Cointelegraph

Circle Internet Group is facing a class action lawsuit led by a Drift Protocol investor claiming it failed to freeze funds stolen in a $280 million exploit of the protocol on April 1.

The lawsuit was filed by Drift investor Joshua McCollum on behalf of over 100 members in a US district court in Massachusetts on Wednesday, which accused Circle of allowing the attackers to transfer about $230 million worth of USDC (USDC) from Solana to Ethereum via Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP) over several hours without intervention.

“Circle permitted this criminal use of its technology and services,” attorneys representing McCollum wrote, adding: “These losses would not have occurred, or would have been substantially reduced, had Circle taken timely action.”

The suit accuses Circle of aiding and abetting conversion as well as negligence. Mira Gibb, the law firm representing McCollum and other Drift investors, is seeking damages, with the final amount to be determined at trial.

The case touches on a legal grey area around crypto companies that retain control over user funds. While such companies may have the technical ability to intervene or freeze assets, they often cite regulatory constraints or the lack of immediate legal authority as reasons for inaction — leaving accountability unclear as exploits unfold in real-time.

Source: James Seyffart

McCollum’s lawyers pointed out that Circle froze 16 USDC wallets in connection with a sealed US civil case about a week before the Drift incident to argue that Circle had the technical capacity to do the same.

Cointelegraph reached out to Circle for comment, but didn’t receive an immediate response.

Crypto analytics firm Elliptic suspected the exploit was committed by North Korean state-backed hackers, who made over 100 transactions via Circle’s bridging technology during US working hours, where the stablecoin company is based.

The funds were converted into Ether (ETH) and sent through the Tornado Cash privacy protocol to launder the proceeds and obscure the trail.

Circle was put in a lose-lose position: ARK Invest

While Circle faced backlash for the inaction, ARK Invest’s director of research for digital assets, Lorenzo Valente, argued on Thursday that it made the right decision, arguing that freezing funds without a legal order opens the door for arbitrary discretion.

“Every future freeze is now a judgment call. Every non-freeze is a political statement. Why freeze the Drift hacker but not that sketchy Nigerian fraud wallet? Why this protester but not that one?”

While Valente sided with Circle’s decision, he speculated that the stolen funds will likely fund North Korea’s nuclear weapons program:

“Whether Circle got it right comes down to how much you weigh rule-of-law principles vs concrete harm. Reasonable people disagree.”

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?

Bitcoin (BTC) appears on track to hit $90,000 in the coming weeks as whales accumulated about 20 times the cryptocurrency’s daily new supply in the past weeks.

Key takeaways:

Whales bought roughly 270,000 BTC in the past 30 days.

BTC broke out of its symmetrical pattern setup with a measured target at around $92,220.

BTC whales accumulate at fastest pace since 2013

Whales, entities that hold over 1,000 BTC, have added roughly 270,000 coins to their wallets in the past 30 days, marking their largest buying spree since 2013, according to onchain data resource CryptoQuant.

Bitcoin spot average order size. Source: CryptoQuant

Part of that whale accumulation likely came from Strategy. The company’s recent filings show that it bought about 42,166 BTC between March and April, accounting for roughly 16% of the 270,000 BTC added by whale wallets over the same period.

US-based spot Bitcoin ETFs also recorded more than $200 million in net inflows during that stretch. Still, those inflows remain modest compared with earlier phases of the cycle, pointing to cautious re-engagement by Wall Street traders.

US spot Bitcoin ETFs 30-day flows. Source: Glassnode

The accumulation came even as Bitcoin whipsawed sharply in recent weeks, including a roughly 15% drawdown before fully recovering those losses, with easing US–Iran tensions helping drive the rebound in risk appetite.

BTC triangle setup hints at rebound to $90,000

From a technical perspective, Bitcoin has entered the breakout stage of its prevailing symmetrical triangle pattern.

Triangle patterns can break in either direction regardless of the prevailing trend, with the resulting move often matching the formation’s maximum height.

In Bitcoin’s case, price has broken to the upside after moving above the triangle’s upper trendline, opening the door for a potential rally toward the measured target near $92,220 by April or May.

BTC/USD daily price chart. Source: TradingView

Bitcoin’s price must break decisively above its 200-day exponential moving average (200-day EMA, the blue line) at around $83,000 to reach the triangle target. This EMA was instrumental in limiting BTC’s attempts at an upside breakout in January.

Earlier, Nic Puckrin, crypto analyst and founder of Coin Bureau, said Bitcoin could push toward $90,000 if the current US–Iran ceasefire holds, oil prices fall toward $80, and softer economic data helps ease stagflation fears.

Bitcoin (BTC) traded between $75,000 and $73,000 over a three-hour period during the New York market open on Thursday, and the abrupt downside move liquidated $283 million in futures positions. The resulting short squeeze pushed BTC back toward $75,000, but sustaining the rebound will require steady buying volume in the spot market.

BTC rebounds amid slower spot demand

A sharp move lower to $73,200 from $75,400 triggered a wave of long liquidations across the futures markets, totaling to $166 million, according to market commentator CryptoReviewing.

Bitcoin liquidation heatmap 24-hour. Source: CoinGlass

The price then reversed quickly, pushing back toward $75,000 and liquidating roughly $117 million in short positions, highlighting a rapid two-sided squeeze within the same trading window.

The move tracked closely with liquidation spikes, which forced closures of short positions. The funding rates turned positive to +0.0005 shortly after the bounce, signaling that bearish positioning had built up before unwinding.

BTC price, spot and futures CVD, funding rate. Source: velo.chart

This indicates that upside momentum came from shorts covering rather than new long exposure. The rally cleared nearby liquidity pockets and pushed the price back toward the session's mid-range.

The spot cumulative volume delta (CVD), which tracks net buying and selling in spot markets, continued to trend lower during the recovery. The divergence points to weaker spot participation even as Bitcoin holds above $74,000.

For a move above the $76,000 range highs, spot demand needs to strengthen alongside derivatives activity, aligning both sides of the market behind the price.

Related: Bitcoin rebounds near $74.5K as US stocks chase after new all-time highs

Bitcoin’s liquidity map defines key inflection points

Bitcoin continues to move between defined liquidity clusters, with the price gravitating around key levels. According to analyst KriptoHolder, the $76,000–$78,000 range contains a concentrated supply zone with $2.81 billion in short-leveraged liquidity, while $74,000 serves as an equilibrium area.

Long-leveraged liquidity of $2.5 billion is below $72,000, forming a potential price magnet if the upper levels fail to clear.

Bitcoin liquidation map. Source: CoinGlass

Meanwhile, the short-term trader behavior also reflects recurring intraday patterns. Bitcoin trader Killa noted that eight of the past 11 Thursdays recorded more downside than upside. Thursday’s session has already seen a near 2% decline from the daily open, offering intraday opportunities within that pattern.

BTC returns on Thursday, analysis by Killa. Source: X

Related: Bitcoin bull run ‘still too early’ to call as demand lags exiting capital: Analyst

Key takeaways:

Negative Bitcoin futures funding rates signal bear-market losses and forced liquidations rather than a shift in sentiment. 

Institutional inflows into Bitcoin ETFs and corporate accumulation suggest that spot demand remains solid.

Bitcoin (BTC) sold off in early trading hours at the US stock market open, briefly losing the $75,000 level before rebounding. This unexpected price swing triggered $120 million in liquidations of leveraged long (buy) BTC futures positions. During this ordeal, the Bitcoin funding rate has remained negative, which could hint at further downside and a potential advantage to the bears. 

Bitcoin perpetual futures annualized funding rate. Source: Laevitas

The negative funding rate has been the norm since Monday, indicating a lack of demand for bullish leverage. Negative rates mean shorts (sellers) are the ones paying to keep their positions open. Under neutral conditions, the indicator should range between 5% and 10% to compensate for the cost of capital and exchange risks. At first sight, a 20% rate indicates conviction, but that is not the whole story.

