clear invalidation levels and respect for the current volatility regime.

In a market dominated by Bitcoin and stables, Ethereum value is sitting at a discount while sentiment remains locked in extreme fear across the crypto complex.

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

Thesis: Ethereum Value Is Cheap for a Reason — But the Market Is Close to Oversold Exhaustion

Ethereum (ETHUSDT) is trading around $1,930, sitting well below all key daily moving averages in a market dominated by Bitcoin at ~56% dominance and a crypto-wide sentiment of Extreme Fear (index at 9). That combination usually means Ethereum value looks optically cheap, but buyers are still too scared to step in size.

The dominant force right now is risk-off positioning: capital is hiding in BTC and stables while growth assets like ETH trade at a discount. The question is not “is ETH undervalued?” in the long-term sense, but rather: is the current downtrend mature enough to justify taking the other side? On the daily chart, the structure is still bearish, but momentum and volatility suggest we may be entering the late phase of the selloff rather than the middle.

Daily Chart (D1): Macro Bias – Bearish, But Late in the Move

On the daily timeframe, ETH/USDT is clearly in a bearing regime. Price is below all major EMAs and trades in the lower half of its Bollinger Band range.

Trend Structure: EMAs

Daily close: $1,930.61
EMA 20: $2,155.87
EMA 50: $2,512.20
EMA 200: $3,036.68

ETH is trading roughly 10% below the 20-day, 23% below the 50-day, and a massive 36% below the 200-day EMA. The short-, medium-, and long-term trend lines are all stacked above price and pointing down.

Interpretation: This is a textbook downtrend. Ethereum value is cheap versus where it traded over the past few months, but it is cheap within a trend, not in a vacuum. Any bounce back toward the 20-day EMA near $2,150 currently looks more like a rally into resistance than a full trend reversal.

Momentum: RSI (14)

RSI (14): 32.56

RSI is hovering just above the classic oversold line without actually breaking below 30.

Interpretation: Sellers are clearly in control, but we are not at capitulation levels yet. This is the zone where continued grind lower is still possible, but it also does not take much additional selling to trigger genuine oversold conditions and spark short-covering. Momentum is bearish, but it is no longer early; it is in the late, heavy phase of the move.

Momentum & Trend Confirmation: MACD

MACD line: -209.59
Signal line: -231.10
Histogram: +21.50

The MACD is deeply negative, confirming the strength and duration of the downtrend. However, the MACD line has crossed above the signal line, turning the histogram slightly positive.

Interpretation: The trend is still down, but downside momentum is slowing. This is often what you see when a selloff is transitioning from acceleration to consolidation or a potential base. MACD is not giving a clean buy signal yet, but it does say the worst of the momentum may be behind us, even if price has not found a firm floor.

Volatility & Positioning: Bollinger Bands

BB mid (20 SMA proxy): $2,075.66
Upper band: $2,373.98
Lower band: $1,777.35
Price vs bands: $1,930 is below the midline, above the lower band.

ETH is trading in the lower half of the band range, closer to the lower band but not hugging it.

Interpretation: The market has already priced in a significant amount of downside, but we are not in an outright panic where price rides the lower band. That usually means the move is more of a controlled de-risking than a liquidation spiral. A retest of the lower band near $1,780 remains on the table if fear intensifies, but the current spot is more weak, but not breaking than freefall.

Volatility & Risk: ATR (14)

ATR (14): $129.21

With ETH at about $1,930, a daily ATR of roughly $129 implies typical daily swings of about 6.5% of price.

Interpretation: Volatility is elevated but not at crisis levels. For traders, it means risk per position is high: stops need more room, and leverage has to be dialed down. For longer-term investors watching perceived Ethereum value, it means short-term noise is large enough that entries will rarely be perfect; you have to be comfortable with $100+ swings even if you are directionally right.

Near-Term Map: Daily Pivot Levels

Pivot (PP): $1,943.22
Resistance 1 (R1): $1,974.94
Support 1 (S1): $1,898.88

Price is trading just below the daily pivot and just above S1.

Interpretation: The intraday balance is slightly negative: the market is leaning under the pivot, but not convincingly breaking support. A clean daily close back above $1,975 would be the first sign that dip-buyers are finally stepping in; a break and hold below $1,900 ramps up the risk of a deeper slide toward the lower Bollinger Band.

Hourly Chart (H1): Short-Term Pressure, Controlled Selling

On the 1-hour chart, ETH is also in a bearish regime, but some signals show compression rather than acceleration.

Trend on H1: EMAs

H1 close: $1,931.95
EMA 20: $1,958.45
EMA 50: $1,970.43
EMA 200: $1,998.02

Price is below all three hourly EMAs, but the distance to them is relatively modest, at about 1–3%.

Interpretation: The short-term trend is still down, but the move is not extended on this timeframe. Bears are in control, yet the market is not heavily stretched intraday. That often leads to choppy, mean-reverting bounces into the EMAs, which then act as resistance.

Hourly RSI & MACD

RSI (14, H1): 35.82
MACD (H1): line -9.38, signal -5.86, histogram -3.52

Hourly RSI is under 40, confirming bearish momentum, while MACD is negative with the histogram also negative.

Interpretation: Unlike the daily MACD, the hourly MACD has not yet turned. Short-term momentum is still drifting lower. This supports the idea that intraday rallies are likely to be sold until we see positive divergence or a flip in the histogram.

