bitcoinist.com

A Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “digital gold” label, pointing to a sharp divergence in 2025 performance as regulation uncertainty and ETF outflows weigh on sentiment.

In a Yahoo Finance interview, Deutsche Bank senior strategist Marion Laboure told Executive Editor Brian Sozzi and senior reporter Ines Ferré that bitcoin’s volatility hasn’t disappeared, it’s simply showing up again, at an awkward moment for a market that spent much of last year selling a cleaner institutional adoption story.

Is Bitcoin No Longer Digital Gold?

Laboure framed recent weakness as another reminder that “volatility is a feature of Bitcoin. It’s not a bug,” while flagging what she described as “a lot of ETFs outflows” since October alongside a messy policy backdrop in Washington. She pointed to the Stablecoin “Genius Act” being signed last year, but said the Clarity Act “is still in Congress and provides an additional layer of uncertainty.”

She also cited a pullback in retail participation. “In our latest survey, we looked at the US crypto adoption,” Laboure said. “And in July, we had 17% of Americans who had invested in crypto. And the number was down to 12% in December.”

Bitcoin is “no longer digital gold,” Deutsche Bank strategist Marion Laboure says. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%.” pic.twitter.com/eBCYp4cxMt

— Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) February 11, 2026

Pressed on whether bitcoin still deserves the “digital gold” tagline, Laboure leaned on returns. “If you think about that, if I look at the 2025 performance, it’s not digital gold or it’s no longer digital gold,” she said. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%. So we are clearly seeing this divergence.”

Her broader framing was that bitcoin remains stuck between narratives. “Bitcoin, I would say it’s not a means of payment. It’s not a currency. It’s unlikely to replace gold or fiat currencies,” Laboure continued. “And I think the way I see Bitcoin is we are in this transition, we are transitioning between a pure speculative asset to a more realistic use case.”

Laboure also returned to what she called a “Tinkerbell effect,” describing a dynamic where price rises on belief rather than fundamentals, until it doesn’t. “So basically, it’s when the price is based on wishful thinking, much more than fundamental factors,” she said.

Asked what could reignite upside momentum, Laboure pointed back to the last two years’ catalysts and suggested the move still looks larger than those inputs alone explain. She noted bitcoin’s run from roughly $35,000 in November 2023 through a period she called “exceptional years,” citing ETF approvals, the halving, and a “very positive stance” from President Trump after his election.

“But all these factors alone probably didn’t fully explain the move that we had from $35,000 in November 2023 to over $120,000 in October last year,” she said, arguing that the market is still searching for a more durable anchor than narrative-driven flows.

X Pushes Back

Laboure’s “digital gold” critique drew immediate rebuttals on X. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas called it “a fine argument to make” but added: “To hinge it on one year’s returns is absurd. Does that mean it WAS digital gold in 2023 and 2024 when it was up 450%? But now it isn’t because gold did better in 2025. Make it make sense.”

Others went more ad hominem. VP of Investor Relations at Nakamoto Steven Lubka dismissed the comments as coming from a “CBDC shill,” referencing an older citation where she said: “When it comes to retail CBDCs, the question is not whether it will happen, but when.”

At press time, BTC traded at $68,007.

A Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “digital gold” label, pointing to a sharp divergence in 2025 performance as regulation uncertainty and ETF outflows weigh on sentiment.

In a Yahoo Finance interview, Deutsche Bank senior strategist Marion Laboure told Executive Editor Brian Sozzi and senior reporter Ines Ferré that bitcoin’s volatility hasn’t disappeared, it’s simply showing up again, at an awkward moment for a market that spent much of last year selling a cleaner institutional adoption story.

Is Bitcoin No Longer Digital Gold?

Laboure framed recent weakness as another reminder that “volatility is a feature of Bitcoin. It’s not a bug,” while flagging what she described as “a lot of ETFs outflows” since October alongside a messy policy backdrop in Washington. She pointed to the Stablecoin “Genius Act” being signed last year, but said the Clarity Act “is still in Congress and provides an additional layer of uncertainty.”

She also cited a pullback in retail participation. “In our latest survey, we looked at the US crypto adoption,” Laboure said. “And in July, we had 17% of Americans who had invested in crypto. And the number was down to 12% in December.”

Bitcoin is “no longer digital gold,” Deutsche Bank strategist Marion Laboure says. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%.” pic.twitter.com/eBCYp4cxMt

— Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) February 11, 2026

Pressed on whether bitcoin still deserves the “digital gold” tagline, Laboure leaned on returns. “If you think about that, if I look at the 2025 performance, it’s not digital gold or it’s no longer digital gold,” she said. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%. So we are clearly seeing this divergence.”

Her broader framing was that bitcoin remains stuck between narratives. “Bitcoin, I would say it’s not a means of payment. It’s not a currency. It’s unlikely to replace gold or fiat currencies,” Laboure continued. “And I think the way I see Bitcoin is we are in this transition, we are transitioning between a pure speculative asset to a more realistic use case.”

Laboure also returned to what she called a “Tinkerbell effect,” describing a dynamic where price rises on belief rather than fundamentals, until it doesn’t. “So basically, it’s when the price is based on wishful thinking, much more than fundamental factors,” she said.

Asked what could reignite upside momentum, Laboure pointed back to the last two years’ catalysts and suggested the move still looks larger than those inputs alone explain. She noted bitcoin’s run from roughly $35,000 in November 2023 through a period she called “exceptional years,” citing ETF approvals, the halving, and a “very positive stance” from President Trump after his election.

“But all these factors alone probably didn’t fully explain the move that we had from $35,000 in November 2023 to over $120,000 in October last year,” she said, arguing that the market is still searching for a more durable anchor than narrative-driven flows.

X Pushes Back

Laboure’s “digital gold” critique drew immediate rebuttals on X. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas called it “a fine argument to make” but added: “To hinge it on one year’s returns is absurd. Does that mean it WAS digital gold in 2023 and 2024 when it was up 450%? But now it isn’t because gold did better in 2025. Make it make sense.”

Others went more ad hominem. VP of Investor Relations at Nakamoto Steven Lubka dismissed the comments as coming from a “CBDC shill,” referencing an older citation where she said: “When it comes to retail CBDCs, the question is not whether it will happen, but when.”

At press time, BTC traded at $68,007.

Strategy Inc. is doubling down on Bitcoin. The move is meant to calm investors while the company keeps buying the crypto asset it made core to its identity. Reports say the pivot centers on expanding a line of perpetual preferred shares that trade near $100 and pay a reset dividend each month.

Preferred Shares To Anchor Volatility

Stretch, often shown as STRC, now sits at the center of that plan. According to Strategy’s own listings, STRC carries an annualized dividend reset that currently reads 11.25% and is structured so its price tends to trade near a $100 par value.

Reports say Strategy CEO Phong Le told Bloomberg the company will lean more on preferred capital than on common equity to raise money for future Bitcoin buys.

A Relentless Buying Stance

Michael Saylor, the company’s executive chair, has been blunt about holding and buying. Based on reports, Saylor affirmed the company will not sell its Bitcoin holdings even if prices fell dramatically, and that Strategy plans to purchase each quarter on an ongoing basis. The comment is meant to reassure holders who have seen the stock move with Bitcoin’s swings.

Funding Bitcoin Buys Without Hitting Stock Price

The logic here is simple. Issue preferred stock that appeals to income-seeking investors and use the proceeds to buy more Bitcoin, rather than selling common shares or liquidating holdings.