Liquidations back Bitcoin’s negative funding rate

The perpetual contract funding rates are calculated every 8 hours on most exchanges. Temporary spikes to 20%, either positive or negative, are not particularly concerning for most traders, as they amount to a 0.05% daily fee. In essence, even if the position has extremely high leverage, such as 20x, the cost is 1%. Unless this issue persists for much longer, it is hardly a burden.

Bitcoin futures aggregate liquidation history, USD. Source: CoinGlass

Bitcoin bearish positions have been forcefully liquidated for $365 million since Monday, which has naturally eroded collateral on short positions. Traders could have opted to sit tight rather than rush to add margin, anticipating that funding rates would adjust on their own. Thus, the negative funding rate reflects losses from bears rather than conviction.

S&P 500 futures (left) vs. Bitcoin/USD (right). Source: TradingView

Bitcoin’s intraday moves have largely tracked the S&P 500 index for the past couple of weeks. The US stock market jumped to an all-time high on Thursday while Bitcoin remains distant from its $126,200 peak. Consecutive failures to re-establish the $76,000 level partially explain the lack of enthusiasm in BTC derivatives markets. Still, the latest round of US economic data is supportive for risk markets, including Bitcoin.

US industrial production decreased by 0.5% in March from the previous month, according to data released by the Federal Reserve on Thursday. Consumer durable goods were the negative highlight, with automotive production down 2.8%. In parallel, the continuing jobless claims increased 31,000 to a seasonally adjusted 1.818 million during the week ended April 4.

While counterintuitive, the S&P 500 benefited from the increased economic recession, which forced the government to accelerate stimulus measures. The upward pressure on inflation, which has also been fueled by the surge in oil prices, reduces incentives to hold fixed-income investments.

Deribit Bitcoin options premium put-to-call ratio. Source: Laevitas

The Bitcoin options market data provides no signs of excessive demand for downside price protection. The premium paid on put (sell) options on Deribit has lagged behind the equivalent call (buy) instruments over the past week. The $921 million in net inflows into US-listed Bitcoin spot ETFs over five days, along with continued accumulation from Strategy (MSTR US), boosted investors’ confidence. 

At the moment, Bitcoin’s negative funding rate does not raise alarms, especially since institutional investor demand remains strong in BTC’s spot markets.

The US Senate returned from a two-week recess on Monday, bringing the CLARITY Act back into the spotlight.

Stablecoin yield has dominated the debate, but the treatment of decentralized finance (DeFi) remains a big issue, particularly for non-custodial platforms and developers operating without control over user funds.

Over the years, many DeFi platforms have restricted or geoblocked US users due to regulatory uncertainty and enforcement risk. Or at least have done so in the past.

The US has been treated as a restricted jurisdiction by several DeFi interfaces. (Hyperliquid)

Magazine caught up with Maylea Ma, deputy general counsel at DeFi aggregator 1inch, to unpack how clearer definitions under the CLARITY Act could open the door for non-custodial DeFi protocols to expand into the US.

This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

Magazine: How does the CLARITY Act treat non-custodial DeFi platforms compared to the European Unions Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA)?

Ma: The coverage is already different because MiCA the current iteration doesnt cover non-custodial, decentralized projects directly.

Theres a lot of talk and it will probably be covered in the next iteration. At the moment, weve got legal opinions from independent law firms to say that our products do not fall under MiCA regulation.

US courts have narrowed liability for DeFi developers ahead of CLARITY. (Hayden Adams)

That already is kind of a big distinction because the CLARITY Act is creating a framework for decentralized, non-custodial projects, whereas MiCA hasnt.

Whats interesting for us is the scope of the non-custodial developer, which is not required to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), or perform KYC, because it is not treated as a financial intermediary.

The question is what projects actually fall under that category? Examples include node operators, validators and those providing interfaces for users to access the technology.

These developers dont fall under registration and enhanced due diligence requirements like KYC, whereas “financial intermediaries” are subject to a more stringent regulatory regime.

For us, it would be important to know what the coverage of the developer is, which basically gets protection from these enhanced regulations.

Editor’s note: An April 13 SEC staff statement says certain crypto frontends may avoid broker-dealer registration if they meet specific conditions. Staff guidance is non-binding and subject to change, while legislation like the CLARITY Act would establish a durable legal framework.

Read also

Features Quantum attacking Bitcoin would be a waste of time: Kevin OLeary

Features 2023 is a make-or-break year for blockchain gaming: Play-to-own

Magazine: How are DeFi protocols navigating the line between being non-custodial developers and financial intermediaries?

Well, a few weeks ago, the SEC and CFTC came up with a joint statement [about treating most cryptocurrencies as commodities – Ed]. Even though they are agencies and dont have the power to set laws, they can provide interpretive guidance. Their guidance basically carved out that decentralized tokens like Bitcoin and Ether are not securities; theyre considered commodities, while things like real-world assets based on actual equities are securities.

That kind of guidance is hugely helpful for the industry to understand what kind of products can be supported and how to support them.

As an example with RWAs, we are looking to support institutional clients, and that comes with requirements like KYC and risk management. So we try to find a middle ground.

DeFi-based RWA access is not offered to general US clients. (1inch)

For example, we may not perform KYC ourselves, but we can import whitelists from issuers or broker-dealers who have already verified users. If they have a list of compliant wallets, we can allow or restrict access based on that.

Read also

Features Quantum attacking Bitcoin would be a waste of time: Kevin OLeary

Features 2023 is a make-or-break year for blockchain gaming: Play-to-own

Magazine: One of the most contested issues is whether DeFi developers could be treated as money transmitters. Where does CLARITY land on that, and what gaps remain?

Ma: The CLARITY Act contains the most explicit language we have seen from US lawmakers on this question. Section 109 of the House-passed bill and Section 604 of the Senate draft both establish that non-controlling developers and non-custodial service providers should not be classified as money transmitters solely for building or maintaining software. For protocols like 1inch, which facilitate trades without ever taking custody of user funds, that distinction is critical.

There is still some uncertainty whether the Senates draft of the bill, which added a new Title III with illicit finance provisions, would affect non-controlling developers and non-custodial service providers. The revised language has not been made public yet, so we are watching the next markup carefully.

Title III includes exclusion for DeFi activities. (US Congress)

Another note, while its true that Roman Storm was convicted on operating unlicensed money transmitting business, it is important to emphasize he was not convicted on money laundering which is a much more serious crime. 

To me, this non conviction is a hopeful signal. We believe code doesnt equal aiding or abetting or having intent. Money laundering also bears more directly on the central DeFi debate of the usefulness of KYC in reducing or stopping money laundering versus other security toolings or solutions that are more privacy-friendly and can achieve similar results.

In March, prosecutors asked for a retrial later this year to resolve sanctions and money laundering charges. (Cointelegraph)

There is plenty of money laundering in TradFi, through institutions that do KYC, due to human errors, flaws in the system or gaps in process.

Magazine: Whats next for the CLARITY Act? What hurdles remain and what should readers expect in terms of the legal process?

Ma: It passed the House last year and is now with the Senate. The main blocker at the moment is stablecoin yield.

We are an interested participant because we support the trading of stablecoins, which represent a significant portion of trading volume.

I think its a big debate. There are different ways to frame yield, whether as interest or as activity-based rewards, but at the end of the day, they are incentives.

More broadly, when new technology emerges, incumbent industries often try to resist it because it threatens their interests and control over users and trading volume.

From our perspective, incentives are important for adoption. Crypto aims to reduce friction in transactions, but people need a reason to move into a new system.

If you remove incentives, adoption becomes harder.

In terms of the process, once the Senate passes a version, if there are changes, it needs to go back to the House for reconciliation before being signed into law.

Its difficult to predict timing. Lawmaking in the US can be slow, and things can be delayed due to other priorities.

Ideally, something could be finalized by summer, but for now we are monitoring developments closely through industry associations.

Subscribe

The most engaging reads in blockchain. Delivered once a week.

Email address

SUBSCRIBE

Δ

Josh Stark, a key researcher and project manager at the Ethereum Foundation, the non-profit organization that stewards development of the Ethereum ecosystem, said Thursday that he is departing the organization after five years.