Hourly Bollinger Bands, ATR & Pivots

BB mid: $1,956.97
BB upper: $1,989.27
BB lower: $1,924.68
ATR (14, H1): $15.41
H1 Pivot (PP): $1,926.62
R1: $1,941.18
S1: $1,917.40

Price is hovering just above the lower hourly band and just above the hourly pivot.

Interpretation: Intraday, ETH is heavy near the lower bands but not breaking down. Volatility around $15 per hour is meaningful but manageable. As long as price holds above $1,917–1,925, short-term sellers are pressing but not dominating; a break below that zone would likely invite a quick slide to test deeper supports.

15-Minute Chart (M15): Execution Context – Micro Downtrend, No Clear Reversal Yet

The 15-minute chart is purely for timing. It mirrors the higher timeframes with a smaller lens.

M15 close: $1,932.26
EMA 20: $1,944.61
EMA 50: $1,956.40
EMA 200: $1,970.96
RSI (14, M15): 36.65
MACD (M15): line -11.13, signal -9.11, histogram -2.02
BB mid: $1,947.85
BB upper: $1,978.96
BB lower: $1,916.74
ATR (14, M15): $10.56
Pivot (PP, M15): $1,926.73 (R1: $1,941.38, S1: $1,917.60)

Price is sitting just above the 15-minute pivot and the lower band area; momentum is bearish but not collapsing.

Interpretation: The micro trend points down, but price action is in a zone where scalpers may start fading further weakness, especially if higher timeframes hold their nearby supports. Any aggressive bounce from $1,920–1,930 that reclaims $1,950–1,960 on M15 would be an early tell that short-term selling is finally tiring.

Market Context: Ethereum Value vs. Macro Crypto Flows

The broader market cap has slipped about 1.8% in 24 hours, and sentiment is pinned at Extreme Fear. BTC dominance above 56% while Ethereum holds under 10% market share is a classic risk-off alignment: the market is rewarding perceived safety in BTC and stablecoins while systematically underweighting ETH and the rest of the risk curve.

On the fundamental side, DeFi activity is mixed. Uniswap V3 fees spiked over 400% in the last day, though seven-day fees are down. That hints at episodic bursts of on-chain activity, likely volatility or rotation trades, rather than a steady growth trend. For Ethereum value, that is a double-edged sword: the network is clearly still used, but the flows do not yet show a definitive, sustained return of risk appetite.

A notable headline is Harvard reportedly rotating from Bitcoin into Ethereum. One institution does not define price, but it underscores a long-running theme: on longer horizons, large players are willing to treat ETH as a core asset rather than a speculative token. In the short term, however, that kind of news is being drowned out by macro de-risking.

Main Scenario Based on D1: Moderately Bearish With a Late-Stage Feel

Taking the daily chart as the anchor, several elements align. The trend based on EMAs is firmly bearish. RSI is weak but not yet washed out. MACD is still negative but starting to improve. Price is in the lower half of the Bollinger range, not pinned to the bottom. Volatility is elevated but not extreme.

Put together, the base case is bearish, with a strong chance we are closer to the later innings of the downtrend than the beginning. The market is still pricing Ethereum value defensively, but signs of momentum fatigue are creeping in.

Scenarios for ETH/USDT

1. Bullish Scenario: Oversold Rebound and Mean Reversion

In the bullish path, the current area around $1,900–1,930 acts as a higher-timeframe support pocket, and extreme fear finally starts to attract contrarian buyers.

Key ingredients:

Support holds: Daily price defends the $1,900 zone (S1) and avoids a clean break of the lower Bollinger band near $1,780.

Momentum flip: Daily RSI stabilizes and curls back above 40, while MACD histogram continues to grow positive, confirming that downside momentum has truly peaked.

Short-term reclaim: On H1 and M15, ETH reclaims and holds above the 20 and 50 EMAs, roughly $1,960–1,980. These start acting as support rather than resistance.

Targets in this bullish mean-reversion scenario:

First, a move back to the daily pivot/R1 cluster around $1,975–2,000.

Then a test of the daily mid-Bollinger and 20 EMA zone around $2,075–2,150.

If risk appetite returns more broadly and BTC dominance cools, a deeper retrace toward the 50-day EMA, currently about $2,500, becomes possible, but that is a second-stage move, not the first expectation.

What invalidates the bullish scenario?

A decisive daily close below $1,900 followed by continuation toward $1,800.

Daily RSI sliding into deep oversold, under 30, with price hugging the lower Bollinger band, which would signal we are not done with the liquidation phase.

2. Bearish Scenario: Continuation Into a Deeper Value Reset

The bearish path says the current pause is just a rest stop in a larger downtrend. Extreme fear does not convert into buying; instead, it reflects real forced selling or macro risk-off that still has legs.

Key ingredients:

Pivot failure: ETH loses the $1,900–1,910 support band on a daily closing basis.

Momentum re-accelerates: Daily MACD histogram stalls or turns back down, and RSI breaks below 30 without an immediate rebound.

Band walk: Price starts trading consistently near or below the lower Bollinger band, indicating sustained selling pressure.

In that case, the next logical area is a full test of the lower band region around $1,780. If that fails, markets will start repricing Ethereum value based not on recent trading ranges but on earlier structural supports, which could be significantly lower than current levels.

What invalidates the bearish scenario?

A strong push that closes the day above $2,000, takes out R1, and holds above the daily pivot for multiple sessions.

H1 and D1 both flipping into a pattern where price rides above the 20 EMA instead of below it, showing a genuine change of control from sellers to buyers.