Stretch is marketed as a way for investors to get exposure while avoiding the same wild swings that hit Strategy’s common shares. Some market watchers argue this shifts risk to preferred holders, and critics in finance commentary have been vocal about the optics of pushing stability through yield products.

How Much Bitcoin And What It Means

Reports note Strategy’s disclosed Bitcoin stack remains vast, numbering in the hundreds of thousands of coins, and executives point to a long time horizon for returns.

The company’s approach makes its balance sheet look more like a crypto fund than a traditional software concern, and that raises questions about how investors should value the stock versus the underlying asset.

Investor Takeaways And Market Signals

Investors who want cash yield without direct crypto exposure may find preferred stocks appealing. At the same time, preferred shares carry their own risks: dividends can be reset, and the company’s obligations to preferred holders compete with the need to manage leverage and reserves.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Strategy Inc. is doubling down on Bitcoin. The move is meant to calm investors while the company keeps buying the crypto asset it made core to its identity. Reports say the pivot centers on expanding a line of perpetual preferred shares that trade near $100 and pay a reset dividend each month.

Preferred Shares To Anchor Volatility

Stretch, often shown as STRC, now sits at the center of that plan. According to Strategy’s own listings, STRC carries an annualized dividend reset that currently reads 11.25% and is structured so its price tends to trade near a $100 par value.

Reports say Strategy CEO Phong Le told Bloomberg the company will lean more on preferred capital than on common equity to raise money for future Bitcoin buys.

A Relentless Buying Stance

Michael Saylor, the company’s executive chair, has been blunt about holding and buying. Based on reports, Saylor affirmed the company will not sell its Bitcoin holdings even if prices fell dramatically, and that Strategy plans to purchase each quarter on an ongoing basis. The comment is meant to reassure holders who have seen the stock move with Bitcoin’s swings.

Funding Bitcoin Buys Without Hitting Stock Price

The logic here is simple. Issue preferred stock that appeals to income-seeking investors and use the proceeds to buy more Bitcoin, rather than selling common shares or liquidating holdings.

Stretch is marketed as a way for investors to get exposure while avoiding the same wild swings that hit Strategy’s common shares. Some market watchers argue this shifts risk to preferred holders, and critics in finance commentary have been vocal about the optics of pushing stability through yield products.

How Much Bitcoin And What It Means

Reports note Strategy’s disclosed Bitcoin stack remains vast, numbering in the hundreds of thousands of coins, and executives point to a long time horizon for returns.

The company’s approach makes its balance sheet look more like a crypto fund than a traditional software concern, and that raises questions about how investors should value the stock versus the underlying asset.

Investor Takeaways And Market Signals

Investors who want cash yield without direct crypto exposure may find preferred stocks appealing. At the same time, preferred shares carry their own risks: dividends can be reset, and the company’s obligations to preferred holders compete with the need to manage leverage and reserves.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

David Schwartz, Ripple’s former CTO and one of the original architects of the XRP Ledger, poured cold water on the idea of returning to Bitcoin development this week, calling Bitcoin “largely a technological dead end” in a reply that quickly ricocheted through crypto’s never-ending decentralization debates.

The exchange started as a fight over history and governance. On Feb. 9, X user Bram Kanstein argued that XRP’s early “genesis reset” — often described as treating the 32,750th XRP block as a kind of starting point — illustrates crypto’s centralized tendencies. Kanstein wrote that the milestone “may be thought of as the genesis,” before adding: “Except it is not. The XRP Genesis reset is a prime example of the centralized nature of ‘CrYpTO’.”

Ex-Ripple CTO Schwartz Calls Bitcoin A ‘Tech Dead End’

Schwartz jumped in with a comparison that redirected the argument toward Bitcoin. “Bitcoin had at least two incidents that showed way more centralization than this incident did,” he wrote, “especially since the decision in this incident was not to make any coordinated changes and just live with it.”

That claim drew a follow-up from X user, who floated SegWit as a candidate for what Schwartz meant, an example of coordinated protocol change. The ex-Ripple CTO pushed back on that framing: “I wasn’t because I don’t really think of adding new features as showing centralization,” he replied. “But I think you could make a good argument that it does. The biggest one I was thinking of was the coordinated 2010 rollback.”

The thread’s tone shifted on Feb. 10 when X user Khaled Elawadi asked the question that put Schwartz’s own priorities in the spotlight: since co-creating the XRPL, had he worked on or even considered developing Bitcoin again?

“Not really,” Schwartz answered. Then he went further, sketching an argument that Bitcoin’s dominance owes less to the evolution of its base-layer tech than to social and monetary inertia. “I think bitcoin is largely a technological dead end for the same reason the dollar is,” he wrote. “The technology just doesn’t seem to matter all that much to its success, at least not at the blockchain layer.”

For XRP supporters, Schwartz’s comments served two purposes at once: a defense against charges that XRPL’s early history implies unique centralization, and a reminder that Bitcoin’s “hands-off” mythology also has had real-world exceptions in its early days.

What’s hard to miss is where the ex-Ripple CTO  draws the line. Bitcoin’s success can persist even if base-layer technical progress slows, because the network’s strength increasingly behaves like a monetary standard rather than an engineering project. Schwartz is pursuing a different strategy for the XRP Ledger. After stepping down as Ripple CTO, he announced that he would pursue his own projects on the XRP Ledger.

At press time, XRP traded at $1.38.

David Schwartz, Ripple’s former CTO and one of the original architects of the XRP Ledger, poured cold water on the idea of returning to Bitcoin development this week, calling Bitcoin “largely a technological dead end” in a reply that quickly ricocheted through crypto’s never-ending decentralization debates.

The exchange started as a fight over history and governance. On Feb. 9, X user Bram Kanstein argued that XRP’s early “genesis reset” — often described as treating the 32,750th XRP block as a kind of starting point — illustrates crypto’s centralized tendencies. Kanstein wrote that the milestone “may be thought of as the genesis,” before adding: “Except it is not. The XRP Genesis reset is a prime example of the centralized nature of ‘CrYpTO’.”

Ex-Ripple CTO Schwartz Calls Bitcoin A ‘Tech Dead End’

Schwartz jumped in with a comparison that redirected the argument toward Bitcoin. “Bitcoin had at least two incidents that showed way more centralization than this incident did,” he wrote, “especially since the decision in this incident was not to make any coordinated changes and just live with it.”

That claim drew a follow-up from X user, who floated SegWit as a candidate for what Schwartz meant, an example of coordinated protocol change. The ex-Ripple CTO pushed back on that framing: “I wasn’t because I don’t really think of adding new features as showing centralization,” he replied. “But I think you could make a good argument that it does. The biggest one I was thinking of was the coordinated 2010 rollback.”

The thread’s tone shifted on Feb. 10 when X user Khaled Elawadi asked the question that put Schwartz’s own priorities in the spotlight: since co-creating the XRPL, had he worked on or even considered developing Bitcoin again?

“Not really,” Schwartz answered. Then he went further, sketching an argument that Bitcoin’s dominance owes less to the evolution of its base-layer tech than to social and monetary inertia. “I think bitcoin is largely a technological dead end for the same reason the dollar is,” he wrote. “The technology just doesn’t seem to matter all that much to its success, at least not at the blockchain layer.”

