Sign-in routes matter more than players realise. Google logins share your profile, wallet logins share an address and its full on-chain history, and every route reveals an IP address and device details.

Below: what each route shares, when casino verification requirements apply, and six crypto casinos ranked on sign-up data and the clarity of their rules.

Data Shared by Each Sign-In Route

The route you pick decides what the casino learns on day one.

Sign-in route

What the casino receives

Note

Email

Your email address and a password

The address often links to your real identity

Google

Name, email and profile details from Google

Convenient, but it shares more than an email form

Telegram

Your Telegram username and display name

Ties the account to your chat identity

Steam or Discord

Profile name and account ID

Links a player profile to a gambling account

Crypto wallet

A public address

Anyone can view that address's full transaction history

Every route

IP address and device information

Collected for security and regulatory reasons

Last verified: September 2026

Wallet addresses can say more than people expect. If one ever received funds from an exchange account in your name, the on-chain trail can connect the two, so a fresh address shares less history than a long-used one.

When Verification Applies

Light sign-up does not exempt an account from checks. Licensed operators must follow AML rules, and crypto casino KYC usually appears at predictable points.

• Withdrawals: reviews often happen before a payout, especially a large one

• Unusual activity: sudden deposit spikes or patterns that look like bonus abuse can trigger checks

• Age confirmation: an operator may ask for proof that a player meets the legal age

• Source of funds: large balances can prompt questions about where money came from

Treat verification as part of play at a licensed site, not an obstacle to plan around. Our guide to crypto casino verification explained walks through each stage from sign-up to withdrawal.

Six Privacy-Minded Crypto Casinos

Positions weigh the data each platform requests at sign-up, the choice of routes it offers, and how plainly its terms explain when further checks may apply.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport offers four sign-up routes: email, Google, Telegram or one of six crypto wallets. Registration skips ID documents, and the terms spell out that verification may follow later. Self-exclusion works by email, and a public on-chain desk shows bets without names. Anjouan licence.

2. BC.Game

BC.Game accepts wallet, Telegram and email sign-ups, so players can choose how much identity to attach at the start. Independent reviews report identity checks on bigger cash-outs, so read its current terms before a significant deposit.

3. Shuffle

Shuffle holds a Curaçao licence through Natural Nine B.V. and supports both email and wallet sign-ups. Reviewers credit it with clear terms, which helps players see when verification may come into play before they commit funds.

4. 1win

1win's wallet authentication creates an account automatically from a connected Trust Wallet, MetaMask or WalletConnect address, so a player can start without an email form. As a Curaçao-based operator, it still applies its own verification rules, which appear in its terms.

5. Rollbit

Rollbit offers wallet and email sign-up routes across its casino, sportsbook and futures desk. Its public buyback dashboard shows strong transparency about the platform's token, though players should still read its account terms for verification rules.

6. Rainbet

Rainbet supports MetaMask and Solana wallets alongside Steam and Discord logins. The social options are convenient, but they link a player profile to the account, so wallet sign-in shares less for anyone who prefers to keep those profiles separate.

Whatever route you choose, good account safety habits, such as two-factor login and a dedicated wallet, protect the data a casino does hold.

Conclusion

Every crypto casino collects some data, and the sign-in route decides how much on day one. Social logins share profile details, wallet logins share an address and its on-chain history, and every route reveals an IP address.

Dexsport ranks first for four sign-up routes, ID-free registration and terms that state plainly when checks may apply, ahead of BC.Game, Shuffle, 1win, Rollbit and Rainbet.

Light sign-up never rules out later verification, so read each platform's terms before a large deposit. Know the rules where you live, fix a deposit limit, and sign up only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters as much as privacy.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Sign-up options, data practices and verification rules change, so check each platform's current terms and privacy policy before you register. Casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The approach suits players who already hold crypto in a wallet they control. It changes how you log in and how you fund play, though not every rule that comes with an account.

Below: the steps behind a Web3 casino login, what it changes, and seven MetaMask casino options compared.

Wallet Login in Four Steps

The process takes a few clicks and follows the same pattern almost everywhere.

1. Connect: choose MetaMask, or a WalletConnect casino route, on the sign-up screen

2. Approve: a pop-up in the wallet requests permission for the site

3. Sign: some platforms ask you to sign a message that proves you control the address

4. Play: the platform creates an account tied to that address, ready for a deposit

Sign-in messages do not move funds. Token approvals and transfers do, so read each wallet prompt before you confirm it, and treat any request to spend tokens with extra care.

What Wallet Login Changes, and What It Leaves in Place

Wallet login cuts some steps, yet every legal obligation stays.

• Passwords disappear: your wallet's keys replace the usual login details

• Email becomes optional: though some bonuses and programmes still require a verified address

• Deposits get simpler: some platforms take payment straight from the connected wallet

• Checks can still apply: licensed operators may still request identity documents, often around withdrawals

• Key loss means account loss: whoever controls the wallet controls the account

The last point matters most. Our comparison of wallet options helps you pick the right self-custody wallet before it touches any casino.

Seven Crypto Casinos You Can Join With MetaMask

Positions weigh how many wallets each platform supports at sign-up, how clearly it explains the process, and how much of the product a wallet account unlocks.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport shows six wallet buttons at sign-up, from MetaMask and Trust Wallet to WalletConnect, among the Dexsport wallet routes.

One wallet account opens a casino of more than 7,500 games, a sportsbook and stablecoin prediction markets. Its terms state that actions from a connected wallet bind the holder. Anjouan licence.

2. BC.Game

BC.Game supports MetaMask through WalletConnect and adds Telegram login, alongside a broad cashier of well over 100 coins. Its large library, sportsbook and community features make it a natural fit for wallet users.

3. 1win

1win added wallet authentication in 2026, so players can register, sign in and deposit with Trust Wallet, MetaMask or WalletConnect. Each new account tied to a wallet appears automatically, and the system supports EVM networks plus TRON through compatible wallets.

4. Shuffle

Shuffle supports MetaMask and WalletConnect, and its casino and sportsbook share one account. Players can wager with its own SHFL token as well as major coins, which suits wallet users who already hold SHFL.

5. Rollbit

Rollbit pairs its casino and sportsbook with a crypto futures desk, all reachable through MetaMask via WalletConnect. Wallet users get access to the full mix of products, which few platforms on this list match.

6. Rainbet

Rainbet offers MetaMask sign-in alongside Solana wallets and social options such as Steam and Discord. The range suits players who move between Ethereum and Solana wallets.

7. MetaWin

MetaWin builds its whole experience around a connected wallet, with MetaMask as the main route in. It suits players who want a fully wallet-based casino, though its game range is narrower than the larger platforms above.

Dexsport users can follow a step-by-step wallet walkthrough from connection to a settled bet.

Last verified: September 2026

Conclusion

Wallet login replaces an email and password with a connected wallet, so you can join a crypto casino in a few clicks. Dexsport leads with six supported wallets and one account across a casino, a sportsbook and prediction markets, ahead of BC.Game, 1win, Shuffle, Rollbit, Rainbet and MetaWin.

The convenience has limits. Some bonuses still need an email, licensed operators may still verify identity, and lost keys mean a lost account.

Read each wallet prompt before you sign it. Confirm what your country allows, cap each session, and join only if you are old enough, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters however you sign in.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Wallet support, sign-up options and platform terms change, so check current details on each platform before you connect. Crypto transactions can be irreversible. Casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The idea sounds simple: play at a casino, hold its token, and share in its success. In practice the models differ widely, and every token comes with the risk of a single platform behind it.

Below: the jobs a casino token can do, the risks to weigh before a purchase, and five Web3 casinos with their own tokens.

Four Jobs a Casino Token Can Do

Casino tokens rarely do just one thing. The typical design combines two or three of these roles.

Role

How it works

What to check

Payment asset

The token works as a deposit and stake currency at the platform

Which networks the cashier accepts

Stake rewards

Holders lock tokens to earn payouts from platform activity

Lock periods and how payouts are funded

Buyback and burn

The operator spends part of its revenue on its own tokens and destroys them

Whether burns appear on a public dashboard or block explorer

Loyalty and promotions

Tokens unlock rewards, contests or lottery entries

Whether rewards depend on a balance or on play

Last verified: September 2026

Revenue-linked models deserve the closest look. When players win more than they lose in a given week, the platform's net revenue from play can turn negative, and a burn funded by revenue may shrink or pause.

Risks to Weigh Before You Buy a Casino Token

Each casino token ties your money to the fortunes of one business.

• Single-platform exposure: if the casino loses players, licences or reputation, the token usually falls with it

• Volatility: small-cap tokens can swing sharply in both directions within days

• Revenue swings: buybacks and stake payouts depend on results the holder cannot control

• Regulatory change: rules on tokens linked to gambling vary widely between countries

• Liquidity: a token that trades on few venues can be hard to sell at a fair price

Every connection to a token contract or reward dApp also leaves token approvals in your wallet, so clear out old permissions with an approval checker from time to time.

Five Web3 Casinos With Their Own Tokens, Ranked

Positions weigh how clearly each token's utility is documented, how widely it trades, and how easily players can check its mechanics independently.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport issues the DESU token on BNB Chain, capped at one billion units. Two firms, CertiK and Pessimistic, reviewed the contract, and the token changes hands on PancakeSwap and, from mid-2026, on the MEXC exchange.

Players can move it in and out of the cashier and collect more through locked stakes, referral rewards, contests, lotteries and a prize wheel. Anjouan licence.

2. Rollbit

Rollbit's RLB, an Ethereum token, lies at the centre of a platform that combines a casino, a sportsbook and crypto futures. Hourly buybacks draw on 10% of casino revenue, 20% of sportsbook revenue and 30% of futures revenue, and Rollbit burns most of each buyback. Its public dashboard tracks the activity in detail.

3. Shuffle

Shuffle launched SHFL in March 2024 as an Ethereum token with a maximum supply of one billion. Part of the platform's casino revenue funds weekly buybacks and burns, and holders who lock their tokens enter a USDC lottery. Shuffle publishes its burn records, which lets holders follow supply changes week by week.

4. BC.Game

BC.Game operates $BC on Solana. Its BC Engine, launched on 8 April 2026, links token stakes to hourly USD-pegged payouts funded by casino, sportsbook and partner revenue. The token contract and burn address are public on Solscan, so supply changes can be checked independently.

5. BetFury

BetFury's BFG token rewards holders who lock it up, with payouts tied to platform activity. It suits players who already use BetFury's casino and want its token rewards to stack on regular play, though it trades on fewer external venues than the tokens above.

Players new to the token can read about DESU on MEXC and what the exchange debut changed for deposits.

Conclusion

Casino tokens combine payment, stake reward, buyback and loyalty roles in different mixes. Dexsport's DESU stands out for its audits, its exchange presence and its use as a cashier asset.

Rollbit's RLB and Shuffle's SHFL lead on revenue-linked burns, BC.Game's $BC on stake payouts, and BetFury's BFG on loyalty rewards.

Every model ties value to a single platform, so volatility and revenue swings come with the territory.

Keep token purchases apart from your play budget. Check local law, cap what you commit, and join only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling comes first.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any token. Token mechanics, listings and platform terms change, so check current details before you act. Crypto assets are volatile and can lose value quickly. Casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Nasdaq’s corporate-action notice, issued September 30, said VerifyMe’s corporate name would become OpenWorld, Inc. and its ticker would change to OPNW, effective Thursday, October 1. Nasdaq Trader recorded the action ahead of the first session under the new symbol.

Although the underlying deal was structured as a reverse merger for accounting purposes, the listed company continuing after the transaction is not necessarily the accounting acquirer. SEC disclosure assigns that role to OpenWorld.

VerifyMe’s Nasdaq Symbol Changes to OPNW on October 1

The completed combination replaced VerifyMe’s name and Nasdaq symbol with OpenWorld and OPNW. Nasdaq identified the effective date as October 1, 2026, establishing when market participants would see the new identifier on the exchange.

The exchange notice describes a corporate-name and ticker change, while the transaction itself was the business combination between VerifyMe and OpenWorld. Independent coverage from Investing.com also reported that OpenWorld began Nasdaq trading as OPNW after the merger was completed.

For shareholders and traders, OPNW is therefore the symbol associated with the post-combination company. The available exchange notice does not provide trading-price information or describe operational changes at OpenWorld, so the disclosed event is principally a change in the identity and market symbol of the Nasdaq-listed issuer.

The timing also separates two related milestones. The Nasdaq notice was dated September 30, one day before the new ticker took effect, while the trading change became effective on October 1. That sequence is consistent with an exchange corporate action being announced before it is reflected in the market’s trading symbol.

OpenWorld Is the Accounting Acquirer

The legal mechanics show why the transaction is more complex than a simple renaming. According to an SEC-filed exhibit, a VerifyMe subsidiary merged with and into OpenWorld, with OpenWorld surviving the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of VerifyMe.

Yet the same disclosure characterizes OpenWorld as the accounting acquirer in a reverse-merger transaction. In other words, VerifyMe remained the public-company parent in the legal structure, while OpenWorld is treated as the acquirer for accounting purposes. The description appears in the SEC filing detailing the combination.

That legal-accounting split is central to the company’s Nasdaq debut. The OPNW trading symbol came through VerifyMe’s existing listed entity and the corporate action on Nasdaq, whereas the transaction disclosure identifies OpenWorld as the accounting acquirer. Neither label overrides the other; they address different aspects of the same transaction.

Reverse-merger accounting can make the acquired or surviving operating business the accounting acquirer even when the legal parent is another company. Here, the SEC disclosure expressly supplies that treatment, rather than leaving it to inference from the name change or the exchange ticker.

The disclosed structure also means that OpenWorld survived the subsidiary merger but became wholly owned by VerifyMe. Following completion, the listed parent adopted the OpenWorld name, producing the company and symbol now seen on Nasdaq.

136.6 Million Shares Registered for OpenWorld Securityholders

VerifyMe registered 136,631,729 shares of common stock for issuance to OpenWorld securityholders under the merger agreement. The figure appears in a September 30 SEC filing and provides the clearest disclosed measure of the share issuance connected to the combination.

The registration figure should not be read as a statement of shares trading in the market at any given time. It refers specifically to shares registered for issuance to OpenWorld securityholders pursuant to the merger agreement, as set out in the SEC exhibit.

It nonetheless illustrates the scale of the equity component behind the newly named Nasdaq issuer. The issuance accompanied the corporate reorganization in which VerifyMe’s public-company platform became OpenWorld, Inc. and its Nasdaq symbol became OPNW.

As of October 1, the market-facing outcome was straightforward: OpenWorld was trading on Nasdaq as OPNW. The filings and exchange notice show that the route to that outcome involved a subsidiary merger, a surviving OpenWorld subsidiary, reverse-merger accounting treatment and a substantial registered share issuance for OpenWorld securityholders.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

In a notice on its website, the company said it stopped accepting new swaps on October 1, 2026. A thread on X further explained the decision, citing increasingly complex regulatory requirements and the cost of continuing to operate globally. Transactions created before the cutoff will continue to be processed, while customer support will remain available through November 30 to help resolve outstanding exchanges.