Positioning, Risk, and How to Think About Ethereum Value Here

This is a trend-down, late-phase environment with elevated volatility and extreme fear. That combination tends to punish both extremes: dip buyers who ignore the prevailing trend and scale in aggressively too early, and late shorts who chase breakdowns after volatility has already expanded.

For traders, the key is acknowledging that the daily trend is still down. Any long attempts are, for now, counter-trend and need tight invalidation levels around the nearby supports, with $1,900 first, then the lower band near $1,780. Short setups should respect the fact that momentum has already done a lot of work; this is not the time for blind, highly leveraged continuation bets without clear levels.

For investors thinking in terms of Ethereum value rather than just price ticks, the current zone is the start of the territory where fear can create opportunity, but the tape does not yet show a confirmed bottom. That means sizing and patience matter more than precision. The market is still willing to discount ETH in favor of BTC and stables; until that changes on the charts, every bounce is suspect.

The only certainty here is uncertainty. Volatility is high, macro risk sentiment is fragile, and the tape is still trending down. Any plan, bullish or bearish, needs clear levels where you admit you are wrong and step aside, rather than trying to fight a market that has already made up its mind for the day.

Market conditions remain fragile as Solana price trades in a decisive downtrend, with volatility elevated and sentiment deeply negative across crypto.

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

Daily Chart (D1): Macro Bias – Clearly Bearish, But Getting Stretched

Trend Structure: EMAs

Price (close): $80.48

EMA 20: $91.19

EMA 50: $107.60

EMA 200: $142.78

Regime: bearish

Solana is trading well below the 20, 50 and 200-day EMAs, with a clean bearish stack (price < EMA 20 < EMA 50 < EMA 200). The 20-day sits ~13% above current price, which signals the short-term down-move is already extended but still very much intact. Moreover, trend-followers are in control; any bounce towards $90–$100 is technically a rally into overhead supply, not a confirmed trend change.

Momentum: RSI (Daily)

RSI 14 (D1): 32.20

Daily RSI is hovering just above classical oversold territory. Bears still have the upper hand, but downside momentum is starting to look tired. This is the zone where trend traders can keep short exposure, yet early dip-buyers will start sniffing around for potential mean reversion. It is weak, not yet capitulative.

Momentum: MACD (Daily)

MACD line: -9.37

Signal line: -10.41

Histogram: +1.04

The MACD lines are deep in negative territory, confirming a sustained bearish phase. However, the MACD line has crossed above the signal line, giving a positive histogram. That is an early sign that downside momentum is easing; think of it as the brakes being tapped on the selloff, not yet a full U-turn. In a strong downtrend, this kind of MACD improvement often fuels countertrend rallies that fail into resistance.

Volatility & Positioning: Bollinger Bands (Daily)

BB mid (20-period basis): $88.05

BB upper: $104.02

BB lower: $72.08

Solana price is trading below the Bollinger mid-band and in the lower half of the band structure, closer to the lower band at $72. Price has already made a run toward the lower band, which is consistent with an ongoing downtrend. The fact that it is not pinned hard to the band suggests sellers are in control but not in full capitulation mode. There is room for a tag of the lower band near $72 if sentiment weakens further, but equally, a snap-back towards the mid-band around $88 is plausible if shorts get crowded.

Volatility Gauge: ATR (Daily)

ATR 14 (D1): $6.51

With ATR around $6.5, the typical daily range is roughly 8% of current price. That is elevated but not extreme for Solana. Practically, it means both downside flushes and upside squeezes can be violent within a single day. Therefore, position sizing and stops need more buffer than during calmer phases.

Short-Term Daily Levels: Pivots (D1)

Pivot Point (PP): $80.92

R1: $82.23

S1: $79.17

Price is slightly below the daily pivot at $80.92, hovering between PP and S1. That is an intraday-bearish skew on the higher timeframe: the market is trading under its short-term equilibrium, with $82–83 acting as the first band of resistance and $79 the immediate support to watch for a potential flush toward the lower Bollinger band near $72.

Daily takeaway: The main scenario is bearish. The market is in a mature downtrend with early signs of selling fatigue. Until Solana can reclaim and hold above the daily 20 EMA (~$91), any bounce is structurally a rally within a downtrend.

1-Hour Chart (H1): Tactical Bias – Bearish, But Sliding Into Support

Trend: EMAs (H1)

Price (close): $80.61

EMA 20: $81.59

EMA 50: $82.77

EMA 200: $84.29

Regime: bearish

On the hourly, Solana is also trading below all key EMAs, which are smoothly fanned out above price. That is consistent with a controlled intraday downtrend rather than a panic dump. Any move back into $82–84 on the hourly chart will hit a wall of moving-average resistance where short-term sellers are likely waiting.

Momentum: RSI (H1)

RSI 14 (H1): 37.74

Hourly RSI sits in bearish-but-not-oversold territory. There is still room for another leg lower without requiring an immediate bounce. Bulls do not have momentum yet; the best they can argue is that the downside is no longer accelerating.

Momentum: MACD (H1)

MACD line: -0.65

Signal line: -0.61

Histogram: -0.04

The hourly MACD is marginally negative, with the line just under the signal line. Momentum is weakly bearish and drifting rather than sharply trending. That often aligns with a grind lower or sideways chop, not with a strong reversal attempt. Bulls would want to see this cross back above the signal with an expanding positive histogram before talking about a serious intraday shift.