Stark did not provide a specific reason for his departure and said in a post on X that he has “no plans for the future.” Instead, he will take some personal time to focus on family and friends. He said:

“The Ethereum ecosystem has reliably done things the world told us were impossible. It is easy to forget how much real fear and doubt there was that Ethereum would never launch, that decentralized finance (DeFi) would never work, or that Proof of Stake would never ship.”

He is one of four people listed as “Management” on an organizational chart which shows nearly all of the Foundation’s staff reporting in. Cointelegraph reached out to Stark about his departure, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Source: Josh Stark

The departure of Stark from the Ethereum Foundation represents the most high-profile exit from the organization since Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin announced sweeping leadership changes and a new direction for the Foundation in 2025. A day earlier, another Foundation contributor, Trent Van Epps, announced that he resigned last week.

The Ethereum Foundation got a shakeup in 2025

In January 2025, co-founder Vitalik Buterin announced sweeping changes to the Ethereum Foundation in response to growing criticism from the Ethereum community over the long-term direction of the ecosystem.

Bringing in “fresh” talent to the organization, greater decentralization and developing the protocol for faster transaction throughput and increased transaction speeds were among some of the goals Buterin listed for the changes.

However, the revamped Ethereum Foundation would not engage in ideological disputes, lobby US lawmakers in Washington or represent “vested interests,” Buterin added. 

“These things aren't what EF does, and this isn't going to change. People seeking a different vision are welcome to start their own orgs,” he said.

Source: Vitalik Buterin

The Ethereum Foundation officially announced new leadership in March 2025, adding  Hsiao-Wei Wang, an Ethereum Foundation researcher, and Tomasz Stańczak, CEO of Nethermind, an Ethereum execution client, as co-directors of the organization.

Stańczak stepped down from his role in February 2026, while Wang remains a member of the Ethereum Foundation’s management board, according to its organizational chart.

Magazine: Back to Ethereum: How Synthetix, Ronin and Celo saw the light

Some legal experts speculated that the state vs. federal jurisdiction battle over regulating prediction markets companies could soon be headed to the United States Supreme Court.

On Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments from lawyers representing prediction markets platform Kalshi and Nevada authorities over the state's ban on the prediction markets' event contracts. The appeal was over a lower court decision preventing Kalshi from offering certain event-based contracts in Nevada, based on claims that the company needed a gaming license.

Thursday oral arguments by Kalshi and the State of Nevada. Source: US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

The appellate judge overseeing Thursday’s oral arguments and the lawyer for Kalshi acknowledged that there had been several state-level enforcement actions against the company and other prediction market platforms, including criminal charges filed in Arizona. However, last week a federal court blocked Arizona authorities from enforcing the state’s gambling laws on Kalshi’s event contracts.

“I think the body of case law does demonstrate that what we really need to avoid here is having a state and a federal court considering exactly the same issue at exactly the same time and potentially reaching different outcomes,” said Colleen Sinzdak, representing Kalshi.

Central to Kalshi’s argument was that the platform’s event contracts were “swaps” falling under the purview of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) rather than state gaming authorities. CFTC Chair Michael Selig has backed this position in the case of Crypto.com’s prediction markets against Nevada authorities.

The appellate court did not immediately announce a decision following oral arguments. Any ruling could affect how state courts treat prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket as policymakers come to terms with the growing market, expected to reach $1 trillion by 2030.

Coinbase’s top lawyer weighs in on prediction market arguments

Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal, whose company was not a party to the Kalshi proceedings but has a stake in the prediction markets fight, speculated that the case could go the US Supreme Court.

“The questions at oral argument are an unreliable signal in predicting the leanings of a court,” said Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal in a Thursday X post following the oral arguments. “Either way, I stand by my longstanding prediction— the Supreme Court will resolve whether sports [contracts] on [Designated Contract Markets] are swaps subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC.”

The US Supreme Court gave states the authority to regulate sports gambling in its 2018 decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association.

Magazine: Should users be allowed to bet on war and death in prediction markets?

HIVE Digital Technologies said it plans to raise $75 million through a private offering of 0% exchangeable senior notes due 2031, with proceeds expected to fund GPU purchases, data center development and other capital investments.

According to Thursday’s announcement, the notes will be issued by a wholly owned subsidiary and offered to qualified institutional buyers, with an option to raise an additional $15 million. Final terms, including the exchange rate, will be set at pricing.

The notes will be exchangeable under certain conditions, with HIVE able to settle conversions in cash, common shares or a combination of both. They will not bear regular interest, will not accrete and are unsecured obligations of the issuer, fully guaranteed by HIVE.

HIVE’s Nasdaq-traded shares (HIVE) sank 11.5% on Thursday while industry tracker CoinShares Bitcoin Mining ETF (WGMI) fell 1.5%, per Yahoo Finance data. HIVE is the seventh-largest holding in that exchange-traded fund, at 4.89% weight.

Proceeds will be directed to the company’s subsidiaries for general corporate purposes, including capital expenditures tied to graphics processing units and data center expansion. HIVE also said it plans to enter capped call transactions with financial counterparties to limit potential dilution from future conversions.

Separately, the company said it has received conditional approval to list its shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange, with trading expected to begin later this month, subject to meeting listing requirements.

HIVE was among the first Bitcoin miners to pivot into high-performance computing in 2022, a shift that is now beginning to show up in its financial results. In its third quarter, the company reported $93.1 million in revenue, up 219% year over year, despite weaker Bitcoin prices and rising network difficulty.

In February, HIVE signed a two-year, $30 million agreement to deploy 504 Nvidia B200 GPUs for enterprise AI cloud services.

Mining companies lean into AI data center pivot

The fundraising comes as publicly traded Bitcoin miners continue to expand into high-performance computing and AI workloads.

Companies including MARA Holdings, Riot Platforms, Bitdeer Technologies, TeraWulf, Hut 8, CleanSpark and IREN have all made moves into AI and high-performance computing, leveraging existing access to power and data center infrastructure.

In January, CleanSpark agreed to buy 447 acres in Texas to build a 300-megawatt AI-focused data center, with plans to expand to 600 MW, while in February, MARA acquired a majority stake in French computing infrastructure company Exaion as part of its push into AI and cloud services.

Meanwhile, CoreWeave, which began as a crypto mining operator and pivoted toward high-performance computing as early as 2019, has grown into a major provider of AI cloud infrastructure.

On Wednesday, the company announced a $6 billion agreement with Jane Street to provide AI computing capacity across its data centers, alongside a $1 billion equity investment from the firm, days after signing a multi-year deal with Anthropic to support its Claude large language models.

The shift is also extending beyond traditional miners. On Thursday, renewable-powered data center developer Soluna Holdings moved to consolidate ownership of its Texas-based campus, positioning the site for a transition toward AI-focused computing.

Top 10 Bitcoin miner stocks by market cap. Source: Bitcoinminingstock.io

Magazine: Forget stablecoin yield, how does the CLARITY Act treat DeFi?

Publicly traded Bitcoin (BTC) mining companies sold more BTC in Q1 2026 than in all four quarters of 2025, as business conditions tighten for the mining industry. 

Publicly listed BTC miners, including MARA, CleanSpark, Riot, Cango, Core Scientific and Bitdeer, have collectively sold more than 32,000 BTC in Q1 2026, according to TheEnergyMag.

The Q1 sales surpassed the 20,000 BTC sold in Q2 2022 during the crypto bear market triggered by the collapse of the Terra-Luna ecosystem, setting a “new record” for BTC miner sales in a single quarter, TheMinerMag said. 

Quarterly BTC liquidations by publicly traded Bitcoin mining companies, Q1 2022-Q1 2026. Source: TheEnergyMag

The sales come as hashprice, that is, the computing cost and a critical metric for miner profitability, sits at record low levels under $35 per petahash/second per day (PH/s), according to data from Hashrate Index.

That $35 PH/s level is the breakeven for many Bitcoin miners, particularly those running older mining machines, and the current hashprice of about $33 PH/s per day places about 20% of the mining industry in unprofitable territory. 