For users now looking elsewhere, there are a few things to figure out. Will another service support the coins and networks they use? How will its quotes compare? And if a swap gets stuck, will someone be there to help?

The answers will depend partly on what brought them to LetsExchange in the first place. Before looking at where they might go next, it helps to understand what they valued about the service they’re leaving behind.

What Customers Actually Liked About LetsExchange

A look at LetsExchange’s Trustpilot reviews helps explain what kept users coming back. The platform holds a 4.7 rating from 605 reviews, with customers still posting positive feedback just weeks before the shutdown. They weren’t only happy when swaps went smoothly, some highlighted how the team handled things when they didn’t.

A verified review posted on September 7 described LetsExchange as one of the user’s top three swap sites and said customer support was available and quick to resolve issues. 

Image source: TrustPilot

A June reviewer described straightforward trades without questions or delays. Another user that month focused on Monero swaps, praising the rates and the ability to track an exchange started through Trocador.

Image source: TrustPilot

In April, one reviewer said a swap ran into low liquidity but appreciated the prompt refund and communication. Another reported receiving a support response within minutes and having an issue resolved in about ten minutes.

These are individual accounts, rather than a survey of the whole customer base. Still, they help explain what a replacement needs to get right.

Users wanted to exchange their coins without unnecessary steps. They cared about the amount arriving in their wallet. And when something stalled, they wanted someone to explain what was happening.

LetsExchange’s advertised breadth mattered too: its profile described more than 6,000 cryptocurrencies across over 300 networks, alongside fixed-rate swaps and comparisons across providers. Someone using a less common asset could have a very different replacement search from someone swapping Bitcoin for a stablecoin.

Which Swap Services Could Win Over LetsExchange Users?

There is no public migration data yet to show where LetsExchange customers are going. The following ranking is a judgment about fit for that familiar swap experience, with different reasons to consider each option.

1. SwapSpace

SwapSpace tops this shortlist because it lets users compare several ways to complete the same swap. Its website describes an aggregator working with more than 45 exchange providers. Users choose their pair and amount, then compare offers showing fixed or floating rates, the estimated amount received, and the terms of swap.

For a former LetsExchange customer, that gives the search a practical starting point. Before committing funds, they can look at the available offers rather than accept the first quote they find.

The distinction between rate types matters. A user who wants certainty about the receiving amount may prefer a fixed-rate offer; someone comfortable with market movement can also examine floating-rate options. Comparing the actual amount quoted is more useful than assuming one type always offers better value.

Crypto-to-crypto swaps do not require registration, and the exchanged assets are delivered to the receiving wallet. SwapSpace also advertises live chat and email support around the clock.

The qualification is that the selected provider executes the transaction. Its checks and processing conditions still matter, and an estimated completion time is not a promise.

SwapSpace’s current site lists more than 2,500 supported assets across 260 networks. That does not reproduce LetsExchange’s advertised catalogue in full, so users with niche tokens should make sure their exact pair and network are available.

The platform's core concept is to maintain a familiar swap process while enabling users to choose from offers provided by trusted partners who compete to offer the best rates and terms of exchange.

SwapSpace was also recently named a breakthrough performer in the swap exchanges category at the CryptoDaily Company Awards. This crypto exchange aggregator also has an excellent rating on Trustpilot, around 4.5.

2. Exolix

Exolix is another candidate for users who want to keep the steps straightforward.

It describes itself as a cross-chain swap aggregator offering fixed and floating rates without mandatory registration. Its product information also highlights transaction tracking and 24/7 support.

That combination fits several preferences visible in LetsExchange reviews: a clear process, visibility while the exchange is underway, and help if something needs attention. As with any replacement, the actual pair, receiving amount and quote conditions deserve a check.

The platform’s AML/KYC policy adds an important detail: Exolix and its third-party providers may request identification or supporting information, and transactions can be delayed during compliance review.

For a former LetsExchange user, Exolix is worth comparing on the swap they actually need. Registration-free access is convenient, but it should not be read as a guarantee that verification can never occur.

3. Godex

Godex belongs here for users whose priority is getting through an individual exchange with few setup steps.

Its website advertises swaps without account creation, fixed and floating rates, and 24/7 support. The homepage currently lists 960 supported currencies, making the exact coin check especially important for anyone coming from LetsExchange’s larger advertised catalogue.

Godex’s FAQ also spells out a condition attached to fixed-rate exchanges: the rate remains fixed if funds arrive within 30 minutes of creating the transaction. That is useful information to have before initiating a transfer.

The platform’s privacy-focused presentation also needs to be read alongside its AML/KYC policy, which allows identity verification and sets geographical restrictions.

Godex is therefore a candidate for someone whose supported pair is available and who prefers a direct swap process. Users needing a broader selection or wanting to compare several provider offers may start elsewhere.

The Next Swap Will Decide More Than The Shutdown Headline

LetsExchange’s closure gives competitors an opening, but its reviews suggest that winning those users means replacing something they already liked.

Crypto exchange aggregator SwapSpace is the first place to check in this shortlist for comparing offers. Exolix is worth examining for its rate options and tracking, while Godex offers another route for supported pairs.

The real test is the transaction in front of the user: the right coin, the right network, an acceptable receiving amount and clear conditions. That is likely to matter more than which platform makes the loudest claim to be LetsExchange’s replacement.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The arrangement keeps transaction-authorizing keys under each institution’s control while Chainlink orchestrates workflows between the institutions’ ledgers and Swift’s ledger. It forms part of Swift’s effort to coordinate cross-border payments: Swift has said deposits remain on participating banks’ own ledgers, with its ledger coordinating the workflow and final settlement continuing through agreed mechanisms such as real-time gross settlement systems.

Chainlink adds self-signing access to Swift’s blockchain ledger

Chainlink said in its September 28 announcement that financial institutions can connect their internal systems and key-signing infrastructure to Swift’s blockchain ledger through Chainlink.

The setup uses the Chainlink Runtime Environment, or CRE, and its self-signing model, according to a Chainlink recap. CRE orchestrates workflows between an institution’s own ledger and Swift’s ledger, while the institution retains control of the keys authorising transactions.

The disclosures present this as workflow connectivity with institutional signing authority preserved—not deposits moving onto a common Chainlink ledger.

Swift’s tokenized-deposit ledger

Swift’s blockchain ledger is built to coordinate 24/7 cross-border payment workflows involving tokenized deposits issued by banks. Those deposits remain recorded on the ledgers of participating banks, Swift said, preserving the underlying location of the deposit even as payment instructions and workflow coordination are handled through the ledger.

The blockchain ledger is intended to coordinate a cross-border payment process across institutions, not to complete final settlement automatically. Swift says that settlement continues through mechanisms agreed by participating parties, such as real-time gross settlement systems; in practical terms, established settlement arrangements still complete the transfer.

Swift set out that model in its July announcement that its ledger was ready for use. The design matters because it frames tokenized deposits as bank-issued liabilities operating within bank-ledger and settlement arrangements, rather than as a separate asset that displaces them. Swift’s description of the ledger also makes clear that its stated purpose is the coordination of payment workflows.

Seventeen banks prepare live pilots

Swift said the blockchain ledger moved from concept to activation in nine months. At the time of its July 9 release, 17 banks across six continents were preparing to pilot live tokenized-deposit transactions.

The pilot group provides the immediate institutional context for Chainlink’s connection. It does not establish that all 17 banks will use Chainlink’s integration, but it indicates the scale of the initial live-tokenized-deposit testing cohort that Swift had identified.

Swift says its broader network connects more than 11,500 financial institutions and corporates across more than 200 markets. That network footprint is considerably wider than the initial pilot group, although the July announcement describes the 17-bank effort as a preparatory pilot stage rather than a network-wide deployment.

Earlier Swift-Chainlink interoperability tests

The ledger connection follows earlier work between Swift and Chainlink on interoperability. In 2023, the organisations used Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol, or CCIP, alongside Swift messaging standards to demonstrate how traditional financial systems could interact with public and private blockchains.

Those earlier experiments involved more than a dozen financial institutions and market infrastructures, according to a joint Swift and Chainlink report. They were demonstrations of interoperability, whereas the current announcement concerns connecting institutional systems and signing infrastructure to Swift’s blockchain ledger.

The progression from messaging and interoperability tests to a ledger connection highlights the practical issue the new design seeks to address: how banks can coordinate tokenized-deposit workflows while maintaining control of their own ledgers and transaction-authorising keys.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The updated announcement says that all eligible users may use bStocks as collateral, subject to jurisdictional restrictions, after the exchange initially framed the addition around VIP access. That distinction matters because the seven assets can support margin positions, but the expansion does not create a new ability to borrow the tokens themselves.

Seven bStocks enter margin-collateral pool

According to Binance’s September 30 announcement, the additions are PDD Holdings (PDDB), Forward Industries (FWDIB), SharonAI (SHAZB), Wendy’s (WENB), Adobe (ADBEB), Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPEB) and Zoom (ZMB).

All seven are being added to the collateral pool for the exchange’s Cross Margin, Portfolio Margin and Portfolio Margin Pro offerings. In margin trading, collateral is the asset posted to support trading positions; Binance’s notice specifically places these bStocks within its listed margin programmes at the scheduled time.

The announcement identifies the tokens by ticker alongside the underlying companies, rather than presenting them as direct conventional equity listings. The scope of the notice is therefore the treatment of these bStocks inside Binance’s margin infrastructure.

Collateral access, not token borrowing

Alongside adding the bStocks tokens as collateral, Binance said it would make the corresponding trading pairs available for margin trading.

The launch did not support borrowing the newly added tokens. For PDDB, FWDIB, SHAZB, WENB, ADBEB, HPEB and ZMB, the available product set was therefore collateral use plus margin trading for the associated pairs—not token borrowing.

Official Binance bStocks margin-collateral announcement visual. — Source: Binance

Eligibility clarification

In an update to its September 30 notice, Binance clarified that all eligible users can access bStocks collateral—not only users at VIP 3 level and above—while noting that access remains subject to jurisdictional restrictions.

The clarification aligns with an earlier Binance announcement dated September 21, which said bStocks collateral eligibility had been extended to all Cross Margin and Portfolio Margin accounts. That earlier framework set different account conditions rather than a universal identical experience.

Regular users and customers at VIP 1 and VIP 2 are subject to additional suitability and risk-control measures, Binance said. Those measures do not apply to VIP 3-and-above users. Portfolio Margin Pro is included in the seven-token September 30 rollout, while the September 21 eligibility description specifically referred to Cross Margin and Portfolio Margin accounts.

As a result, the updated wording broadens the eligible-user premise behind the seven-token addition, while preserving account-tier controls for lower-tier users and the exchange’s geographic limitations.

Forward Industries confirms FWDIB debut

Forward Industries separately confirmed that FWDIB is part of the same seven-token batch and said spot trading would open at 12:00 UTC on September 30. In its announcement, the company described FWDIB as a tokenized security on BNB Smart Chain.

Forward Industries also said FWDIB is not offered to U.S. persons. That restriction is specific to FWDIB in the company’s statement, while Binance’s broader eligibility update refers to jurisdictional restrictions for bStocks collateral.

The company’s confirmation provides an independent account of one asset in the rollout and ties its spot opening to the same 12:00 UTC schedule as Binance’s margin-collateral expansion.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

NYSE Arca's listing and registration of the shares was certified before trading began, according to a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Bitwise confirmed the launch in a September 29 announcement.

NRR begins trading on NYSE Arca

NRR is now listed on NYSE Arca, the exchange on which the fund's shares began trading. The launch marks Bitwise's entry into a spot NEAR product in the US market, rather than a vehicle tied to derivatives or another form of indirect exposure.

Secondary reporting also said NRR went live on the exchange on September 29 with spot NEAR exposure and planned staking rewards, corroborating the launch details published by Bitwise.

How NEAR staking is intended to reach NRR shareholders

Bitwise intends to stake the fund's NEAR holdings in-house. Rather than making direct reward distributions to shareholders, the firm said staking rewards are intended to accrue through an increase in NRR's net asset value.

The company cited an annualized staking reward rate of approximately 5% as of September 25, 2026. That figure is a stated rate at that date, not a fixed return for fund shareholders.

Official Bitwise NEAR ETF launch graphic displaying ticker NRR. — Source: Bitwise Investments

The fee against the staking proposition

NRR charges a 0.75% management fee. Bitwise describes the fund as a route to direct NEAR exposure that also pursues additional returns through staking, placing the fund's reward mechanism alongside the ongoing cost of ownership.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The planned derivatives rollout would give U.S. customers access to contracts on BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, DOGE, ADA, LINK and HYPE. Bitcoin and Ether perpetuals may offer leverage of up to 10x, while the remaining listed assets would be capped at 3x, according to Robinhood’s announcement.

U.S. crypto perpetual futures

Perpetual futures differ from conventional futures contracts because they have no expiry date. Robinhood said its proposed U.S. product will be available to eligible customers in the coming months, without setting out a more specific launch date.

The differentiated leverage limits put BTC and ETH at the top of the planned range. Leverage can amplify both gains and losses, making the 10x ceiling on the two largest crypto assets materially higher than the 3x limit Robinhood outlined for SOL, XRP, DOGE, ADA, LINK and HYPE.

The Block independently reported that the perpetual-futures launch is planned for the coming months and described it as part of Robinhood’s broader effort to expand its offerings for active U.S. traders. The planned product adds a derivatives route for customers seeking exposure beyond standard spot trading.

Bitstamp routing and trading tools

Robinhood said its U.S. perpetual contracts will be offered through Robinhood Derivatives via Bitstamp. The company is advertising a promotional fee of 0.01% per trade through the end of 2026.

No-expiry contracts are planned, with stop-loss and take-profit tools as well as liquidation-price tracking included in the offering.

The company gave only a coming-months timeframe for the U.S. launch and did not provide a precise date in the announcement.

Official Robinhood graphic showing the announced perpetual-futures and earnings-contract products. — Source: Robinhood Newsroom

Robinhood Agents and AI trading

Robinhood unveiled Robinhood Agents, an in-app feature that lets customers create dedicated agentic accounts, select models from leading AI labs including OpenAI, research markets, develop strategies and place trades, the company said. Robinhood said manual approval for each trade is enabled by default, giving users an initial control point over orders generated through the agentic-account workflow. The Block reported that the agents can research markets, build strategies and trade automatically.

Agentic-account adoption

Robinhood said more than 150,000 customers had opened agentic trading accounts since third-party agent connectivity launched in May 2026. It also reported that agents were using Robinhood’s tools nearly 30 million times per day.

