BSC News

Stellar (@StellarOrg) has integrated EURAU, a fully reserved euro stablecoin issued by AllUnity, bringing MiCAR-compliant euro liquidity directly to the network. The launch lands the same week Stellar crossed $2 billion in real-world assets, sharpening its pitch as the rail of choice for regulated finance.

AllUnity, a joint venture between DWS, Flow Traders, and Galaxy, confirmed the integration on April 13. EURAU was already live on Ethereum, Polygon, Base, Optimism, and Arbitrum. Stellar is the latest chain to host the token, and the addition is squarely aimed at European banks, fintechs, and corporates that need a euro settlement asset with full regulatory cover.

What is EURAU?

$EURAU is a euro-pegged stablecoin backed one-to-one by reserves held across a consortium of European banks. It runs under the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets framework, known as MiCAR, and is issued by AllUnity, an electronic money institution licensed by Germany's financial regulator BaFin since July 2025.

Holders have a statutory right under MiCAR to redeem tokens at par at any time. Reserves are verified through proof-of-reserve disclosures and regulatory reporting. That puts EURAU in a small group of euro stablecoins that meet the EU's full regulatory bar, alongside Circle's $EURC and Société Générale-Forge's $EURCV, both of which already trade on Stellar.

Why Stellar?

Stellar's pitch is settlement speed and low fees on a network purpose-built for payments. EURAU on Stellar gives institutions a euro asset that can move globally in seconds at fractions of a cent per transaction. That opens up cross-border B2B payments, payroll automation, treasury operations, and tokenized settlement on exchanges and lending protocols, all denominated in euros without touching a correspondent bank.

PwC Germany, Noumena, and Crossmint are already building on the integration. None of those names are crypto-native shops looking for a quick token launch. They are infrastructure and advisory firms working on enterprise plumbing.

Peter Grosskopf, CTO and COO of AllUnity, framed the move around utility:

"Expanding EURAU to the Stellar network aligns with our mission to make digital currency accessible, transparent, and useful across borders. This launch enables businesses and consumers to experience the efficiency of blockchain-based payments while maintaining confidence in regulatory compliance and liquidity."

Raja Chakravorti, Chief Business Officer at the Stellar Development Foundation, made the institutional case:

"EURAU's launch on Stellar underscores why institutions choose Stellar as the go-to infrastructure for enterprise-grade finance. With a network purpose-built for regulated assets, high-throughput payments, and real-world interoperability, Stellar enables compliance-minded euro-based liquidity to move globally at the speed and scale modern financial markets demand."

How big is Stellar's RWA footprint?

A day after the EURAU news, Stellar said its real-world asset footprint had crossed $2 billion. According to live data on Dune, the breakdown sits at:

RWA market cap: $1.98 billion

Total supply including stablecoins: $2.28 billion

Reserve-verified stablecoins on the network: $297 million

The growth is being driven by names that read like a tokenization who's who: Franklin Templeton, Ondo Finance, Spiko, Centrifuge, and Digital Real Estate via Swan. These are tokenized treasuries, money market funds, private credit, and real estate exposure, not speculative experiments.

What does this mean for XLM holders?

The direct token impact is harder to pin down than the network story. EURAU is a stablecoin, not an XLM-pegged asset, and stablecoin issuance does not automatically translate into $XLM price action. What it does do is increase the volume of transactions settling on Stellar, every one of which burns a small amount of XLM as a network fee.

The bigger read is positioning. Tether and Circle dominate the global stablecoin market in dollars. Europe is a different story. MiCAR has reset the rules, and only a handful of issuers can legally serve the EU market at scale. By stacking EURC, EURCV, and now EURAU, Stellar is making a serious play to be the default settlement layer for compliant euro liquidity, not just one of many chains hosting the assets.

Low fees plus regulatory compliance is the formula institutions actually want. Stellar is one of the few networks delivering both at the same time.

Sources:

Stellar Development Foundation official announcement of the EURAU integration with quotes from AllUnity and SDF leadership.

AllUnity launch release covering EURAU's BaFin license, MiCAR framework, and reserve structure.

Blockonomi coverage of the Stellar integration and ecosystem partners onboarding the stablecoin.

Stablecoin Insider background on AllUnity's regulated status and 2025 launch trajectory.

Dune Analytics live dashboard tracking Stellar real-world asset and stablecoin supply.

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act has roughly a 30% chance of clearing Congress this year, according to Ron Hammond (@RonwHammond), head of policy at crypto market maker Wintermute. The number landed in an April 11 interview, the same week Senator Cynthia Lummis told colleagues this is their last real opening before 2030.

Two voices, one bill, and a very tight calendar.

What Hammond actually said

Hammond pointed to political friction, stalled negotiations, and shifting timelines as the main drags. He said there is "light at the end of the tunnel" but warned that passage in 2026 will require breakthroughs that have so far been elusive.

His firm has skin in this. Wintermute opened a New York office after the 2024 election and has been hiring in the United States. A favorable market structure law would lock in that bet. A failed one leaves the firm operating in the same patchwork it does today.

He also flagged a political wildcard: scrutiny of former President Trump's crypto-related dealings. If that intensifies around June, Democratic support could harden, making any bipartisan deal harder to assemble.

Why is the bill stuck?

The CLARITY Act passed the House in July 2025 by a vote of 294 to 134. It then moved to the Senate, where it has been parked in the Banking Committee since last fall. Chairman Tim Scott pulled a planned markup on January 14 after more than 100 amendments piled up.

The fight is over stablecoins. Specifically, whether platforms can pay yield or rewards on user balances. Banks have lobbied hard against it. A widely cited Standard Chartered estimate warns that uncapped stablecoin yield could pull up to $500 billion in deposits out of the insured banking system. Coinbase and Stripe argue that yield is the main reason institutions and retail users would adopt these instruments at scale.

Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks brokered a compromise on March 20 that bans passive yield but allows activity-based rewards. The framework is close to final, but the American Bankers Association rejected an earlier White House version on March 5 and is still pushing back. A markup date has not been set, and momentum cooled again after the Easter recess.

What does Lummis want?

Lummis posted on April 10 that this is the last chance to pass the bill until at least 2030. The Wyoming Republican announced in December 2025 that she will not seek a second term, which gives her warning extra weight.

Her math is simple. The November midterms will rearrange committee priorities. A new Congress takes time to organize. Complex financial legislation rarely survives a leadership reshuffle intact.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent published a Wall Street Journal op-ed the day before her post, framing the bill as a national security issue. Former White House crypto coordinator David Sacks called for an immediate Banking Committee vote. SEC Chair Paul Atkins urged Congress to "future-proof against rogue regulators." Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, who pulled the firm's support in January, reversed and said it is time.

White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt told reporters on April 13 that negotiations have "made considerable progress in the background" on issues beyond stablecoin yield, and said the team is "very close to closing them out."

Where do other forecasts land?

The 30% number sits well below most other estimates floating around right now.

Polymarket has priced 2026 signing odds in the 56% to 66% range over the past week

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse has put the odds at 80% to 90%

JPMorgan analysts described mid-2026 passage as a positive catalyst for digital assets, citing tokenization growth and institutional scaling

That gap between Hammond and the prediction markets is the story. Traders are pricing optimism; Hammond is pricing the friction.

Why does it matter?

The bill would do four things. It would split jurisdiction cleanly between the SEC and the CFTC. It would create registration paths for exchanges, brokers, and custodians. It would offer safe harbors for DeFi developers and validators. And it would block the Federal Reserve from issuing a retail central bank digital currency.

A March 17 joint interpretation from the SEC and CFTC already classified Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP, and Dogecoin as digital commodities. The CLARITY Act would write that into statute, removing it from future agency reinterpretation.

Without the bill, regulation by enforcement returns the moment a different administration takes office.

What happens next?

Hammond expects "some progress soon." The practical deadline is the Senate floor calendar. If the Banking Committee does not move by May, the bill almost certainly slips past the midterms. After that, Lummis is on her way out, the post-midterm Senate looks different, and the math gets harder.

Three weeks of legislative time. One stablecoin fight left to settle. The crypto industry is about to find out whether its biggest policy ask of the cycle survives the room.

Sources:

Senator Cynthia Lummis on X — Lummis' April 10 post warning the CLARITY Act window closes until 2030 if the Senate fails to act

Yahoo Finance — Coverage of Lummis' retirement, the Tillis-Alsobrooks compromise, and Polymarket signing odds

CoinDesk — Original April 11 interview where Hammond gave the 30% estimate

Yellow.com — Detailed breakdown of the stablecoin yield fight, Standard Chartered $500 billion estimate, and Hammond's 30% number in market context

Crypto.news — Coverage of regulator endorsements from Atkins and the Witt negotiation update

Congress.gov — Official text and 294-134 House vote record for H.R. 3633

Starting April 15, 2026, Rakuten Wallet is adding XRP as both a listed asset and a payment method, allowing users to buy XRP with Rakuten Points and spend it at more than 5 million merchant locations across Japan.

The integration marks the first time a third-party token has been embedded directly into Rakuten's loyalty and payments infrastructure. It also connects XRP to one of Japan's largest loyalty point systems, where more than 3 trillion points, worth roughly $23 billion, are currently in circulation.

What Does the Rakuten and XRP Integration Actually Do?

Rakuten Pay, the payments app behind this integration, has 44 million users in Japan. It is not a crypto-native product. It is the everyday payments app that millions of Japanese consumers use for regular shopping, which makes this a notably wide distribution channel for XRP.

Through the new setup, users can:

Buy XRP directly using Rakuten Points

Load Rakuten Cash with XRP

Spend XRP at over 5 million registered merchant locations that accept Rakuten Pay across Japan

Rakuten Cash is the platform's digital wallet balance, used for purchases across Rakuten's ecosystem. By allowing XRP to charge that balance, the integration gives the token a direct path into everyday retail transactions.

How Do Rakuten Points Connect to XRP?

Rakuten Points are Japan's most widely used loyalty currency. The system has issued more than 3 trillion points to date, equivalent to approximately $23 billion in value. Under the new arrangement, users can convert those points directly into XRP.

This is significant for XRP's real-world utility argument. Loyalty points typically sit idle or get spent on discounts. Giving users the option to convert them into a cryptocurrency that can then be spent at merchants adds a functional layer that most loyalty programs do not offer.

Rakuten's Crypto History

This is not Rakuten's first move into digital assets:

In 2021, Rakuten announced plans to launch its own token, Rakuten Coin, intended for use within its loyalty rewards system

In 2023, Rakuten began accepting Bitcoin, Ether, and Bitcoin Cash as payment options through its app

The addition of XRP in 2026 expands that offering and brings a third-party token into the loyalty infrastructure for the first time.

Is Institutional Interest in XRP Growing Beyond Japan?

Yes, and the Rakuten announcement comes alongside rising institutional activity around XRP in the United States. Goldman Sachs recently became the largest disclosed holder of spot XRP exchange-traded fund (ETF) shares among institutional investors.

An ETF, or exchange-traded fund, is a financial product that tracks the price of an asset and trades on traditional stock exchanges, giving investors exposure without directly holding the cryptocurrency. Several asset managers, including BlackRock, Bitwise, Canary, and Franklin, have filed for or launched spot XRP ETFs.

The combination of retail access through Rakuten in Japan and institutional product development in the U.S. reflects growing interest in XRP across different market segments.

Why Does This Matter for XRP's Real-World Utility?

XRP was originally designed by Ripple for fast, low-cost cross-border payments between financial institutions. Expanding its use into consumer retail payments in Japan is a different use case, but one that adds to the argument that XRP can function as a spendable currency, not just a speculative asset.