Bollinger Bands & Volatility (H1)

BB mid: $81.43

BB upper: $82.54

BB lower: $80.33

ATR 14 (H1): $0.75

Price is near the lower hourly Bollinger band at $80.33, with ATR around $0.75. That puts Solana near short-term support after a recent push down. Intraday, this is where you often see either a brief bounce or a band walk. Given the broader bearish context, a slow crawl along the lower band is more likely than a clean V-shaped recovery unless macro conditions suddenly improve.

Hourly Pivots

Pivot Point (PP): $80.44

R1: $80.94

S1: $80.12

Price is sitting basically on the hourly pivot ($80.44–80.61 area), meaning the market is at a local decision point. A sustained push above R1 (~$80.94) would open the door for a test of the hourly EMAs near $81.5–82. Failing here and losing S1 (~$80.12) would validate continuation pressure toward $79 and the daily S1 zone.

15-Min Chart (M15): Execution Context – Seller Control, No Clear Base Yet

Trend: EMAs (M15)

Price (close): $80.58

EMA 20: $80.88

EMA 50: $81.37

EMA 200: $82.84

Regime: bearish

The 15-minute chart mirrors the higher timeframes: price under all EMAs, with a clear bearish alignment. Short-term rallies into $81–82 are likely to meet sellers quickly. For intraday traders, that area is the obvious battleground for fade setups unless structure changes.

Momentum: RSI (M15)

RSI 14 (M15): 40.67

On the 15-minute, RSI is weak but not oversold. That supports a slow grind or mild intraday bounces, not a clean trend reversal. Momentum across all three timeframes is consistently on the bearish side, just not at extremes.

Momentum: MACD (M15)

MACD line: -0.40

Signal line: -0.35

Histogram: -0.06

The 15-minute MACD is mildly bearish with a small negative histogram. Sellers remain in control, but there is no strong thrust; it is controlled pressure rather than aggressive dumping. This usually favors shorting failed bounces rather than chasing breakdowns at local lows.

Bollinger Bands & ATR (M15)

BB mid: $80.99

BB upper: $82.17

BB lower: $79.81

ATR 14 (M15): $0.46

Solana is trading just below the mid-band on M15, not pressed into extremes. Intraday volatility around $0.46 per 15-minute bar is meaningful but not chaotic. This structure favors range-trading or trend-follow setups rather than betting on immediate violent reversals.

M15 Pivots

Pivot Point (PP): $80.44

R1: $80.91

S1: $80.10

The 15-minute pivot roughly coincides with the hourly pivot, reinforcing the $80.4–80.6 zone as the short-term decision area. As long as M15 candles are closing below R1 (~$80.91) and the 20 EMA, the very short-term flow stays in favor of sellers.

Bullish Scenario for Solana Price (Countertrend Bounce)

A bullish case from here is countertrend only on current data. It hinges on selling pressure finally exhausting in this $78–81 band and the broader market stabilizing.

What bulls want to see:

A clear intraday higher low above roughly $79, visible on the 1H and 15m charts, rather than a straight-line bleed.

Hourly RSI pushing back above 45–50 with MACD crossing positive and expanding, showing fresh upside momentum rather than just a dead-cat bounce.

Price reclaiming and holding above the H1 EMA 20 (~$81.6) first, then the H1 EMA 50 (~$82.8). That would signal bears are losing grip on the intraday trend.

A push toward the daily Bollinger mid-band around $88, and ideally a test of the daily EMA 20 near $91. That is the logical first upside target zone for any relief rally.

If Solana can close multiple daily candles back above $91 (the 20-day EMA) with RSI lifting toward neutral (40s–50s) and MACD staying in a positive cross, the conversation shifts from a dead-cat bounce to a potential medium-term base forming.

Bullish scenario invalidation: A decisive break and daily close below the lower daily Bollinger band area, roughly $72, would seriously damage the bounce setup and point to a fresh leg lower. Also, continued failure to reclaim even the H1 EMA 20 while BTC dominance grinds higher would keep bulls firmly on the back foot.

Bearish Scenario for Solana Price (Trend Continuation)

The main scenario, given the data, is still trend continuation to the downside. The structure across D1, H1, and M15 is aligned: price below EMAs, bearish regimes on all timeframes, and a macro environment of extreme fear with BTC dominance rising.

What bears are looking for:

Failure of price to hold above the intraday pivots at $80.4–80.6, followed by a clean loss of the $79–80 area (daily S1 and local support band).

Hourly and 15-minute RSI staying weak (sub-45) on any bounce, showing no real momentum shift.

Hourly and daily MACD remaining in negative territory even if the histogram flips around zero, meaning rallies without structural trend change.

A move toward the daily lower Bollinger band region around $72. If fear deepens, price can overshoot that band before any lasting relief.

Below $72, there is a risk of a momentum break where forced liquidations and stop runs accelerate the downside. With daily ATR at $6.5, a one- or two-day slide of $10–15 is entirely possible if liquidity thins out.

Bearish scenario invalidation: Bears start losing the narrative if Solana can:

Reclaim the H1 EMA 200 (~$84.3) and hold above it, turning it into support.

Push into the $88–91 zone (daily mid-band and EMA 20) and consolidate there instead of instantly rejecting.

Show a daily RSI drift back into the 40s–50s with MACD holding a sustained positive cross.

Under those conditions, shorting every bounce becomes dangerous; the market would be shifting from a pure trend phase into a potential range or early accumulation.