The figures are company-reported and do not independently assess trading activity or investment performance, but they indicate that Robinhood had established a sizeable base of agentic-account users before introducing Robinhood Agents.

The company’s AI research and strategy tools, alongside planned crypto perpetual futures, broaden its expansion aimed at active U.S. traders. Robinhood said the perpetual futures are expected to launch in the coming months for eligible U.S. customers.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

October baseball rewards a different read from the regular season. Short series, aces on full rest, and bullpens used without restraint all shift how games play out and how prices form.

Below: the MLB postseason 2026 calendar, the contenders, the key markets for a playoff game, and how the new ball-strike challenge system fits in.

Four Rounds to the Fall Classic

Each round of the postseason asks for more wins than the last.

Round

Format

Dates

Wild Card Series

First to two wins

29 September to 1 October

Division Series

First to three wins

3 to 10 October

League Championship Series

First to four wins

11 to 20 October

World Series

First to four wins

23 to 31 October

Last verified: September 2026

The World Series opens at the home of the league champion with the stronger regular-season record. If it goes the distance, Game 7 falls on Saturday, 31 October, Halloween night.

Contenders for the 2026 Title

Regular-season records set the bracket, and three clubs stood out.

• Milwaukee Brewers: 103-59, the most wins in baseball and the No. 1 overall seed, with a bye past the Wild Card round

• Los Angeles Dodgers: 100-62, the 2024 and 2025 champions, now in pursuit of a third straight title

• Tampa Bay Rays: 98-64, the No. 1 seed in the American League

• Cleveland Guardians: the No. 2 seed in the American League, also with a bye

Wild Card series opened with familiar rivalries, among them Yankees against Red Sox and Phillies against Braves. Short series make upsets common, so a high seed offers an edge, not a guarantee. Coverage of the playoff race through the summer showed how tight several divisions finished.

Markets for a Playoff Game

Baseball crypto wagers centre on runs, innings and pitchers, and a handful of markets matter most in October.

• Match winner: the moneyline, the team that wins the game, extra innings included

• First five innings: the result after five innings, which isolates the starters before bullpens take over

• Totals: over or under a set number of runs for the full game

• Handicaps: the run line, usually 1.5 runs, which gives the underdog a head start

• Extra innings: whether a game, or a set of games, goes past nine innings

• Shutouts: whether a team, or a set of games, records a shutout

The first five innings market suits October especially well. Teams line up their aces, so the early innings often reflect a true duel on the mound before managers turn to their bullpens.

The Ball-Strike Challenge in October

The 2026 season introduced the Automated Ball-Strike System through a challenge format, and it now operates in the playoffs. Players can challenge a ball or strike call, and the system decides.

Its effect on markets stays subtle. Challenges can extend at-bats and change counts at key moments, and one challenge has already decided a playoff game this postseason. Totals may feel that influence most, since a single overturned call can keep an inning alive.

Baseball on Dexsport

Dexsport sets out eight Dexsport baseball market types in its rulebook: match winner, first five innings, totals, handicaps, home and away wins, the most and least productive match, the number of shutouts and the number of extra-inning games.

Its prediction market board also lists MLB questions in the sports category, settled in stablecoins. The smallest bet is $1, while the maximum shifts from one event tier to the next. Our look at licensed Web3 sportsbooks shows how other platforms approach MLB coverage. Its licence comes from Anjouan, and the rules may change mid-postseason.

Conclusion

This year's MLB postseason stretches from 29 September to a possible Game 7 on 31 October, with the World Series from 23 October. The Brewers enter with the most wins at 103-59, the Dodgers try for a third straight title, and the Rays lead the American League.

Short series reward a close read of the starters, which makes first-five-innings markets especially useful in October, while the ball-strike challenge adds a small new variable to totals.

Check the rotation before each game. Confirm the rules in your country, fix one budget for all of October, and sign up only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters through a long postseason.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Schedules, results and market lists change during the postseason, so check official sources and current details before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

These novelty markets attract real money, sometimes millions of dollars, and behave differently from mainstream questions. Thin trade, loose resolution terms, and attention spikes make their prices swing far more than a sports market's.

Below: five standout examples from 2026, why they behave as they do, and how to read one first.

Five Novelty Markets That Drew Real Money

Each of these markets traded on major platforms during 2026. Prices are dated, since they move with every headline.

1. The Second Coming Before 2027

Polymarket's question on whether Jesus Christ returns before 2027 traded around 4% in early February 2026 and nearer 2% by September. It resolves on "a consensus of credible sources", which makes it more a cultural curiosity than a forecast.

Polymarket novelty went a step further with a side market on whether the main market's odds would pass 5%, and users complained that traders moved prices to win that second bet.

2. Alien Confirmation

One repeat alien disclosure market asks whether the US government will confirm that alien life exists by a set date. In September 2026, the 31 December contract traded near 4%. Disclosure hearings and declassified reports tend to move it briefly before it settles back.

3. A Celebrity Wedding Guest List

The engagement of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce spawned a celebrity wedding market cluster on the date, location, guests and bridesmaids. In June 2026, Polymarket priced actress Blake Lively's attendance at 25% while Kalshi priced it at 18%, a reminder that two crowds can read the same gossip differently.

4. What Happens Before GTA VI

One market asks which of several events happens before Grand Theft Auto VI launches, with options from a new music album to a $1 million Bitcoin. The game's repeated delays turned it into a familiar joke, and the market drew millions of dollars in volume.

5. Social Media Counts

Weekly markets ask how many posts a high-profile figure such as Elon Musk will publish in a set period. They resolve on a count, which makes them more mechanical than most novelty questions.

Traits Behind the Price Swings

Novelty markets share a few traits that explain their unusual price swings.

• Thin trade: small orders can move prices sharply, much like a low-volume token

• Loose resolution terms: phrases such as "a consensus of credible sources" leave room for interpretation

• Long-shot economics: a No share bought at 97 or 98 cents returns a small, near-certain profit, which attracts traders who treat these markets like a low-yield deposit

• Attention cycles: viral posts and news coverage pull in crowds that leave as quickly as they came

The long-shot point surprises newcomers most. Long-shot No positions often hold much of the money in a market on an extremely unlikely event, and they collect a few cents per share at resolution.

Four Checks Before a Novelty Trade

These checks separate a sensible position from an expensive joke.

1. Read the resolution source first. A named, verifiable source beats a vague consensus clause

2. Check the deadline. Long-dated novelty markets tie up funds for months for small returns

3. Compare platforms. Prices for the same question often differ, as when you compare odds across platforms on a sports match

4. Watch for side markets. A second market that rewards price moves in the first can distort both

Novelty Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport files novelty questions in the same section as game releases, AI rankings and hardware launches. The platform says it will list almost any question, as long as the answer can be pinned down and the topic fits its rules.

Correct shares pay out in stablecoins, and the rules box on each question names its source and cut-off, details that matter more for novelty questions than almost anywhere else among Dexsport prediction markets.

For the basics of Dexsport's prediction markets, see the product walkthrough. The platform's licence comes from Anjouan.

Conclusion

Novelty prediction markets cover questions from celebrity weddings and alien confirmation to religious prophecy and social media counts. Some drew millions of dollars in 2026, even with prices in the low single digits.

Thin trade, loose resolution terms and attention cycles make them swing sharply, and much of their money rests on the No side for a near-certain small return.

Read the resolution source and deadline before you trade any novelty question. Check your local rules, keep novelty stakes small, and sign up only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters even when a market feels like a joke.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here takes a view on any belief, person or claim. Prices quoted reflect the dates shown and change constantly, so check current figures before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

That broad demand backdrop arrives as SOL traded at $120.29 at 03:21 UTC on October 2. The immediate chart question is narrow but consequential: whether buyers can protect the clustered support near $118 and overcome resistance stretching from $122.65 to $124.95. A convincing move through that band would put the editor’s $125 scenario back into focus; failure would leave SOL within its recent technical range.

The daily trend evidence remains largely constructive, although momentum signals are not entirely aligned. That disagreement makes confirmation at the nearby levels more important than the ETF headline alone.

SOL’s daily trend remains bullish, but MACD signals caution

SOL’s daily RSI (14) stood at 64.0 on October 2, a bullish reading that the published analysis described as strong while remaining below the conventional 70 overbought threshold. In practical terms, the measure indicates positive momentum without the source characterising the market as overextended on that measure. Coinotag also placed price above all eight moving averages it tracked and noted that the 50-day average was above the 200-day average, a bullish longer-term alignment.

The underlying moving-average structure is reinforced by a separate September 30 reading. It put the 12-day EMA at $116.30, the 26-day EMA at $110.25, the 50-day EMA at $102.51 and the 200-day EMA at $94.91, with SOL reported above each one. Those levels show that the $118 area is not simply a horizontal chart marker: it sits close to the reported 12-day EMA and is the first point at which the short-term trend structure faces a meaningful test. Block2Learn identified the same broader setup as price holding above the 12-, 26-, 50- and 200-day EMAs.

Momentum readings are less uniform. A separate October 2 daily assessment from DappRadar put RSI (14) at 61.74 and classified it as neutral, while listing MACD (12,26) at 5.44 with a bearish, or sell, signal. That conflicts with the bullish moving-average picture and with the September 29 reading cited by Block2Learn, which said MACD was above its signal line.

Because the MACD assessments come from different publications and observation times, they should not be treated as a single, unified reading. The practical message is that trend positioning favours buyers, but momentum has not unambiguously confirmed a break above the nearby ceiling: a sustained advance through resistance would strengthen the bullish trend signals, while repeated rejection would lend more weight to the bearish MACD interpretation.

SOL support at $118 and the $122.65-$124.95 breakout barrier

At the reported $120.29 spot price, SOL was trading only a little above its nearest support and below its first resistance. The levels form a compressed decision area, with roughly $118 functioning as the line buyers need to defend and the low-to-mid $120s acting as the zone that must be cleared before $125 can be assessed as more than an intraday test.

LevelRolePublished basis$118.01Nearest supportCoinotag’s nearest daily support; a close below it weakens the bullish setup.$118.08Nearby support23.6% Fibonacci retracement and nearby 12-day EMA support zone.$113.18Next supportSecond daily support in Coinotag’s table.$102.51Medium-term supportPublished 50-day EMA.$122.65Nearest resistanceCoinotag’s first daily resistance.$122.94-$124.95Key resistance zoneRepeated-test ceiling identified by Block2Learn.$127.38Next resistanceSecond daily resistance in Coinotag’s table.$141.52Higher resistanceThird daily resistance in Coinotag’s table.

The support case begins with the tight $118.01-$118.08 cluster. Coinotag said a daily close below $118.01 would weaken the bullish setup, while Block2Learn located a 23.6% Fibonacci retracement and nearby EMA-12 support at $118.08. Holding that area would preserve the short-term structure and keep the first upside challenge at $122.65 in view. The next published downside level is $113.18, followed by the $102.51 50-day EMA. Coinotag and Block2Learn provide the cited level sets.

On the upside, $122.65 is the first obstacle, but the more demanding barrier runs from $122.94 to $124.95. The latter range was identified as a ceiling after repeated recent tests and would need to be converted into support for a confirmed breakout. The $125 figure in the headline sits immediately beyond that published zone; it is an editorial scenario target, not an independently sourced resistance level.

Therefore, an upward move needs more than a brief push to $125. SOL would first need to clear $122.65, move through the $122.94-$124.95 band and demonstrate that the area can hold on a pullback. If that occurs, the next supplied resistance is $127.38. Conversely, rejection within the band followed by a close under the $118 area would weaken the near-term bullish thesis and shift attention to $113.18.

Can record ETF inflows put $125 back in play for SOL?

Yes, $125 is conditionally back in play for this Solana price prediction, but the ETF flow record does not by itself resolve the chart’s immediate resistance problem. Approximately $188 million of weekly net inflows and participation across all seven U.S. spot Solana ETFs offer a stronger demand backdrop than a flow total driven by only one or two products. BSOL nevertheless accounted for about 68% of the weekly total, underlining its central contribution to the record week.

There is also a separate development catalyst in the background. Solana developers were testing the Alpenglow upgrade, intended to reduce payment finality from roughly 12.8 seconds to about 150 milliseconds, CoinDesk reported. That is a development item rather than a price trigger, but it adds to the stream of Solana-specific news arriving alongside the ETF inflows.

For the $125 scenario to gain technical credibility, SOL needs to defend $118.01-$118.08 and break through $122.65 before overcoming the $122.94-$124.95 ceiling. A hold above that resistance zone would align the price action with the bullish daily RSI and moving-average configuration. It would also reduce the significance of the current MACD disagreement, though not eliminate the need to watch momentum after a breakout.

The opposing outcome is equally well defined. A daily close below $118.01 would weaken the bullish setup identified by Coinotag and expose the next published support at $113.18. Persistent bearish MACD signals or another failure at the $122.94-$124.95 range would similarly argue that ETF demand has not yet translated into a completed technical breakout.

Record ETF inflows have improved the fundamental demand context around SOL, particularly because every listed U.S. spot product reportedly participated. But with spot at $120.29, price remains between its nearest support and resistance. The market has a clear route to test $125; it still needs to execute it.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

2026 had a bit of everything: new companies finding their place in the market, familiar projects changing direction, products getting better, crypto markets moving through their usual ups and downs, and plenty of people quietly doing good work somewhere in the middle of all that.

We recently highlighted the companies that stood out to us in 2026, but behind most of those stories, and countless others, are individuals whose decisions, ideas, and contributions helped drive the year forward. 

That’s where this list comes in.

How the 2026 Honorees Were Picked

Putting the list together meant looking at very different kinds of work across Web3, so there was never going to be one single formula for every pick.

What stayed consistent was the focus on recent efforts, wider track record, and whether there was a clear case for that person to be there in the first place.

For some, that came down to what they built. For others, it was growth, technical development, public presence, market analysis, or the role they played in moving a particular conversation forward.

This year’s awards are split across the following categories:

• Entrepreneurship

• Engineering & Development

• Product & Design

• Marketing & Growth

• Education & Public Speaking

• Thought Leadership

• Trading & Market Intelligence

Each category includes three honorees: 

• CryptoDaily’s Choice, 

• Runner-up Pick, 

• and Honorable Mention.

CryptoDaily’s Choice goes to the person who, from our editorial team’s perspective, stood out most strongly in that category this year. Runner-up Pick recognizes another name with a particularly strong case, while Honorable Mention gives the third spot to someone whose work also deserved attention.

That gives us 21 honorees in total across seven parts of Web3.

Winners

Entrepreneurship 

Crypto Daily’s Choice – Michael Jerlis

Michael Jerlis is the founder & CEO of EMCD, a crypto mining and fintech platform he built from zero reputation over nine years into two global award-winning businesses. EMCD Mining Pool commands more than 4% of global Bitcoin hashrate, serves customers across 120 countries, and has mined 30,000+ BTC to date. Coinhold Wallet has $70M+ total value on platform, with 500,000+ wallets created to date. Jerlis solves every business problem the same way –  systematically, not reactively. That approach is why EMCD has outlasted every halving and every crypto winter since 2017.