Rakuten's scale makes the example concrete. With 5.6 trillion yen in annual e-commerce gross merchandise value (GMV) flowing through its platform, even a small fraction of transactions involving XRP would represent meaningful volume.

What the Numbers Show

44 million Rakuten Pay users

5 million-plus merchant locations accepting Rakuten Pay in Japan

3 trillion-plus loyalty points, worth roughly $23 billion, now convertible to XRP

5.6 trillion yen in annual e-commerce GMV across Rakuten's platform

Conclusion

Rakuten's integration of XRP adds Ripple's token to a consumer payments platform used by 44 million people in Japan, with access to more than 5 million merchant locations. Users can buy XRP with Rakuten Points and spend it via Rakuten Cash, connecting a major loyalty currency to a digital asset for the first time on this platform. 

The move follows Rakuten's earlier adoption of Bitcoin, Ether, and Bitcoin Cash in 2023, and comes as institutional interest in XRP through ETF products continues to grow in the United States.

Resources 

Tatsuya Kohrogi on X: Post on April 13

Report by CoinDesk: Rakuten to allow XRP to be used as payment method by its 44 million customers

Report by Forbes: 'Quietly Accumulating'—Goldman Sachs Revealed As Top XRP ETF Holder

Chainlink has added SIX Group, the operator of Switzerland's and Spain's stock exchanges, to its DataLink platform, making equities data covering more than €2 trillion in combined market capitalization available onchain for the first time.

The integration, announced Wednesday, means smart contracts across more than 75 blockchains can now programmatically access real-time market data from the SIX Swiss Exchange and BME (Bolsas y Mercados Españoles). The data reaches over 2,600 applications within the Chainlink ecosystem.

What Is Chainlink DataLink and How Does It Work?

Chainlink DataLink is an institutional-grade data publishing service built on Chainlink's oracle infrastructure. Oracles are the bridge between off-chain data, such as stock prices, and on-chain environments like smart contracts. Without oracles, blockchains have no native way to read external data.

DataLink is designed specifically for large, regulated data providers that need to maintain control over entitlements and distribution rights when moving data onto public or private blockchains. In plain terms, a financial data firm can publish its proprietary data onchain without losing control of who can access it or how it is used.

“Chainlink DataLink provides globally trusted data providers like SIX a secure, scalable path to commercialize high-quality market data on-chain while preserving the integrity, entitlements, and distribution controls required by regulated financial institutions,” said Fernando Vázquez, president, capital markets, Chainlink Labs.

What Data Is SIX Making Available Onchain?

SIX Group operates two major exchanges: the SIX Swiss Exchange in Switzerland and BME in Spain. Together, these exchanges list equities with a combined market capitalization exceeding €2 trillion.

Through the Chainlink integration, developers can now access:

Real-time equities pricing from the SIX Swiss Exchange

Market data from BME (Bolsas y Mercados Españoles)

Standardized data formatted for smart contract environments at scale

“Through this integration with Chainlink’s institutional-grade data publishing service, SIX delivers real-time, high-value market data while bringing flagship Swiss and Spanish blue-chip equities onchain via Chainlink’s DataLink,” Matthew Nurse, Head of Market Data at SIX, said. “This enables digital asset applications to access trusted market data through proven, secure infrastructure, fostering trust and innovation across global financial ecosystems.” 

Who Else Has Joined Chainlink DataLink?

SIX is the latest in a growing list of major financial data providers to plug into DataLink. Other notable names include:

FTSE Russell – the global index provider

Deutsche Börse – Germany's main stock exchange operator

S&P Global – the U.S.-based financial data and ratings firm

BX Digital and BX Swiss – both part of the Boerse Stuttgart Group, which partnered with Chainlink last week

Coinbase – feeding DataLink its order book and futures trading data

Why Does Onchain Equities Data Matter for Tokenization?

Tokenization refers to the process of creating blockchain-based assets that mirror or officially represent real-world equivalents, such as stocks, bonds, or indices. Some analysts project the tokenized asset market could eventually reach the multi-trillion-dollar range.

For tokenized products to function accurately, they need access to trusted, real-time price feeds from the underlying assets. That is where equities data from exchanges like SIX becomes essential.

Use Cases the SIX Integration Enables

With equities data from SIX now readable by smart contracts, developers can build:

Tokenized stock indices based on Swiss and Spanish blue-chip equities

Structured products that reference real exchange prices

Compliant DeFi applications that use regulated market data

Prediction markets tied to actual equity performance

New trading primitives built directly within blockchain environments

SIX's Background in Blockchain and Digital Assets

SIX is not new to blockchain infrastructure. The company launched the SIX Digital Exchange (SDX) in 2020, one of the first regulated digital asset exchanges in the world. SDX operates as a digital asset central securities depository (CSD), the type of institution that settles and holds securities.

SIX has also collaborated with central banks and commercial banks on distributed ledger technology (DLT) experiments. Its early positioning in both traditional market infrastructure and digital assets makes it a natural fit for DataLink, which sits at the intersection of both.

Conclusion

The SIX and Chainlink integration extends onchain access to equities data from two of Europe's largest exchange operators, covering more than €2 trillion in combined market cap. The data is now readable by smart contracts across 75-plus blockchains via DataLink, supporting use cases that include tokenized indices, structured products, and DeFi applications. 

SIX joins a roster of institutional data providers including FTSE Russell, Deutsche Börse, and S&P Global that have connected to Chainlink's infrastructure as demand for reliable, regulated financial data onchain continues to grow.

Resources

Press release: SIX and Chainlink Bring Data of Swiss and Spanish Equities with a Combined Market Value of €2 Trillion Onchain

Report by The Block: DLT is finding favor among financial market infrastructures and participants

Report by The Trade: SIX brings equities data on-chain via Chainlink integration

Morgan Stanley's new spot Bitcoin ETF, ticker MSBT, is the first spot $BTC fund from a major U.S. bank, and it arrived swinging. It carries the lowest fee in the category at 0.14%, posted the biggest Day 1 in Morgan Stanley's entire ETF history, and has roughly doubled its assets under management in its first week of trading.

That combination, cheapest fees plus a captive advisor network worth trillions, is why rival issuers should be paying attention.

How has MSBT performed so far?

MSBT started trading on NYSE Arca on April 8 with an April 7 inception date. It tracks the CoinDesk Bitcoin Benchmark Rate Index, holds real BTC with Coinbase as crypto custodian and BNY Mellon handling cash and administration, and is structured as an ETP.

Day 1 brought in roughly $30.6 million to $34 million in net inflows on more than 1.6 million shares traded. Bloomberg analyst Eric Balchunas placed it in the top 1% of all ETF debuts in history and called it "arguably the biggest Bitcoin ETF launch since they began."

By April 13, cumulative net inflows since inception had climbed to $37.50 million, with another $6.28 million added that day alone. What makes that April 13 print notable is that the broader spot Bitcoin ETF category saw net outflows the same day. Money was leaving rivals and still flowing into MSBT.

The fund's AUM sits around $63.84 million on Morgan Stanley's own numbers, with SoSoValue showing $70.12 million. It holds roughly 960 BTC. Market price closed at $21.05 against a $20.93 NAV, a modest 0.57% premium. Since-inception returns are tracking Bitcoin closely, with the market price up 6.86% and NAV up 6.24%.

It is still small. MSBT ranks around #12 by AUM in a category now sitting near $94 billion, with BlackRock's IBIT still the undisputed leader. But the trajectory matters more than the starting point.

Why the 0.14% fee matters

MSBT's expense ratio undercuts every competitor in the U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF market:

Morgan Stanley MSBT: 0.14%

BlackRock IBIT: 0.25%

Most others: 0.20% to 0.39%

Grayscale GBTC: historically the highest, still above the pack

Eleven basis points under IBIT sounds small. In ETF land it isn't. Fee compression is how BlackRock crushed Grayscale's GBTC lead in 2024, and Morgan Stanley is now running the same play on BlackRock.

The difference this time is distribution. Morgan Stanley (@MorganStanley) has around 16,000 financial advisors and more than $9 trillion in client assets sitting on its wealth platform. Balchunas and other analysts have floated $5 billion in AUM within the first year as a realistic target, built on that advisor pipeline alone.

The vampire fund problem for rivals

Here is where it gets interesting for IBIT and the rest.

Advisors and RIAs already on Morgan Stanley's platform now have a cheaper, in-house option sitting next to the ETFs they previously recommended. A fiduciary argument almost writes itself: same exposure, lower cost, same roof. Expect a slow bleed of reallocations as quarterly reviews hit.

That is the vampire fund dynamic. MSBT does not need to pull capital off the street to grow. It can feed on its own ecosystem.

The April 13 flow data is the early tell. On a day the category bled, MSBT absorbed $6.28 million. Whether that is redirected money from IBIT, Fidelity's FBTC, or fresh capital is impossible to say from the SoSoValue snapshot alone, but the direction is the point.

What to watch next

Three things are worth tracking over the next one to three months.

First, weekly inflow rankings. If MSBT consistently shows up in the top three despite being the smallest in the top tier, the migration thesis is real. Second, IBIT's flow data. Any sustained slowdown there while MSBT climbs would be the clearest signal. Third, Morgan Stanley's advisor guidance. If internal desk research starts leaning on the fee comparison, the floodgates open faster.

MSBT is not going to topple IBIT in 2026. BlackRock's lead is measured in tens of billions. But the fee and distribution combo makes Morgan Stanley the first genuinely structural threat the incumbent spot Bitcoin ETFs have faced since the category launched. That is the real story of Day 1, and it is why this one is worth watching.

Sources:

Fortune — launch day coverage, Balchunas top 1% ranking, Coinbase and BNY Mellon custody structure, Ethereum and Solana trust filings.

Yahoo Finance — Morgan Stanley's 16,000 advisors and $9.3T in client assets, Nate Geraci distribution commentary, E*Trade rollout plans.

CryptoPotato — Balchunas "arguably the biggest Bitcoin ETF launch since they began" quote, $5B first-year AUM projection, HODL15Capital 430 BTC Day 1 buy data.

Bitcoin.com News — fee structure breakdown, authorized participants (Jane Street, Virtu, Macquarie), Morgan Stanley's $729M in third-party Bitcoin ETF stakes pre-launch.

SoSoValue Spot Bitcoin ETF Tracker — live AUM, NAV, and flow data across the full U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF category.

Ondo Finance has formally asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission not to take enforcement action against a proposed model that would use Ethereum to record and manage securities entitlements linked to U.S. stocks and ETFs. 

The request, submitted Monday as a no-action letter, centers on the firm's Ondo Global Markets (OGM) platform, which already offers non-U.S. investors exposure to U.S.-listed equities through tokenized notes.

What Is Ondo Asking the SEC to Do?

A no-action letter is a request for written confirmation from SEC staff that they would not recommend enforcement action if a company proceeds with a specific activity. It does not create a new rule or set industry-wide precedent. What it does do is give a firm a regulatory green light for a clearly defined, bounded model before going live.

Ondo's request is narrow. It does not ask the SEC to rewrite securities law or approve tokenized securities as a broad category. Instead, it seeks confirmation that Ondo can proceed with one specific operational change: using Ethereum to represent, in tokenized form, certain securities entitlements that underpin its OGM products.

How Would the Model Actually Work?

The OGM platform currently allows non-U.S. investors to access U.S.-listed stocks and ETFs through tokenized notes. The underlying equities are held through the Depository Trust Company (DTC) via Alpaca, a registered U.S. broker-dealer. That custody and legal structure stays in place under the proposed model.