How to Think About Positioning Now

Solana is in a clear downtrend on the daily, hourly, and 15-minute charts, with all EMAs stacked bearishly and momentum weak across the board. At the same time, daily RSI near 32 and a MACD that is starting to curl up indicate the easy part of the short trade may be behind us. This is often the phase where trend followers still have the edge, but the risk of sharp, painful squeezes increases.

In practice:

Any strength into the $82–88 band is currently a test of resistance, not a proven trend reversal.

The first real structural shift would be a sustained reclaim of the daily EMA 20 around $91.

The downside magnet in the current structure is the $72 daily lower Bollinger band region, with volatility high enough to reach it quickly if sentiment worsens.

Volatility is elevated, market-wide fear is extreme, and BTC is soaking up dominance. That combination can produce both deep flushes and violent bear-market rallies. Whatever your bias on Solana price, the data argues for respecting risk, as ranges are wide, reversals can be abrupt, and certainty is low even if the current trend is clearly down.

The current crypto environment is risk-off, and the XRP price reflects that mood with a controlled drift lower rather than a panic move.

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

Market Thesis: XRP Price in a Controlled Descent, Not a Panic Dump

XRPUSDT is trading around $1.40, sitting below all the key daily moving averages and under the Bollinger mid-band. The higher timeframe structure is clearly bearish, but this is not a crash; it is a grind lower in a broader risk-off crypto environment.

Total crypto market cap is down about 1.8% over 24 hours, BTC dominance is elevated at ~56%, and the Fear & Greed Index is stuck in Extreme Fear (9). Capital is hiding in Bitcoin and stables, and altcoins like XRP are feeling the weight. However, the dominant force right now is defensive positioning, not speculative appetite.

On XRP specifically, the daily trend is down, momentum is weak, yet volatility is relatively contained. That cocktail usually favors controlled stair-steps lower rather than explosive moves in either direction, until a catalyst or a clear technical break appears.

Daily Timeframe (D1): Macro Bias = Bearish

On the daily chart, XRP is in a textbook downtrend that has been developing over time rather than erupting suddenly.

Trend Structure: EMAs

EMA20: 1.51  |  EMA50: 1.70  |  EMA200: 2.13  |  Price (close): 1.40

Price is trading below all three EMAs, and they are stacked bearishly (20 < 50 < 200). That is a mature downtrend, not just a pullback. Being below the 20-day in particular means short-term sellers still control the tape; there is no sign of a real reclaim yet.

Momentum: RSI (14)

RSI14: 37.82

RSI is below 40, so momentum is bearish, but it is not deeply oversold. Sellers are in charge, but they are not maxed out. That leaves room for further downside without requiring an immediate relief rally. Yet it also hints that forced selling is not extreme at this stage.

Momentum Confirmation: MACD

MACD line: -0.10  |  Signal: -0.12  |  Histogram: 0.02

MACD is negative, aligning with the downtrend, but the line is slightly above the signal, hence the small positive histogram. That is a mild momentum stabilisation: the downside push is slowing rather than accelerating. Bears are still in control, but the pressure is easing a bit instead of snowballing.

Volatility and Range: Bollinger Bands & ATR

Bollinger Bands (20): Mid 1.46 | Upper 1.66 | Lower 1.27
ATR(14): 0.11

Price sits below the middle band but not pinned to the lower band. That is a controlled downtrend rather than a waterfall. There is still room to the downside (toward ~1.27) if selling picks up, but current positioning shows more of a slow drift than outright panic. ATR at 0.11 means daily swings of roughly 8% are normal right now, elevated enough to hurt overleveraged positions, but not extreme for XRP.

Short-Term Levels: Daily Pivot

Pivot Point (PP): 1.41  |  R1: 1.43  |  S1: 1.38

Price is sitting right under the daily pivot at 1.41. That keeps intraday bias slightly negative. As long as XRP holds below 1.41–1.43, rallies are more likely to be sold into than extended. First nearby support is around 1.38; losing that opens up a deeper test lower in the daily Bollinger range.

Daily takeaway: The main scenario is bearish. Trend, structure, and momentum lean down. The only nuance is that the selloff is controlled, not capitulatory, which shapes expectations for follow-through.

Hourly Timeframe (H1): Weak Bounces in a Bearish Channel

On the 1H chart, XRP is grinding sideways to lower, echoing the daily bias but with even less energy showing up in the candles.

Trend: EMAs (H1)

EMA20: 1.42  |  EMA50: 1.44  |  EMA200: 1.45  |  Price: 1.40

Price is under all key intraday EMAs, and those averages are clustered just above: 1.42–1.45 is a dense resistance zone. Each time price tries to bounce, it runs into this overhead supply. Intraday buyers are losing the fight at the averages, which reinforces the short-term bearish tone.

Momentum: RSI & MACD (H1)

RSI14: 36.41
MACD line: -0.01 | Signal: -0.01 | Histogram: 0.00

RSI on the hourly is weak but not washed out, again around the high 30s. This mirrors the daily: persistent selling, no real sign of exhaustion. MACD is flat and negative, showing a lack of strong intraday impulse in either direction. Sellers are pushing price lower through grind, not aggression or panic.

Range & Intraday Pivot (H1)

Bollinger Bands (H1): Mid 1.42 | Upper 1.44 | Lower 1.40
ATR(14): 0.01
Pivot (H1 PP): 1.40 | R1: 1.41 | S1: 1.39

Price hugs the lower hourly band and sits right on the intraday pivot at 1.40. That signals a tight, low-volatility drift lower. With ATR at just 0.01, the hourly moves are small and controlled. Scalpers are trading a compressed range around 1.39–1.41. A decisive break below 1.39 would likely expand that range to the downside.