For XRP supporters, Schwartz’s comments served two purposes at once: a defense against charges that XRPL’s early history implies unique centralization, and a reminder that Bitcoin’s “hands-off” mythology also has had real-world exceptions in its early days.

What’s hard to miss is where the ex-Ripple CTO  draws the line. Bitcoin’s success can persist even if base-layer technical progress slows, because the network’s strength increasingly behaves like a monetary standard rather than an engineering project. Schwartz is pursuing a different strategy for the XRP Ledger. After stepping down as Ripple CTO, he announced that he would pursue his own projects on the XRP Ledger.

At press time, XRP traded at $1.38.

Ripple’s Chief Legal Officer (CLO), Stuart Alderoty, has signaled that a compromise may emerge soon from ongoing discussions among banks, the US Senate, and crypto leaders over stablecoin rewards. The comments followed a smaller White House meeting focused on stablecoin regulations, which highlighted which activities should be allowed under upcoming rules. Depending on the outcome, this could directly affect Ripple’s operations and the broader outlook for XRP. 

Compromise Puts Ripple In Regulatory Focus

Popular Journalist Eleanor Terrett reported on Wednesday, February 11, that both banking and crypto participants had described the Stablecoin yield meeting in the White House as productive, even though no final agreement was reached. The meeting explored deal specifics in more detail than previous sessions, with particular attention on how stablecoin rewards, highlighted in the Clarity Act, could be structured under future rules. 

During the meeting, Alderoty stated that “compromise is in the air,” signaling potential movement toward shared ground between banks and crypto representatives. For XRP, this matters because Ripple’s role in cross-border payments and the services of its stablecoin RLUSD depend heavily on how regulators define permissible reward-based and transaction-based activities. 

Notably, Terrett stated that banks and trade groups arrived at the White House meeting with a written set of prohibition principles that outlined what they would not accept regarding stablecoin rewards. These principles were designed to protect traditional banking structures while limiting the extent to which digital assets could compete with deposit products. 

Under the principles, banks stated that payment stablecoins should not offer yield or rewards to prevent deposit flight and preserve lending in local communities. They also called for strong enforcement measures to close loopholes, restrictions on marketing that could present stablecoins as insured or risk-free, and a regulatory review after two years to assess potential risks. 

According to Terrett, one source said banks made a key concession by accepting language that included possible exemptions, something that had previously been off the table. This change opens the possibility that transaction-based rewards could be permitted under tightly defined conditions, a development that may influence how Ripple structures its stablecoin services, with potential effects on XRP as well. 

What Negotiations Could Mean For XRP And Stablecoins 

A major point of debate during the meeting was the definition of permissible activities, which would determine what crypto firms like Ripple are allowed to do when offering stablecoin rewards. Crypto representatives pushed for broader definitions to provide more clarity for stablecoins, while banks argued for narrower boundaries to reduce risks to the financial system. 

The White House urged both parties to reach an agreement by March 1, 2026, with further discussions expected in the coming days. Although it’s unclear whether another meeting of the same scale will take place this month, Ripple’s participation puts RLUSD and XRP directly in the spotlight. The outcome of these negotiations could shape how the crypto company and the broader stablecoin market offer rewards and likely influence how they operate under future regulatory frameworks.

Thailand has quietly moved a big step closer to making crypto part of its money markets. The Cabinet has given the green light to let cryptocurrencies serve as the underlying assets for regulated products such as futures and options. This opens the door for mainstream trading that is tied to real legal rules and cleared through licensed systems.

Regulators Set Rules

Based on reports, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission will write the detailed rules next. Those rules will say how exchanges must operate, how trades are cleared, and what kinds of risk controls firms must put in place.

Exchanges and banks will need licenses. Custody standards will be tightened. Market makers and institutional investors are already talking to local firms about possible listings and clearing setups. Some work will be done by trading venues; other work will be done by third parties that handle settlement.

Tokenized Bonds And Tax Moves

Reports have disclosed earlier projects that helped pave the way. The government introduced tokenized government bonds, known as G-Tokens, which were offered through licensed digital trading platforms in 2025.

That experiment showed how public debt can sit on a blockchain while still being issued under normal law. At the same time, Reports say a temporary tax break was offered to encourage on-shore crypto trading — a five-year capital gains tax exemption running from 2025 to 2029 for trades on approved platforms.

Stablecoins such as USDT and USDC were added to the approved list to ease trading and settlement.

Market Reaction And Institutional Interest

According to market watchers, the move drew fast interest from regional fund managers and some global trading desks. There is talk of creating Bitcoin futures and possibly ETFs that link to regulated contracts.

Trading firms say the main pull is clearer rules and a legal route for hedging exposure. Liquidity providers see a chance to offer more tools to investors, and some exchanges have already started building product designs.

Volatility remains a concern, and many firms are cautious about running big positions until the clearing rules are final.

Concerns are being raised about custody, fraud, and links to money laundering. Regulators intend to require robust know-your-customer checks and strict audit trails.

Leverage levels will likely be limited at first. Margining rules are expected to be strict so that a sudden price move does not cascade through the system.

Many observers point out that bringing crypto into regulated markets can help manage these risks — if rules are enforced.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Three Cardano ecosystem announcements landed onstage at Consensus Hong Kong yesterday, spanning cross-chain rails, a new stablecoin rollout timeline, and a privacy-focused network’s march to mainnet.

#1 Cardano Taps LayerZero

Intersect said via X its Critical Cardano Integrations workstream has approved bringing LayerZero into the Cardano ecosystem, positioning the move as the network’s largest interoperability expansion to date. In its post, Intersect framed the integration as a step-change in access to cross-chain assets and infrastructure:

“LayerZero is one of the most widely adopted omnichain messaging protocols in Web3, connecting 150+ blockchains and enabling access to 400+ tokens and $80B+ in omnichain assets. This integration unlocks the largest cross-chain connectivity expansion in Cardano’s history, opening pathways to stablecoin liquidity, Bitcoin-backed assets, tokenized real-world assets, and shared DeFi infrastructure across the broader crypto ecosystem.”

A companion write-up describes the effort in similar terms, saying the protocol “connects over 160 blockchains” and “has facilitated over $200 billion in cross-chain volume,” with Cardano gaining technical access to “over 400 tokens” and “$80 billion in omnichain assets” once the LayerZero endpoint is deployed.

The post argues that LayerZero’s messaging-layer approach is chain-agnostic “regardless of the underlying execution model,” explicitly flagging Cardano’s extended UTXO design as a historical friction point for tooling built around account-based chains.

Intersect said delivery work now moves into deployment, with “further milestones and timelines to be shared as progress continues.”

#2 USDCx Gets A Launch Date

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson used the event to put a calendar marker on USDCx, saying the product now has a target launch window at the end of February. “We’ve announced not long ago that we will have USDCx. Now we have a launch date for USDCx, end of February. We’ve done some amazing engineering to have a beautiful UX. You can go straight from any wallet to Coinbase, or Binance, and back, and there’s instant convertibility to USDC,” Hoskinson said.

He also claimed feature advantages versus standard USDC in circulation, saying USDCx has “privacy, and it’s also immutable and irreversible, so it’s actually better [than USDC].”

#3 Midnight Targets Mainnet Before End Of March

Midnight, the privacy-oriented network tied to the broader Cardano ecosystem, said its mainnet is now imminent. “On the ConsensusHK stage, we shared that Midnight mainnet will officially go live before the end of March,” the team posted via X, calling it “a major milestone and the beginning of a live, production network designed to support early applications built around selective disclosure and real-world privacy.”