What changes is how certain records are tracked. Ondo would mint tokens on Ethereum Mainnet to represent the relevant securities entitlements. Those tokens would be held by BitGo, acting as custodian, and used to support recordkeeping and operational workflows.

The firm says the goal is operational improvement, not a structural overhaul. Specifically, Ondo cited three expected benefits:

Cleaner collateral monitoring

More efficient creation-and-redemption workflows

Simpler reconciliation within the OGM product stack

The official books and records would remain within the existing legal framework. The Ethereum layer would sit alongside it, not replace it.

Why Use Ethereum Mainnet?

Ondo pointed to a practical reason for choosing Ethereum Mainnet rather than a private or permissioned chain: OGM already operates within Ethereum and Ethereum-compatible environments. Using the same infrastructure reduces friction and keeps the broader system coherent. The firm also noted that public blockchain infrastructure can support regulated markets when the right controls are in place.

What Is a Securities Entitlement, and Why Does It Matter Here?

A securities entitlement is a legal interest a person holds in a financial asset through an intermediary, such as a broker. When you buy stock through a brokerage, you typically hold a securities entitlement rather than the share certificate itself. The DTC sits at the center of this system in the United States, serving as the central securities depository that holds and transfers most publicly traded securities.

Ondo's model does not move the underlying entitlements off the DTC system. It adds a parallel tokenized representation of those entitlements on Ethereum, limited to specific operational use cases like collateral management and reconciliation.

What Does BitGo's Role Mean for the Model?

BitGo is a qualified digital asset custodian. Under the proposed structure, it would hold the Ethereum-based tokens representing the securities entitlements. This keeps the custody function within a supervised, regulated entity, which is central to Ondo's argument that the model fits within the existing legal framework without requiring a change to how securities law works.

Is the SEC Open to Tokenization Right Now?

The current regulatory environment in the United States is more receptive to tokenization than it has been in prior years. Under the Trump administration, regulators have shown a greater willingness to engage with the concept. SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce recently encouraged firms working on tokenized products to approach the agency directly.

Congressional signals have pointed in a similar direction. At a recent House Financial Services Committee hearing, Representative Andy Barr stated that tokenization of securities is coming, while also stressing that investor protections need to be preserved as the market develops.

The SEC has already approved a rule change that would allow Nasdaq to support tokenized share trading. Separately, firms including the New York Stock Exchange, Robinhood, Kraken, and Coinbase have been launching their own onchain equities offerings.

Where Does the Tokenized Asset Market Stand?

Market size projections for tokenized real-world assets vary widely, but analysts broadly expect the sector to scale into the trillions of dollars over the next decade. Estimates for 2030 range from roughly $2 trillion on the conservative end to more than $10 trillion in more optimistic forecasts. The wide range reflects genuine uncertainty about adoption pace, regulatory outcomes, and infrastructure readiness.

Ondo's filing represents one specific use case within a much larger trend of institutions exploring how blockchain infrastructure can improve back-office processes without dismantling the legal frameworks that underpin existing markets.

Conclusion

Ondo's no-action request is a limited but concrete step: it asks the SEC to confirm that a specific, supervised use of Ethereum for recordkeeping within an existing regulated product is acceptable. 

The underlying equities stay with the DTC, custody stays with a qualified custodian, and the legal framework stays intact. The addition is an onchain layer intended to make collateral monitoring, creation-and-redemption workflows, and reconciliation more efficient for OGM investors. The outcome of the request will offer one of the clearest early signals yet of how far U.S. regulators are prepared to let tokenized securities infrastructure develop within the current rulebook.

Resources

Blog article by Ondo: Why We Submitted Our SEC No-Action Letter Request

Report by The Block: Ondo seeks SEC clearance for tokenized equities model on Ethereum

No Action Letter to the US SEC

Report by McKinsey & Company: From ripples to waves: The transformational power of tokenizing asset

The US SEC's Division of Trading and Markets issued a staff statement on April 13, 2026, confirming that providers of self-custody crypto wallet interfaces and DeFi frontends can operate without registering as broker-dealers, provided they meet 12 specific conditions. The guidance covers both native crypto tokens and tokenized equities and debt securities and took effect immediately.

The statement applies to what the SEC calls "Covered User Interface Providers." These are entities that build websites, browser extensions, mobile apps, or other software that helps users interact with blockchain protocols through their own self-custodial wallets. The guidance is part of a broader SEC push to clarify how existing securities law applies to crypto activities.

Commissioner Hester Peirce issued a separate statement alongside it, arguing that existing law already makes the SEC's position clear, and calling for formal rulemaking to go even further. The staff statement will automatically expire five years from April 13, 2026, unless superseded.

What Is A Covered User Interface Under This SEC Guidance?

The SEC defines a Covered User Interface as software that converts a user's trade instructions, such as buy or sell orders, volume, asset, and price range, into commands that a blockchain can read. Those commands are then signed and sent through the user's self-custodial wallet. The user, not the interface provider, holds the private key.

These interfaces often also display market data, including potential execution routes, asset prices, and estimated gas fees. Providers typically charge a fixed percentage per transaction. The key word in the SEC's definition is "self-custodial." Neither the wallet provider nor the interface can hold or access the user's private key, encrypted or decrypted.

This restriction limits the statement's immediate reach to users comfortable managing their own keys. However, institutional investors using enterprise-grade self-custody solutions could also use these interfaces, potentially bypassing traditional broker-dealer intermediaries for their own trading activity.

What Are The 12 Conditions For The Broker Exemption?

The SEC does not grant a blanket pass. Providers must meet all of the following conditions to avoid broker-dealer registration:

Users must be able to customize any default transaction parameters, and the interface must offer educational material to help them do so.

The provider cannot solicit users to engage in any specific crypto securities transactions.

The provider must select trading venues or distributed ledger systems based on objective factors, such as liquidity, latency, transparency, and security.

If the provider is affiliated with a connected trading venue, that affiliation must be clearly disclosed, and the venue must be treated on equal terms with unaffiliated venues.

If only one execution route is shown, users must be able to see additional routes where they exist.

If multiple routes are shown, sorting must be based on objective factors, such as price or speed. The interface cannot label any route as "best" or "most reliable."

The interface cannot provide commentary or subjective recommendations on execution routes.

All software used to prepare trading instructions and display market data must operate on pre-disclosed, independently verifiable parameters.

The interface cannot exercise any discretion or decision-making over the market information it displays or the transactions it processes.

Fees must be fixed, consistent, and neutral. They cannot vary based on the asset chosen, the route taken, or the counterparty involved.

The provider must establish policies to evaluate, onboard, and audit connected trading venues and periodically reassess default transaction parameters.

The provider must prominently disclose its non-registered status, fee structures, conflicts of interest, cybersecurity policies, MEV-related risks, and system parameters to users.

Does This Statement Cover Tokenized Stocks And Bonds?

Yes, and that is one of the more significant aspects of this guidance. Earlier discussions about the SEC's planned innovation exemption suggested it would be limited to issuer-sponsored tokenized securities traded on automated market makers (AMMs), with whitelisting requirements and volume limits.

This statement is broader. It covers any tokenized equity or debt security traded through a qualifying interface. That said, the statement does not remove other regulatory obligations that may sit at the issuer or token level, such as whitelisting, KYC, or volume limits, which could be imposed through separate regulatory actions.

The result is that a tokenized equity could potentially trade in two very different regulatory environments: on a national securities exchange through a registered broker-dealer under full Regulation NMS rules, or on a permissionless AMM through an unregistered interface under disclosure-only obligations. Registered broker-dealers carry best execution, capital, supervisory, and investor protection obligations. Interface providers under this statement do not.

What Activities Are Excluded From The Safe Harbor?

The statement is explicit about what interface providers cannot do without triggering broker-dealer registration requirements.

Excluded activities include:

Negotiating transaction terms

Soliciting specific crypto securities transactions

Making investment recommendations or providing financial advice

Arranging for financing

Processing trade documentation

Conducting independent asset valuations

Holding, accessing, or managing user funds, securities, or stablecoins

Executing or settling transactions

Taking or routing orders

The routing exclusion creates an immediate gray area. Interfaces that suggest optimal execution paths may remain within the safe harbor if they present the route for user approval and allow alternatives. 

But aggregator protocols like CowSwap, whose solver network actively finds counterparties and determines execution paths, may fall outside it. The distinction between "preparing" a transaction and "routing" an order will be tested in the comment period.

The financing exclusion is equally notable. Lending protocols such as Aave and Morpho, whose core function is arranging for borrowing and lending, appear to fall outside the scope of this statement entirely. Their frontends would need separate regulatory clarity.

How Does The Self-Custody Requirement Work In Practice?

The self-custody condition is the statement's most important limiting factor. The SEC's definition requires that neither the provider nor the interface have custody of or access to the user's private key.

Wallet technology is evolving, however. Multi-party computation (MPC) wallets distribute key shards so that no single party holds the complete key. Smart contract wallets with social recovery introduce yet another model. Whether these architectures qualify as "self-custodial" under the SEC's definition will likely be tested.

Coinbase is one firm that will be closely watched. It already operates a self-custodial wallet separate from its main exchange, founded the Base blockchain, and has broad ambitions across the digital asset value chain. The affiliate disclosure condition in the statement requires transparency about such relationships, but economic incentives remain.

What Does This Mean For The Traditional Financial Services Industry?

The broker-dealer community, led by SIFMA, has consistently argued that wallet providers performing broker-like functions should be regulated based on the substance of their activities, not their technical form.

As recently as February 2026, SIFMA's follow-up letter to the Crypto Task Force emphasized "significant functional similarities between traditional broker-dealer services and some wallet provider activities" and urged notice-and-comment rulemaking rather than blanket exemptions or no-action relief.

The staff statement is technically broader than a no-action letter and was issued without a prior comment period. It is effective immediately. That combination may make this guidance harder to accept for traditional financial services firms accustomed to formal rulemaking processes.

That said, the SEC staff faced a genuinely difficult task. Blockchain technology does not map neatly onto existing regulatory categories. An interface that converts a user's trade parameters into blockchain commands and routes them through a self-custodial wallet does not function like a traditional broker. The 12 conditions the staff imposed represent a serious attempt to replicate key investor protections without requiring full broker-dealer registration.

Security And MEV: What Disclosures Are Required?

The statement requires interface providers to disclose their cybersecurity policies, procedures, and controls, if any. The phrase "if any" is significant. A provider is not required to have security controls in place, only to disclose whatever it does or does not have. For an interface handling tokenized equities and bonds, this is a lower standard than what applies to registered broker-dealers.

On MEV (maximal extractable value), the statement requires disclosure of policies to protect user trading information from front-running strategies. MEV refers to the practice by which blockchain validators or other actors reorder, insert, or censor transactions to extract additional profit, often at the expense of ordinary users. The SEC explicitly acknowledges the MEV risk in a footnote but frames the remedy as disclosure rather than prohibition.

Who Is Accountable At The Protocol Level?

A notable gap in the statement is what it does not cover. The safe harbor applies only to the interface layer. The underlying AMM protocols, the smart contracts that actually match liquidity and execute trades, are not addressed and are therefore presumed to sit outside the regulatory framework entirely.

This means no entity is directly accountable at the protocol level for trade execution. The frontend provider has disclosure obligations but does not execute trades. The protocol executes trades but is not subject to this framework. The user is self-custodial, so there is no intermediary bearing responsibility for execution quality. For institutional participants accustomed to a market structure where someone is always accountable for execution, this is a meaningful departure.