Runner-up Pick – Sam Green

Sam Green is the founder and CEO of Cambrian, a financial intelligence platform built around blockchain data, AI, and institutional use cases. Before Cambrian, he co-founded Semiotic Labs, worked on The Graph ecosystem, and helped develop the DEX aggregator Odos. In 2026, Cambrian raised a $6 million seed round co-led by Polychain and Franklin Templeton, bringing total funding to $11.9 million.The company is now building data infrastructure aimed at institutions and AI agents operating onchain, giving Green a particularly timely entrepreneurship story with a business built around where onchain data is actually being used next.

Honorable Mention – Varun Choudhary

Varun Choudhary is the founder of ORO, an AI-based interface designed to make onchain finance easier to use through natural-language commands. Instead of moving manually between DeFi protocols, users can ask ORO to trade, lend, borrow, or deposit while keeping control of their assets. In 2026, ORO raised another $3 million, taking total funding to $4 million, while reporting around 400,000 users across more than 80 languages. The platform now works across Ethereum, Solana, and ZIGChain, making Choudhary an interesting newer founder to watch as AI becomes more closely tied to DeFi products.

Engineering & Development 

CryptoDaily’s Choice – Zac Williamson

Privacy has been one of Ethereum’s harder technical problems for years, and Zac Williamson has spent much of his career working on exactly that. A former particle physicist and co-inventor of PLONK, he went on to co-found Aztec, the privacy-focused Ethereum L2. In 2026, Aztec rolled out its Alpha V5 upgrade, cutting private proving times by more than half, bringing block times down to six seconds, and making fully private transfers possible for under $0.05. Williamson has also remained a visible voice around zero-knowledge proofs, private execution, and how privacy can actually work at Ethereum scale.

Runner-up Pick – Jure Granić-Skender

Jure Granić-Skender is a founding engineer at MetaDAO, where he works on protocol development and market-based governance on Solana. His background spans SaaS, Web3 tooling, wallet infrastructure, and AMM design, but his 2026 work is what makes him especially relevant here. At Solana Summit Serbia, he spoke about using AI agents to help build secure smart contracts handling millions in TVL, while his earlier projects include the Sign In With Solana Rust library. He is still a relatively low-profile name globally, but technically, there is a clear body of work behind the inclusion.

Honorable Mention – Anam Ansari

Prediction markets have given Anam Ansari plenty to work on in 2026. As Blockchain Engineering Lead at Trepa, she has been building the Solana smart contracts behind the platform, with a particular focus on fixed-point math, testing, and making sure payouts behave properly in production. She also broke down Trepa’s architecture for developers at a Superteam Malaysia session this April and appeared on the Ship Safely podcast earlier in the year to discuss the engineering behind prediction markets. Before Trepa, her work already stretched across Solana infrastructure, mobile integrations, SDKs, and developer tooling.

Product & Design 

CryptoDaily’s Choice – Maria Carola 

Maria Carola has spent close to a decade in crypto, first on the marketing side and later running StealthEX. What makes her fit this category is how closely her role has stayed tied to the product itself: keeping instant swaps simple, expanding the asset list, adding fiat access, integrations, and user-facing tools without turning the platform into something overly complicated. StealthEX has continued to push that straightforward, non-custodial model in 2026, and Carola’s work sits right in the middle of that balance between product growth and keeping the experience easy to use. 

Runner-up Pick — Simon Rico

A lot of Simon Rico’s work has been about making DeFi trading feel less like a technical exercise. Until June 2026, he was Principal Designer at 0x, leading design work around Matcha and helping shape the way traders move through swaps, token discovery, and more advanced trading flows. His design changes have previously translated into measurable improvements in mobile conversion, and in 2026 he wrapped up more than three years at Matcha before moving on to build his own design product, Logram. That mix of hands-on Web3 product work and a very clear design point of view makes him a strong runner-up here.

Honorable Mention — Mike McCabe

Privacy products are notoriously difficult to make usable, and that is exactly the problem Mike McCabe has been working on at 0xbow. As Product Lead for Privacy Pools, his role sits between technical privacy infrastructure and the question of how people actually use it onchain. He has been unusually visible in 2026, appearing at EthCC, ETHPrague, ETHis, and ETHSofia to talk about privacy, compliance, and product adoption. That repeated presence matters here: McCabe is not just attached to a product title, he has been part of the wider 2026 conversation around how privacy tools move from protocol ideas into something users can realistically interact with.

Marketing & Growth 

CryptoDaily’s Choice – Mike Ermolaev

Mike Ermolaev spent 2026 pushing Outset PR beyond the usual agency model. The soft launch of Outset Media Index was a major step, bringing traffic, engagement, SEO, collaboration data, and other signals into the way crypto media is evaluated. But the bigger story is how consistently he has built around that same instinct: question the standard approach, test what actually works, and turn those insights into something practical. Under his leadership, Outset PR has grown into a more data-led, strategic partner for crypto brands, while Mike himself has remained a strong voice on market events, media performance, and AI-driven discovery.

Runner-up Pick – Silvia Mogas

Silvia Mogas has been difficult to miss on the Web3 marketing circuit in 2026. Her year has included appearances at ETH Bucharest, Crypto Expo Europe, ETHGlobal NYC, AIM Congress and other industry events, usually around go-to-market strategy, adoption, positioning, and bringing Web3 products to wider audiences. Outside the conference circuit, she works with digital asset companies as a fractional CMO and strategist, covering everything from exchanges and tokenized assets to institutional products. It is that mix of hands-on marketing work and repeated public presence that makes her a natural fit here.

Honorable Mention – Jack Haldorsson

For Jack Haldorsson, 2026 has largely been about the less glamorous side of Web3 growth: what happens after the launch hype fades. Through Lunar Strategy, he has been writing and speaking repeatedly about go-to-market planning, creator campaigns, founder-led marketing, community building, and keeping growth going between major announcements. The agency says it worked with more than 110 clients in 2025, while Haldorsson has continued running webinars, publishing practical growth guides, and appearing on marketing podcasts this year. His profile is still relatively compact, but the body of 2026 work is easy to trace.

Education & Public Speaking 

CryptoDaily’s Choice – Rick Baker

Education has been the core of Rick Baker’s work for years, and 2026 gave him several reasons to stay visible. He spoke at Web3 Expo Dubai on accessible Web3 learning and how institutions can prepare for wider adoption, while continuing to build Learn Crypto Global and the Tokenised Asset Academy around blockchain, DeFi, and tokenisation education. In September, he also co-hosted a live DeFi masterclass aimed at making the subject easier to understand for people outside the usual crypto crowd. His work this year has stayed firmly focused on turning technical topics into something people can actually follow.

Runner-up Pick – Diana Rodriguez

Diana Rodriguez has spent much of 2026 doing the practical side of crypto education: workshops, beginner sessions, and live speaking rather than simply posting explainers online. She ran a crypto-for-beginners workshop with Gemini in January, hosted and spoke at a sold-out International Women’s Day event in Sydney in March, and joined a panel at New Zealand CryptoCon in June. Her focus is deliberately beginner-friendly, covering wallet setup, self-custody, scams, and the basics people usually have to figure out the hard way. That steady run of public education work makes her a strong fit here. 

Honorable Mention – Ashley Wright

Ashley Wright has spent much of 2026 doing what she does best: making crypto easier to understand for people who are not already deep in the industry. She taught practical digital-asset classes early in the year, spoke at Cayman Crypto Week, and later joined Blockchain Futurist Conference in Toronto, where she also led a workshop around crypto, AI, and the future of money. Through The Wright Success and Crypto Strategy Academy, she has taught hundreds of students and built a broader profile around digital-asset education, financial literacy, and bringing more people into Web3 without drowning them in jargon.

Thought Leadership 

CryptoDaily’s Choice – Lisa Loud

Lisa Loud has had a fairly visible 2026 across both Web3 and fintech conversations. At Consensus Hong Kong, she moderated a session on open source, decentralization, and edge AI, and later appeared in interviews around tokenized assets, financial inclusion, and leadership in emerging tech. She has also continued publishing her own takes on trust, careers, and leadership in Web3 through Forbes. Her background includes roles at Apple, PayPal, ShapeShift, and Secret Network, which gives her a wider frame than someone speaking from just one corner of crypto.

Runner-up Pick – Yuanjie Zhang

A lot of Yuanjie Zhang’s public work this year has centered on where blockchain actually fits into the next phase of finance. In 2026, he spoke repeatedly about RWAs, stablecoins, institutional adoption, cross-border payments, and the role blockchain could play in AI-driven economies. He appeared at Conflux’s Digital Finance & Ecosystem Conference in Hong Kong, joined institutional-focused events with HashKey, and gave several interviews on Asia’s role in bringing real-world assets onchain. That steady run of public commentary makes him a strong thought-leadership pick rather than just another protocol executive.

Honorable Mention – Alex Tapscott

Alex Tapscott has spent years writing and speaking about where blockchain fits into the wider economy, and he stayed active in that role through 2026. He appeared at Web3 Toronto alongside founders, policy people, and institutional finance leaders, while continuing to speak about tokenization, digital assets, and the shift from blockchain as “infrastructure” to something that can open up new markets and financial products. His background as an author and longtime commentator gives him a different angle from the other two picks: less company-led, more focused on explaining where the industry may be heading and why.

Trading & Market Intelligence 

CryptoDaily’s Choice – Markus Thielen

Markus Thielen has been one of the more consistently visible crypto market researchers in 2026. Through 10x Research, he has spent the year tracking Bitcoin through onchain data, ETF flows, options positioning, liquidity, and broader macro signals rather than leaning on price charts alone. His market calls have been picked up repeatedly by CoinDesk, Benzinga, and other outlets, and CryptoQuant currently ranks his Bitcoin calls among the stronger analyst records it tracks. That steady mix of research, media appearances, and actual market positioning makes him a natural first pick here.

Runner-up Pick – Vetle Lunde

Few people spend quite as much time digging through the less glamorous parts of the Bitcoin market as Vetle Lunde. At K33 Research, his work in 2026 has covered everything from low trading activity and leverage to institutional flows, market bottoms, and the way Bitcoin has behaved against other risk assets. He has appeared in interviews and podcasts throughout the year while K33 continued publishing its regular market reports and 2026 research. Lunde’s strength is less about headline-grabbing predictions and more about reading market structure closely enough to explain what is actually changing underneath the price.

Honorable Mention – James Check

James Check has kept up a very steady stream of Bitcoin market work through 2026. His Checkonchain reports have followed capitulation, ETF flows, holder behavior, realized price, market-cycle shifts, and the return of spot demand, while his analysis has also appeared in podcasts, live sessions, and market coverage outside his own platform. In September, Cointelegraph picked up his argument that Bitcoin may already have established its cycle bottom near $58,000. What keeps his work interesting is the way he uses onchain behavior to explain why the market is moving, not just where the price might go next.

One Last Word on the 2026 CryptoDaily™ Individual Awards

The best part of an annual awards list usually comes later.

Not on the day it is published, but months down the line, when you look back and see which names kept going, which took a completely different turn, and which suddenly made a lot more sense than they did at the time.

So consider this one bookmarked.

2026 is not finished writing its story just yet, and neither are the people on this list. We’ll see what the next twelve months do with both.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

About 23.38 million SUI, equivalent to 0.2% of total supply and about 0.6% of market capitalisation, are scheduled to unlock, Tokenomics.com shows. The amount is measurable but modest relative to the token’s stated market value; whether the market absorbs it cleanly matters because spot is sitting around immediate support and just below a dense resistance range.

The near-term SUI price prediction therefore hinges less on an assumed Basecamp rally than on a narrower test: whether daily bullish momentum can carry price through $1.1858 and then the $1.20–$1.21 area without the unlock prompting a break below support.

SUI’s daily momentum is bullish, but RSI is nearing overbought territory

The daily technical picture was constructive heading into the unlock. The 14-day RSI stood at 67.3 on October 1, a bullish reading that remained below the conventional 70 overbought threshold, according to the technical data cited by Crypto Daily. That leaves room for further upside in principle, but it also means momentum is approaching a zone where a pullback can become more likely if buyers fail to force a breakout.

MACD (12,26) was positive at 0.004 and carried a Buy classification on the daily timeframe. Price was also reported above both its seven-day moving average, approximately $1.17, and its 30-day moving average, approximately $1.16. Together, those readings describe positive short-term momentum rather than a completed breakout.

That distinction is important at the current price. A bullish RSI, positive MACD and position above the two moving averages can support attempts higher, but none removes the nearby overhead supply indicated by resistance levels. With RSI already at 67.3, a sustained advance would need to be confirmed by price holding above the levels immediately in front of it, rather than merely touching them.

The technical evidence also has a timing limitation. The cited indicator readings were observed on October 1, while the spot reference of $1.17 is from October 2. They provide a recent daily framework, not a guarantee of how the market will react once newly unlocked tokens arrive.

SUI support at $1.1717 and resistance from $1.1858 to $1.21 frame the immediate move

The closest reference point is $1.1717, identified as daily support through confluence involving a high-volume node, Fibonacci, pivot and MACD-cross measures. Given that SUI was quoted near $1.17, the market is effectively testing that area rather than trading comfortably above it. A stable hold around this level would preserve the near-term bullish setup; a decisive loss would shift attention lower.

LevelRoleWhat it signals$1.1717Nearest daily supportHolding it would keep the immediate recovery structure intact.$1.1630-day moving-average supportA loss of $1.1717 would bring this next support into focus.$1.11–$1.12Daily S1 and 0.618 Fibonacci zoneThis is the deeper supplied support area if weakness extends.$1.1858Nearest daily resistanceThe first barrier to clear for an upside continuation attempt.$1.20–$1.21Retest and recent swing-high resistanceClearing this cluster would strengthen the short-term bullish case.$1.27Higher continuation resistanceA sustained close above it would strengthen the breakout case.

On the upside, $1.1858 is the first meaningful obstacle. It is followed quickly by $1.20, described as near-term retest resistance, and $1.21, the cited recent swing high. The proximity of those barriers means a move above $1.1858 alone would be constructive, but it would not settle the breakout question. Price would still need to clear the $1.20–$1.21 band.

If that band is overcome and held, the next supplied resistance is $1.27. That level should not be treated as an automatic destination: the underlying analysis says a sustained close above $1.27 would itself strengthen a breakout case. It is therefore better understood as a later confirmation threshold than as a forecast.

On the downside, a break through $1.1717 would put the approximate $1.16 30-day moving average in view. Failure there would expose the $1.11–$1.12 zone, identified as daily S1 and a 0.618 Fibonacci retracement area in CoinStats AI Market Analysis. The levels show why the unlock deserves attention even though its stated size is small: the price is close enough to support that a modest change in order flow could matter.