Hourly takeaway: H1 confirms the bearish daily bias, but in a slow bleed rather than a dump. Any bounce into 1.42–1.45 remains suspect unless price can close and hold above that band on multiple hourly candles.

15-Minute (M15): Execution Context, Not a Trend Reversal

On M15, XRP is just chopping near the lows of the broader range, offering more noise than signal for bigger-picture direction.

Short-Term Structure: EMAs (M15)

EMA20: 1.41  |  EMA50: 1.42  |  EMA200: 1.44  |  Price: 1.40

The same pattern repeats: price is below all short-term EMAs, which are stepping down. The micro-structure is aligned with the higher timeframes. There is no hidden bullish divergence in trend here that would justify a strong reversal call.

Short-Term Momentum & Volatility (M15)

RSI14: 42.78
MACD: Line -0.01 | Signal -0.01 | Histogram 0.00
Bollinger Bands (M15): Mid 1.41 | Upper 1.42 | Lower 1.39
Pivot (M15 PP): 1.40 | R1 1.41 | S1 1.39
ATR(14): 0.01

RSI on M15 is slightly higher than on H1, in the low 40s, hinting at mild intraday dip-buying or at least some stabilization. But MACD is flat, and price sits near the lower band and near S1 at 1.39–1.40. For execution, this timeframe shows short, tradable bounces from 1.39–1.40 into 1.41–1.42, but nothing that challenges the broader bearish structure.

15m takeaway: Micro bounces are possible, but the lower-timeframe action is just noise inside a larger downtrend and should be treated as such by higher timeframe traders.

Market Regime and Cross-Timeframe View

Across D1, H1, and M15, the regime flags are all explicitly bearish. There is no timeframe showing a clear bullish shift yet or a durable change in structure.

Trend: All key EMAs above price on every timeframe → bears control structure.

Momentum: RSI below 50 across the board, with daily and hourly sitting in the 30s → persistent selling, not oversold panic.

Volatility: ATR is moderate on D1 and compressed on intraday → controlled drift, not capitulation.

Macro context: BTC dominance high, extreme fear in the broader market → altcoins are in the penalty box and struggle to attract new inflows.

The only mild tension is between the slowing downside momentum (MACD histogram on D1 slightly positive) and the still-bearish price structure. In plain terms, the downtrend is aging, but it has not actually reversed or even properly challenged the dominant sellers yet.

Key Levels for XRP Price

Key technical zones continue to define the battleground where bulls and bears are likely to react.

Immediate resistance: 1.41–1.43 (daily PP and R1, plus intraday resistance)

Short-term resistance band: 1.42–1.45 (cluster of H1/M15 EMAs and hourly Bollinger mid)

Stronger resistance: 1.51 (daily EMA20) and 1.66 (daily upper Bollinger)

Immediate support: 1.38 (daily S1) and 1.39 (intraday S1)

Deeper support zone: 1.30–1.27 (daily lower Bollinger band region)

Scenario Map for XRP Price

Bullish Scenario

For a meaningful bullish case, XRP needs more than a scalp bounce; it needs to start reclaiming structure step by step on multiple timeframes.

What a constructive bullish path looks like:

Hold above 1.38–1.39 on closing basis (H1/D1). This confirms buyers are defending current support.

Break and hold above 1.41–1.43, turning the daily pivot band from resistance into support.

Reclaim the 1.42–1.45 EMA cluster on H1 with RSI moving back above 50. That would show that intraday control is shifting from sellers to buyers.

Daily close back above the EMA20 (~1.51). That is the key line where the daily downtrend starts to be questioned. Above there, rallies toward 1.60–1.66 (upper Bollinger) become realistic.

If this plays out, XRP could transition from a controlled downtrend into a mean-reversion rally, with shorts covering and new longs targeting the mid-1.60s region rather than new lows.

What invalidates the bullish scenario?

A decisive break below 1.38 on daily closing basis, with RSI staying below 40 and MACD turning more negative again, would put the bullish path on ice. That would show that the apparent stabilisation was just a pause before another leg down.

Bearish Scenario

The current setup already leans bearish, so continuation is the path of least resistance unless something shifts in structure or momentum.

What a continuation lower looks like:

XRP fails to reclaim 1.41–1.43 and keeps closing below the daily pivot zone.

Intraday, H1 and M15 EMAs continue to cap rallies in the 1.42–1.45 band, with RSI stuck sub-50.

Price breaks below 1.38–1.39, expanding intraday volatility and dragging daily RSI closer to the low 30s.

Selling extends toward the 1.30–1.27 area (daily lower Bollinger band and psychological zone), where a more meaningful oversold condition could finally form.

In this path, XRP grinds lower in legs, not in a straight line. Expect short, sharp bounces as shorts take profit, but with the broader direction still down until key resistance levels are convincingly reclaimed.

What invalidates the bearish scenario?

A sustained move back above 1.45, followed by a daily close over 1.51 (EMA20), would start to break the bearish narrative. If that move is backed by RSI reclaiming 50+ on both H1 and D1, the downtrend would be in doubt, and bears would have to reassess their positioning.

Positioning, Risk, and Uncertainty

The XRP price is in an established downtrend, in a market that is clearly risk-off, and in an environment of extreme fear. That combination usually rewards patience and disciplined level-by-level trading, not aggressive bets in either direction.