Conclusion

The SEC's staff statement creates a conditional, time-limited framework that allows self-custody crypto interface providers to operate outside broker-dealer registration for five years. It covers native crypto tokens and tokenized equities and bonds, imposes 12 specific conditions around fee neutrality, disclosure, venue evaluation, and conflict management, and explicitly excludes activities such as order routing, lending facilitation, fund custody, and investment advice. 

The guidance addresses the interface layer only and leaves protocol-level accountability unresolved. Security standards are disclosure-based rather than prescriptive. Commissioner Peirce has called for formal rulemaking to go further, while industry groups like SIFMA have pushed back on the absence of a prior comment period. The SEC staff welcomes public comment on the statement through File Number 4-894.

Resources 

Press release by US SEC: Staff Statement Regarding Broker-Dealer Registration of Certain User Interfaces Utilized to Prepare Transactions in Crypto Asset Securities

Report by Crypto Briefing: SEC sets conditions for crypto trading apps to stay outside broker rules

Report by The Block: SEC carves out path for some crypto interfaces to bypass broker registration

InterLink Foundation (@itl_fdn) has named co-founder KV (@kv_interlink) as its Chairman, handing long-term stewardship of the Human Network to one of its earliest architects. The announcement landed on April 13, 2026, via the Foundation's official X account and followed an internal vote by the organization.

For a project that crossed 7 million users and is now pushing toward payments and real-world asset tokenization, the appointment reads less like a routine title change and more like a signal about who will steer what comes after the growth sprint.

Who is KV and why does this matter?

KV is a co-founder of InterLink Labs and previously served as its CTO. He is a Computer Science graduate of the National University of Singapore with a competitive programming background, and he has been involved since the earliest days of building the Human Network. His X bio now lists him as chairman of @itl_fdn, with a following above 38,000.

The move takes him out of day-to-day product and tech execution at Labs and into governance at the Foundation. That shift matters because it keeps a founding voice inside the room where treasury, board decisions, and ecosystem strategy get decided.

In the Foundation's words, KV will lead with a clear mission: democratizing digital asset ownership for 1 billion users and transforming InterLink into an ecosystem for global payments and real-world assets. The Foundation called the appointment "a declaration of intent."

In a follow-up post on his personal account, KV went further, committing to dedicate everything he has to the ecosystem and pledging that no personal gain would take priority over the interests of the organization or its users. He also used the post to announce the launch of the Foundation's official website at interlink.foundation, with the whitepaper set to follow later this week.

What is the InterLink Foundation?

The InterLink Foundation launched in February 2026 as an independent non-profit, separate from InterLink Labs (@inter_link). Its purpose is to provide neutral, sustainable governance as the project scales past its early growth phase.

The Foundation's stated responsibilities include:

Stewarding the $ITL and $ITLG treasury

Funding builders and researchers through grants and hackathons

Advancing core tech work on scalability, quantum-resistant security, zero-knowledge systems, and AI integration

Engaging governments and enterprises on compliant real-world adoption

Overseeing the curator tier introduced in March 2026

The Foundation does not own InterLink and does not seek profit. It exists to keep the project's long-term direction stable while Labs handles the product.

How big is InterLink now?

InterLink is a human-centric blockchain network built around Proof of Personhood. Users verify through the InterLink App using smartphone-based facial recognition and liveness detection, so no special hardware is needed. Verified users become Human Nodes, earn rewards, and anchor the network's anti-Sybil model.

The stack includes InterLink ID for biometric-verified identity, the InterLink App for mining and payments, InterLink Chain as the base layer, and SDK and MDK tools for developers building verified-identity features.

The Foundation's announcement confirmed the network has crossed 7 million users, with daily active usage across more than 20 countries, including the UAE, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the United States.

Its stated ceiling is ambitious: onboard 1 billion real humans, with an eventual target of up to 5 billion internet users. Recent technical work includes the Transaction-Backed Digital Assets Protocol, which links real-world business revenue to on-chain assets. That protocol sits directly underneath the Foundation's RWA ambitions and gives KV's payments and tokenization mandate something concrete to build on.

How can builders get involved?

Alongside the website launch, KV outlined three entry points for anyone who wants to build on or support the network at this stage:

Apply for a Grant: Open to teams building technical or community-focused projects that create real ecosystem value.

Tokenize a Business: For existing or planned businesses that want to tokenize using the Transaction-Backed Digital Assets Protocol.

Become a Validator: Applications are open for participants who want to help secure the network and earn rewards.

KV said he will personally review every application and provide hands-on support from deployment on the InterLink Testnet Taj Mahal all the way through to InterLink Private and Open Mainnet. It's a notable commitment from a Chairman, and one that ties the governance role directly to builder activity rather than leaving it at the board level.

In a separate reply, KV also addressed ongoing community questions about the Verified KYC process. He confirmed that responsibility sits with @scott_itl, who held it before the Chairman transition, and said the 1 billion user goal remains intact. He added that curator processing speed may be slower than expected as the Foundation tightens regulatory compliance.

What comes next?

The Foundation said the full composition of the board will be revealed in the coming days, which is the first near-term milestone to watch. Beyond that, the Testnet Taj Mahal is queued for its first phase, and the grant program for mini-apps and ecosystem builders continues to run.

Community response across X has been strongly positive, with congratulatory posts from ambassadors and country leads in India, Vietnam, Indonesia, Turkey, and the Philippines. The recurring themes are governance maturity, the 1 billion user target, and anticipation of the testnet and private mainnet phases.

For a project that built its reputation on rapid user growth, the harder work now is institutional, and putting a founding technologist in the Chairman seat is InterLink's answer to who should be running that phase.

The Foundation called this a declaration of intent. KV is now the one who has to deliver on it.

Sources:

InterLink Foundation on X Official announcement of KV's appointment as Chairman

KV on X Personal commitments post and Foundation website launch

InterLink Foundation Newly launched official Foundation site

InterLink Labs Main project site covering the Human Network, app, and tokens

InterLink Whitepaper Technical documentation and roadmap

Artificial intelligence is now the biggest bucket on Grayscale's altcoin watchlist. The asset manager's Q2 2026 "Assets Under Consideration" list, published April 10, features 30 names across four sectors, with 10 of them sitting under AI alone.

That is up from seven AI names in Q1, and it came with a roster cut from 36 assets to 30, the removal of the entire Consumer and Culture category, and fresh additions including @CantonNetwork, Helium, Kite AI, Venice, and Fabric Protocol. It is the clearest signal yet of where one of the largest crypto asset managers is pointing its research desk.

What does "under consideration" actually mean?

@Grayscale defines Assets Under Consideration as digital assets not currently in a Grayscale product but flagged by its research team as possible candidates for a future one. The list is illustrative, not a promise. Tokens can drop off a quarter later, and inclusion does not guarantee a fund filing.

Still, it carries weight. Grayscale runs some of the largest crypto trusts and ETFs in the US, and its quarterly updates tend to move attention and price action when they land.

The full Q2 2026 list

Smart Contract Platforms:

Canton Network - $CC

Celo - $CELO

Mantle - $MNT

MegaETH - $MEGA

Monad - $MON

Toncoin - $TON

Tron - $TRX

Financials:

Ethena - $ENA

Hyperliquid - $HYPE

Jupiter - $JUP

Kamino Finance - $KMNO

Maple Finance - $SYRUP

Morpho - $MORPHO

Pendle - $PENDLE

Artificial Intelligence:

Fabric Protocol - $ROBO

Flock - $FLOCK

Grass - $GRASS

Kaito - $KAITO

Kite AI - $KITE

Nous Research

Poseidon

Venice - $VVV

Virtuals Protocol - $VIRTUAL

Worldcoin - $WLD

Utilities and Services:

DoubleZero - $2Z

Geodnet - $GEOD

Helium - $HNT

Jito - $JTO

LayerZero - $ZRO

Wormhole - $W

The Currencies bucket got no new names, and the Consumer and Culture category has been removed from the framework entirely.

Why is AI now the biggest bucket?

AI grew from seven names in Q1 to 10 in Q2, making it the largest single category. Grayscale added @FabricFND, Kite AI, and Venice while keeping Flock, Grass, Kaito, Virtuals Protocol, and Worldcoin on the watchlist.

The tilt lines up with a broader thesis that decentralized compute, data, and agent networks are the next frontier for crypto product design. @grass stands out in particular. The project focuses on distributed web scraping for AI training data and has climbed from a niche retail play into a name serious desks now track.

Who got cut from the list?

Grayscale removed 11 names between Q1 and Q2:

Smart Contract Platforms: Aptos - $APT, Arbitrum - $ARB, BNB Chain - $BNB, Polkadot - $DOT

Financials: Euler - $EUL, Lombard - $BARD, Plume Network - $PLUME, Sky - $SKY

Consumer and Culture: ARIA Protocol, Bonk, Playtron

Smart contract platform names fell from 10 to seven, financials from 11 to seven, and Utilities and Services ticked up from five to six.

What caught the market's eye?

Three additions pulled most of the chatter.

@JupiterExchange, the Solana-based DEX aggregator, was a surprise under Financials given the ongoing debate around DeFi app tokens and revenue capture. Helium landed in Utilities and Services after years of skepticism about decentralized wireless economics. Grass rounded out the AI bucket and continues its climb from a retail-favorite data project into a watchlist regular.

Replies under Grayscale's announcement post were dominated by $KAS (Kaspa) holders asking why their chain did not make the cut. That pressure tends to resurface every quarter when the list gets refreshed.

What happens next?

Grayscale said it plans to refresh the list as often as 15 days after each quarter ends, which puts the Q3 version on track for mid-July. In the meantime, the firm has already filed with the SEC for a spot Hyperliquid ETF, pulling one of the Q2 names into active product discussion.

For traders, the takeaway is narrow. Grayscale has a long history of screening assets that never reach a product filing, so the list is better read as a research signal than a buying cue. Even so, it remains one of the cleaner windows into how a major asset manager is thinking about crypto sectors right now.

Sources:

Grayscale official Assets Under Consideration page, updated April 10, 2026

Yahoo Finance breakdown of the Q2 list including assets cut from the prior quarter

Crypto.news reporting on the Q2 list alongside the spot HYPE ETF filing

TradingView News coverage of the institutional themes behind the update

Large investors are buying up TRUMP memecoin ahead of an invitation-only gala hosted by President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago on April 25, even as the token trades near record lows around $2.80. Blockchain data shows multiple wallets pulling significant amounts off exchanges — a move widely read as a sign of long-term accumulation.

What the On-Chain Data Shows

Blockchain analytics firm Lookonchain has tracked several notable withdrawals from centralized exchanges in recent days.

One wallet, labeled "8DHkza," withdrew 850,488 TRUMP tokens — worth roughly $2.4 million — from Bybit over three days. Another address, "7EtuAt," pulled 105,754 tokens (about $298,000) from Binance and now holds 1.13 million tokens, valued at approximately $3.2 million.

On Monday, a third holder grew their position to more than 368,000 tokens after withdrawing from BitMart. A fourth whale crossed the one million token mark after pulling funds from Bybit, according to blockchain explorer Solscan.

When tokens move off exchanges, it typically signals that the holder intends to take direct custody — meaning they are not planning to sell in the near term. This reduces immediately available sell-side supply in the market, which can influence price dynamics.

Larger Wallet Brackets Also Moving In

The accumulation is not isolated to a handful of wallets. According to FX Street, wallets holding between one million and ten million TRUMP tokens added 5.56 trillion tokens during the same period, bringing that bracket's total to 166.94 trillion tokens. The 100,000 to one million bracket grew by 5%, rising from 96.59 trillion to 101.46 trillion tokens.