SUI price prediction: Basecamp catalysts must absorb the October 3 unlock before a $1.20-$1.21 break can strengthen

The conditional near-term outlook is mildly bullish, but only while the support structure holds. Daily RSI at 67.3, a positive 0.004 MACD reading and price above the reported seven- and 30-day averages all support the case for another push higher. The most immediate test is $1.1858; a successful break followed by acceptance above $1.20 and $1.21 would make the bullish technical case more credible.

Basecamp supplies a defined calendar focus. The Sui Foundation has scheduled its 2026 event for October 7–8 at Marina Bay Sands in Singapore alongside TOKEN2049, according to the official Basecamp page. But a scheduled event is not, by itself, evidence that the token will rise. In this setup, its relevance is that it arrives soon after the unlock, when the market will have had an opportunity to show whether it can retain the $1.1717 area.

There are also continuing supply-and-access considerations beyond the one-day unlock. Sui says its stablecoin-yield-funded buyback programme is purchasing approximately 23,800 SUI daily, as reported on its buyback page. Separately, the 21Shares Sui Staking ETF provides spot exposure and generally intends to stake 70% to 90% of holdings. That offers an institutional access route, while the stated staking approach also carries liquidity considerations.

For the title’s $1.20–$1.21 question, the answer is conditional rather than directional certainty. The range is supported in the research as near-term resistance, not as a guaranteed target. Holding $1.1717 through the October 3 unlock and then clearing $1.1858 would strengthen the chance of a test; a convincing move through $1.20 and $1.21 would be the more meaningful confirmation. Conversely, unlock-related weakness that drives SUI below $1.1717 and then $1.16 would weaken the bullish reading and place the $1.11–$1.12 support zone back in focus.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

$BTC price reaches top of parallel channel

Source: TradingView

The $BTC price was boosted to the upside on Thursday and into Friday after breaking clear of a descending triangle pattern within a parallel channel. Once volume got behind the breakout it was a relatively short amount of time before the price ascended to the top of the channel, where it was rejected - at least for the time being.

As can be seen on Friday morning, the $BTC price is once again heading back to the top of the channel. Will it get there just to receive another rejection, or is pressure starting to build on the top trendline of the channel ready for a potential breakout?

One important factor that the bulls need to take into consideration is that this window of opportunity for a breakout may not be open for long, given that the price is starting to enter an overbought condition.

Remain in channel or breakout?

Source: TradingView

The daily time frame illustrates the clear smaller parallel channel with the descending triangle within it. It may be that the $BTC price does meander some more within the channel. This would probably be a healthier option rather than the direct breakout, given that momentum indicators could be allowed to reset again, potentially leading to a much stronger breakout further down the line.

That said, what will be will be, and if there is a breakout today or over the weekend, the $BTC price could surge into the low to mid $90K region before the next, possibly longer period of consolidation, or even the first decent correction in this so far unconfirmed bull market.

Which resistance level can the bulls reach?

Source: TradingView

The weekly time frame shows the absolutely to be expected surge out of the bull flag. If the full measured move out of the bull flag is to take place, this rally still has a good way to run. 

In fact, if one looks at the price action in this macro-level chart there really isn’t anything untoward throughout the whole of the bear market, the latter stages of the last bull market, and this current bull market. Price has followed each of the patterns and has exited them in the expected direction every time.

Momentum is still with this current rally, although it remains to be seen how far the $BTC price can rise before gravity takes over. The Stochastic RSI at the bottom of the chart has the blue fast line on top of the red slow line once more. This is perhaps signalling one last effort to the upside. While $89,250 is very doable, $94,280 is a much greater level of resistance, with the bull market confirmation level of $97,880 beyond that. Let us see which of these levels this current rally can arrive at.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The game has already slipped twice, which taught traders to treat Rockstar's calendar with caution. Markets now cover far more than the release date, from new trailers to PC dates and even novelty questions about what happens first.

Below: the road to launch, the four kinds of countdown market, and how to tell real information from noise.

The Road to Launch

The countdown has run for nearly three years, and each milestone reset expectations.

Date

Milestone

5 December 2023

First trailer released

2025

Release moved from autumn 2025 to 26 May 2026

2025

Release moved again, to 19 November 2026

25 June 2026

Console pre-orders open

27 August 2026

Extended gameplay reveal

12 November 2026

Console pre-load begins

19 November 2026

Console launch

Last verified: September 2026

Each delay hit markets hard, because questions tied to the earlier dates resolved No. This history explains why delay markets still attract money, even with the launch weeks away.

Four Kinds of Countdown Market

Entertainment platforms frame the run-in to launch through several types of question.

1. Delay Markets

Will the launch slip again? With pre-loads scheduled and pre-orders taken, another delay looks unlikely, so each GTA 6 delay market usually trades at a low price. Even so, one credible report of trouble can reprice it within minutes.

2. Trailer Markets

Will another trailer appear before a set date? Each GTA 6 trailer market rests on promotional beats that publishers schedule carefully, and these questions resolve on official channels, so a surprise drop on Rockstar's own accounts settles them at once.

3. PC Markets

Will Rockstar announce a PC date, publish system requirements or confirm a PC price by a deadline? They stay open after the console date, since Rockstar has kept the PC edition under wraps so far.

4. Novelty Markets

Some platforms run playful questions about what happens before the game comes out, from music releases to crypto price milestones. They trade more on attention than on information and can swing sharply on thin volume.

Signal Versus Noise

The countdown produces a flood of rumours, and only some of them deserve weight.

• Official channels decide most outcomes: Rockstar Newswire posts and Take-Two filings usually serve as resolution sources

• Leaks rarely count: store listings, ratings entries and insider posts move prices but seldom settle a market alone

• Earnings calls matter: Take-Two executives sometimes address the schedule, and markets react within seconds

• Volume swings with attention: trailer weeks bring crowds and volatility, quiet weeks leave prices stale

Long countdown positions tie up funds for weeks, so stablecoin deposits keep the value of an open position steady while you wait.

Dexsport's Three PC Questions

Dexsport keeps a set of Dexsport prediction markets on the PC side of the countdown under its Other tab: when the PC edition appears, what hardware it needs and what it costs. Those questions outlast the console launch, which suits traders who expect the PC news to follow later.

On this crypto prediction platform, positions settle in stablecoins once the result becomes official, and on-chain settlement leaves a visible record of the payout. Each market page lists its deadline and resolution source. Anjouan licenses the operator, and the terms can change.

Conclusion

Console players get GTA 6 on 19 November 2026, after pre-loads start a week earlier. After two delays, countdown markets now cover delays, trailers, PC dates and novelty questions about what happens first.

Official Rockstar and Take-Two channels decide nearly every outcome, while leaks and listings mostly move prices and rarely decide a market.

Treat attention spikes as noise unless an official source confirms them, and expect quiet spells between announcements. Confirm what your country allows, keep countdown stakes modest, and join only if you are old enough, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling covers launch-week markets too.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Release plans and market terms can change, so check official Rockstar sources and current market pages before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Evernorth shareholders approved the Armada business combination on September 30. The company expects the transaction to close on October 7, with Nasdaq trading under the XRPN ticker expected to begin on October 8.

Evernorth expects to hold about 473 million XRP at closing and said the transaction and related private placements generated roughly $300 million in gross cash proceeds. That is a specific market-development backdrop for XRP, but the chart still shows a recent failed breakout rather than an already-confirmed recovery.

XRP’s daily indicators show a bullish trend with fading momentum

The daily indicator mix remains constructive overall, though it is not uniformly bullish. XRP’s 14-day RSI was 56.4 on October 2, according to Blockspot’s XRP/USD data. That places the reading above the neutral midpoint and below overbought territory, leaving room for an advance without indicating an overheated market on this measure.

Trend gauges also lean positive. The 12-day EMA stood at $1.49, above the 26-day EMA at $1.45. Longer-term simple moving averages were reported at $1.38 for the 50-day SMA and $1.28 for the 200-day SMA, a configuration the source described as a golden cross. Price was also reported above the 20-day EMA at $1.4564 as of September 30, supporting the case that the short-term trend had not yet broken down.

The momentum signal is less encouraging. Daily MACD was 0.0410 against a 0.0460 signal line, meaning the MACD remained below its signal line. In practical terms, that reading does not confirm that upside momentum has re-accelerated, even while the moving-average structure remains positive.

The recent price action helps explain the split. XRP briefly traded above $1.5495 before rejecting that area; the reported session low was $1.4656, and reversal volume was materially higher than in the prior session, according to CoinDCX. A high-volume reversal at a recent high makes the $1.5495 zone more consequential: a renewed test would need to overcome selling that was already visible there.

For the bullish technical case to improve, RSI would need to remain constructively above its midpoint while price regains the near-term resistance sequence. Conversely, the bearish MACD position and the failed-breakout history mean that a move toward $1.55 should be treated as a conditional retest scenario, not an established continuation.

XRP support at $1.48–$1.4564 and resistance through $1.5495

At $1.49 spot, XRP sits only marginally above its first published daily-pivot support at $1.48 and below the nearest overhead barrier at $1.51. That leaves little room for ambiguity in the short-term setup: holding the immediate support band would keep a rebound attempt viable, while a sustained move through the first resistance would be the first evidence that buyers are regaining control.

LevelRolePublished basis$1.48SupportDaily pivot S1$1.46SupportDaily pivot S2 and recent reaction zone$1.4564Support20-day EMA and immediate trend support$1.37SupportMoving-average cluster and rising-structure lower boundary$1.51ResistanceDaily pivot R1$1.54ResistanceDaily pivot R3 and nearby rejection area$1.5495ResistanceRecent swing high and failed-breakout level$1.65ResistanceLate-September high and reported triangle upper boundary

The closest downside references are $1.48, $1.46 and the 20-day EMA at $1.4564. These levels form a narrow support area rather than a single line. If XRP can hold this region, the price remains positioned to revisit $1.51. A loss of the $1.46–$1.4564 area would weaken the immediate trend setup and shift attention to $1.37, where CoinEdition identified a cluster involving the 50-day and 200-day exponential moving averages and the lower boundary of a rising structure.

On the upside, $1.51 is the first test, followed by $1.54 and then $1.5495. The proximity of the latter two levels matters more than their small numerical difference suggests, because $1.5495 is the point where the previous upside attempt failed. A move toward the editor’s $1.55 scenario would therefore require XRP to clear this resistance sequence, rather than merely touch $1.51. The next published resistance beyond that zone is $1.65, but it should not be treated as an implied destination.

Can Evernorth approval help XRP retest $1.55?

Evernorth’s approval supplies a timely catalyst as the market assesses XRP near its short-term pivot range. The planned XRPN debut and the company’s expected XRP holdings give the event direct relevance to the asset. Separately, XRP spot ETF products logged an 11th straight week of inflows, with about $75.59 million added in the latest reported week, according to CoinEdition.

At $1.49, XRP remains below the $1.51 and $1.54 levels it needs to reclaim before confronting the more important $1.5495 rejection point. The developments described above can support market attention and demand narratives, but they do not by themselves negate the failed breakout on the daily chart. If XRP sustains a break through that area, the case for a retest of $1.55 would strengthen; $1.55 is an editorial scenario target immediately above the published failed-breakout level.

The supportive case is clearest if XRP holds $1.48 and the $1.46–$1.4564 support band while daily RSI stays above neutral and the short-term moving-average alignment remains intact. That would preserve the constructive trend backdrop while allowing price to make another attempt at the resistance cluster. The upcoming expected October 7 close and October 8 XRPN trading start also leave the market with identifiable event dates rather than a vague catalyst.

The setup weakens if price loses the immediate support zone and fails to regain it, particularly with MACD still below its signal line. In that outcome, the nearby bullish case would be impaired and $1.37 becomes the next published structural reference. For now, Evernorth approval improves the news backdrop around XRP, but a credible move toward $1.55 depends on a technical reclaim of the $1.51, $1.54 and $1.5495 barriers.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

ADA was trading at $0.2487 on October 2, after rising roughly 2%–3% following the announcement, although quoted market readings can differ by venue and timestamp. That leaves the token just below its nearest daily resistance at $0.2523 and facing a more substantial band above it.

The news provides a fresh narrative, particularly as Petrobras pursues SAF, renewable diesel and biorefining investments in its 2026–2030 plan. But the announced work is R&D, not an agreement for ADA payments or token purchases, meaning the chart still needs to supply the confirmation for a sustained move.

ADA daily indicators

ADA’s daily trend readings are constructive rather than uniformly bullish. The daily 14-period RSI was 59.5 on October 2, placing it in the bullish-but-not-overbought range in data published by Blockspot. This indicates positive momentum without an RSI reading that, by itself, signals an overheated market.

The moving-average configuration supports that view. The 12-day EMA stood at $0.2434, above the 26-day EMA at $0.2328. ADA was also above the 50-day and 200-day simple moving averages, recorded at $0.2162 and $0.2134 respectively; Blockspot characterised the latter relationship as a golden cross. With spot at $0.2487, the short-term EMA is below price, while the two longer simple averages sit materially lower.

Momentum confirmation is less clear in the MACD data. Blockspot’s October 2 daily reading put MACD at 0.010604 against a 0.0109 signal line, a bearish crossover configuration by a narrow margin. A separate October 1 reading from CoinAlertNews showed the opposite: MACD at 0.011723 versus a 0.010920 signal, alongside an RSI of 59.68.

The difference highlights the sensitivity of short-term momentum measures to publication time and price movement. The more consistent takeaway is that ADA retains a positive daily moving-average structure and an RSI below overbought territory, but has not produced a single, unambiguous MACD signal. A breakout attempt into overhead resistance would carry more technical weight if momentum readings align rather than remain split.

There is also a derivatives and holder-positioning caveat. Coin Edition reported that futures open interest fell 9% week over week to about $1.81 billion, while large holders sold around 90 million ADA since September 20. Those reported flows do not negate the spot-market response to the Petrobras news, but they complicate the case that the announcement alone has created broad, durable buying pressure.

ADA support and resistance

At $0.2487, ADA is positioned between nearby support and the first resistance test. The daily pivot R1 at $0.2523 is the immediate ceiling. Above that, $0.2564 is identified as 0.786 Fibonacci resistance and a published breakout trigger, followed by the $0.2580–$0.2655 overhead supply zone.

LevelRolePublished basis$0.2523Nearest resistanceDaily pivot R1$0.2564Resistance / breakout trigger0.786 Fibonacci level$0.2580–$0.2655Overhead resistance zonePublished resistance band$0.2886Higher resistanceMay swing high$0.2420Nearest supportDaily pivot S1$0.2380–$0.2410Support zoneBreakout-retest area$0.2316Lower supportDaily pivot S3$0.2134Deeper support referencePublished Fibonacci support

A move through $0.2523 would be the first requirement for a stronger upside sequence, rather than confirmation that ADA has already cleared the market’s resistance. Holding above $0.2564 would put attention on the $0.2580–$0.2655 range. CoinAlertNews identifies a sustained close above $0.2655 as an event that would strengthen the bullish setup.