Midnight added that mainnet is “foundational,” describing it as the stable base for teams to “launch, test, and iterate,” while setting expectations for “rapid protocol and tooling expansion ahead.”

At press time, Cardano traded at $0.261.

Danske Bank has started offering Bitcoin and Ethereum ETPs to customers for the first time, but the bank still doesn’t endorse crypto assets.

Danske Bank Now Offers Bitcoin & Ethereum ETPs

As announced in a press release, Danske Bank’s customers can now invest in some exchange-traded products (ETPs) tracking the two largest cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin and Ethereum.

The bank said that the new option is a response to increasing user demand for digital assets and improved regulation related to the sector. Kerstin Lysholm, head of investment products & offering at Danske Bank, noted:

As cryptocurrencies have become a more common asset class, we are receiving an increasing number of enquiries from customers wanting the option of investing in cryptocurrencies as part of their investment portfolio.

Headquartered in Copenhagen, Danske Bank is the largest bank in Denmark with 3.75 trillion DKK (around $596 billion) in assets. Previously, the bank took a stalwart stance against offering cryptocurrency trading, but the latest move suggests it’s finally opening up to the market.

Though, Danske Bank still doesn’t offer advisory services for digital assets, labelling them as “opportunistic investments” rather than part of a long-term portfolio strategy. The addition of the new Bitcoin and Ethereum investment option is geared at investors who use the firm’s trading platform without receiving any investment advice, the bank said.

Investors using the option will gain exposure to the cryptocurrencies not by direct holding, but via ETPs, investment vehicles that allow for indirect exposure. This means that traders won’t have to engage with blockchain components like wallets and exchanges.

Lysholm emphasized that access to digital asset ETPs on the company’s trading platform shouldn’t be taken as a recommendation of cryptocurrencies from Danske Bank. The bank warned that the asset class involves “high risk” and may result in large losses.

The move to allow Bitcoin and Ethereum ETPs isn’t the only one related to the cryptocurrency sector that Danske Bank has made recently. In September, the bank joined hands with eight other major European banks to develop a shared euro-pegged stablecoin.

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies that have their price pegged to a fiat currency. Currently, the space is heavily dominated by the USD-based tokens, and the consortium of Danske Bank and other European banks plans to challenge this hegemony.

Since the initial announcement, the consortium has gradually added more members, now involving a total of twelve European financial institutions. The banks have set up a company called Qivalis in Amsterdam to handle the issuance of the stablecoin.

While the exact launch date of the token is unknown, the consortium has said it aims to make a commercial release in the second half of 2026.

BTC Price

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is floating around $66,700, down more than 8% in the last seven days.

BlockFills, a Chicago‑based cryptocurrency trading and lending firm that caters to institutional investors, has temporarily halted client deposits and withdrawals following the latest sharp downturn in digital asset markets. 

The decision came after Bitcoin (BTC) dropped to around $60,000 last week before recovering some of its losses. A company spokesperson confirmed on Wednesday that the suspension remains in effect.

BlockFills Imposes Trading Limits

The firm, which is backed by Susquehanna Private Equity Investments and the venture capital arm of CME Group, said the pause was introduced as a precautionary step. 

According to reports, clients were notified last week that the measure was designed “to further the protection of our clients and the firm.” The notice stated that any funds sent to the platform during the suspension period would be rejected and returned. 

While deposits and withdrawals are frozen, BlockFills clients are still permitted to trade, though under certain limitations. Positions or loans requiring additional margin may be closed if necessary.

BlockFills operates across several areas of the crypto market, offering spot and derivatives execution, structured products, and crypto‑backed lending services. Its clientele includes Bitcoin miners, hedge funds, and other professional counterparties. 

The company emphasized that trading for both spot and derivatives markets remains available for opening and closing positions, subject to restrictions implemented in response to current conditions.

No End In Sight

In a public statement, BlockFills said that recent market and financial volatility prompted the temporary suspension. The firm added that it is working to restore liquidity to the platform as quickly as possible. 

The company has not indicated how long the suspension will last, nor has it disclosed specific details about the underlying issues beyond citing heightened market volatility. 

While such pauses are disruptive, they are not without precedent in the cryptocurrency industry. During the 2022 market downturn often referred to as the “crypto winter,” several major centralized lenders and exchanges froze customer withdrawals as liquidity strains intensified. 

Companies including Celsius, Voyager Digital, BlockFi and Genesis eventually filed for bankruptcy after suspending client funds. More recently, in 2025, some exchanges experienced temporary disruptions. Binance, for example, briefly halted futures trading for less than an hour, attributing the interruption to technical issues.

The situation for BlockFills and its users will likely persist until crypto prices recover. For example, Bitcoin renewed its downtrend on Wednesday, dropping toward $67,554. The cryptocurrency registered losses of 2% and 8% in the 24-hour and seven-day time frames, respectively, positioning it 46% below all-time high levels.

According to CoinGecko data, Ethereum (ETH), XRP, and Solana (SOL) followed Bitcoin’s lead, with respective declines of 3%, 2%, and 3.5% in the 24-hour time frame alone, adding to the growing fear of a full-fledged bear market taking place. 

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com 

Quick Facts:

• Hong Kong’s SFC is officially exploring allowing perpetual futures contracts, a major step toward institutional crypto adoption in Asia.
• This move drives demand for high-performance blockchain infrastructure that can support sophisticated, high-frequency trading applications.
• Bitcoin Hyper aims to meet this demand by integrating the high-speed Solana Virtual Machine (SVM) as a Bitcoin Layer 2 solution.
• The project has attracted significant interest, with its presale raising over $31M and attracting major whale investments.

In a landmark move, Hong Kong’s top financial regulator has signaled the city is actively exploring perpetual futures contracts for licensed crypto exchanges. The announcement from Julia Leung, CEO of the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), at Consensus Hong Kong, marks a profound maturation of the region’s digital asset framework.

We’re moving far beyond the simple spot ETF approvals that dominated headlines earlier this year. Frankly, this isn’t just a minor regulatory tweak; it’s a foundational shift that acknowledges the sophisticated demands of institutional and professional traders.

Perpetual contracts, which let traders speculate on an asset’s price without an expiry date, are the lifeblood of the global crypto derivatives market (we’re talking trillions in monthly volume). By opening the door to these instruments, Hong Kong is positioning itself as a premier crypto hub in Asia, aiming to capture capital that currently flows offshore.

But what most coverage misses is the second-order effect: this legitimization creates immense pressure on the underlying blockchain infrastructure. Institutional-grade trading demands sub-second execution, low fees, and deep liquidity, capabilities that legacy networks like Bitcoin simply can’t provide on their own.

This creates a paradox. Bitcoin remains the ultimate institutional asset, the digital gold standard. Yet its base layer is too slow and expensive for the high-frequency world of derivatives.

The market is crying out for a solution that bridges Bitcoin’s unparalleled security with the high-performance execution required by modern finance. The question is no longer if institutions will build on Bitcoin, but how.

Bringing Solana-Speed Smart Contracts to Bitcoin

The chasm between Bitcoin’s security and the market’s need for speed is exactly where new infrastructure is emerging. One of the most ambitious is Bitcoin Hyper ($HYPER), a project designed from the ground up as the first Bitcoin Layer 2 integrated with the Solana Virtual Machine (SVM). This isn’t just an incremental improvement. It’s a quantum leap for the Bitcoin ecosystem.