Why Are Whales Buying Now?

The buying is tied directly to an upcoming event. The top 297 TRUMP token holders have been invited to an exclusive luncheon at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on April 25. The top 29 holders get additional access: a VIP reception and champagne toast with President Trump himself.

Per reports, Trump is set to be joined by 18 "superstars" at the event, and the organizer behind the token, Get Trump Memes, has confirmed that Trump plans to attend. "After the conference at Mar-a-Lago, the President will fly back to Washington for the White House Correspondents' dinner," a spokesperson said.

That second commitment — the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner in Washington, D.C. — is also scheduled for April 25, raising logistical questions about Trump's ability to attend both. The event's own terms and conditions note that Trump "may not be able to attend" and that the gathering could be rescheduled or canceled. Qualified participants could receive a "limited edition TRUMP NFT" as a substitute if that happens.

The leaderboard competition tracking the top holders has been extended by four days, with the new deadline set for April 14 at 12 p.m. Eastern Time.

GOOD NEWS! EXTENDED! 4 DAYS ONLY 🇺🇸

You now have 4 more days to get in to the Mar-a-Lago Conference & Gala Luncheon with President Trump and 18 Superstars.

Join the leaderboard. You can still attend! ⁰Leaderboard ends April 14th, 12 PM EST. pic.twitter.com/DA2gZOfSi3

— TrumpMeme (@GetTrumpMemes) April 9, 2026

Is The Token's Price Reflecting The Excitement?

Not yet. Despite the whale activity, TRUMP is trading at approximately $2.80 — down 67% over the last year..

Trump's March announcement of the luncheon briefly pushed the token to $4.35. Since then, it has fallen by more than 33%.

Dominick John, an analyst at Zeus Research, told Cointelegraph that retail selling pressure is a key factor. "At the same time, insider supply overhang means even small distributions from concentrated wallets can absorb whale bids, limiting any meaningful upside follow-through," he said.

This is not the first time Trump has hosted a token-holder event. In May 2025 — a few months after his January 20 inauguration — he held his first "crypto gala" dinner. In the lead-up to that event, TRUMP peaked at $15.59 about a month before the dinner, then fell as the date approached. A month after the event, the token had dropped to around $8.90.

John suggested a partial recovery is possible this time around, with the 2026 midterm elections potentially acting as a sentiment driver. He noted that early signs of institutional accumulation and positive announcements could help establish a price floor and trigger upward movement.

Political Scrutiny Adds Pressure

The luncheon has attracted significant criticism. Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation aimed at limiting how much political figures can profit from memecoins. Critics accuse Trump of using the presidency for personal financial gain — an argument that has resurfaced around this event just as it did in 2025.

Adding to the pressure, CoinDesk this week reported on a controversial lending strategy used by World Liberty Financial, a Trump-linked crypto venture, on the Dolomite decentralized finance (DeFi) platform. The report put additional downward pressure on TRUMP's price.

Conclusion

Large wallets are clearly positioning ahead of the April 25 Mar-a-Lago luncheon, with on-chain data confirming millions of dollars in exchange outflows over recent days. But the token itself remains under pressure, trading near $2.80 amid retail selling, a highly concentrated supply structure, and political controversy tied to both the event and World Liberty Financial. The 2025 gala offers a precedent: a price peak well before the event, followed by a sustained decline. Whether this cycle plays out differently depends on factors that remain unresolved as the April 14 leaderboard deadline approaches.

Resources

Lookinchain on X: Posts (April, 2026)

Report by The Block: Trump's Mar-a-Lago memecoin gala collides with correspondents’ dinner, raising attendance questions

Report by CoinDesk 1: Trump token sees whale accumulation ahead of Mar-a-Lago gala; senators raise questions over event

Report by FX Street: Trump whales load up as Mar-a-Lago luncheon approaches

Report by CoinDesk 2: Trump's World Liberty Financial uses five billion WLFI to borrow $75 million from a platform its adviser co-founded

HSBC has successfully completed a pilot simulating the issuance, transfer, and atomic settlement of its Tokenised Deposit Service (TDS) on the Canton Network, marking the first time the bank's tokenised deposits were issued and used on a public blockchain.

The pilot, conducted through HSBC's Global Payments Solutions (GPS) business, tested how tokenised deposits could be settled atomically against other digital assets on Canton-enabled applications. It also demonstrated interoperability by connecting HSBC's internal deposit ledger with an external blockchain network, a step that has direct implications for how institutional finance could eventually plug into public blockchain infrastructure.

Manish Kohli, Head of Global Payments Solutions at HSBC, said the focus is on "building secure, interoperable capabilities that enable clients to move money more efficiently across different environments, while maintaining the trust and regulatory standards expected of a global bank."

What Did the HSBC Canton Network Pilot Actually Test?

The pilot covered three core functions: issuing tokenised deposits on the Canton Network, transferring them between parties, and settling them atomically against other digital assets. 

Atomic settlement, for those unfamiliar with the term, means that both legs of a transaction, the asset being sent and the payment being received, complete at exactly the same time. There is no gap where one party has delivered and the other has not. In traditional finance, that gap is a source of counterparty risk.

The pilot also explored how Canton could connect to additional settlement rails, extending what is known as delivery-versus-payment (DvP) settlement across both cash and asset legs. DvP is a standard settlement mechanism in capital markets designed to eliminate the risk that one side of a trade is completed without the other.

What Is HSBC's Tokenised Deposit Service?

HSBC's TDS allows corporate clients to convert fiat deposits into digital tokens on a 1:1 basis, then transfer them instantly on HSBC's ledger. The service currently supports five major currencies: USD, GBP, EUR, HKD, and SGD. It is built to support 24/7 real-time settlement and programmable payments, which allows businesses to automate payment conditions in ways that standard wire transfers cannot.

The Canton pilot represents an extension of this existing service onto a public blockchain for the first time.

One of the core findings of the HSBC pilot was that interoperability, the ability of different blockchain networks and ledgers to communicate and settle with each other, is a prerequisite for scaling tokenised finance.

Yuval Rooz, CEO of Digital Asset and co-founder of the Canton Network, noted that tokenised deposits are gaining traction across capital markets, corporate banking, and treasury, and that Canton is "quickly becoming a primary network for deployment, enabling tokenized deposits to move seamlessly across institutions and applications while maintaining privacy, control and interoperability."

What Is the Canton Network?

Canton Network is a public, permissionless blockchain co-created by Digital Asset. Its primary design feature is configurable privacy, which means institutions can transact on a public chain without exposing sensitive financial data to the broader network. That addresses one of the main reasons banks have historically avoided public blockchains: the compliance and data visibility risks that come with full transparency.

The network already includes a substantial list of institutional participants. DTCC, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan (via its Kinexys platform), BNP Paribas, and now HSBC are among the names active on Canton. As of early April 2026, the network has over 40 Super Validators, which sit at the top of Canton's trust and governance hierarchy, and more than 800 validators in total.

How Does Canton's Token Model Work?

Canton runs on a burn-and-mint equilibrium (BME) model using its native token, $CC. Every time an institution settles a transaction or interacts with the Global Synchronizer, Canton's core privacy layer, a usage fee is paid by burning $CC at an on-chain conversion rate that Super Validators update every 10 minutes. Those burned tokens are permanently removed from supply.

New $CC is minted as rewards for Super Validators, standard validators, and application builders, distributed based on actual contributions to the network. There is no pre-mine and no venture capital allocation. 

As of April 13, 2026, live data from CoinMarketCap showed circulating supply at approximately 38.3 billion $CC, priced between $0.147 and $0.148, with 24-hour burn volume recently exceeding $6.7 million.

The Canton Foundation announced on April 8 that the network has burned 2,898,443,014 $CC, worth roughly $417 million at the time of the announcement. That represents approximately 10% of circulating supply removed in under two years of meaningful operation, driven entirely by institutional usage rather than a scheduled burn event or governance vote.

Which Institutions Are Now Super Validators on Canton?

In March 2026, Canton added several major names as Super Validators, including:

Visa

Circle

Apollo Global

Fireblocks

QCP Group

Zenith

Meshpay

Each Super Validator secures the chain, validates transactions, and participates in governance with an assigned voting weight, typically 10 or 5 depending on their tier.

Conclusion

The HSBC Canton pilot confirmed that a major global bank can issue tokenised deposits on a public blockchain, settle them atomically against digital assets, and connect an internal deposit ledger to an external network without sacrificing regulatory compliance. 

HSBC's TDS already operates across five currencies with real-time, programmable settlement. The Canton Network, with over 800 validators, $417 million in cumulative burns tied to actual institutional usage, and Super Validators including Visa, Circle, and Goldman Sachs, provided the infrastructure to support it. The pilot did not announce a product launch. It demonstrated that the technical and regulatory pieces for institutional tokenised settlement are already in place.

Resources

Press release: HSBC Announces Successful Tokenised Deposit Pilot on the Canton Network

HashKey Group X announcement - Original announcement of HashKey Cloud validator node and Canton collaboration

Canton Foundation (@CantonFdn) on X — Original announcement of Ledger joining as Super Validator, February 19, 2026

Canton Foundation (@CantonFdn) on X Official announcement of the 2.9 billion $CC burn milestone on April 8, 2026

Cantonscan Live Canton Network explorer with real-time burn data, circulating supply, and transaction metrics

Visa Official press release detailing Visa's Super Validator role and stablecoin strategy on Canton Network, published March 25, 2026

Circle Blog post announcing USDCx availability on Canton via Circle xReserve

The Aave DAO has approved the "Aave Will Win" (AWW) proposal with nearly 75% of votes in favor, directing 100% of revenue from all Aave-branded products back to the community treasury and marking one of the biggest governance decisions in the protocol's history.

The vote passed on a Saturday in February 2025, and Aave founder Stani Kulechov wasted no time calling it "the most important proposal in Aave's history." The framework sets Aave V4 as the foundation for future development, restructures how revenue flows to the DAO, and outlines a multi-year plan to grow the protocol from $40 billion to $1 trillion in total value.

What Did the Aave Will Win Proposal Actually Pass?

On February 12, Aave Labs introduced the AWW governance proposal to the Aave DAO. The core idea is: any revenue generated by Aave Labs from products built under the Aave brand goes entirely to the DAO treasury, not to the development company itself.

This covers a wide range of products:

Aave.com and Aave App – consumer-facing interfaces targeting mainstream users

Aave Pro – a platform for power users with advanced DeFi tools

Aave Kit – enterprise-grade integration tools, SOC2-compliant, for fintechs and partners

Horizon – Aave's real-world asset (RWA) platform, expanding with V4 support

GHO – Aave's native stablecoin, part of the broader token-centric model

Swaps on Aave.com and Aave Pro are already generating $10 to $20 million in new revenue on top of existing protocol income. The protocol itself has accumulated $140 million in DAO revenue in 2025 alone, per AIP-1 (Aave Improvement Proposal 1), and 2026 is on track to match that figure despite a broader market downturn.

How Does Aave V4 Fit Into This?

Aave V4 introduces a "reinvestment feature" that puts idle capital in lending pools to work generating yield, creating additional revenue beyond standard borrowing and lending activity. V4 also introduces "Spokes," which are modular extensions to the protocol that unlock new collateral types and address liquidity demand across different chains and markets. Aave V3 will remain fully maintained by Aave Labs in parallel.

How Is Aave Labs Being Funded Under This Framework?