Only after that resistance stack has been overcome does $0.2886 come into focus as the next supplied major ceiling. It is a published May swing-high resistance, not a level established by the Petrobras announcement. The title’s $0.29 figure is therefore broadly adjacent to the cited $0.2886 resistance, but it should be treated as a scenario target rather than an automatic extension of the news-driven gain.

On the downside, $0.2420 is the closest daily pivot support. The adjacent $0.2380–$0.2410 breakout-retest zone is especially important because it sits just beneath it and forms the next nearby area where buyers could attempt to stabilise price. A failure to hold that cluster would weaken the immediate breakout structure and expose $0.2316. The deeper $0.2134 Fibonacci support is a lower-risk reference cited by Coin Edition, not a near-term base case.

Can Petrobras news support $0.29?

The Petrobras development gives Cardano a credible new enterprise-traceability research catalyst. Its relevance is reinforced by Petrobras’ stated plan to invest in SAF, renewable diesel and biorefining through 2030, as detailed by Petrobras. That strategic context may help keep attention on the applications beyond the initial announcement.

Yet the available facts do not establish a direct source of ADA demand. The Foundation describes two R&D applications, not a commercial arrangement requiring Petrobras to buy, hold or use ADA for payments. The distinction matters when assessing whether the initial rise can turn into a move through successive technical barriers.

For the $0.29 scenario to become technically more credible, ADA would first need to clear $0.2523, then hold through $0.2564 and the $0.2580–$0.2655 resistance zone. A sustained close above $0.2655 would strengthen the positive daily trend structure already reflected in the RSI near 59.5 and the bullish EMA alignment. From there, $0.2886 is the supplied higher resistance that most closely corresponds with a push toward $0.29.

The opposing scenario begins with rejection below the nearest ceilings and a loss of $0.2420. A break beneath the $0.2380–$0.2410 support area would materially weaken the immediate bullish case, particularly if falling open interest and reported large-holder sales persist. With MACD readings mixed across the supplied sources, ADA has supportive trend conditions but incomplete momentum confirmation. Petrobras-related R&D news has revived the path toward $0.29; the market still has to validate it by converting the $0.2523–$0.2655 resistance stack into support.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

There is fresh infrastructure context behind the renewed interest. Stellar recently integrated with BVNK’s multi-chain stablecoin payments platform, opening access to cross-border payments, merchant payouts and treasury disbursements, according to the Stellar Development Foundation.

The chart setup remains more demanding than the daily gain alone suggests. XLM is above a key longer-term average and momentum readings lean positive, but a declining volume figure and several nearby resistance points leave a move toward $0.25 conditional.

XLM momentum improves, but volume does not confirm the rebound

The broad technical picture has improved. A recent FXEmpire analysis put XLM’s two-week RSI near 54, a reading it characterised as improving momentum without an overbought condition. That assessment also noted price recovery above major moving averages. An RSI near 54 does not establish an extended breakout, but it supports the view that the recent recovery has not yet reached an obvious momentum extreme.

A separate reading from Clearank showed RSI at 66 on October 1 and placed the 50-day moving average at $0.1888. As the RSI timeframe and methodology were not specified in that report, it should not be treated as directly comparable with the two-week measure. Still, at the October 2 spot price, XLM remained above the reported 50-day average, keeping the medium-term technical backdrop constructive.

Participation is the counterweight. CoinGecko reported roughly $254.2 million in 24-hour XLM volume, down 27.5% day over day, while the token was gaining on price. That divergence does not negate the rebound, but it means buyers have yet to show stronger reported trading activity as XLM approaches overhead barriers.

For the short-term swing context, this produces a mixed but tilted setup: price and momentum measures favour bulls, while volume leaves the durability of the advance unconfirmed. A push through resistance on firmer participation would provide more persuasive confirmation than a move that simply revisits the same intraday ceiling.

XLM support at $0.2142 and the resistance path through $0.2366

With XLM near $0.2196, the closest level beneath the market is $0.2142, identified as primary pivot support in the latest daily OHLC analysis. Holding that area would preserve the immediate recovery structure. A break below it would shift attention first to $0.2071, the seven-day range low, and then to the reported 50-day moving average at $0.1888 if short-term support failed.

Upside is constrained by a compact group of levels. The first pivot resistance sits at $0.2275, just below the $0.2293 24-hour high. Beyond that, $0.2366 marks the top of XLM’s seven-day range. CoinGecko places the full seven-day band between $0.2071 and $0.2366, illustrating how much of the recent range remains overhead from the current spot price.

LevelRoleWhy it matters $0.2142Nearest supportPrimary daily pivot support. $0.2071Lower supportSeven-day range low and recent swing-low area. $0.1888Deeper supportReported 50-day moving average. $0.2275First resistancePrimary daily pivot resistance. $0.2293Near-term resistanceCurrent 24-hour high and rejection area. $0.2366Higher resistanceSeven-day range high and recent swing-high area.

The bullish path therefore requires more than holding above $0.2142. Buyers would need to clear $0.2275 and $0.2293, then overcome $0.2366 to demonstrate that the seven-day range is being left behind rather than merely retested. Conversely, loss of $0.2142 would weaken the immediate case and expose the $0.2071 area. The supplied levels do not establish $0.25 as a technical resistance point; it is the scenario target posed in this forecast.

Can Stellar return to $0.25? The XLM price forecast

A return to $0.25 is plausible as a conditional upside scenario, not a confirmed destination. XLM’s position above the reported $0.1888 50-day average, together with the two-week RSI near 54 and the separate RSI reading of 66, gives the token a more constructive technical footing than a purely range-bound chart. Stellar’s BVNK integration adds timely payments-infrastructure news to that backdrop, though the announcement itself does not prove a causal link to the latest price move.

The case would strengthen if XLM can hold $0.2142 while breaking the $0.2275-$0.2293 resistance zone and subsequently clearing $0.2366. Stronger participation would matter: the latest reported 24-hour volume fell 27.5% even as price rose, making volume confirmation a relevant test for any attempt to extend the rebound beyond the recent seven-day high.

Fundamentally, Stellar has continued to point to network activity tied to tokenised assets and stablecoins. The foundation said the network had more than $3 billion in real-world assets by June 2026 and more than $256 million in USDC market capitalisation in the first quarter. Those figures, reported by the Stellar Development Foundation, provide context for the payments and settlement narrative but do not remove the immediate chart obstacles.

For now, the forecast is cautiously bullish rather than decisively so. A sustained advance through the supplied resistance sequence would make the $0.25 question materially more credible. Rejection below $0.2293 or a loss of $0.2142 would weaken the setup, with $0.2071 becoming the more immediate level to watch. Crypto markets remain volatile, and these scenarios are market analysis rather than investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The timing coincides with a new application-layer development. DogeOS opened its public testnet on September 30, offering an EVM-compatible environment for Dogecoin applications, including trading, lending, stablecoins, games and consumer apps. For now, however, the launch is a testnet event rather than a mainnet rollout, so DOGE's near-term direction remains concentrated around a tight set of daily chart levels.

DOGE daily indicators remain constructive but not decisively bullish

The daily setup has a constructive foundation. DOGE was reported above both its 200-day exponential moving average at $0.0932 and its 20-day EMA at $0.0921 on October 1, with the Supertrend remaining in buy mode. At the October 2 spot price, that leaves the token above the two closest trend references below the market.

The two EMAs also form a narrow support cluster. That is useful for bulls because it gives the current price structure a relatively clear line of defence, but it does not by itself establish a breakout. DOGE still sits below $0.10, and the gap between spot and that resistance is small enough that a routine daily move could decide whether the constructive structure extends or fades.

Momentum evidence is less forceful than the moving-average picture. Daily RSI was 56 on September 30, classified as neutral, while Blockspot's composite reading based on RSI, MACD and moving-average signals was also neutral. Its Fear & Greed reading stood at 47/100. Those readings do not point to an established momentum surge, even as price holds over important averages.

This creates a mixed but not contradictory signal: trend measures are supportive, while the broader short-term composite remains neutral. The 50-day EMA at $0.0871 is the next lower moving-average reference identified in the technical setup, but it becomes relevant only if DOGE first loses the nearer 200-day and 20-day EMA area.

The DogeOS news supplies a fresh narrative for traders to monitor, rather than a confirmed change to Dogecoin's operating economics. The public testnet uses test DOGE, and no mainnet launch date has been announced. As a result, the chart’s response around $0.10 may offer a cleaner near-term measure of market conviction than the announcement alone.

DOGE faces $0.10 resistance with $0.0932 and $0.0921 as immediate supports

At $0.095973, DOGE is trading between an unusually close support band and its principal overhead barrier. The first task for buyers is $0.1000, described as both immediate psychological resistance and a prior failed breakout level. A daily close above it would be the technical condition that opens the next cited upside test at $0.1055.

LevelRoleTechnical basis $0.1000ResistancePsychological barrier and prior failed breakout level $0.1055ResistanceRecent high; next upside test after a daily close above $0.10 $0.1180Higher resistancePrior May high and higher resistance zone $0.0932Support200-day EMA and reported breakout-hold level $0.0921Support20-day EMA $0.0871Lower support50-day EMA if nearer supports fail $0.0800Lower supportArea near the mid-September low

The immediate bullish path is therefore specific: DOGE would need to clear and close above $0.10, putting $0.1055 into focus. A move through that recent high would leave $0.1180, the cited prior May high, as the higher resistance zone. These are conditional tests, not projected destinations.

On the downside, $0.0932 and $0.0921 deserve more attention than the lower levels because they sit closest to the current price. Holding that pair would preserve DOGE's position above the 200-day and 20-day averages. Losing both would weaken the recent breakout-hold structure and bring $0.0871 into view; $0.0800 is the further listed support area near the mid-September low.

Recent coverage similarly characterised $0.092-$0.093 as nearby support and approximately $0.105 as the next upside test after a breakout. The narrowness of the $0.0921-$0.10 range means the coming sessions could produce a clear technical signal without requiring a large percentage move.

Recent DOGE daily chart showing price near $0.096, the 20-day, 50-day and 200-day EMA levels, and Supertrend signals. — Source: CoinEdition / TradingView

DogeOS launch makes $0.10 a conditional make-or-break test for DOGE

The DOGE price prediction for the near term is conditional rather than directional: the technical case is constructive enough to support another challenge of $0.10, but not yet decisive enough to treat a breakout as established. Price is above the $0.0932 and $0.0921 daily EMA supports, Supertrend is in buy mode, and the DogeOS testnet provides a timely development for the Dogecoin ecosystem.

A sustained daily move above $0.10 would strengthen that case and shift attention to $0.1055, the next supplied resistance. It would also show that the DogeOS headline coincided with buying strong enough to overcome the prior failed-breakout area. Neutral RSI at 56 and the neutral composite reading mean that confirmation at resistance matters more than assuming momentum will carry price through it.

The counter-case is equally clear. A rejection below $0.10 followed by a loss of $0.0932 and $0.0921 would undermine the positive trend signals and turn focus toward $0.0871. In that outcome, the testnet launch would not have translated into a durable near-term technical catalyst.

There is also an execution gap between DogeOS's ambitions and what is currently live. The initial design relies on selected operators, protected hardware and a Security Council, while Dogecoin miners do not yet verify application proofs directly, according to CoinDesk. With no announced mainnet date and test DOGE used on the public testnet, the launch is an early ecosystem milestone rather than a completed adoption event.

That leaves $0.10 as the make-or-break level for the week. Holding the EMA cluster keeps a breakout attempt viable; a confirmed move through $0.10 would validate the constructive daily setup. Failure at that barrier, especially alongside a break below $0.0921, would weaken the launch-driven bullish case.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The rally was tied to reports that an identity platform built on Hedera had reached IBM Cloud, adding force to the network’s enterprise-adoption narrative. WalletInvestor reported on that development on September 29.

Daily spot was $0.1024 on October 2, per Blockspot. That leaves HBAR at a technically sensitive point: short-term momentum readings remain constructive, but the price is sitting at the nearest identified support after a news-driven reversal.

Daily indicators retain short-term bullish momentum despite the reversal

The daily RSI (14) stood at 59.4 on October 2. Blockspot classed the reading as bullish, while noting that it remained below the conventional 70 overbought threshold. In practical terms, the indicator does not show the kind of extreme daily reading that would by itself signal an overheated market, even after the late-September surge.

Momentum also remains positive on the supplied MACD reading. The daily MACD (12/26/9) was 0.0074, above its 0.0064 signal line, a bullish alignment in the source data. The short-term exponential moving averages point in the same direction: the 12-day EMA was $0.0987, above the 26-day EMA at $0.0913.

Those measures matter because HBAR is now trading above both of those cited short-term EMA readings despite giving back a substantial portion of the rally. They support the case that the pullback has not yet erased all near-term upside momentum. They do not, however, settle the broader trend question.

The longer moving-average structure remains weaker. Blockspot placed the 50-day SMA at $0.0814 and the 200-day SMA at $0.0818, describing their relationship as a death cross. That bearish longer-term configuration sits uneasily alongside the bullish RSI, MACD and EMA signals, making the daily setup mixed rather than a clean continuation signal.

The reversal also followed without a further Hedera announcement, according to CryptoTicker, which said the move appeared more connected to positioning and news momentum than to a fresh protocol update. As a result, a hold at support would carry more weight than the indicators alone: it would show that buyers can absorb the post-headline selling.

HBAR support at $0.1024 and $0.1007 faces resistance at $0.1048

At $0.1024, HBAR is directly on the nearest support and daily pivot or cluster level identified by Coinotag. This is the first level the market needs to respect after the reversal. The next nearby buffer is the $0.1010-$0.1007 zone, identified following the rally pullback; $0.1007 is also listed as daily S1 in the supplied data.

LevelRoleWhy it matters$0.1024Nearest supportDaily pivot and cluster level; a close below it weakens the bullish setup.$0.1010-$0.1007Secondary support zoneRecent post-rally support area and daily S1 at $0.1007.$0.0958Lower supportDaily S3 pivot and the strongest support in the cited pivot set.$0.1048Nearest resistanceClustered pivot, Fibonacci, moving-average and volume-profile resistance.$0.1094First higher resistanceDaily resistance identified after the IBM-related rally pullback.$0.1107Higher resistanceDaily R3 and strongest resistance in the cited pivot set.$0.1152Next resistanceHigher technical level-clustering resistance.

On the upside, $0.1048 is the first obstacle because it is the closest marked resistance to current spot. The level is based on a confluence of pivot, Fibonacci, moving-average and volume-profile clustering in Coinotag’s analysis. A sustained move above it would improve the market’s ability to test $0.1094, the initial resistance noted by Crypto Daily when HBAR was reported near $0.1064 on October 1.