Hashprice for BTC miners has been declining since July 2025 and now sits at about $33 PH/s per day. Source: Hashrate Index

The heavy BTC sales come as the mining industry struggles with increased competition represented by a rising hashrate, the total computing power expended by miners to secure the network, reduced block rewards and macroeconomic headwinds. 

BTC held by miners has been declining long-term while treasury companies pour in

The Bitcoin Miner Reserve, a metric tracking all the BTC held by miners, has been gradually decreasing since 2023, according to CryptoQuant.

Bitcoin miners collectively held over 1.86 million BTC at the end of 2023, but only hold about 1.8 million BTC at the time of publication.

The total number of BTC held by Bitcoin miners has been gradually declining since 2023. Source: CryptoQuant

Miners periodically sell portions of their BTC to cover operating expenses, but a combination of lower crypto prices and rising energy costs has forced some miners to offload coins they would have held in their corporate treasuries.

“We expect further capitulation among higher-cost operators in H1 2026 unless BTC’s price recovers materially,” asset manager CoinShares said in its Q1 2026 Bitcoin Mining Report.

Standing in sharp contrast to the miners’ selling are Bitcoin treasury companies, like Strategy, which has been a regular buyer of the biggest crypto.

Michael Saylor, the co-founder of the biggest Bitcoin treasury company, earlier this week signaled that Strategy is acquiring more BTC, as the price retreated from the local high of over $73,000 reached this week.

“Think bigger,” Saylor said on Sunday, while sharing the chart of Strategy’s BTC purchase history that has become synonymous with imminent BTC acquisitions.

Magazine: Bitcoin mining industry ‘going to be dead in 2 years’: Bit Digital CEO

Market analysts said Bitcoin’s (BTC) latest rally to $76,000 was a “clear momentum shift,” confirming a short-term uptrend for BTC price. 

Bitcoin’s short-term holder (STH) supply in profit, a measure of the share of recently acquired coins currently held at an unrealized gain, suggests that BTC/USD has not exhausted its bear market rally, data from Glassnode shows.

Local tops in bear market rallies have historically formed when this metric approaches its statistical mean of 54.2%, a threshold where the concentration of profitable STHs becomes sufficient to trigger meaningful distribution.

Currently at 43.2%, the STH supply in profit remains “meaningfully below that threshold, suggesting the present rally has not yet reached the zone of typical exhaustion,” Glassnode said in its latest Week Onchain newsletter, adding:

“This leaves slight room for further upside toward the True Market Mean, while also providing a quantitative level to monitor as price advances.”

Bitcoin: Short-term holder supply in profit. Source: Glassnode

Meanwhile, Bitcoin has remained in “deep under extension territory” relative to its 50-week simple moving average (SMA), currently at $96,800, analyst McKenna said in a recent post on X.

When markets deviate either to the upside or downside, they usually revert back to their mean.

Combined with “clear momentum shifts and bullish trending signals firing then I would be inclined to be directionally bullish here, the analyst said, adding:

“BTC breaking above $74K and holding this level on a HTF is the final trigger I want to see to be confident in mid to high 80s over the coming weeks.”

BTC/USD price vs. 50-weekly SMA. Source: X/McKenna

Fellow analyst Bitcoin Archive focused on the falling US dollar index, saying that it provides a “massive tailwind for the next leg up” for Bitcoin. 

US dollar index. Source: X/Bitcoin Archive

As Cointelegraph reported, several metrics support Bitcoin’s potential to rise higher, including increasing network activity and a strengthening technical setup. 

Onchain data reveals key Bitcoin price levels to watch

Bitcoin’s 41% drawdown from its $126,000 all-time high has seen the BTC/USD pair drop below key pricing levels, including the active realized price at $85,100, the STH cost basis at $80,950 and the true market mean currently at $78,140.

At $74,000, Bitcoin is 5.2% below the true market mean, a metric tracking the cost basis of active BTC supply. 

While the price is yet to “test and stabilize above this key threshold, the probability of a spike toward and potentially above it remains considerable in the mid-term,” Glassnode added.

Bitcoin risk indicator. Source: Glassnode

The importance of this resistance level is reinforced by cost basis distribution. The heatmap below shows that over 200,000 BTC were acquired for around $78,000.

Bitcoin cost basis distribution heatmap. Source: Glassnode

On the downside, the first major support is at $72,000, where the 20-day and 50-day exponential moving averages (EMAs) appear to converge. It is also where investors bought approximately 220,000 BTC.

Lower than that, the $65,000-$70,000 demand zone is a key area to watch. This price band has historically served as a vital support level, as seen between October and November 2024, providing a launching pad for the October 2024-January 2025 rally.

As Cointelegraph reported, a drop below the $70,000 would suggest the bears are back in control, increasing the prospects of a drop toward $60,000.

The chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Michael Selig, said he would not wait for the appointment of additional commissioners to lead the regulatory agency before moving ahead on rulemaking potentially related to digital assets and prediction markets.

In a Thursday hearing of the House Agriculture Committee, Selig responded to questions from ranking member Angie Craig, who called out the lack of leadership at the CFTC, which normally has a bipartisan panel of five commissioners. The Minnesota representative asked the chair to commit to not finalizing regulations while he is the only commissioner.

“In the interim, we cannot, for the sake of the American people, slow down in our rulemaking,” said Selig. “It’s very important that we get investor protections, consumer protections and safeguards for our markets. And so, I cannot, unfortunately, commit to not do my job that I was appointed to do by the president.”

CFTC Chair Michael Selig speaking on Thursday. Source: US House Committee on Agriculture

Selig, who has served as the CFTC’s sole commissioner and chair since December, has come under scrutiny from many lawmakers for unilaterally leading the agency on rules favoring crypto and prediction markets with no bipartisan group of commissioners. As of Thursday, President Donald Trump had not publicly announced any nominations to staff the agency nor signaled he intended to do so.

“We’re going to do more through rulemaking,” said Selig in response to a question on the CFTC’s leadership from Representative Don Davis. “We can’t have the staff deciding on discretion what the rules are.”

The CFTC chair proposed rulemaking in March that could amend or issue new regulations over event contracts on prediction markets. Selig has been outspoken about claiming that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets as the companies behind some platforms face state-level lawsuits related to sports betting laws and proposed legislation to crack down on insider trading.

CFTC’s legal fight over prediction market continues

Gaming authorities in several US states have filed lawsuits against prediction market companies like Kalshi and Polymarket, alleging the platforms offered sports betting in violation of state laws.

New Mexico Representative Gabe Vasquez questioned Selig at Thursday’s hearing with a visual aid showing that bets on event contracts and through state-level gaming “aren’t much of a difference, yet they are regulated completely differently.” He accused the CFTC of using “loopholes” to bypass state laws and requirements for prediction markets, causing some jurisdictions to miss out on revenue.

“The CFTC was not created or intended to regulate sports gambling,” said Vasquez, adding:

“Are we regulating real economic risk, or are we allowing prediction markets to steal billions of dollars in an unregulated free-for-all, with no consumer protection as Congress and the CFTC turns a blind eye?”

Companies like Kalshi have argued that they are under the sole jurisdiction of the CFTC. This argument led the company to court wins in Arizona and New Jersey, where this month judges blocked state officials from taking action against Kalshi.

Magazine: Should users be allowed to bet on war and death in prediction markets?

Charles Schwab, one of the largest US brokerage firms, will roll out spot cryptocurrency trading for retail clients in the coming weeks, starting with Bitcoin and Ether through a dedicated account linked to its brokerage platform.

According to Thursday’s announcement, the offering will allow clients to trade and view crypto alongside stocks and other assets across Schwab’s web, mobile and Thinkorswim platforms, with custody held by its banking unit and execution handled through a partnership with Paxos, a federally regulated trust company.

Schwab reported $12.22 trillion in total client assets as of February 2026, according to its latest filings, and operates as a brokerage providing trading, banking and wealth management services.

At launch, the service will support trading in the two biggest cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH), at a fee of 75 basis points per transaction, with plans to add more cryptocurrencies and enable deposits and withdrawals over time.