The DAO approved $25 million in stablecoins for Aave Labs, paid in monthly installments over 12 months, alongside an allocation of 75,000 AAVE tokens vesting linearly over four years. The stablecoins fund day-to-day operations, while the token allocation is structured to align developer incentives with long-term protocol growth.

Other grants tied to specific product launches and development milestones will go through separate governance proposals rather than being bundled into the AWW vote.

What Does "Token-Centric" Mean for AAVE Holders?

The AWW framework formalizes what Kulechov calls a "one asset, one model" approach. Under this model, holding AAVE means holding a stake in the protocol's revenue, its brand, its user base, and its integrations.

As Kulechov put it in his post on X: 

"If you own AAVE, you own not just the economic rights of the protocol, but the brand, the users, and the integrations."

The framework also establishes a community-protected vehicle to independently govern Aave's brand assets and intellectual property on behalf of token holders. Aave Labs has committed to working exclusively on Aave-related products going forward.

What Does This Mean for Governance?

The DAO is adopting what Kulechov describes as a "zero-bureaucracy" approach. Service providers (SPs) will be held to measurable goals, and payments simply for posting governance proposals are finished. The framework explicitly states zero tolerance for relationship gating, meaning no SP can use backroom access to influence decisions at the expense of token holders.

Aave Labs will also set up a permanent internal risk management function to work alongside external risk managers like Llama Risk and Token Logic.

Is Aave Building a Regulatory Moat?

Yes, and this is one of the less-discussed but more significant parts of the AWW framework. Aave Labs has spent years building regulated entities around its products. This includes Push Virtual Assets Ireland, which holds a CASP (Crypto Asset Service Provider) license under MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, the EU's crypto regulatory framework), as well as a UK EMI (Electronic Money Institution) licensed entity.

Aave is pursuing additional licenses globally to enable direct fiat-to-Aave onboarding, which is a prerequisite for bringing non-crypto users into the protocol at scale. The Aave App is being built with a fintech-like experience and will include $1 million in account protection per user. A card product is also planned for later, which would generate additional fees for the DAO treasury.

Aave Kit, the enterprise integration layer, is already SOC2-compliant, meaning it meets the security and data standards that banks and financial institutions typically require before partnering with any platform.

Conclusion

The Aave Will Win framework passed with a clear majority and sets a defined direction for the protocol: all revenue flows to the DAO, AAVE becomes the single asset representing the full value of the protocol, and Aave Labs focuses entirely on building Aave products. With $140 million in protocol revenue already accumulated in 2025, regulated entities operating under MiCA and UK law, and products targeting both retail and institutional users, the AWW vote is less a statement of ambition and more a formalization of where Aave already stands.

Resources

Aave on X: Posts (April , 2026)

Stani Kulechov on X: Post on April 12

Report by CoinDesk: Aave labs proposes ‘Aave Will Win’ plan to send 100% of product revenue to DAO

The 21Shares Polkadot ETF (TDOT) pulled in $784.96K on April 9, its first positive daily flow since March 12 and the end of a 27-day stretch of zeros. The single-day pop pushed cumulative net inflows past $1.33M and lifted total net assets to roughly $10.99M, according to the SoSoValue dashboard.

It is not a flood. But for a product that had been stuck in flatline mode since launch week, it is the first sign that TradFi is paying attention to DOT again.

What the dashboard shows

TDOT, listed on NASDAQ with a 0.30% fee, launched on March 6, 2026 with around $11M in seed assets. The first real institutional tick came on March 12, when the fund logged $544.48K in net inflows. After that, the tape went quiet. Daily flows printed $0.00 from March 13 through April 8, with assets drifting in a $9.6M to $12.2M band on light trading.

April 9 broke the streak. The key numbers from the SoSoValue dashboard:

Daily net inflow: +$784.96K (603.54K DOT)

Cumulative net inflow: +$1.33M

Total net assets: $10.99M (around 0.50% of DOT's market cap)

Total value traded that day: $113.25K

Market price: ~$15.77, premium/discount +0.63%

Trading volume stayed thin at roughly 2,460 shares, so this is not a sentiment shift driven by retail noise.

Why this matters now

The flow lands directly on top of what was arguably Polkadot's most consequential month ever. As we covered in Was March 2026 the Most Important in Polkadot's History?, March delivered two structural changes back to back: the spot ETF itself, and a tokenomics overhaul that capped supply at 2.1 billion DOT and slashed annual issuance from roughly 10% inflation to about 3.11%, with further biennial reductions baked in.

That moved $DOT from an uncapped inflationary asset to a disinflationary one in a single governance cycle. It is the biggest economic change the network has ever shipped.

The problem in March was that the structural news did not translate into ETF demand. The supply cap landed, the ETF opened, and then the inflow column went dark for 27 days. April 9 is the first data point that pushes back on that disconnect.

Is this actually a turn?

One day is not a trend. $785K is a rounding error next to the $BTC and $ETH spot products, and DOT has been chopping in a $1.20 to $1.65 range through early April with no obvious price reaction to the inflow print. The premium sits at +0.63% and trading volume held at roughly 2,460 shares, neither of which signals broad demand yet.

What is on the board is this: Polkadot has a U.S. spot ETF, a hard supply cap, halved issuance, and 24 to 48 hour unbonding as of early April. After 27 sessions of flat zeros, the inflow column finally has a number on it. Traders and analysts will watch whether April 9 marks the start of sustained flows or remains an outlier.

Sources:

SoSoValue: U.S. Spot DOT ETF Dashboard — Daily and cumulative flow data, AUM, premium/discount, and trading volume for TDOT.

21Shares Product Page — TDOT structure, fee schedule, and physically-backed methodology.

Michael Saylor thinks Bitcoin has already put in its cycle low. Speaking at a private Mizuho analysts' dinner in Miami this week, the Strategy executive chairman told the room that Bitcoin likely bottomed near $60,000 in early February 2026, and that the worst of the selling is behind the market.

With BTC now trading around $72,000, the market has already climbed roughly 15 to 20 percent off from the level he flagged.

Why Saylor thinks the bottom is in

Saylor's reasoning is not built on a chart pattern or a valuation model. According to notes from Mizuho analysts Dan Dolev and Alexander Jenkins, who attended the dinner, Saylor framed the February low as seller exhaustion. Forced sellers got flushed. Over-leveraged miners capitulated. Weak hands handed their coins to stronger ones. Bottoms form when the selling stops, he argues, not when price hits a target.

He also pointed to what is now sitting on the demand side:

Sustained spot ETF inflows that continue to absorb daily new supply from miners

Corporate treasuries reallocating into Bitcoin

Improving macro liquidity, with rate-cut expectations adding tailwinds

The picture he painted is a market where the supply overhang has cleared and steady institutional bids are doing the heavy lifting.

The quantum threat? Overblown

The other thing Saylor wanted to clear up was quantum computing. Fears that a future quantum machine could crack Bitcoin's cryptography have been circulating for months, and he is not buying the panic.

His position is straightforward. The threat is theoretical and likely decades away from anything practical. Even if quantum computing did advance to the point of threatening current cryptography, Bitcoin is open source. The community would upgrade the protocol long before any real attack became viable. Saylor has been making this case for a while, and he reportedly mentioned that Strategy has been working with other large holders on a Bitcoin security council to coordinate on long-term risks like this one.

The bigger vision: Bitcoin as a credit engine

Saylor did not stop at the bottom call. He used the dinner to push his longer-term thesis, which is that the next leg up for Bitcoin will come from credit markets built on top of it.

He pointed to existing digital credit products, including Strategy's own STRC preferred stock, which yields 11.5 percent. That number is high by traditional standards, but in Saylor's framing, it is still well below what he expects Bitcoin itself to return over the long run. The bigger catalyst, he says, is true banking credit denominated in or backed by Bitcoin. That is where he sees BTC moving from a non-yielding asset into what he called a capital markets engine.

With ETF flows steady and corporates still adding BTC to balance sheets, the infrastructure for those credit products has more demand to lean on than it did a year ago.

Mizuho still bullish on Strategy

Mizuho analysts came out of the dinner unchanged on their view of Strategy, keeping their Outperform rating with a $320 price target, which implied roughly 150 percent upside at the time of the report. @Strategy remains the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, and Saylor has shown no signs of slowing the accumulation.

His track record on big-picture calls is strong, even if his short-term timing has missed in past cycles. This time, with $BTC already moving in his direction, the call is harder to wave off. Whether February 2026 holds as the actual cycle low is something the next few months will settle. For now, @saylor is doing what he has always done: stacking, building credit products on top, and telling everyone else to stop worrying about quantum computers.

Sources:

CoinDesk Detailed coverage of the Mizuho event including the digital credit and banking angle.

Yahoo Finance UK Primary summary of Saylor's remarks at the Mizuho dinner.

Avalanche has achieved sub-second block times, making it reportedly the fastest major Layer-1 network for executing decentralized applications (dapps). In practical terms, the network now produces a new block and confirms transactions in less than one second, cutting the wait between a user action and its on-chain confirmation to nearly nothing.

Avalanche now has sub-second block times 🔺

What it means for you:
• faster transaction confirmations
• snappier dapps + quicker state updates
• a more responsive onchain feel

Preparing for the future where everyone uses Avalanche. pic.twitter.com/SsTyezIl1S

— Avalanche🔺 (@avax) April 8, 2026

How Fast Is Avalanche Now?

The current block speed is more than twice as fast as the minimum block times recorded before the network's "Granite" upgrade, which activated in November 2025. That upgrade was designed specifically to make on-chain transactions faster and cheaper on the $6 billion chain.

To put the speed in everyday terms, Avalanche describes its blocks like commuter trains. If you miss one departure, the next one arrives in under a second. For users, that removes the noticeable pause that typically separates blockchain applications from standard web apps, producing what the network calls a more "web2-like" feel.

What Changed After the Granite Upgrade?

The Granite upgrade set the technical foundation for where Avalanche stands today. One of its core focuses was improving how the blockchain handles shifting transaction volumes.

Here is what that looks like in practice:

During low activity, the network scales its computing resources down.

During peak usage, it scales those resources back up to keep transactions moving.

The system calibrates based on current transaction volume rather than fixed capacity limits.

This design keeps the network stable whether it is processing a handful of transactions or running under heavy load, without manual intervention.

Why Does Sub-Second Finality Matter for Traders?

Speed at this level has direct consequences for financial activity on the network. Faster block times allow for quicker trade execution and more efficient liquidations, two functions that depend on the network confirming positions before prices shift significantly.

The reduction in latency also gives dapp users an experience closer to what they expect from conventional websites, which is a relevant factor for reaching users who are not already comfortable with typical blockchain confirmation delays.

What This Means for On-Chain Applications

Applications that require real-time state updates, including on-chain order books, prediction markets, and multiplayer games, become more viable when finality is measured in milliseconds. Sub-second block times raise the ceiling for what developers can realistically build on the network.

Avalanche's Growing Institutional Footprint

The speed upgrade arrives alongside notable institutional activity. CME Group, one of the world's largest derivatives exchanges, announced plans to launch regulated AVAX futures contracts. Standard contracts are sized at 5,000 AVAX and micro contracts at 500 AVAX. Both are cash-settled and expected to go live on May 4, subject to regulatory approval. The contracts will trade on CME Globex before moving to CME's new 24/7 schedule, which takes effect May 29, 2026.

Separately, Broadridge Financial Solutions selected Avalanche on April 6 to power a new on-chain proxy voting system. Broadridge already processes $8 trillion in tokenized assets per month. The system is built on a dedicated Avalanche Layer 1 blockchain powered by Ava Cloud, with votes recorded on that L1 and distributed across multiple blockchains. Galaxy (NASDAQ: GLXY) will be the first company to use it, tied to its upcoming annual shareholder meeting.