Above that, $0.1107 is the next cited barrier, followed by $0.1152. Those are not forecasts or assured destinations; they are the supplied levels that would need to be cleared for the rebound to extend beyond the immediate post-selloff range.

The downside path is more immediate. Coinotag specifically said that a daily close below $0.1024 would weaken the bullish setup. If that pivot fails, the $0.1010-$0.1007 area becomes the more important test. Losing that zone would leave $0.0958, the daily S3 pivot and strongest support in the cited pivot set, as the next supplied support level.

HBAR price prediction: holding the post-IBM rally support is the first requirement

The near-term HBAR price prediction is conditional rather than decisive. The daily RSI at 59.4, MACD above its signal line, and the bullish 12/26 EMA alignment leave room for a recovery attempt. But the long-term SMA relationship remains bearish, while the original rally was quickly reversed without another Hedera announcement.

For the recovery case to remain credible, HBAR needs first to hold $0.1024 on a daily basis. More importantly, buyers would need to preserve the $0.1010-$0.1007 support zone if the nearest pivot comes under pressure. Defending that band would keep the short-term momentum signals relevant and prevent the pullback from developing into a deeper technical breakdown.

A move back through $0.1048 would be the first indication that buyers are regaining control after the selloff. Reclaiming that resistance would then put attention on $0.1094 and $0.1107. The $0.1152 level is the next supplied resistance beyond those barriers, but reaching it would require HBAR to overcome each nearer level rather than simply revisit the September 28 move.

Conversely, a daily close below $0.1024 would weaken the bullish thesis, as the cited technical analysis indicates. A failure to hold $0.1010-$0.1007 would further undermine the argument that the IBM Cloud-linked rally has established a durable floor, shifting attention to $0.0958 instead.

For now, the title question has a straightforward answer: $0.1024 is HBAR’s immediate level to hold, with $0.1010-$0.1007 the more consequential support area beneath it. The IBM Cloud-linked news supplied the catalyst for the late-September jump, but spot’s position at $0.1024 means the next directional signal is likely to come from whether that support survives and whether price can reclaim $0.1048.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs announced the launch of more than 400 cryptocurrency ATMs across the United States. The machines allow customers to purchase Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT and USDC with cash at a stated flat 5% fee. Customers can also pre-register online before visiting an ATM.

Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs, a new nationwide low-fee Bitcoin ATM operator, launched today with an initial rollout of more than 400 Bitcoin ATMs across the United States, a footprint that places it amongst the largest Bitcoin ATM operators in the country on its first day. It also launched with a name that does most of the marketing department's job for it. The brand charges a flat 5% Bitcoin ATM fee to buy Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT or USDC with cash, displays the fee and exchange rate on screen before the customer confirms, and, as of today, lets first-time customers register online in about two minutes so they can skip onboarding at the machine entirely.

400+ Bitcoin ATM locations on day one

Most Bitcoin ATM operators in the U.S. run a few dozen machines. Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs opens with more than 400 Bitcoin ATM locations in the convenience stores, gas stations and shopping centers people already visit, with machines in Florida, California, Arizona and Texas among other states, as the first phase of a larger rollout.

"Four hundred machines is not a pilot. It's a network," said Quincy Mathis, Operations Manager at Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs. "We wanted to be one of the biggest Bitcoin ATM operators in the country on the day we opened, because a low fee only matters if there's a machine near you. This is phase one."

Buy Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT and USDC with cash: coins, limits and one fee

Every Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATM sells Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Tether (USDT) and USD Coin (USDC) for cash, all at the same 5% fee, all sent directly to the customer's own wallet. No bank account or credit card is needed. The machines are non-custodial: the company never holds customer funds.

Bitcoin ATM daily limits are set by verification tier:

• Tier 1, phone number only: up to $2,000 per day
• Tier 2, government ID and Tax ID: up to $50,000 per day

Bitcoin ATM fees compared: what $1,000 buys

The typical Bitcoin ATM in the United States charges roughly 12% to 15% to buy, and some of the largest national brands charge 20% or more. Here is what that looks like when a customer walks up with $1,000 in cash:

Illustrative, based on posted percentage fees only and before exchange rate. Many operators add an exchange-rate markup on top of the posted fee; Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs shows both the fee and the rate on screen before a transaction is confirmed. Industry figures reflect publicly reported U.S. Bitcoin ATM fee ranges. See how the Bitcoin ATM fees compare.

At a 20% machine, one dollar in every five never becomes crypto. At Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs, it's one in twenty. The name is not subtle; neither is a 20% fee.

"We wanted a rate people can look at on the receipt and feel good about, not one they have to make peace with," said Quincy Mathis. "Five percent, shown up front, with the exchange rate right next to it. That's the whole pitch."

Stablecoin ATMs are becoming the way people send money overseas

A growing share of customers are using the machines as USDT and USDC ATMs, buying dollar pegged stable coins to send money to family and friends overseas and to pay suppliers and contractors abroad. A customer inserts cash, the stable coins arrive in the recipient's wallet within minutes, and the recipient holds dollars they can keep or cash out locally. No wire counter, no multi-day wait, and no bank account needed to send.

That makes the fee gap matter more, not less. Someone sending $1,000 home once a month pays about $600 a year in fees at a 5% machine, $1,440 to $1,800 at a typical machine, and $2,400 at a 20% machine. The difference is real money to the people who can least afford to lose it, which is why low fees matter most to remittance customers.

"The people using stable coins to support family abroad are exactly the people who shouldn't be paying 20% for the privilege," said Quincy Mathis.

How to use a Bitcoin ATM: four steps, under two minutes, now with online pre-registration

New with today's launch is online Bitcoin ATM pre-registration. First-time customers can pre-register online before they ever visit a machine, so the first visit is as fast as the tenth. At any of the 400+ machines, they simply enter their phone number.

1. Register online, once. About two minutes on a phone.
2. Walk up and enter your phone number. The machine recognizes you. No paperwork at the kiosk.
3. Pick a coin, scan your wallet, insert cash. Scan your wallet's QR code and feed in the bills.
4. Check the screen and confirm. The fee and exchange rate are displayed before you press anything. Crypto lands in your wallet within minutes.

Customers who would rather register at the machine still can. It just takes a little longer, and the company would like to gently point out that it no longer has to. A full walkthrough of how a Bitcoin ATM works is on the company's website.

Compliance, briefly

Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs is a FinCEN-registered money services business, and every machine operates in compliance with federal and state regulations. Customer data is encrypted, and transactions are non-custodial and irreversible. No government agency, bank, utility or tech-support line will ever ask anyone to pay them at a Bitcoin ATM; if someone does, it is a scam. Common questions are answered in the company's Bitcoin ATM FAQ.

Find a low-fee Bitcoin ATM near you

Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs are live now at 400+ locations across the United States, with further phases of the rollout to follow. Customers can find a Bitcoin ATM near them and pre-register at lowestfeebitcoinatms.com. New customers can use code LOWEST at the machine for 20% off the transaction fee, which brings the fee on that $1,000 transaction down to $40.

About Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs

Lowest Fee Bitcoin ATMs is a nationwide low-fee Bitcoin ATM operator whose initial network of more than 400 machines ranks among the largest in the United States. Customers can buy Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT and USDC with cash for a flat 5% fee, with the fee and exchange rate displayed on screen before every transaction. The company is a FinCEN-registered money services business. Users can learn more at lowestfeebitcoinatms.com.

ContactMarketing DirectorBrian S. SmithLowest Fee Bitcoin ATMssupport@lowestfeebitcoinatms.com

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Twelve nations take part: the Six Nations teams against the four southern giants plus Japan and Fiji. Three rounds took place in July, and the last three come to Europe across November.

Below: how Nations Championship 2026 works, the November calendar, what Finals Weekend Twickenham decides, and the markets for a Test.

A New Format for the Autumn

The Nations Championship turns the old July and November windows into a single competition, played every two years outside World Cup and Lions years.

• Northern group: England, France, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales

• Southern group: South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Argentina, plus invited sides Japan and Fiji

• Structure: each team plays all six sides from the opposite group, three away in July and three at home in November

• Points: the standard World Rugby system, with four points for a win, two for a draw and bonus points for four tries or a narrow defeat

• Relegation: not in 2026 or 2027, though promotion and relegation with the World Rugby Nations Cup may follow later

Every November result now moves a table, which changes how teams approach Tests that once counted only for rankings and pride.

The November Calendar

The final pool rounds fall across three weekends, followed by Finals Weekend.

Weekend

Round

Example fixture

6 to 8 November

Round 4

England v Australia, Twickenham, Sunday 8 November

13 to 14 November

Round 5

England v Japan, Twickenham, Saturday 14 November

20 to 21 November

Round 6

England v New Zealand, Twickenham, Saturday 21 November

27 to 29 November

Finals Weekend

Six Tests at Twickenham, with pairings set by the tables

Last verified: September 2026

Southern teams travel to European venues for all three pool rounds, so home advantage lies firmly with the northern side in November.

Finals Weekend, Explained

Finals Weekend packs six Tests into three days at Twickenham, played as double-headers.

Each match pairs teams by their final position in their group. The team that tops the northern table meets the team that tops the southern table for the title, while the other places meet in turn, second against second and so on. Every side therefore plays a fourth November Test with something on the line.

This structure adds a new kind of market to the rugby calendar: questions on who reaches the title decider, settled only once round six ends.

Four Markets for a Rugby Test

Rugby markets stay compact compared with football, built around the result and the scoreline.

• Match winner: the straightforward result, usually priced as a two-way market with the draw handled separately

• Draw: a standalone price on a level score, rare in Test rugby and priced long as a result

• Handicap: rugby handicap markets give the underdog a points start, often large when a tier-one nation faces Japan or Fiji

• Total points: rugby total points markets ask for more or fewer points than a set line, where November weather can matter

Rain and wind in a European November tend to limit ball-in-hand play and favour the boot, which can pull points totals down. Compare lines across books before a big Test, since compare odds exercises often show wide gaps on handicaps.

Rugby on Dexsport

Dexsport lists four Dexsport rugby market types in its sportsbook rules: outright match winner, draw, handicaps and total points. Those cover the core questions for every November Test.

Stakes can be as small as $1, with maximums set competition by competition. Rugby coverage stays modest across crypto sportsbooks, and rankings of market depth show how widely coverage varies by sport. 

Anjouan licenses the operator, and terms can change, so check the current rules before a Test weekend.

Conclusion

The 2026 autumn internationals form the second half of rugby's first Nations Championship. Twelve teams complete their pool matches across 6 to 21 November, and Finals Weekend at Twickenham on 27 to 29 November decides the title.

England face Australia, Japan and New Zealand at home, and every result now feeds a table. Finals Weekend matches teams by final group position, and the two group leaders meet for the championship.

Handicaps and total points often suit these Tests, especially with November weather in play. Check local law, set a budget for the month, and bet only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters over a busy November.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Fixtures, formats and market lists can change, so check official sources and current details before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

CoinMarketCap’s October 1 market analysis said XLM had risen about 3.16% over 24 hours to roughly $0.227 amid broader altcoin rotation. Its technical snapshot placed spot at $0.2228 on the same date, leaving the token close to immediate support but still below its recent swing high.

That positioning makes the October question relatively clear. Fresh ecosystem catalysts provide a constructive backdrop, but September momentum needs to translate into a hold above $0.221 and then a break through $0.23641 before a more durable upside continuation can be argued.

XLM daily indicators retain a bullish bias below overbought territory

The daily technical readings observed on October 1 lean bullish, though they do not show an asset that has already cleared its nearest obstacle. XLM’s 14-day RSI stood at 63.44, which CoinMarketCap CMC AI characterized as bullish momentum while remaining below the conventional overbought threshold. In practical terms, the reading supports the case for continued buyer interest without, on its own, confirming a breakout.

MACD was also positive on the daily timeframe, according to the same analysis. The combination of a positive MACD and RSI above the midpoint gives the near-term picture a positive tilt, particularly following the reported September strength. Yet momentum indicators are most useful here as confirmation of price behaviour around the stated levels, rather than as substitutes for a break above resistance.

The moving-average structure is similarly constructive. At the October 1 spot price of $0.2228, XLM was above its seven-day EMA of $0.220, a level identified as immediate support. Blockspot listed the 14-day SMA at $0.2141 with a short-term Buy signal, while the 50-day and 200-day SMAs were $0.1889 and $0.1799 respectively; its analysis described their relationship as a golden cross.

Those readings put the short-term and longer-term trend measures in alignment rather than in conflict. Price remains above the seven-day EMA, the shorter SMA is below spot, and the 50-day average sits above the 200-day average. That is a favourable daily setup, but it also concentrates attention on whether XLM can preserve the $0.220–$0.221 area after any intraday volatility.

There is a distinction between a bullish bias and a confirmed continuation. The supplied indicators show positive momentum and trend conditions as of October 1, but the market had not yet surpassed the $0.23641 recent swing high. For October, the technical case is therefore contingent on price action validating those signals at resistance.

XLM support at $0.221 and resistance at $0.23641 define October’s first test

The closest meaningful support is $0.221, immediately below the $0.2228 spot reference. CoinMarketCap CMC AI ties that area to both the seven-day EMA and the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement, making it the first level that needs to hold if the current bullish structure is to remain intact.

LevelRoleBasis$0.221Immediate supportSeven-day EMA and 23.6% Fibonacci retracement$0.212Next support38.2% Fibonacci retracement; stated downside level if $0.221 fails$0.2086Lower supportThird daily pivot support$0.23641First resistanceRecent swing high and near-term breakout level$0.2436Next resistanceThird daily pivot resistance$0.254Higher resistance127.2% Fibonacci extension after a decisive swing-high break

A sustained defence of $0.221 would keep XLM above the immediate moving-average support cited in the daily analysis. Should that level fail, $0.212 is the next supplied downside reference, based on the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement. Below that, the third daily pivot support at $0.2086 becomes relevant. These are conditional waypoints rather than predictions that a decline will occur.

On the upside, $0.23641 is the first barrier that matters. It marks the recent swing high and is explicitly identified as the near-term breakout level in CoinMarketCap CMC AI’s October 1 analysis. A move through it would need to hold rather than merely briefly trade above it to strengthen the continuation case.

Beyond the swing high, $0.2436 is the third daily pivot resistance listed by Blockspot. The higher $0.254 level is the 127.2% Fibonacci extension identified as relevant following a decisive break above $0.23641. As a result, an upside sequence would require XLM first to defend $0.221, then clear the swing high, before the two higher references come into play.

Can Stellar sustain its September momentum into October?