At 75 bps, or 0.75%, Schwab’s fee places it above exchanges such as Kraken, where fees start around 0.25% to 0.40% and decline with volume, while broadly in line with Coinbase, where fees start at about 0.40% to 0.60% for lower-volume traders, according to information on those exchanges’ websites.

Clients will access the service through a separate crypto account, with assets held by Schwab’s banking subsidiary under a custodial model. The rollout will begin in phases over the coming weeks, initially limited to eligible US retail clients except residents of New York and Louisiana.

Schwab said the move expands its existing crypto offerings, which include exchange-traded products, futures and funds tied to digital assets. The company said its clients currently hold about 20% of spot crypto exchange-traded products, based on internal estimates.

Traditional financial firms expand crypto offerings

Traditional financial companies are expanding their crypto offerings across trading, exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and structured products.

On April 8, Morgan Stanley launched a spot Bitcoin ETF (MSBT) that recorded $30.6 million in inflows on its first day of NYSE Arca trading, marking its entry into the market for regulated crypto investment products. The fund website showed total net assets at $87.6 million as of April 15.

Also in April, Goldman Sachs filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission to launch a Bitcoin-linked ETF designed to generate income through options strategies, offering indirect exposure to Bitcoin while aiming to limit volatility.

As traditional financial firms expand into crypto, crypto-native companies are moving in the opposite direction, pushing into traditional markets through tokenized equities.

In December, Coinbase introduced trading for equities and ETFs, while in February Kraken launched tokenized equity perpetual futures, offering leveraged exposure to US stocks, indexes and commodities.

Magazine: Forget stablecoin yield, how does the CLARITY Act treat DeFi?

Bitcoin (BTC) hit range highs above $76,000 on Wednesday, but Glassnode analysts say data suggest that calling for the start of a new bull market is premature. 

New capital inflows have stayed weak, with Bitcoin’s growth rate remaining negative across all 105 trading days in 2026, highlighting a gap between stable price action and limited new demand.

Bitcoin profitability signal remains unresolved

Glassnode analyst CryptoViz.art uses the true market mean (TMM) to estimate the average cost basis of active BTC investors. The metric divides investor capitalization by liveliness-adjusted circulating supply, filtering out inactive coins and the lost supply.

Bitcoin crossed below this level on Jan. 31 and has stayed there for 75 days. The move placed the average active holder in a loss position, with a peak drawdown of 20% and a current gap of about 5% below the entry level.

Bitcoin's true market mean. Source: Glassnode/X

Historical comparisons show 10 similar breaks since 2016, with durations ranging from two days to over 11 months. The deepest drawdowns reached 57% during the 2018–2019 and 2022–2023 cycles, while the March 2020 event saw a 40% decline over 49 days. The analyst added, 

“That said, 75 days is still early. The 2018 and 2022 episodes didn't bottom until months 5-9. The signal isn't "all clear" — it's watch closely.”

Reclaiming the TMM, currently at $78,013, is key for active investors to return to profit, and it has aligned with momentum resets in earlier cycles.

Related: Adam Back says Bitcoin’s post-quantum shift may reveal true Satoshi stash

BTC capital outflows shape the price ceiling

Bitcoin researcher Axel Adler Jr. points to a steady outflow of capital from the BTC market. The 365-day growth rate of market cap relative to realized cap has remained negative for all 105 trading days in 2026, with the latest reading at -0.000652.

Bitcoin growth rate. Source: Axel Adler Jr.

In simple terms, the market is not attracting enough new money to support higher prices.

The 30-day realized cap change shows the same trend. Only seven days saw positive inflows this year, all during a brief period in mid-January. Since Jan. 23, the metric has stayed negative, though it has improved slightly to -0.32% from early April lows near -0.54%.

Realized cap has also dropped to $1.08 trillion from $1.12 trillion since the start of the year, a 3.23% decline.

Adler Jr. said the recent improvement signals a slowdown in BTC outflows, not a bullish reversal. A meaningful shift would require both metrics to turn positive and hold above zero for a sustained period.

Bitcoin realized cap change. Source: Axel Adler Jr.

Related: Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin fund overtakes WisdomTree after 6 trading days

Bitcoin (BTC) treaded water at Thursday’s Wall Street open as the S&P 500 reached new all-time highs.

Key points:

Bitcoin stays locked on $74,000 after its local highs preceded a new record for the S&P 500.

Analysis warns that the US midterm elections may impact the stock rally.

Bitcoin could follow the Nasdaq 100 higher, a trader suggests.

BTC price tripped after fresh highs from the S&P 500

Data from TradingView showed $74,000 continuing to form an intraday BTC price focus.

BTC/USD one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

US jobless claims came in marginally below expectations at 207,000 versus 213,000, pointing to the labor market withstanding current geopolitical and inflation pressures.

These followed a new record for the S&P 500, which crossed 7,000 points for the first time in history after Bitcoin hit two-month highs.

Commenting, trading resource Mosaic Asset Company noted that the S&P had advanced by nearly 11% in the past 11 trading sessions.

“It ranks as the fifth quickest recovery to record highs following a deep pullback,” it wrote in its latest “Mosaic Chart Alerts” update. 

“The S&P closed firmly above the 7,000 level for the first time in history despite the ongoing uncertainty in the Middle East that sparked a 9% drawdown in the index into late March.”

S&P 500 one-day chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

Gold dipped to intraday lows and WTI crude oil eyed $94 per barrel as markets awaited further cues over the US-Iran war.

QCP, meanwhile, warned that seasonal trends could still end the stock rally as the US entered midterm elections. The S&P 500, it noted, “tends to find its peak about now ahead of mid-term elections, and then recovering during the final quarter of the year.”

“I would not base any investment decision or outlook based on seasonals alone, which is why I’m also watching confirmation from breadth,” it cautioned.

S&P 500 seasonality data. Source: Mosaic Asset Company

Trader sees “opportunity” in Bitcoin versus Nasdaq

With BTC price action finding resistance near its range highs, market participants eyed exchange order-book liquidity for clues as to where the next showdown could come.

“The price bucket at $72.2K - 72.4K has a large amount of open interest that has slowly accumulated,” Shubh Varma, CEO of crypto data platform Hyblock, told Cointelegraph on the day.

“We've seen this level where traders are often active, entering and exiting. Most recently, about $100 million longs and shorts opened here, bringing the total close to $400 million at that price bucket, over the last seven days (on Binance stablecoin perps).”

Varma added that this could form “an area to watch as potential support if price revisits it, as many of these longs and shorts may exit at breakeven ‘psychological’ level."

BTC/USDT perpetual contract open interest data. Source: Hyblock

Continuing the stocks theme, crypto trader Michaël van de Poppe flagged Bitcoin’s relationship with the Nasdaq-100 index as a cause for optimism going forward.

“Bitcoin is about to follow Nasdaq,” he told X followers. 

“The reason for this is quite simple: the correlation has been significantly strong most of the time. This period? The weakest correlation in the past 10 years.”

BTC/USD vs. Nasdaq 100 futures one-week chart. Source: Michaël van de Poppe/X

Van de Poppe eyed a “tremendous opportunity” for Bitcoin buyers, having recently seen a similar bullish setup in Bitcoin versus gold.

Crypto exchange Zonda said a cold wallet holding around 4,500 Bitcoin is currently inaccessible as the platform faces concerns over delayed withdrawals.

Zonda CEO Przemysław Kral posted a video statement on Thursday disclosing the exchange’s wallet address, saying the private keys to the wallet were never handed over.

In the statement, Kral denied accusations of misappropriating funds, saying the private keys were intended to be handed over by Zonda founder and former CEO Sylwester Suszek, who has been missing since 2022.

“So for all those who claim that I had anything to do with Sylwester's disappearance, this is the prime argument that I care the most about Sylwester being found,” Kral said.

The disclosure follows weeks of controversy around the exchange after local reports suggested a probe into Zonda by Polish authorities, followed by an analysis by blockchain platform Recoveris, which alleged Zonda could have been insolvent based on a sharp drop in the exchange's hot wallet balances.