Conclusion

Avalanche now confirms blocks in under one second, built on the foundation the Granite upgrade established. The network dynamically adjusts computing resources based on transaction load, stays stable across varying usage levels, and delivers finality fast enough to support financial applications with real-time demands. With CME-listed futures contracts and Broadridge's on-chain governance system both tied to AVAX infrastructure, the sub-second milestone reflects where the network's technical and institutional development currently stands.

Resources

Avalanche on X: Post on April 8

Report by The Street: Avalanche achieves sub-second block times for faster digital transactions

Announcement by CME Group: CME Group to Continue Expansion of Regulated Crypto Suite with Launch of Avalanche and Sui Futures

Press release by Broadridge: Broadridge Live with On-Chain Governance for Tokenized Equities, Extending Market Infrastructure into Digital Assets

Blog article by Avalanche: Avalanche Granite Upgrade - Enhancing ICM, Unlocking Biometric Use Cases, and Enabling Dynamic Block Times

World Liberty Financial (WLFI), the crypto venture co-founded by the Trump family, has issued a direct rebuttal to allegations of insider access and depositor risk following a CoinDesk report analyzing its transactions on DeFi lending protocol Dolomite. 

WLFI confirmed it deposited 1.99 billion of its own governance tokens as collateral and borrowed approximately 31.4 million in stablecoins, but disputed the characterization of the position as a risk to the protocol or its users.

Per reports, Dolomite co-founder Corey Caplan serves as an advisor to World Liberty Financial. 

What Did WLFI Actually Do on Dolomite?

On-chain records analyzed by CoinDesk, sourced from Etherscan and Arkham, show the transaction sequence began on February 8. WLFI's treasury deposited 14 million USD1, its own dollar-pegged stablecoin, into Dolomite as collateral and borrowed 11.4 million USDC against it. USDC is a separate stablecoin issued by Circle, widely used across DeFi lending protocols.

Minutes after that borrow, 11.45 million USDC moved to a Coinbase Prime deposit address. Two days later, 12.5 million USD1 moved directly from WLFI's treasury to a separate Coinbase Prime address, bypassing Dolomite entirely. Coinbase Prime is an institutional service typically used for converting crypto to fiat currency or for large over-the-counter trades.

The WLFI governance token entered the picture twelve days after the initial transaction:

On February 20, the treasury deposited 890 million WLFI into Dolomite and borrowed 20 million USD1 against it

On March 24, a further 1.1 billion WLFI was deposited

In total, 1.99 billion WLFI tokens now sit as collateral inside Dolomite

Across both transactions, the treasury received approximately 31.4 million in stablecoins

In April, activity continued through a separate channel. On April 2, the WLFI treasury sent 2 billion WLFI to a Gnosis Safe proxy wallet at address 0x44a681DD. Five days later, another 1 billion WLFI followed. Neither transfer went directly to Dolomite, and on-chain data does not yet show their destination. At WLFI's current price of $0.0888, those three billion tokens are worth approximately $266 million.

Why Did the Dolomite Position Raise Concerns in the First Place?

The USD1 lending pool on Dolomite is where the depositor risk question sits. The pool currently shows $193.66 million supplied against $171.22 million borrowed, a utilization ratio of approximately 88%.

In DeFi lending, utilization ratio measures how much of a pool's available liquidity is currently out on loan. At 88%, retail depositors who added USD1 to the pool expecting on-demand withdrawals cannot all exit simultaneously. Their funds remain locked until the large borrower repays. 

According to CoinDesk, the USD1 supply rate sits at 16.24% and the borrow rate at 9.18%, figures that reflect a single large actor's borrowing pressure rather than distributed organic demand.

USDC lending rates on Dolomite have spiked to 13.5% as the protocol works to attract fresh liquidity. DeFi analyst Ignas flagged this on X as a potential systemic concern, drawing comparisons to conditions that preceded the Stabble protocol's 62% TVL collapse on Solana, where similar pressure built gradually before a sudden exit event.

The collateral itself is also a point of contention. WLFI is a governance token with limited secondary market depth relative to the size of the position. 

What Is WLFI's Defense of the Dolomite Position?

WLFI addressed the criticism directly in a public statement, calling the analyst commentary misinformation and framing the position as intentional infrastructure for yield generation.

On liquidation risk, WLFI stated it is "nowhere near liquidation" and that if markets moved significantly against the position, it would "simply supply more collateral." The project described this as standard DeFi practice rather than a vulnerability.

WLFI's core argument is that by acting as the anchor borrower on the protocol, it is generating the yield that makes the platform attractive to other users. In its own words, everyday users are earning above-market stablecoin yields at a time when traditional finance is offering limited returns.

To support its broader financial position, WLFI pointed to several figures:

USD1 is running at a $159.5 million annual revenue run rate

Over the past six months, the project bought back 435,301,344 WLFI tokens at an average price of $0.1507, totaling $65.58 million in open market purchases

A governance proposal to unlock locked tokens for early holders is expected to go to a community vote shortly after forum input

WLFI also outlined recent technical upgrades to USD1, including gasless transfers allowing AI agents and users to send the stablecoin without holding ETH for gas fees, native support for AI payment protocol infrastructure including MPP and x402, compliance-grade fund safety controls, and a seamless upgrade that carried over all existing balances and integrations without requiring migration.

Conclusion

WLFI confirmed it deposited 1.99 billion of its own governance tokens into Dolomite as collateral and borrowed approximately 31.4 million in stablecoins, then disputed the risk framing directly. 

The project cited its anchor borrower role as a yield-generating mechanism for other users, pointed to $65.58 million in token buybacks, a $159.5 million USD1 revenue run rate, and upcoming governance proposals for early token holders. 

On the other side, the USD1 pool sits at 88% utilization, retail depositor exits are restricted, WLFI's secondary market depth remains limited relative to the collateral position.

Resources

Report by CoinDesk: Trump's World Liberty Financial uses 5 billion WLFI to borrow $75 million from a platform its advisor co-founded

World LibertyFi on X:  Post on April 10

Dolomite stats

Ignas on X: Post on April 8

Quantum computing poses a credible but manageable threat to Bitcoin, describing it as "a medium to long term system upgrade cycle rather than a risk," Wall Street brokerage Bernstein has told investors. The assessment, led by analyst Gautam Chhugani, comes as recent advances in quantum hardware have compressed timelines that the crypto industry once assumed were safely distant.

The report does not dismiss the concern. It simply argues the industry has enough time to respond, roughly three to five years, before quantum systems reach the capability needed to threaten Bitcoin's cryptographic foundations.

What Makes Quantum Computing a Threat to Bitcoin?

To understand the risk, it helps to know how quantum computers differ from the machines running today's systems.

Classical computers process information in binary bits, either 0 or 1. Quantum computers use qubits, which can exist as 0 and 1 simultaneously through a property called superposition. Combined with entanglement, another quantum property, this allows quantum systems to process vast numbers of possibilities at once and solve certain mathematical problems far faster than any classical machine.

Bitcoin relies on two distinct cryptographic systems:

Elliptic curve cryptography (ECC): Used to secure wallet transactions and digital signatures

SHA-256 hashing: Used to power the Bitcoin mining process

Quantum computers running Shor's algorithm could theoretically break ECC by solving the elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem (ECDLP). A March 2026 paper from Google Quantum AI estimated that with just under 500,000 qubits, an attacker could crack ECDLP-256, Bitcoin's signature security foundation, in approximately nine to twelve minutes.

Bitcoin mining, however, is a different matter. Bernstein stated that SHA-256 encryption "is quantum safe for several millions of years even after recent improvements, including Grover's algorithm."

Where Is Bitcoin Most Vulnerable Right Now?

The Bernstein report identified a specific, concentrated area of exposure rather than a network-wide threat.

Approximately 1.7 million BTC, worth around $116.6 billion, sits in legacy wallets from the era when Satoshi Nakamoto was still active. These older address formats expose public keys directly on the blockchain, making them potential targets for what security researchers call a "harvest now, decrypt later" attack. That means an adversary could collect encrypted data today and decrypt it once quantum hardware matures.

Research from Chaincode Labs estimates that between 20% and 50% of all Bitcoin could be vulnerable under a future quantum attack scenario, representing roughly $400 billion to $900 billion at current valuations.

Newer wallet formats and practices significantly reduce this exposure. Bernstein noted that for more recent protocols and crypto-linked real-world assets, the threat is limited to specific unsafe practices that can be mitigated through upgrades.

What Are Bitcoin Developers Doing About It?

The industry is not standing still. Bitcoin contributors are already advancing BIP360, a proposal designed to address signature vulnerabilities before they become exploitable. The Ethereum Foundation has published a four-part roadmap to upgrade its $260 billion network to post-quantum standards by 2029.

Google itself committed to migrating most of its authentication and digital signature systems to post-quantum cryptography by 2029, citing faster-than-expected progress in quantum hardware and error correction.

Blockstream CEO Adam Back, a Bitcoin pioneer recently identified by The New York Times as a likely candidate behind the Satoshi Nakamoto identity, offered a measured view. He told Bloomberg that current quantum systems remain "extremely basic," noting that the largest calculation a quantum computer has performed is factoring the number 21 into seven times three. He said the prudent response is to give Bitcoin users sufficient time to migrate keys to a quantum-ready format, with custodians and exchanges leading the transition.

Bernstein expects wallet standard upgrades, reduced address reuse, and key rotation to form the core of that migration process.

Conclusion

Quantum computing is a real and accelerating technical challenge for Bitcoin, but one the industry has the time and tools to address. The concentrated risk in legacy wallets is measurable and known. Mining remains unaffected. 

Developers are already working on quantum-resistant proposals. The window for an orderly upgrade exists, but it will not stay open indefinitely. The question is whether the industry moves fast enough while it still has the advantage of time.

Resources

Report by DL News: Quantum threat to Bitcoin ‘neither existential, nor novel,’ Bernstein says

Report by The New York Times: My Quest to Solve Bitcoin’s Great Mystery

Adam Back’s interview with Bloomberg: Quantum Risk Not Imminent for Crypto: Adam Back

Yes, inflows are back. On April 7, the Canary Capital HBR ETF recorded $472,050 in net inflows, snapping a dry spell that stretched all the way back to March 17. Three weeks of zeros on the daily ledger had some wondering whether institutional interest in Hedera was fading. That single green print says otherwise, but the bigger question is what comes next.

What Does the Data Actually Show?

The HBR ETF, listed on Nasdaq and still the only US spot HBAR product on the market, has quietly built one of the more consistent track records among altcoin ETFs since its late October 2025 launch.

As of April 8, 2026, per SoSoValue:

Cumulative total net inflows: $94.74 million

Total net assets: $51.69 million

$HBAR market cap share: 1.34%

Management fee: 0.95%

The gap between cumulative inflows and current AUM tells the story of HBAR's price slide since launch. Investors have put in nearly $95 million on a net basis, but the token has dropped enough to shrink those holdings to roughly half that value. It is unrealized loss, not outflows, driving the difference.

How Long Was the Lull?

The daily flow data paints a clear picture. From March 18 through April 6, every day printed $0.00 in net inflows. No outflows either. Just nothing.

Before that pause, March 17 logged $405,080 in inflows. And zooming out to the full month, March 2026 still ended with roughly $2.12 million in positive net flows, enough to rank among the top altcoin ETFs for the period. The weekly view confirms that the first two weeks of March did the heavy lifting, with the week of March 6 bringing in $1.06 million and the week of March 13 adding $655,150.