By using the SVM, known for its parallel processing and blistering speed, Bitcoin Hyper aims to deliver transaction finality faster than Solana itself, all while anchoring its security to the Bitcoin mainnet. This architecture directly addresses the very limitations that prevent complex financial apps from running on Bitcoin today.

Developers can build high-speed decentralized exchanges (DEXs), lending protocols, and NFT platforms with familiar tools like Rust, unlocking a wave of innovation previously locked out of the ecosystem.

The project’s design is purpose-built for the future Hong Kong is signaling: Bitcoin for settlement, and a real-time SVM layer for execution. When traders need to execute complex strategies tied to BTC perpetuals, they’ll require an on-chain environment that can actually keep up.

Bitcoin Hyper provides a high-throughput venue for DeFi, payments, and other dApps, all while using wrapped BTC as its core transactional asset.

EXPLORE THE FUTURE OF BITCOIN L2S WITH $HYPER

Smart Money Takes Note as Presale Momentum Builds

So, is there demand for a high-performance Bitcoin L2? The numbers speak for themselves. The Bitcoin Hyper presale has seen a staggering influx of capital, raising over $31M date. With its $HYPER token currently priced at $0.0136754, this level of early-stage funding suggests a broad consensus: solving Bitcoin’s scalability is one of the biggest opportunities this cycle.

And it’s not just retail enthusiasm. Smart money is moving. On-chain analysis shows high-net wallets scooping up as much as $500K in a single purchase. Moves like this often precede wider market recognition, suggesting savvy investors are getting in position.

Delivering a flawless and secure bridge for $BTC is a massive technical challenge, and the project’s success ultimately hinges on its ability to deliver on its ambitious roadmap. We think this is definitely one of the best crypto to watch.

Still, the proposition for investors is compelling. Presale participants can stake their tokens immediately after the Token Generation Event (TGE) to earn a high APY while helping secure the network. This combination of a powerful technical narrative, clear market demand, and serious early funding places Bitcoin Hyper right at the center of the evolving Bitcoin L2 landscape.

BUY YOUR $HYPER HERE

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. The cryptocurrency market is volatile, and readers should conduct their own research before making investment decisions.

Quick Facts:

• Sam Bankman-Fried has officially appealed his fraud conviction, reigniting discussions about security and trust in the crypto industry.
• The FTX collapse highlighted the severe risks of centralized custody, pushing the market toward more robust security solutions.
• BMIC is building a quantum-secure financial stack, including a wallet and staking, to protect assets from future cryptographic threats.
• The looming danger of ‘harvest now, decrypt later’ attacks makes post-quantum cryptography a critical area of innovation for digital assets.

Sam Bankman-Fried, the disgraced founder of FTX, is officially appealing his conviction and 25-year prison sentence. The legal filing reopens one of the biggest fraud cases in crypto history, and for an industry still grappling with the fallout, it’s like pouring salt in a very old wound.

SBF’s appeal challenges various trial decisions, from witness testimony to alleged conflicts of interest. But let’s be clear: the FTX saga was never about tech failing. It was a catastrophic breakdown of trust.

Billions in user funds vanished not because of a sophisticated hack, but due to internal fraud and shockingly poor custody. That collapse forced a painful but necessary conversation across the market: How do we actually secure digital assets?

While the courts wrestle with crypto’s ghosts, innovators are already building for the future. We’re now seeing a clear shift in investor focus toward projects that prioritize provable, next-gen security over pure hype. That’s where the real story is.

The Quantum Threat and BMIC’s Future-Proof Solution

But what most market coverage misses is that while the industry defends against today’s threats, a far bigger one looms: quantum computing. State-sponsored and corporate labs are racing to build machines capable of shattering the encryption that protects everything from bank accounts to crypto wallets.

It’s a threat (one many still dismiss) known as the ‘harvest now, decrypt later’ attack, stealing encrypted data today with the plan to unlock it once quantum computers are powerful enough. For crypto, this isn’t just a problem; it’s an existential risk.

This is the exact problem BMIC ($BMIC) was engineered to solve. It isn’t just another DeFi protocol or meme coin; it’s a foundational security layer built for the quantum age. The project delivers a full stack of financial tools, wallet, staking, and payments, all shielded by post-quantum cryptography (PQC).

While traditional wallets expose public keys during transactions, BMIC uses ERC-4337 smart accounts and a Zero Public-Key Exposure model to protect users from both current and future threats. It even integrates an AI-enhanced threat detection system to proactively neutralize suspicious activity.

The key difference here is a shift from reactive security to preemptive protection. So, is your portfolio truly safe if its core cryptography has a known expiration date?

LEARN MORE ABOUT BMIC AND ITS QUANTUM STACK

A New Security Standard Attracting Early Investment

If history has taught us anything, it’s that after a major market failure like FTX, capital flows toward infrastructure that promises to prevent the next crisis. We’re seeing that play out right now. The early traction for the BMIC presale seems to prove the point, having already raised over $446K, with tokens currently priced at just $0.049474.

Frankly, this doesn’t look like speculative froth; it looks like a calculated investment in a long-term solution. It’s why we picked $BMIC as a best new cryptocurrency.

The project’s utility is centered on its native token, $BMIC, which powers the whole ecosystem. It’s used for staking on the quantum-secure network, participating in governance, and fueling its ‘Burn-to-Compute’ model for access to advanced security features.

The ripple effect of a successful quantum-proof platform could be immense, potentially setting a new security standard for the entire industry. The risk? As always, it comes down to execution and adoption. But in a market still scarred by FTX, a project building decentralized, future-proof security is a compelling story.

buy your $BMIC here

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. All investments carry risks, and readers should conduct their own due diligence.

Quick Facts:

• SkyBridge Capital is buying the Bitcoin dip, signaling strong institutional conviction in the market’s long-term outlook.
• After big consolidations, capital tends to rotate into new infrastructure projects that solve core problems like liquidity fragmentation.
• LiquidChain is being built to unify the siloed liquidity of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana into a single execution layer for cross-chain DeFi.
• There’s a growing demand for capital efficiency, highlighting the need for Layer 3 solutions that can unlock trillions in passive assets.

While Bitcoin consolidates below its all-time highs, institutional players are sending a clear signal: this is an accumulation zone, not a time to panic. SkyBridge Capital, led by Anthony Scaramucci, has been actively buying the Bitcoin dip, he shared at Consensus Hong Kong, reinforcing a narrative of long-term conviction in the face of short-term volatility.

This kind of strategic buying matters less for its immediate price impact and more for what it represents, a deeply-held belief that the current market lull is just a foundational reset before the next major leg up.

Right now, the market is wrestling with conflicting data. On one hand, spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen some pretty big outflows lately, dragging the price down. On the other hand, macro players like Scaramucci are stepping in, viewing prices in the low-$60Ks as a discount.

This divergence gets at a crucial theme. While first-gen institutions are busy scooping up Bitcoin, the next wave of value is going to come from putting that capital to work. The digital gold needs its own financial rails.

History shows that after every major consolidation, capital starts hunting for new, high-growth verticals. The problem? Trillions in liquidity remain trapped in isolated ecosystems like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana.

So, what’s the knock-on effect of all this institutional buying? A growing, urgent demand for infrastructure that can finally bridge these islands of capital.