Last recorded transaction dates to November 2025

Kral’s public disclosure of the wallet marks the first time that Zonda has disclosed the address amid the controversy.

The address cited by the CEO holds 4,503 Bitcoin (BTC) currently worth about $334 million, with the last transaction recorded in November 2025 as of the time of publication.

Source: Blockchain.com

The CEO previously denied insolvency claims following the hot wallet investigation by Recoveris on April 6, insisting that Zonda remained fully solvent with more than 4,500 BTC in holdings.

CEO plans legal action, says Zonda will meet customer obligations

In the video, Kral said that much of Zonda’s recent withdrawal pressure was driven by an abnormal spike in withdrawal requests, which he linked to negative media coverage.

He said Zonda normally processed around 100,000 withdrawal requests per year but saw more than 25,000 requests within hours and days around April 6.

Kral said the company plans to take legal action over what he described as false claims surrounding the exchange and promised to fulfill obligations to customers amid withdrawal concerns.

Source: Przemysław Kral

Polish lawmaker Tomasz Mentzen said on X that Zonda may have lost access to its cold wallet following the disappearance of former CEO Suszek. Kral did not explicitly say the funds were lost, but said the private keys to the wallet were never transferred during the company handover.

Suszek has reportedly been missing since March 2022, with reporting referencing alleged criminal ties among certain shareholders of Zonda, formerly BitBay.

The exchange was founded in Poland in 2014 and rebranded as Zonda in 2021. Kral told Cointelegraph in February that the company registered in Estonia amid regulatory uncertainty in Poland, citing delays in implementing the European Union-wide Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation.

The issue has drawn the exchange into a broader political debate, adding pressure on regulators and increasing scrutiny of Poland’s crypto sector.

Magazine: How crypto laws changed in 2025 — and how they’ll change in 2026

Stablecoin issuer Tether, the company behind USDt (USDT), said Thursday it will back a $150 million recovery program for the Drift Protocol decentralized exchange (DEX) following an exploit of the platform in April.

The recovery plan for the $280 million Drift Protocol exploit includes $127.5 million from Tether, with the rest coming from undisclosed partners, according to Tether’s announcement. Tether said:

“Rather than relying on upfront capital alone, the structure links funding and recovery to ongoing trading activity on the Drift platform, allowing user balances to be restored as the exchange returns to normal operations.”

The Drift Protocol platform will “contribute directly” to the ongoing recovery of user funds as the platform resumes normal trading activity. 

The top 10 crypto assets stolen from the Drift Protocol in the exploit. Source: Quill Audits

Drift will also transition its settlement asset from Circle's USDC (USDC) dollar-pegged stablecoin to Tether’s USDt as part of the platform’s relaunch. 

Cointelegraph reached out to Tether but did not receive a response by the time of publication. 

The recovery program highlights a growing trend of crypto industry companies collaborating to restore user funds and help platforms resume normal operations after major hacks or cybersecurity attacks that cause hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

Circle comes under fire for not freezing funds after Drift Protocol attack

Crypto industry executives, cybersecurity researchers and blockchain security firms criticized Circle for not freezing the USDC wallets linked to the Drift Protocol exploiter, despite having a window of several hours to intervene.

The exploiter used Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), a native bridge that allows tokens to be transferred to other blockchain networks, to transfer over $232 million USDC from the Solana network to the Ethereum network, according to onchain sleuth ZachXBT.

Source: ZachXBT

The funds were transferred in more than 100 transactions, he said, adding, “Despite the attacker laundering funds over six consecutive hours across Circle's own native bridge, no USDC was frozen. The attacker has been linked to North Korea by Elliptic.” 

Circle’s stock sank by about 10% on April 9, following criticism over the company’s failure to freeze the funds from the hack and downgraded forecasts from market analysts. The NYSE-traded shares have since clawed back that decline, increasing about 20% as of yesterday’s close, according to Yahoo Finance data.

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?

United Arab Emirates investors are leaning into the artificial intelligence sell-off rather than running from it, despite the regional conflict testing the Gulf’s ambitions to become a global hub for AI and digital assets. 

New eToro data shared with Cointelegraph on Wednesday show users in the UAE boosted holdings of software and AI infrastructure names whose share prices fell sharply in the first quarter, suggesting they used the downturn to “buy the dip” rather than broadly de-risk.

The pattern suggests UAE investors are staying exposed to long-term AI and digital-infrastructure themes even as the conflict raises fresh risks for data centers, logistics and cross-border technology build-outs in the Gulf. An April 13 report from Deutsche Bank said the shock is more likely to sharpen rather than derail demand for AI, cybersecurity and sovereign digital infrastructure in the region.

Josh Gilbert, market analyst at eToro, told Cointelegraph that UAE investors became more selective over where they took risk in Q1, and investor behavior was driven by long-term themes rather than a risk-off mindset. 

He said the clearest signal was across AI infrastructure and software names, pointing to ServiceNow (+125%), Super Micro Computer (+65%), Adobe (+54%) and Oracle (+38%), which all saw significant increases despite market pressure.

What UAE investors bought in Q1, 2026. Source: eToro

On the crypto side, he said that Strategy Inc. remained the eighth-most-held stock, indicating continued exposure to crypto-linked equities.

War puts Gulf AI ambitions under pressure

The resilience comes as the US-Israeli conflict with Iran has exposed new risks for Gulf tech infrastructure. Deutsche Bank cited reported strikes on Amazon Web Services data centers in the UAE and Bahrain and threats against the planned 1GW Stargate campus in Abu Dhabi. 

Gilbert said the conflict was driving volatility, with sharp oil price swings that can ultimately affect tech valuations. Maintaining core exposure to diversified mega-cap tech while rotating within the sector suggests a more nuanced, risk-aware approach, he said.

Why is the Gulf so well-suited for AI? Source: Deutsche Bank

Deutsche also highlighted that the Gulf, and the UAE in particular, is unlikely to abandon the AI race. The region benefits from cheap energy, an unusually dense pipeline of data center projects, and sovereign wealth funds that control about $5 trillion worldwide in 2025, with Abu Dhabi vehicles among the most aggressive backers of global AI deals, the report said.

Crypto companies stay open as conflict remains

On the ground in Dubai, crypto players say the conflict has slowed but not derailed the city’s hub ambitions. HashKey MENA’s managing director, Ben El-Baz, told Cointelegraph that operations remained “broadly functional,” helped by cloud-based trading and custody systems less dependent on a physical location, even though remote work and travel disruptions were unavoidable.

Other companies, including Binance, also continued normal operations, despite reports to the contrary. A Binance spokesperson told Cointelegraph employees were given the option of temporary relocation as a precautionary measure, but the “vast majority” chose to remain, while major conferences such as Token2049 were postponed.

Dubai-based investment firm, Ento Capital, says the conflict is “refining” rather than derailing the GCC story. Senior executive officer Hayssam El Masri told Cointelegraph that investors have shifted from “confidence-driven to risk aware,” but are generally not exiting the region. War-tested resilience and ongoing investment in AI, cloud and crypto infrastructure may ultimately strengthen the GCC’s long-term positioning, he said.

Regulators bet clear rules will anchor capital

Dubai’s Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA) has continued to roll out its activity-based framework throughout the turmoil, including detailed guidance on token issuance and formal rules for crypto derivatives.

Sean McHugh, VARA’s head of market assurance, told Cointelegraph that in periods of stress, serious market participants do not seek “the lightest-touch jurisdiction, they look for the clearest one,” adding that Dubai’s combination of transparent licensing, visible supervision and active enforcement is meant to persuade institutions to treat the emirate as a strategic base rather than an opportunistic punt.

Magazine: Bitcoin will not hit $1M by 2030, says veteran trader Peter Brandt

In the United States, victims of the $4 billion crypto Ponzi scam OneCoin are finally receiving compensation. 

On April 13, the US Department of Justice said that $40 million in assets are available to anyone who purchased OneCoin between 2014 and 2019 and experienced a net loss.