For directional traders, the important thing is timeframe alignment and respecting where structure actually changes:

If you are trading the daily trend, the bias is down until price starts closing above 1.51 on a consistent basis.

If you are trading intraday, your battlefield is roughly 1.38–1.45, with tight ranges and low ATR on the lower timeframes.

Volatility is moderate but can expand quickly if 1.38 breaks or if the broader market moves out of extreme fear. Uncertainty remains high: sentiment is fragile, and any macro or regulatory headline can flip the tape in either direction.

In summary, XRP is in a controlled bearish regime. The market is not pricing in a collapse, but it is also not willing to pay up for risk. Until the key levels outlined above are reclaimed or cleanly broken, treating this as a trend-following environment with respect for volatility and liquidity makes more sense than trying to call heroic tops or bottoms.

Societe Generale has extended its digital euro ambitions with an xrpl stablecoin move that embeds bank-grade compliance into a major public blockchain.

Societe Generale brings EUR CoinVertible to XRP Ledger

The digital-asset arm of Societe Generale, SG-FORGE, has deployed its euro stablecoin EUR CoinVertible on the XRP Ledger, adding to existing implementations on Ethereum and Solana. The rollout, disclosed in a February 18, 2026 press statement, marks another bank issued stablecoins entry into the XRPL ecosystem with a clear institutional and regulatory focus.

In the release, SG-FORGE presented the XRP Ledger integration as part of a broader multi chain deployment strategy, explicitly listing it alongside Ethereum and Solana rather than treating it as an isolated pilot. Moreover, the firm said it expects the decision to “increase adoption” by leveraging XRPL performance characteristics such as scalability, transaction speed, and low fees on what it described as a “secure and decentralized Layer 1 blockchain.”

Institutional focus and infrastructure narrative

That “Layer 1” description signals the intended audience: institutions prioritizing predictable settlement and operational risk controls rather than speculative retail flows. However, SG-FORGE’s parallel social media messaging leaned further into infrastructure language, emphasizing performance, cost profile, and network architecture while downplaying community culture or token-centric narratives.

Cassie Craddock, Ripple‘s managing director for UK & Europe, highlighted the institutional framing as she celebrated the go-live. “Delighted that EUR CoinVertible is live on the XRP Ledger! A win for the ecosystem. Proud to have Ripple’s custody tech powering this milestone,” she wrote, underscoring how a societe generale stablecoin may bolster perceptions of XRPL in traditional finance.

Ripple custody and trading use cases

Ripple’s role goes beyond branding support. SG-FORGE stated that the launch on XRPL is “supported by Ripple’s custody solution,” confirming a technical integration with the company’s infrastructure. Moreover, the bank identified next steps that appear tailored to professional users, including potential inclusion of EUR CoinVertible in Ripple‘s product suite and using the asset as collateral in trading workflows.

A Ripple employee, Luke Judges, reinforced the depth of the partnership in public comments. He pointed out that “a top 10 European bank with $1.8TN in assets does not follow XRP ledger community norms or niceties and has their own compliance reqs & timescale for announcements,” a statement that underlines the stringent governance and disclosure standards around the stablecoin societe generale product.

Regulation, MiCA alignment and roadmap delivery

For SG-FORGE, the deployment also reflects a longer-term, regulation-first strategy. Back in November 2024, the firm publicly stated its intention to bring its MiCA compliant stablecoin to the XRP Ledger as part of a plan to expand usage across institutional channels. That earlier signal aligns closely with the rationale highlighted in the latest announcement, indicating that the launch was a planned roadmap milestone rather than a tactical experiment.

Jean-Marc Stenger, CEO of SG-FORGE, framed the move as the next step in that regulated product journey. “The successful euro coinvertible launch on the XRP Ledger is a new step. We look forward to further innovation and expanding the reach,” he said, suggesting future integrations and use cases as the xrp ledger adoption story matures around compliant, euro-denominated instruments.

Market backdrop for XRP

The integration arrives as the broader XRPL stablecoin narrative continues to evolve, with banks and fintechs exploring tokenized cash instruments under Europe’s fast-approaching MiCA deadlines. At the time of the announcement, XRP changed hands at $1.42, offering a snapshot of market conditions as Societe Generale‘s digital euro joined the network.

Overall, the EUR CoinVertible expansion to XRPL deepens the link between regulated European banking and public blockchain rails, while reinforcing Ripple’s role in custody and institutional connectivity.

A new wave of event-contract platforms is reshaping how fans wager, with Novig sports betting emerging as a well-funded challenger to entrenched prediction markets.

Novig raises $75 million to challenge Kalshi and Polymarket

As prediction platforms Kalshi and Polymarket capture the attention of both investors and regulators, sports-focused startup Novig has secured $75 million in fresh capital to take them on. The new Series B funding round, led by blockchain venture firm Pantera Capital, values Novig at $500 million, underscoring growing interest in sports-centric prediction products.

However, the company is entering a highly contested space. Kalshi and Polymarket have already established themselves as the leading venues for event contracts, while regulators continue to scrutinize how far prediction markets can push into areas resembling traditional gambling.

From Supreme Court ruling to prediction markets boom

Sports betting in the United States was once tightly restricted. That changed after a pivotal 2018 Supreme Court decision that allowed individual states to legalize wagering on major leagues such as football, basketball, and baseball. The ruling triggered a nationwide rollout of regulated sportsbooks and opened the door to new financial-style betting products.