Unifying Trillions in Fragmented Liquidity

The core challenge holding DeFi back from hitting its full potential? Liquidity fragmentation. Bitcoin’s ~$1.3T market cap is largely passive, unable to interact seamlessly with Ethereum’s smart contracts or Solana’s high-speed applications without relying on risky, centralized bridges and wrapped assets.

This digital segregation creates friction, kills capital efficiency, and, let’s be honest, opens up huge security risks. What happens when you can execute a trade or deploy an application that draws on the native liquidity of all three giants simultaneously?

That’s the exact problem LiquidChain ($LIQUID) is engineered to solve. It’s a Layer 3 protocol that acts as a cross-chain liquidity layer, creating one single execution environment that fuses the strengths of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana.

Its architecture is built around a Unified Liquidity Layer. This lets developers deploy an application once to give users access to the combined liquidity and user bases of these powerhouse chains. Frankly, it’s a paradigm shift from the current clunky model.

Instead of cumbersome multi-step bridging and swapping, users could perform complex cross-chain actions in a single, verifiable transaction. Of course, the risk, as with any ambitious infrastructure play, is in the execution. But the thesis is undeniably powerful.

FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE LIQUIDCHAIN ECOSYSTEM

The Infrastructure Play for the Next Cycle

While Scaramucci is buying spot Bitcoin, a parallel opportunity is brewing: building the infrastructure that will service this growing pool of capital. Historically, infrastructure projects that solve fundamental problems are some of the most resilient and highest-performing investments when the market expands.

They’re the picks and shovels in a digital gold rush. LiquidChain is positioning itself squarely in this category, aiming to become the connective tissue for the market’s largest liquidity pools. It’s why we think it’s one of the best crypto to watch.

The project is still in its early stages, offering what looks like a ground-floor entry point. According to its official site, the LiquidChain presale has already raised over $535K, with the $LIQUID token priced at just $0.0136. That kind of early traction suggests its vision of a truly interoperable future is resonating with investors who are looking beyond the daily price charts.

By creating a ‘Deploy-Once’ architecture, LiquidChain drastically lowers the barrier for developers to build cross-chain dApps. That alone could spark a new wave of innovation. If DeFi is going to onboard the next 100M users, the experience has to be seamless. Unifying liquidity is the first, and most critical, step.

VISIT THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDCHAIN ($LIQUID) PRESALE SITE

This article does not constitute financial advice. The cryptocurrency market is volatile, and readers should conduct their own research before investing in any digital assets.

Quick Facts:

• Top banking associations (ABA, BPI) are pushing the U.S. Senate to reject the landmark FIT21 crypto regulation bill.
• The pushback reveals a deep conflict between old-school centralized finance and crypto’s decentralized ideals.
• SUBBD Token is emerging as a decentralized, AI-driven alternative for the creator economy, aiming to fix problems like high fees and censorship.
• Washington’s regulatory stalemate could be unintentionally boosting platforms like SUBBD that operate outside traditional financial control.

As Washington grapples with regulating digital assets, a powerful banking coalition just drew a line in the sand against the landmark Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act (FIT21). It’s a move that highlights the growing schism between traditional finance and crypto, a conflict that’s inadvertently pushing users toward projects operating completely outside the old guard’s control.

The banking groups involved did release a statement after the meeting, despite not moving forward, but it didn’t outline the next steps.

In a recent letter to Senate leadership, the American Bankers Association (ABA) and the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), among others, urged lawmakers to kill the bill, even after it passed the House with surprising bipartisan support. Why the pushback? They claim FIT21 would create regulatory gaps, undermine existing securities laws, and expose consumers to undue risk. The bill itself is designed to do the opposite: establish a clearer framework for digital assets by finally delineating the jurisdictions of the SEC and CFTC.

Let’s be clear: this resistance isn’t just about policy. It’s about power. The banking sector sees the burgeoning crypto ecosystem, especially stablecoins and DeFi, as a direct threat to its long-held dominance over finance.

By lobbying against regulatory clarity, they perpetuate the very uncertainty that stifles mainstream adoption. And the second-order effect? It pushes innovation and user interest right into the arms of decentralized platforms that promise to bypass the gatekeepers altogether. While titans debate, builders build.

SUBBD Emerges as an Answer to Centralized Control

This battle in Washington underscores a problem that goes way beyond finance: the pitfalls of centralization. Sound familiar? The same dynamics, exorbitant fees, censorship, and arbitrary rule changes, plaguing traditional banking, are just as rampant in the $191B content creation industry. Platforms like YouTube, Twitch, and OnlyFans can slash creator earnings with fees as high as 70%, all while holding the power of sudden de-platforming over their heads.

This is the exact friction point that SUBBD Token ($SUBBD) was built to solve. It’s a Web3-native alternative that merges a decentralized ethos with powerful AI tools, aiming to become the ultimate hub for the modern creator.

The platform tackles the industry’s biggest pain points head-on, offering creators multiple ways to earn, from subscriptions and tipping to NFT sales, all within a transparent ecosystem on Ethereum.

What most coverage misses is the parallel here. The banking lobby fears disintermediation, and frankly, the creator economy is more than ready for it. SUBBD’s entire architecture is designed to hand power back to the user. It integrates an AI Personal Assistant for automating fan interactions, AI voice cloning, and even the ability to launch fully AI-driven influencers.

For fans, the platform isn’t just about consumption; it’s about participation through token-gated content and staking rewards. It creates a symbiotic economy where both sides win, without a middleman taking an outrageous cut.

CHECK OUT THE $SUBBD TOKEN ON ITS PRESALE PAGE

Presale Momentum Signals a Shift in Creator and Fan Sentiment

The market’s appetite for a decentralized fix is becoming undeniable. The ongoing SUBBD Token presale has already pulled in over  $1.4 mwith tokens priced at just $0.057495. That kind of early-stage funding isn’t just noise; it’s a clear signal that people believe the creator economy is ripe for a shakeup.

Investors aren’t just buying a token; they’re buying into a whole new model for content ownership. The project’s staking mechanism, which offers a fixed 20% APY for the first year, gives an immediate incentive to get involved.

Stakers get access to exclusive content, livestreams, and other perks, transforming them from passive consumers into active participants. The risk? Well, like any new platform, it all comes down to achieving critical mass, attracting enough great creators and dedicated fans to make the ecosystem thrive.

Ironically, the regulatory gridlock in the U.S. might just be SUBBD’s biggest catalyst. As legacy institutions fight tooth and nail to preserve the status quo, they’re inadvertently making the best possible case for platforms that are transparent and fair by design.

The traction in SUBBD’s presale says it all: creators and users aren’t waiting for permission from Washington or Wall Street anymore. They’re just building a better system themselves. Join the SUBBD Token presale here.

BUY YOUR $SUBBD HERE

This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. All investments in cryptocurrency carry inherent risks, and you should conduct your own research.

A White House meeting aimed at breaking the logjam over stablecoin rewards under pending crypto market structure legislation aka Clarity Act ended without a compromise, even as both banking and crypto participants described the session as “productive,” according to details shared by Crypto In America reporter Eleanor Terrett citing sources in the room.

The follow-up gathering, smaller than the first meeting last week, zoomed in on what has become the most combustible line item in the Clarity Act debate: whether, and under what constraints, crypto firms can offer “rewards” tied to stablecoin usage. The White House urged both sides to reach a deal by March 1, Terrett reported, though it remains unclear whether another meeting of this scale will occur before the end of the month.