This program marks a milestone for OneCoin victims, most of whom had no recourse to get back what they lost, until now. Victims in the UK attempted a class action suit in 2024, but it fell apart when litigation funding was terminated.

Few crypto schemes were as prominent as OneCoin, in terms of scale and the international intrigue that followed. Founders and associates have been imprisoned or killed, while the ringleader is still on the lam.

The Wild West of early crypto was often defined by schemes and eccentric characters, the effects of which, in the case of OneCoin, are still felt today. 

OneCoin’s founding and legal troubles

In 2014, cryptocurrency was still a niche internet phenomenon. The Bitcoin white paper was only six years old, and general knowledge of cryptocurrencies and blockchain tech was limited. Still, interest in the new asset class was rising among retail investors.

From August to December 2014, Ruja Ignatova and Karl Sebastian Greenwood founded OneCoin. Initial promotions began in Europe, and soon entities popped up in Bulgaria, Dubai and Belize. 

OneCoin’s structure was convoluted. Investors needed to buy packages of tokens that would allow them to “mine” OneCoin. There were several different price entry points for packages, with almost no upper limit. The most expensive, according to CoinMarketCap, was 225,000 euros.

“Trader packages” for OneCoin. Source: CoinMarketCap

Promoters, meanwhile, could earn commissions by bringing new investors into the program. This allowed the project to expand rapidly.

While marketed as a cryptocurrency, it was not decentralized. The coin itself was hosted on the centralized servers of OneCoin Ltd. The coins were not available for public trading and owners could only trade nominal amounts in a closed system. 

The project seemed fairly suspect from the outset, but fear of missing out, as well as the massive audiences drawn by Ignatova at seemingly above-board conferences, were enough to convince many.

Throughout 2015, the project grew across the globe in Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America. Repeating the familiar MLM playbook, promoters emphasized urgency, and the immediacy of an impending explosion in value and crypto adoption. 

Regulators began to catch on by late 2015. Bulgaria's Financial Supervision Commission issued a warning about OneCoin, after which the company ceased all operations in the country. 

By 2016, several other national financial regulators also had OneCoin on their lists. By year’s end, Norway, Bulgaria, Finland, Sweden and Latvia were all investigating the project. The Hungarian central bank called it a pyramid scheme.

In December, Italian authorities defined OneCoin as an illegal pyramid scheme and demanded it cease activities in the country. China began investigating the project and even arrested some investors. 

Regulation efforts ramped up again in 2017. Germany, Thailand, Belize and Vietnam all issued cease-and-desist orders or declared OneCoin illegal. In India, undercover police arrested 18 organizers of a OneCoin event that attempted to bring in new investors. Indian authorities went so far as to charge Ignatova herself in July.

By the year’s end, things had reached a breaking point. Investors were concerned about delays in a supposed exchange that would allow them to cash out their coins. This was supposedly going to be addressed at an October meeting of OneCoin organizers in Lisbon, Portugal. 

But Ignatova didn’t show. According to a BBC investigation, she boarded a Ryanair flight from Sofia to Athens, Greece on Oct. 25, 2017. No one has seen her since. 

Arrests, murders and Crypto Queen on the run

In early 2018, investigators moved in on the project. At the request of prosecutors in Germany, Bulgarian police raided the OneCoin offices in Sofia. The raid, which according to the Sofia Globe also included German police and Europol, seized servers and material evidence. 

In July, co-founder Greenwood was arrested on charges of money laundering and fraud in Thailand, where he would await extradition back to the United States.

Ignatova’s own lawyer, Mark S. Scott, was convicted of conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to commit bank fraud due to his connections and activities at OneCoin. He would be disbarred a few years later. 

OneCoin stayed in the headlines for the next couple of years as developments continued to unfold. In July 2020, two project promoters, Oscar Brito Ibarra and Ignacio Ibarra, were kidnapped and murdered in Mexico. Local media reported that local cartels, which were increasingly becoming interested in cryptocurrencies, could have been involved. 

In 2020, entertainment media in Hollywood reported that Kate Winslet would star in a movie about OneCoin. To date, it hasn’t started production. 

While Greenwood’s case proceeded in the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation put Ignatova on its Ten Most Wanted fugitives list in June 2023. 

Source: FBI

In September, Greenwood was sentenced to 20 years in prison and ordered to pay $300 million in damages. He pleaded guilty to charges of fraud and money laundering. His sentence was a marked reduction from the initial 60 years sought by the prosecution. 

In 2024, the DoJ arrested and charged William Morro for bank fraud in connection with OneCoin. Morro moved some $35 million in OneCoin funds between banks in China and Hong Kong, and $6 million between Hong Kong and the US. Morro surrendered himself to authorities and pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud.

In the latest news, the DoJ announced on Monday that $40 million in assets are available to compensate investors who bought OneCoin between 2014 and 2019 and recorded a net loss. 

By the time everything was said and done, some 3.5 million people had lost money to the crypto scheme. Authorities estimate that organizers ultimately made away with $4 billion in user funds. 

Ignatova remains at large and on the Ten Most Wanted list. The FBI is offering a $5 million reward for info leading to her arrest and/or conviction. 

Magazine: Bitcoin will not hit $1M by 2030, says veteran trader Peter Brandt

Key takeaways

Australia could generate A$24 billion, or about $17 billion, annually from digital assets and tokenized finance. But that opportunity depends on whether policymakers establish clear and supportive regulatory frameworks.

Tokenization could transform financial markets by improving liquidity, automating settlement processes and expanding investor access to assets such as foreign exchange, equities, government debt and investment funds.

Tokenized money, including CBDCs and stablecoins, could significantly reduce the cost and time of cross-border payments by minimizing reliance on traditional banking networks.

Regulatory uncertainty remains the biggest barrier to growth, as financial institutions hesitate to commit capital without clear rules on licensing, custody standards and compliance for digital asset businesses.

Australia is widely regarded as one of the most technologically advanced financial markets in the Asia-Pacific region. However, in the area of digital assets and tokenized finance, the country faces a critical choice.

The Digital Finance Cooperative Research Centre (DFCRC) and the Digital Economy Council of Australia published a report titled “Unlocking Australia’s $24b Digital Finance Opportunity.” It warns that the country will capture only a small portion of these gains unless its regulatory framework is updated swiftly.

The report emphasizes that tokenized markets and digital finance could deliver around A$24 billion (approximately US$17 billion) in annual economic benefits for Australia, provided lawmakers move forward with regulation.

The scale of Australia’s digital finance opportunity

The DFCRC analysis indicates that tokenization and digital asset infrastructure could significantly improve several parts of Australia’s financial system. These improvements are expected to create economic value by making markets more efficient, increasing liquidity and allowing more investors to participate.

The report highlights three main sources of value that together represent an estimated A$24 billion opportunity.

Improved financial markets

Tokenized financial markets are likely to deliver significant economic benefits. By recording traditional securities such as shares or bonds on blockchain-based systems, markets can automate settlement processes, lower operational costs and open participation to a wider range of investors.

Tokenized infrastructure can also bring greater transparency and efficiency to assets including:

foreign exchange

investment funds

public equities

government debt

Improved liquidity and easier access for investors can lead to higher trading volumes and less friction throughout the financial system.

Improved payments

Tokenized forms of money such as stablecoins, bank deposit tokens and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) could make both domestic and international payments faster and cheaper.

At present, many cross-border payments depend on correspondent banking networks, which are often slow and costly. Tokenized payment systems could enable near-instant transfers between institutions, shortening settlement times and reducing fees.

Better use of digital assets

Tokenization allows financial assets to become more programmable and easier to use in digital financial services. Smart contracts can automatically manage tasks such as margin calls, collateral handling and settlement, which are currently manual and time-intensive processes.

According to the DFCRC report, almost half of the gains related to assets could come from enabling new activities on tokenized infrastructure, including collateralized lending, repo markets and invoice financing.

Did you know? Australia was among the earliest countries to explore blockchain for financial market infrastructure. In 2017, the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) began a project to replace its decades-old clearing system with blockchain technology before later reconsidering the plan.