So the lull was real, but it did not erase a broadly positive month.

Why Does the April 7 Print Matter?

On its own, $472,050 is not a large number. But context matters.

Since launch, the HBR ETF has recorded only one isolated outflow day across its entire history. The pattern has been consistent: steady accumulation punctuated by occasional flat stretches, never sustained selling. Every month since the October 2025 debut has ended net positive.

That makes the pause notable, and the return of inflows equally so. It suggests the buyer base has not disappeared. It was waiting.

The Weekly Trend in Perspective

Looking at the weekly data from SoSoValue over the past several months:

Week of Jan 23, 2026: $3.31 million

Week of Feb 6: $997,650

Week of Feb 27: $927,270

Week of Mar 6: $1.06 million

Week of Mar 20: $405,080

Week of Apr 8: $472,050

The pace has clearly slowed from the heavier accumulation seen in January and February, but flows remain directionally positive.

Is This "Just the Start"?

That depends on what you are measuring against.

If the question is whether HBAR is about to see the kind of launch-week fireworks that pushed nearly $30 million through the door in a single day back in October 2025, probably not. That was first-mover excitement for a brand new product.

If the question is whether the structural bid is still intact, the data says yes. The ETF continues to absorb supply even through a period where HBAR has traded in the $0.08 to $0.10 range, well off its highs. Institutions are not chasing price. They are accumulating at levels they find attractive, and the consistent absence of outflow days suggests conviction rather than speculation.

Hedera's positioning helps. The network's Governing Council includes names like Google, IBM, Boeing, and McLaren. It has processed over $10 billion in real-world asset settlements. And HBAR's classification as a commodity by both the SEC and CFTC removes a layer of regulatory uncertainty that still hangs over many altcoins.

None of that guarantees bigger inflows tomorrow. But it does explain why the money that has come in is not leaving.

Sources:

SoSoValue HBAR Spot ETF Dashboard — Primary source for all daily, weekly, and cumulative flow data cited in this article

ETFdb — Cross-reference for HBR ETF listing data, 5-day and longer-term net flow figures

The Canton Foundation announced on April 8 that the network has burned 2,898,443,014 Canton Coins ($CC), worth roughly $417 million at the time of the post. That amounts to about 10% of the circulating supply removed in under two years of meaningful operation.

That is a big number for a network that does not treat burns as a marketing event. On Canton, every token destroyed is a direct byproduct of institutional activity on a live blockchain. No manual triggers, no governance votes, no hype cycles. Just usage.

How Does Canton's Burn Mechanism Actually Work?

Canton Network runs on a burn-and-mint equilibrium (BME) model. The idea is simple: token supply should reflect real demand for the network, not speculation.

Here's how it works in practice.

The Burn Side

Every time a user or institution settles a transaction, synchronizes data, or interacts with an application on the Global Synchronizer (Canton's core privacy-preserving network layer), they pay a usage fee. Those fees are denominated in USD but paid by burning $CC at the current on-chain conversion rate, which Super Validators update every 10 minutes.

The burned tokens are permanently removed from circulation. They do not go to validators. They do not go to a treasury. They are gone.

The Mint Side

New $CC is minted as rewards for participants who contribute real utility to the network: Super Validators, standard validators, and application builders. Rewards are distributed every 10 minutes based on actual contributions like running nodes, driving transaction volume, or building applications.

There is no pre-mine. There are no VC allocations. Every token in circulation has been earned through network activity.

The Equilibrium Target

Canton is designed to burn and issue roughly 2.5 billion $CC per year once it reaches a steady state. When network activity grows faster than rewards, burns outpace mints, and net supply shrinks. When activity dips, more minting occurs to incentivize growth. The result is a self-regulating supply that tightens as adoption scales.

Where Does the Network Stand Today?

As of April 9, live data from Cantonscan shows circulating supply sitting at approximately 38.27 billion $CC, with the token priced around $0.144 to $0.147. Twenty-four-hour burn volume recently exceeded $2.3 million, and the burn-to-mint ratio has been steadily improving toward that equilibrium target.

Circulating supply has shown minimal net growth in recent months despite ongoing validator and builder rewards. That tells you the burns are doing their job.

Why This Burn Is Different

Crypto is full of burn announcements. Most of them are scheduled events or one-off publicity stunts designed to create short-term price pressure. Canton's model is structurally different.

The $417 million in burned tokens was not decided by a DAO vote or triggered by a team wallet. It accumulated automatically as institutions used the network for real financial operations. Names like DTCC, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, and Nasdaq are already active on Canton, processing high volumes of regulated, private transactions. Each one of those transactions triggers a burn.

That distinction matters. A burn mechanism tied to actual settlement activity on a privacy-first institutional blockchain is not the same thing as a project torching tokens from a marketing wallet. One reflects genuine demand. The other reflects a communications strategy.

What Comes Next?

The math here is straightforward. As more real-world assets get tokenized on Canton, more settlements flow through the Global Synchronizer, accelerating the burn rate. Minting stays contribution-based and capped by design. That creates sustained deflationary pressure as long as adoption keeps growing.

Canton is already handling trillions in tokenized assets monthly across private credit, tokenized Treasuries, and institutional settlements. If that volume continues to grow, the gap between burns and mints should widen further, putting more pressure on the circulating supply.

For now, the $417 million milestone is a clean data point. It shows that Canton's tokenomics are functioning as designed, and that institutional blockchain usage can drive real, measurable deflation without anyone needing to push a button.

Sources:

Canton Foundation (@CantonFdn) on X Official announcement of the 2.9 billion $CC burn milestone on April 8, 2026

Cantonscan Live Canton Network explorer with real-time burn data, circulating supply, and transaction metrics

Canton Network Official Site Documentation on the burn-and-mint equilibrium model, reward structure, and network architecture

Canton Dashboard by The Tie Institutional analytics dashboard tracking Canton supply dynamics and network activity

The White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) has released a report finding that banning stablecoin yield would increase bank lending by just $2.1 billion while costing consumers roughly $800 million in lost welfare. The findings directly challenge months of banking industry warnings that stablecoin rewards would trigger a mass exodus of deposits from the traditional financial system.

The report arrives at a critical moment for the CLARITY Act, a proposed U.S. law designed to create a federal regulatory framework for digital assets, and is expected to reshape ongoing negotiations between banking and crypto lobbyists in the Senate.

What Is the CLARITY Act and Why Does the Yield Debate Matter?

The CLARITY Act is a proposed U.S. market structure bill for digital assets. It builds on the GENIUS Act, which was signed into law in July 2025 and already requires stablecoin issuers to hold reserves backing outstanding stablecoins on a one-to-one basis.

Under the GENIUS Act framework, stablecoin issuers cannot pay yields directly on balances. The CLARITY Act debate centres on a different question: whether third-party crypto firms, such as Coinbase, can distribute stablecoin rewards to their customers through affiliate or external arrangements.

Banks have pushed hard for language in the CLARITY Act that would close this channel entirely. Their core argument has been that if stablecoins offer competitive returns, households will move money out of bank accounts and into tokens, shrinking the deposits banks rely on to issue loans.

What Did the White House Report Actually Find?

The CEA built a model using current market conditions to test the banking industry's claims. The results were decisive.

At baseline calibration, eliminating stablecoin yield:

Increases bank lending by $2.1 billion, which equals a 0.02% rise in total loans

Produces a net welfare cost of $800 million, meaning the harm to consumers outweighs the benefit to the banking system

Results in a cost-benefit ratio of 6.6, where every dollar gained in additional lending costs the broader economy $6.60

The report also broke down who would benefit from that additional lending. Large banks would conduct 76% of it, adding around $1.6 billion. Community banks, defined as those with assets below $10 billion, would provide the remaining 24%, equal to roughly $500 million, representing a 0.026% rise in their lending.

These figures are far smaller than the $6.6 trillion in deposit outflows that banking industry voices had projected.

Does the Worst-Case Scenario Change the Picture?

The CEA also stress-tested its model by stacking every pessimistic assumption at once. Even in that extreme scenario, the numbers remain modest by historical financial standards.

The model produced $531 billion in additional aggregate lending, which represents a 4.4% increase in bank loans as of the fourth quarter of 2025. But reaching that figure requires three conditions that do not reflect today's reality:

The stablecoin market grows to roughly six times its current size as a share of bank deposits

All stablecoin reserves are held in unlendable segregated cash rather than short-term Treasuries

The Federal Reserve abandons its current ample-reserves monetary framework

Even under those conditions, community bank lending would rise by only $129 billion, a 6.7% increase. The report noted that the conditions required to produce a positive welfare effect from prohibiting yield are "similarly implausible."

One important technical point from the CEA: stablecoin reserves do not disappear from the banking system. Most reserves recirculate as ordinary bank deposits. Only the portion held in direct bank accounts, estimated at around 12% of reserves, is truly locked out of the credit multiplier that drives lending.

Why This Report Matters for the CLARITY Act's Future

The release adds significant pressure to an already tense legislative standoff. The Senate Banking Committee had kept its markup of the CLARITY Act on hold while banking and crypto industry representatives attempted to reach an agreement on the yield provision.

Senators Thom Tillis, Bill Hagerty, and Cynthia Lummis had reportedly pushed the White House for weeks to release the report to inform those negotiations.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent added further weight to the push for legislation. In an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal, Bessent argued that regulatory uncertainty had already pushed crypto development toward jurisdictions with clearer rules, specifically naming Abu Dhabi and Singapore. The House of Representatives passed its version of the CLARITY Act in July.

How Big Could the Stablecoin Market Become?

Stablecoin transaction volumes reached approximately $28 trillion in 2025. Chainalysis estimates that figure could rise to $719 trillion by 2035, which would require a compound annual growth rate of roughly 133% sustained over a decade.

Some projections go further. Rachael Lucas, a crypto analyst at Australian exchange BTC Markets, told Cointelegraph that a ceiling-case scenario could reach $1.5 quadrillion. She was careful to frame this as a high-end possibility rather than a base case.

Lucas noted that stablecoin volume measures how many times money moves, not how much exists. A single dollar can settle dozens of transactions in a day, which explains why volume figures can exceed the total value of underlying assets by a wide margin.

For context, global remittance flows were estimated at $905 billion in 2024. The World Population Review estimates total global assets across banks, property, and cash at around $662 trillion, below even the base-case projection for stablecoin volumes by 2035.

Conclusion

The White House CEA report gives Congress a quantitative basis for resolving the stablecoin yield dispute. Under current market conditions, the data shows that banning stablecoin rewards would produce minimal gains for bank lending while imposing measurable costs on consumers. 

Producing the large lending effects the banking industry has warned about requires assumptions that do not reflect how the financial system operates today. With the CLARITY Act stalled in the Senate and Treasury Secretary Bessent publicly urging passage, the report is likely to shift the terms of negotiation in a direction more favourable to crypto firms seeking to distribute stablecoin rewards to their users.

Resources 

Report by White House Council of Economic Advisers: Effects of Stablecoin Yield Prohibition on Bank Lending

Op-ed by Scott Bessent: Digital Asset Rules Need Clarity

Report by Reuters:

Report by Crypto In America: White House Report Finds Stablecoin Yield Poses Limited Risk to Banks

Report by Chainalysis: The $100 Trillion Wealth Shift: Stablecoin Utility and the Future of Payments

Report by CoinTelegraph: Chainalysis claims stablecoin volumes could reach $1.5 quadrillion by 2035