Crypto Clarity Act Update

Terrett said banks and banking trade groups came prepared with a written handout titled “Yield and Interest Prohibition Principles,” framing “payment stablecoins” as payment instruments and pushing for a bright-line ban on consideration paid to holders.

“In the GENIUS Act, Congress specifically designed payment stablecoins to be payment instruments,” the document states. “Consistent with this design, market structure legislation should incorporate the following yield and interest prohibition principles to limit deposit outflows that reduce the availability of credit for communities.”

The handout’s core demand is sweeping: “No person may provide any form of financial or non-financial consideration to a payment stablecoin holder in connection with the payment stablecoin holder’s purchase, use, ownership, possession, custody, holding, or retention of a payment stablecoin.” It pairs that with a call for regulator enforcement authority and civil monetary penalties, anti-evasion language, and strict marketing and disclosure rules that would bar firms from implying rewards are “interest,” “risk-free,” or comparable to insured deposits.

One source highlighted a narrow shift in bank posture: the inclusion of “any proposed exemptions” language, which Terrett said was viewed as a concession because banks had previously been unwilling to discuss exemptions “with respect to offering rewards on a transaction-based basis at all.” Even so, the handout insists exemptions must be “extremely limited in scope” and must not “drive deposit flight that would undercut Main Street lending.”

Terrett reported that a major share of the discussion centered on “permissible activities”: the types of account behavior that could qualify a crypto firm to offer rewards. Crypto representatives want those definitions broad; banks want them narrowed. That framing captures the heart of the dispute: whether rewards can be designed as functional incentives for payments activity, or whether any such consideration is inherently deposit-like and therefore destabilizing for traditional funding models.

Ripple Chief Legal Officer Stuart Alderoty struck an optimistic tone after the session, writing via X: “Productive session at the White House today – compromise is in the air. Clear, bipartisan momentum remains behind sensible crypto market structure legislation. We should move now – while the window is still open – and deliver a real win for consumers and America.”

Dan Spuller, EVP of the Blockchain Association, described the meeting as a shift from general debate to “serious problem-solving,” while underscoring the gap that remains. “Stablecoin rewards were front and center,” he wrote. “Banks did not come to negotiate from the bill text, instead arriving with broad prohibitive principles, which remains a key disagreement.”

The meeting was led by Patrick Witt, Executive Director of the President’s Crypto Council, and included Senate Banking Committee staff, Terrett reported. Crypto-side attendees included Coinbase’s Paul Grewal, a16z’s Miles Jennings, Ripple’s Alderoty, Paxos’s Josh Rosner, Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger, and Ji Kim of the Crypto Council. Banks represented included Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citi, PNC Bank, and U.S. Bank, alongside trade groups including the Bank Policy Institute, the American Bankers Association, and ICBA.

Mersinger said the continued convenings signal momentum even without a deal. “Today’s second White House meeting reflects continued, meaningful momentum toward delivering bipartisan digital asset market structure legislation, and we’re encouraged by the progress being made as stakeholders remain constructively engaged on resolving outstanding issues,” she said. “We’re thankful to Patrick Witt and the Administration for their continued leadership and commitment to keeping this process moving forward.”

For now, the White House appears to be applying time pressure rather than dictating terms. Further discussions are expected “in the coming days,” Terrett reported, setting up a race to define “permissible activities” narrowly enough to satisfy banks, but broadly enough for crypto firms to preserve rewards as a competitive product feature before the March 1 target date.

At press time, the total crypto market cap stood at $2.26 trillion.

The United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has escalated its enforcement action against crypto exchange HTX, accusing the platform of illegally promoting crypto services to British consumers and seeking to restrict its presence across digital platforms in the country.

HTX Faces UK App Store Ban 

In a statement released on Tuesday, the FCA said it has formally asked major social media companies and app store operators to block access to HTX in the UK. 

The regulator is seeking the removal of HTX’s applications from Google’s Play Store and Apple’s App Store for UK users, as well as the blocking of the exchange’s social media accounts for British audiences. 

The regulator alleged that HTX has repeatedly advertised “illegal crypto services” on popular social media platforms, including TikTok, X (previously Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. According to the FCA, these promotions breached UK financial rules governing how crypto products can be marketed to the public.

The FCA also alleged that HTX operates through an “opaque corporate structure” that conceals the identities of its owners and those responsible for running its website. The FCA also said that its repeated attempts to engage with the company have gone unanswered.

While HTX has taken some steps since the legal proceedings began—specifically by restricting new UK users from registering for accounts—the FCA said those measures do not go far enough. 

The FCA added that HTX has not provided any assurance that its restrictions on new users will be permanent, leaving concerns that breaches could continue.

FCA Signals Tougher Crypto Enforcement

Steve Smart, the FCA’s joint executive director of enforcement and market oversight, said the regulator’s rules are intended to support a stable and competitive crypto market while ensuring consumers can make informed decisions. 

He said HTX’s behavior sharply contrasts with that of most firms attempting to comply with the UK’s regulatory framework. Smart noted that this is the first time the FCA has taken enforcement action against a crypto firm for illegally marketing its products to UK consumers.

HTX is currently listed on the FCA’s Warning List, meaning consumers who engage with the platform are not eligible for protections such as access to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

Commenting on the case, Nick Barnard, a partner at law firm Corker Binning, said it highlights the difficulty of regulating the crypto industry from a single jurisdiction. 

He noted that the FCA’s options are limited when a company has no physical presence in the UK. However, he added that the regulator has likely concluded it must still demonstrate a firm stance against companies that openly flout UK rules.

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com 

UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has taken legal action against crypto exchange HTX for illegal promotions to UK-based users.

FCA Has Started Legal Proceedings Against Crypto Exchange HTX

The FCA, UK’s financial watchdog, has begun legal proceedings against HTX, as revealed in a press release on the regulator’s website. The reason for the action is the crypto exchange not complying with FCA’s digital asset promotion rules. “Firms providing crypto products to UK consumers need to comply with rules which protect consumers from unfair and misleading marketing,” noted the regulator.

The rules first came into effect back in October 2023 and since then, the majority of firms that FCA has engaged with have responded positively in complying with the regime. FCA previously served a warning to HTX for illegally promoting services to UK consumers, but unlike other companies, the exchange continued to push financial promotions on its website and social media platforms.

“HTX’s conduct stands in stark contrast to the majority of firms working to comply with the FCA’s regime,” said Steve Smart, joint executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA.

Formerly known as Huobi, HTX is a crypto exchange founded in China that now operates offices in various countries. The FCA has described the platform’s organizational structure as ‘opaque,’ with the identities of the owners and website operators remaining unknown, and repeated attempts by the regulator to engage with the firm ignored.

Following the initiation of the proceedings by FCA, HTX has restricted new accounts from users based in the UK. The crypto platform hasn’t stopped existing users from logging in, however, and has also not given any assurance that the changes are permanent, leaving the regulator concerned that the risk of ongoing breaches continues.

“This is the first time we’ve taken enforcement action against a crypto firm illegally marketing their products to UK consumers,” noted Smart. Alongside the legal action, the FCA has requested Google Play and Apple stores to drop HTX’s applications in the UK. The regulator has also asked social media platforms to block the exchange’s accounts to UK-based users.