Moreover, a 2024 court victory by Kalshi broadened the scope of contracts prediction markets can legally list. Platforms quickly expanded beyond weather and entertainment outcomes to cover politics, macro events, and sports. Today, Kalshi generates the vast majority of its trading volume from sports contracts, even as some U.S. states move to limit or close sports-based markets.

That said, Novig is positioning itself not around regulatory victories, but around a consumer message: existing options exploit users through high fees and opaque pricing, according to its founders.

Novig’s pitch: peer-to-peer, not playing against the house

“We started the company because we felt sports betting was broken,” cofounder Jacob Fortinsky told Fortune. “Our mission from day one was to build a platform really built for modern sports bettors in the most consumer-friendly, the most engaging, and the most profitable way possible.”

Fortinsky began developing Novig in 2021 during his senior year at Harvard, alongside cofounder Kelechi Ukah. The pair entered the startup accelerator Y Combinator in the following year, seeking to build a technologically advanced, trading-style sports platform while the regulatory backdrop for prediction markets remained uncertain.

However, that environment was fraught. Polymarket, which operates on blockchain rails, was barred from serving U.S. users in 2022 after regulators determined it was offering unlicensed betting products. The case highlighted the risks for any platform straddling the line between gambling and financial markets.

Regulatory evolution and the shift toward CFTC oversight

Novig initially pursued a conventional path by registering as a regulated sports betting operator in Colorado. It later pivoted to a sweepstakes-style model in an effort to broaden reach while staying within state rules. Neither approach, however, allowed Novig to operate nationwide, and the sweepstakes structure drew new legal pushback from state regulators.

Now, Novig is applying to operate under the supervision of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Fortinsky says he hopes the regulatory approval process can be completed within roughly six months, which would move the platform more squarely into a financial-market framework rather than being treated as a casino-style sportsbook.

In his pitch, Fortinsky argues that Novig’s event markets are distinct from traditional operators such as FanDuel. Because trades are matched on a peer-to-peer basis, users are not betting against the house. In theory, that structure should translate into better pricing for active sports traders.

Fees, “vig,” and Novig’s commission-free model

Where Novig sees its clearest differentiation from Kalshi is cost. The startup argues that Kalshi’s fee schedule makes trading prohibitively expensive for frequent or smaller participants. By contrast, Novig is commission-free for retail traders, a feature embedded in its brand: the name is a play on “vig,” the traditional rake sportsbooks charge on bets.

Instead of monetizing through customer-facing fees, Novig plans to charge institutional participants that provide liquidity on the platform. That setup means everyday users are often trading against so-called “smart money” rather than a centralized house. However, Fortinsky says around 20% of Novig bettors are likely to be profitable, a figure he describes as “still-depressing” but significantly higher than typical win rates on incumbent platforms.

In Fortinsky’s view, this structure makes the novig sports betting platform feel closer to a financial exchange than a casino, aligning incentives between the company and its most active users.

Built for sports fans, not crypto natives

On a more fundamental level, Fortinsky argues that Novig has been designed from the ground up for sports fans. Kalshi and Polymarket initially emphasized contracts on policy, macro events, and niche topics, only later expanding into sports. Novig, by contrast, is framing itself as a pure sports product with financial-market mechanics running under the hood.

“Our basic bet as a company is that the median sports fan is far more likely to use an app whose brand and whose product is really built with sports in mind, rather than with crypto or war in South America,” Fortinsky said. Moreover, the company is betting that a cleaner user experience and tighter spreads will attract serious fans who already follow data and odds closely.

Whether that approach proves healthier for sports culture is an open question. Critics, alongside various state authorities, argue that modern prediction platforms are effectively a new wrapper for gambling, raising familiar concerns around addiction and consumer protection.

Gambling or financial trading? The ethical and legal debate

Fortinsky rejects the idea that Novig is simply another betting shop. “Ultimately financial trading and betting are sort of converging,” he said. “In a colloquial sense, we certainly don’t view what we’re doing as gambling.” To him, sports wagering is becoming part of a broader spectrum of risk-taking activities, from options trading to fantasy contests.

The distinction may appear subtle, yet some regulators share the view that event contracts fit within the domain of financial oversight rather than pure gaming. CFTC chair Michael Selig recently argued in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that such markets fall squarely under his agency’s remit and can “serve legitimate economic functions.” That position, if solidified, would provide a clearer pathway for platforms like Novig to operate at scale.

However, the blurred ethical lines around athlete and league involvement persist. Fortinsky maintains that, for many fans, placing small, informed wagers is simply an extension of their existing fandom rather than a separate vice.

The changing fan experience and what comes next

For Fortinsky, sports wagering is not just about profit but about deepening engagement. “For many sports fans, it deepens their engagement, deepens their enjoyment and their fan experience,” he said. In his view, the core problem is not betting itself but what he describes as a “commoditized product” dominated by casino-affiliated operators seeking to maximize revenue at the expense of fans.

Novig is betting that a peer-to-peer market structure, a focus on sports-first branding, and a commission-free model for retail users can carve out space in a crowded field. However, its success will hinge on navigating evolving regulation, differentiating from established players like Kalshi and Polymarket, and convincing users that trading on outcomes should look more like investing and less like a trip to the casino.

In summary, Novig’s $75 million Series B led by Pantera Capital positions the startup as a major new entrant in U.S. sports-focused prediction markets, but its long-term impact will depend on regulation, user adoption, and how the line between betting and trading continues to blur.