Why regulation is the primary obstacle

While digital asset markets show great promise, the DFCRC report identifies regulatory uncertainty as the main factor holding back growth in Australia.

Large financial institutions generally avoid investing significant capital in new technologies until clear legal frameworks are established. Without specific rules on licensing, asset custody and compliance, many firms are hesitant to launch major tokenized products.

Key structural challenges include:

Vague licensing: It is currently unclear how digital asset businesses should obtain official permits.

Poor collaboration: There is a lack of communication between regulatory bodies and the industry.

Limited trials: A shortage of large-scale pilot programs limits practical testing.

Legal ambiguity: The status of tokenized financial products remains undefined.

These issues hinder progress even when the necessary technology is already available. Institutional investors need a well-defined regulatory foundation to enter the market with confidence.

The high cost of regulatory inaction

Continued delays in modernizing Australia’s regulatory framework could severely erode the country’s potential gains from digital finance.

If policy stagnation persists, Australia may capture only around A$1 billion (approximately US$710 million) from digital assets and tokenized finance by 2030. This figure represents only a small fraction of the A$24 billion in potential benefits that could be realized under a more supportive and predictable regulatory environment.

This massive shortfall highlights how regulatory hurdles can alter the future path of financial innovation. In the absence of clear, enabling policy settings, several damaging consequences could follow:

Pilot programs find it difficult to scale into live, production-grade systems.

Institutional capital stays on the sidelines, unwilling to take meaningful risks.

Cutting-edge innovation and talent increasingly relocate to jurisdictions offering regulatory clarity and predictability.

Australia’s domestic financial infrastructure modernizes more slowly than that of global peers.

Ultimately, prolonged regulatory uncertainty does not merely slow progress but may actively divert economic value and opportunity to other countries that have established favorable frameworks for digital finance.

Did you know? Australia hosts one of the densest networks of crypto ATMs in the Asia-Pacific region. It is also one of the largest markets for crypto kiosks outside North America.

What the industry is asking for in regulation

Australia has made initial strides toward establishing a regulatory framework for digital assets. However, industry stakeholders stress that more needs to be done to unlock meaningful institutional participation:

Clear licensing regimes for digital asset platforms: Trading venues, exchanges and other digital asset service providers urgently need well-defined licensing pathways. These include precise rules on permissible activities, operational requirements, capital standards and ongoing compliance obligations.

Modern, fit-for-purpose custody rules: Digital assets introduce distinct risks around security, segregation and operational resilience. Regulators should set clear, risk-based custody standards that safeguard client assets.

A coherent framework for stablecoins: Stablecoins are widely viewed as foundational infrastructure for tokenized markets and efficient on-chain payments. Industry participants are calling for clarity on issuance, reserves, redemption rights, supervision and cross-border rules to remove legal and operational uncertainty.

Balanced and proportionate consumer and investor protections: Strong safeguards against fraud, misconduct and loss are essential. But they must be designed carefully to avoid stifling legitimate innovation.

When addressed together, these regulatory building blocks would provide the clarity financial institutions need before committing significant capital and infrastructure to tokenized finance in Australia.

Why regulatory sandboxes are important

The DFCRC report recommends creating regulatory sandboxes tailored specifically for tokenized financial markets.

These sandboxes allow companies to test new financial technologies under close regulatory oversight before obtaining a full license. This approach lets regulators see how the innovations perform in practice while keeping risks under control.

Australia already has an Enhanced Regulatory Sandbox (ERS) managed by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). It permits eligible firms to trial certain financial services for a limited period without holding a full financial services license.

However, industry groups argue that more specialized sandboxes would speed up testing and development in key areas such as tokenized securities and digital settlement systems.

Targeted sandboxes would also improve dialogue between regulators and the industry, enabling policymakers to shape better rules based on actual testing outcomes.

The role of tokenized government bonds and CBDCs

The DFCRC report proposes that tokenized government bonds and a central bank digital currency (CBDC) could form essential infrastructure for digital financial markets.

Government bonds are already widely used as collateral in financial markets. Tokenizing them would allow for automated collateral management, faster settlement and improved transparency.

A CBDC designed for use by financial institutions rather than the general public could provide secure final settlement for tokenized assets. Together with stablecoins and bank deposit tokens, it would help build a flexible and efficient system for digital financial transactions.

These tools would create the reliable settlement infrastructure institutional markets need to operate at scale.

Did you know? Australia’s central bank was among the first to experiment with central bank digital currency trials. Earlier projects explored how a wholesale CBDC could help automate bond settlement and other complex financial transactions between institutions.

Project Acacia and Australia’s experimentation with digital money

Australia is already exploring these concepts through initiatives such as Project Acacia. This collaboration examines how digital money could work in tokenized wholesale markets.

The project tests how different forms of digital settlement, including CBDCs and stablecoins, can support financial market infrastructure.

Pilot programs like these can play an important role. They allow policymakers and financial institutions to test technical designs, operational risks and regulatory issues before moving to large-scale systems.

Real-world experimentation helps regulators create rules based on practical experience rather than theory alone.

Technological ability alone is not enough

A central finding of the DFCRC report is that technology alone is not enough to create new financial markets.

For institutions to adopt tokenized finance, the following are required:

clear legal frameworks

reliable settlement infrastructure

proper custody standards

effective risk management protocols

appropriate regulatory oversight

Together, these elements build the trust financial institutions need to commit to new technologies.

Without that trust, tokenized finance is likely to remain confined to small pilot projects rather than becoming part of mainstream financial systems.

Australia’s competitive challenge

The global competition to develop digital asset infrastructure is accelerating. Many jurisdictions are already building regulatory frameworks for tokenized securities, stablecoins and digital payment systems.

If Australia delays, it risks losing talent, investment and innovation to countries that provide regulatory clarity sooner.

In this sense, digital asset regulation is not just a financial policy issue. It is also a question of competitiveness for Australia’s broader economy.

Countries that put credible frameworks for digital finance in place are better positioned to attract capital and technology firms seeking stable regulatory settings.

South Korean tech company Naver and Upbit operator Dunamu said in a corrected filing that their planned share swap includes forming an initial public offering (IPO) committee for Naver Financial within one year of closing, outlining a path toward a future listing. 

The disclosure, outlined in the corrected filing on Wednesday, said the companies would pursue a listing within five years, with a possible two-year extension. Naver said it plans to secure voting rights in Naver Financial so the fintech unit remains a consolidated subsidiary after the deal.

The filing suggests the deal goes beyond a simple ownership change, outlining a structure that could eventually bring Upbit’s parent under a listed fintech group. The move indicates Naver and Dunamu are positioning any future South Korea listing at the fintech-parent level rather than through a standalone listing of Upbit’s parent.

However, Dunamu said no specific decisions have been made on whether to proceed with the IPO or on its timing or structure. It added that the deal remains subject to regulatory approvals that could still delay or derail the transaction. 

Naver Financial’s plans to acquire Dunamu were first reported in September 2025 by local outlets including Yonhap and Chosun, which said the company was preparing a share swap to bring the Upbit operator under its umbrella. Naver later confirmed the transaction in a November regulatory filing, outlining a roughly $10.3 billion all-stock deal.

Investor agreement sets IPO framework, control terms

The filing said Naver, Dunamu and related parties entered into an investor agreement tied to the share swap, under which they agreed to use their “best efforts” to pursue a future listing of Naver Financial after the transaction closes.

The agreement forms the basis for post-deal restructuring, including preparations for a potential IPO. 

The filing described the listing plan as conditional, noting that key elements, including timing, structure and execution, will depend on market conditions and regulatory developments. It added that more detailed plans would be disclosed if and when formal decisions are made. 

The updated disclosure follows a roughly three-month delay to the Naver and Dunamu share swap deal timeline.

It also comes as Dunamu reported weaker operating performance in 2025, with revenue falling about 10% year-on-year to 1.56 trillion won and operating profit dropping 26.7% to 869.3 billion won, which the company attributed to reduced crypto trading volumes during a broader market slowdown.

Magazine: Singapore isn’t a ‘crypto hub’ — it’s something better: StraitsX CEO