Although the ownership structure of HTX is hidden, a name that has publicly been associated with the crypto exchange is billionaire Justin Sun, who serves as a global advisor. Sun’s name, however, doesn’t appear in FCA’s lawsuit.

In some other news, Coinbase Advanced witnessed net outflows of stablecoins earlier, as highlighted by CryptoQuant author Darkfrost in an X post. Stablecoins are digital assets that have their price pegged to a fiat currency. Generally, investors withdraw into these tokens when they want to avoid the volatility associated with cryptos like Bitcoin, so exchange outflows related to stablecoins can be a sign that traders are retreating from the market.

From the chart, it’s visible that recently the trend has started to reverse, with stablecoins flowing into Coinbase Advanced once more, a potential sign that US-based whales are becoming interested in swapping into the volatile side once more.

Bitcoin Price

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is trading around $68,700, down 6% over the last week.

As Russia moves to regulate the crypto sector later this year, the European Union (EU) is considering implementing strict sanctions on all digital asset transactions linked to the country to curb sanctions evasion.

EU Seeks Sanctions On Russian Crypto Transactions

On Tuesday, the Financial Times (FT) reported that the European Commission (EC) is evaluating measures to prohibit all crypto transactions with Russia, stepping up its efforts to crack down on the country’s use of digital assets to evade sanctions.

According to documents reviewed by the FT, the Commission has seemingly proposed a broader prohibition “instead of attempting to ban copycat Russian crypto entities spun out of already sanctioned platforms.”

“In order to ensure that sanctions achieve their intended effect [the EU] prohibits to engage with any crypto asset service provider, or to make use of any platform allowing the transfer and exchange of crypto assets that is established in Russia,” explained the internal document outlining the proposed sanctions.

The Commission argued that “any further listing of individual crypto asset service providers … is therefore likely to result in the set-up of new ones to circumvent those listings.”

Notably, the proposal reportedly focuses on preventing the growth of successors to the Russia-linked crypto exchange Garantex. In 2022, the US sanctioned the platform for “operating as the exchange of choice for cybercriminals”.

Moreover, the document is aimed at the payments platform A7, a company reportedly conceived as a mechanism to facilitate cross-border trades due to sanctions imposed after Russia invaded Ukraine, and its connected ruble-pegged stablecoin A7A5, previously used by Garantex to transfer funds to Kyrgyz exchange Grinex.

As reported by Bitcoinist, the EU, UK, and US have adopted restrictive measures against the payment platform. Despite this, recent reports revealed the stablecoin has an aggregate transaction volume of $100 billion.

In addition, the EC suggested adding 20 banks to the list of sanctioned entities and a ban on any digital ruble-related transactions. The Commission also proposed a ban on the export of certain dual-use goods to Kyrgyzstan, claiming that local companies have sold prohibited goods to Russia.

Nonetheless, imposing the measures would require the unanimous support of member states, and three of the bloc’s countries have reportedly expressed doubts, three diplomats briefed on discussions told the FT.

Russia’s Digital Assets Landscape

The potential crackdown comes as Russia continues to develop its upcoming digital assets framework. The CBR recently unveiled its comprehensive regulatory proposals to enable retail and qualified investors to buy digital assets through licensed platforms in the country.

Last month, the Committee on State Building and Legislation at the State Duma also advanced a bill to regulate the seizure of crypto assets in criminal proceedings and reduce the risks associated with the use of digital assets in criminal activities, including money laundering, corruption, and terrorist financing.

Meanwhile, Russia’s largest bank by assets, Sberbank, recently announced that it is preparing to offer crypto-backed loans to corporate clients following strong corporate interest.

The bank affirmed its readiness to work with the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) to develop regulations, and it is finalizing the necessary infrastructure and procedures for potential scaling of crypto-backed lending.

Project 11 CEO Alex Pruden is challenging a CoinShares estimate that only 10,200 bitcoin sit in “genuinely” quantum-vulnerable legacy addresses, arguing instead that roughly 6.9 million BTC could be exposed if cryptographically relevant quantum computers arrive sooner than the market expects.

The dispute, amplified by Castle Island partner Nic Carter, goes to the heart of a debate that has started to spill out of academic circles and into investor-facing research: not whether quantum computing would be catastrophic for today’s signature schemes, but how much Bitcoin is already exposed given how keys are used on-chain and how quickly the ecosystem would need to coordinate a migration.

Why ‘Only 10,000’ Bitcoin Are The Wrong Estimate

Pruden’s core objection to the “only 10k BTC” framing is definitional. In his thread, he argues quantum vulnerability extends well beyond old-style pay-to-public-key (P2PK) outputs and includes “any address that has signed a transaction once (and left residual funds there),” because the public key becomes visible on-chain once a spend is signed. In that model, coins left behind in those UTXOs could be vulnerable to an attacker able to derive a private key from a known public key.

He points to a “constantly updated tracker” run by Project Eleven listing 6,910,186 BTC as quantum-vulnerable, and cites Chaincode Labs’ technical report on post-quantum threats to Bitcoin as a cross-reference.

Pruden also singles out Satoshi Nakamoto’s presumed holdings as a large, dormant target surface. “The entity believed to be Satoshi alone holds 1,096,152 BTC across 21,924 addresses. All vulnerable,” he wrote, framing those coins as exposed under his broader definition.

Carter, responding to coverage circulating around the CoinShares number, said: “re that number of ‘only 10k quantum-vulnerable BTC’ you are seeing reported today… as much as I respect Chris and his work at Coinshares, he’s wrong on this one.”

Pruden situates the Bitcoin debate inside a wider shift among large tech companies and security institutions toward post-quantum planning. He cites a Google blog post by Hartmut Neven and Kent Walker that characterizes post-quantum cryptography as an urgent, systemic transition requiring coordinated action and accelerated adoption.

He also references a Google research result suggesting breaking RSA-2048 may require “~1 million noisy qubits,” lower than earlier estimates, and argues this compresses perceived timelines — even if Bitcoin uses ECDSA rather than RSA. To reinforce the uncertainty, Pruden quotes prominent theoretical computer scientist Scott Aaronson warning against complacency around Shor-vulnerable systems:

“On the other hand, if you think Bitcoin, and SSL, and all the other protocols based on Shor-breakable cryptography, are almost certainly safe for the next 5 years … then I submit that your confidence is also unwarranted. Your confidence might then be like most physicists’ confidence in 1938 that nuclear weapons were decades away, or like my own confidence in 2015 that an AI able to pass a reasonable Turing Test was decades away… The trouble is that sometimes people, y’know, do that.”

Pruden’s conclusion from that framing is less about predicting a date and more about avoiding a planning regime built on “it’ll be slow.”

Pruden argues the CoinShares post underestimates the operational reality of a post-quantum transition for an already-deployed, decentralized system. He highlights the need to migrate “millions of distributed keys,” the lack of a centralized authority, and the fact that asset ownership is enforced purely by digital signatures, with “no fallback.”

He also cites peer-reviewed research claiming “the BTC blockchain would have to shut down for 76 days” to process migration transactions for the existing UTXO set in a best-case scenario — a datapoint meant to stress that even a distant threat can demand near-term engineering and governance work.

Pruden further criticizes what he calls an appeal to authority in citing a hardware-wallet executive as evidence quantum is far away, arguing vendors may have incentives to downplay urgency if quantum-resistant signatures would obsolete existing devices.

At press time, BTC traded at $69,050.