The available evidence supports a cautiously constructive October XLM price prediction, not an unconditional one. Stellar has entered the month with tangible newsflow: the State Street Galaxy fund’s September 29 launch on the network, BVNK’s Stellar integration announcement, and recent Protocol 28 and Soroban Rust SDK v28 development cited by CoinMarketCap CMC AI. That source also reported September stablecoin-card spending of $69.3 million, adding a usage-focused element to the broader catalyst picture.

News catalysts can improve the market narrative around a token, but they do not remove the need for technical confirmation. At $0.2228, XLM was only marginally above $0.221 support and still below $0.23641 resistance. The daily RSI at 63.44, positive MACD and price position above the $0.220 seven-day EMA suggest that the market has the momentum conditions to test higher levels; none of those readings establishes that resistance has already been overcome.

The bullish October scenario would be reinforced if $0.221 continues to hold and buyers achieve a decisive break above $0.23641. In that event, $0.2436 and then $0.254 are the supplied upside references. The latter is not a guaranteed destination: it is a Fibonacci-extension level that the cited analysis associates with a decisive break of the recent swing high.

Conversely, a loss of $0.221 would weaken the premise that September’s momentum is carrying cleanly into October. It would shift attention to $0.212, with $0.2086 as the lower supplied pivot support. That outcome would not negate the network developments, but it would show that the near-term market structure had deteriorated despite a supportive catalyst backdrop.

For now, Stellar can plausibly retain its September momentum into October, because institutional deployment, stablecoin infrastructure news and positive daily trend signals are arriving together. The decisive test remains price-led: hold the $0.221 area and reclaim $0.23641. Until that breakout occurs, the most evidence-based view is a bullish bias within a clearly defined range, rather than a confirmed October advance.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bitcoin holding firm while other asset classes fall

Source: TradingView

Into the teeth of obdurately rising bond yields, the $BTC price has performed exceptionally well, while other asset classes such as stocks and precious metals have been battered. This is not the usual state of affairs we have been used to, as until relatively recently, the Bitcoin price would have slavishly followed the US stock market, going down hard if stocks went down. Since rising out of its bear market Bitcoin has been a different beast, holding firm while the likes of gold have continued a slow but persistent decline.

The 4-hour time frame chart above shows the sideways choppiness of the $BTC price. Within this new parallel channel the price is generally respecting the 0.25% and the 0.5% demarcation lines (dotted lines). If the price can get above 0.25% it is likely to continue up to the 0.50% line. From there, a big gap up to the top of the channel awaits. We will see if the $BTC price can get there and at least have the chance of a breakout.

Bounce or collapse?

Source: TradingView

While it is certainly not confirmed, a downsloping trendline has been drawn in, which would make the current pattern a descending triangle. These are generally bearish patterns, but as can be seen, the $BTC price is currently trying to break beyond this trendline. If the pattern is kosha, then perhaps we might see some volume boosting the price up if it breaks out.

At the bottom of the chart, the Stochastic RSI has its indicator lines coming down at a faster rate. They might be expected to touch bottom by the end of the weekend.

Below this is the Relative Strength Index. The indicator line here is following along the top of the descending trendline nicely. If it doesn’t fall through, a decent bounce would be reflected in the price action in the chart above heading for the top of the channel. If it does fall through, expect a corresponding collapse in the price action.

Bull flag breakout move still to come?

Source: TradingView

The weekly time frame reveals that after testing the $83K support level the $BTC price is probably ready to go higher. Why higher? Because the price has only just broken out of the bull flag and therefore it would be expected to rise quite a bit higher in order to get at least somewhere near its measured move to the upside ($94K).

The Stochastic RSI indicator lines have crossed bullish, with the blue fast line back on top of the red slow line. In addition, the MACD for the weekly is recording a steady upward trend. The histogram gets a pale green bar now and then, but the blue MACD line is well above the red signal line, and so this trend looks set to continue.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

At 12:00 GMT on October 1, DOGE traded at $0.095029, according to Investing.com. Its 200-day simple moving average was $0.095584, putting that nearby level above spot. The shorter-horizon daily indicators were modestly constructive, but the reading was not a broad breakout signal, so the $0.10 scenario still depends on a move through the overhead levels.

DOGE Technical Analysis: Short-Term Averages Improve, but the 200-Day Average Caps Price

In the October 1 daily summary, DOGE traded at $0.095029, above its 20-day SMA of $0.094809 and 50-day SMA of $0.094596. Investing.com labeled both shorter averages Buy, indicating an improved immediate price structure relative to those trend references.

The same summary listed daily RSI(14) at 51.480, a neutral reading that was neither overbought nor oversold. MACD(12,26) was 0 and labeled bullish, or Buy, by Investing.com. Together, the shorter-term averages and bullish MACD support an upside attempt, while neutral RSI leaves room for movement in either direction.

The 200-day SMA was $0.095584, $0.000555 above spot, and labeled Sell by the source. DOGE therefore remained below the longer-term measure. The technical data does not establish a wider bullish breakout until DOGE trades through the 200-day average and nearby pivot resistance levels.

DOGE Support and Resistance Levels Around $0.095

The published pivots place DOGE in a narrow range around spot. The closest downside reference, Fibonacci Camarilla S1 at $0.094975, was only marginally below the $0.095029 spot price. On the upside, Classic R1 at $0.095332 is the first immediate obstacle, followed by the 200-day average at $0.095584.

LevelPricePublished basis Resistance$0.095332Classic R1 pivot Resistance$0.095584200-day simple moving average Resistance$0.095869Classic R2/Fibonacci R3 pivot Resistance$0.096779Classic R3 pivot Support$0.094975Fibonacci Camarilla S1 pivot Support$0.094422Central pivot point and nearby Fibonacci support area Support$0.093885Classic S1 pivot Support$0.092975Classic S2/Fibonacci S3 pivot

For a bullish continuation, DOGE would first need to clear $0.095332 and then reclaim the 200-day average at $0.095584. A sustained move through $0.095869 and $0.096779 would remove the remaining published resistance levels in this dataset. The $0.10 figure in the headline is an editorial scenario, not a sourced technical resistance level; the supplied levels therefore show the hurdles DOGE faces before that scenario can become technically more plausible.

On the other side, holding $0.094975 would preserve the nearest support below spot. A loss of that level would put the $0.094422 central pivot area in focus, followed by $0.093885. Should those supports fail, $0.092975 is the next published downside reference. These are intraday pivot levels, so they frame the immediate market structure rather than offering a long-range forecast.

DogeOS Testnet Catalyst: Can DOGE Build Toward $0.10?

DogeOS gives DOGE a new near-term narrative, but the nature of the launch limits what can be inferred from it. The public testnet supports Ethereum-compatible applications using test DOGE, including trading, lending and stablecoin functions, CoinDesk reported. That is a tangible testnet milestone, not evidence that these applications have transitioned into a live, miner-secured ecosystem.

Initially, DogeOS applications rely on selected operators and protected hardware rather than Dogecoin miners. The proposed Dogecoin Core upgrade designed to link miner security remains in draft and has no activation date, while DogeOS itself has provided no mainnet launch date. Its official website describes an application layer for trading, earning, playing, spending and building on Dogecoin, but also lists several ecosystem components as coming soon.

Institutional-flow evidence offers another reason to separate the narrative from confirmed demand. CoinDesk said three U.S. Dogecoin ETFs accumulated about $12 million in net inflows over almost 10 months and recorded no net flows on 166 of 199 trading days. Those figures do not rule out a market reaction to the testnet, but they point to limited institutional demand despite the new utility angle.

The conditional near-term outlook is therefore straightforward. DOGE has a route toward the headline's $0.10 scenario if the short-term constructive signals translate into a break above $0.095332, a reclaim of the $0.095584 200-day average, and clearance of the higher pivot barriers at $0.095869 and $0.096779. The testnet can support interest in that attempt, but it is early-stage infrastructure rather than a completed mainnet catalyst.

Conversely, failure to hold $0.094975 would weaken the short-term setup and shift attention to the $0.094422 to $0.092975 support sequence. With RSI neutral and the 200-day average still above price, the available evidence supports a possible move above $0.10 only as a conditional upside case—not as a validated breakout or a guaranteed destination.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

One track pays out bonus money and spins over three deposits, with a rollover to clear. Its counterpart adds free bets across three deposits, with combo rules to follow.

The wrong pick can lock you into terms that don't suit how you play. Below: the two tracks side by side, what each returns on a typical deposit, and how to choose a bonus at signup.

The Two Tracks Side by Side

Dexsport treats the Dexsport welcome bonus as a single choice, so each account receives one track, never both.

Casino track

Sports track

Headline

480% up to $10,000 plus 300 free spins

Up to 60% in freebets

Split across deposits

130%, 150% and 200%

15%, 20% and 25%

Maximum per deposit

$4,000, then $3,000, then $3,000

$100 freebet each time

Extras

100 free spins per deposit on Pragmatic Play slots, among them Gates of Olympus and Sweet Bonanza

None

Main condition

40x rollover within 7 days of activation

Combo bets of 3 or more events, each at odds of 1.3 or higher

Activation window

30 days

Check current terms

Last verified: September 2026

The promotions page lists minimum casino deposits of $10, $20 and $50 for the three steps, while the terms document states a lower flat figure. Check both before you plan a first deposit.

Returns on a $100 Deposit

The headline numbers differ hugely, so a single worked example helps.

Casino track, first deposit of $100. The 130% match adds $130 in bonus funds and 100 free spins. If the 40x rollover applies to the bonus amount, it requires $5,200 in bets within seven days. At a typical slot return near 96%, that volume brings an expected cost of roughly $208, more than the bonus itself.

Sports track, first deposit of $100. The 15% sports freebet bonus adds $15, which must go on a combo of three or more events, each priced at 1.3. As with any freebet, only the profit comes back, so its real value falls below $15, and the combo requirement lowers it further.

Both tracks come with strings attached. Casino funds come in larger sums with a heavy rollover, while the sports track offers small freebets with lighter conditions.

Signup Choice in Four Steps

The welcome step appears inside the three-step signup flow.

1. Create the account with an email, Google, Telegram, or a connected wallet

2. Reach the welcome step, where Casino, Sports, and "I'll choose later" appear, with the later option preselected

3. Add any promo code at this step, where the field shows up again

4. Decide now or defer, because the choice can move to account settings and wait until you know how you'll play

Anyone who wants the sports track should add a verified email address, since sports offers depend on it.

Which Track Fits Which Player

Your usual play matters more than the size of the headline.

• Slot players who plan long sessions may find the casino track worthwhile, provided they can clear 40x within seven days at their normal stakes

• Sports bettors who already build combos can use the sports track naturally, since its freebets fit the bets they place anyway

• Players who want to withdraw soon often do better to skip both, since rollover and bet-type rules delay a clean cash-out

• Occasional players may prefer to defer the choice until they see which products they use

Our deeper look at bonus-funded play explains how rollover changes the return on a casino session, and free spins have their own maths, as a comparison of free spin value across casinos shows.

Conclusion

Dexsport's casino track offers 480% up to $10,000 plus 300 free spins across three deposits, with a 40x rollover to clear within seven days. The sports track offers up to 60% in freebets, capped at $100 per deposit, for combos of three or more events.

On a $100 first deposit, that means $130 in bonus funds and 100 free spins, or a $15 freebet.

Choose by how you play, as with any crypto casino welcome offer, or defer and skip both if you plan an early withdrawal.

Look up the law where you live, cap your deposits, and sign up only once you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling outranks any bonus.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Bonus figures reflect the platform's published terms in September 2026 and can change or be withdrawn, so check the current terms before you deposit. Figures in the worked examples are illustrative. Casino games and sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

On October 1, HBAR was changing hands at $0.1064, based on CoinMarketCap data. The price remained below the first daily resistance at $0.1094 while holding above the closely clustered support zone around $0.1010 and $0.1007.

A recent market analysis linked the advance to IBM-related enterprise news and wider institutional, artificial-intelligence and tokenization narratives. Those themes may continue to draw attention, but the post-spike price action and an overbought daily RSI mean buyers need to show that they can regain momentum rather than merely absorb a pullback.

HBAR’s daily signals remain bullish but overbought

On the daily timeframe, HBAR remains above all three supplied exponential moving averages. The 20-day EMA stood at $0.09233, the 50-day EMA at $0.08322 and the 200-day EMA at $0.08750 on September 29, according to CoinDCX. With spot at $0.1064 on October 1, this arrangement still describes a price trading above its short-, medium- and longer-term trend references.

That is constructive trend evidence, but it also shows how extended the preceding move became. The daily 14-period RSI was 76.59 on September 29. As the reading is above 70, CoinDCX characterised the market as overbought: momentum remained strong, while the risk of a cooling phase had increased.

The sequence from the $0.1310 intraday peak to the following day’s sell-off is consistent with that tension. An overbought RSI does not establish that HBAR must fall, nor does trading above its EMAs rule out further volatility. It does mean a recovery attempt faces a higher bar: the market needs to convert the rally’s underlying trend support into renewed buying after a sharp bout of profit-taking.

Activity has remained elevated. HBAR’s 24-hour trading volume was approximately $843.65 million on October 1, following the rally and reversal, Market Capitalize reported. Elevated turnover can accompany either absorption by buyers or continued distribution by sellers, so volume alone does not settle the direction of the next move.

Another supplied daily signal is positive, although its detail is limited. Blockspot reports a strongly positive MACD-based signal alongside an “Extreme Greed” score of 88/100, but does not publish the underlying MACD line. The available evidence therefore supports a bullish momentum reading, not a precise MACD crossover or numerical interpretation.

HBAR support at $0.1010 and resistance at $0.1094 frame the next move

The immediate range is narrow. At $0.1064, HBAR sits between $0.1010 Fibonacci support and $0.1094 primary daily pivot resistance. The $0.1007 daily pivot support sits almost alongside the former, creating a near-term area that matters more than the more distant September base while the token remains close to spot.

LevelRoleWhy it matters $0.1094ResistancePrimary daily pivot resistance and the first upside hurdle. $0.1010SupportNearest Fibonacci support below spot. $0.1007SupportPrimary daily pivot support, reinforcing the nearby support area. $0.1230ResistanceRecovery cap identified after the pullback from the spike. $0.0940SupportNext downside level if $0.1010 gives way. $0.1310ResistanceSeptember 28 swing high and rally peak.

For an upside continuation, HBAR would first need to reclaim $0.1094. Clearing that pivot would put attention on $0.1230, the recovery cap identified after the retreat from the spike. Only then would the September 28 high of $0.1310 return as the relevant test. These are successive obstacles, rather than indications that HBAR is assured to revisit the rally high.

On the other side, holding $0.1010 and $0.1007 would indicate that buyers are defending the nearest post-rally support area. A loss of that zone would expose $0.0940, identified as the next downside level if the Fibonacci support fails. The $0.07190 September-base floor is the deeper structural level in the supplied analysis; it is not the immediate focus at current prices.

There is also a higher resistance at $0.15562, marked above a triangle-breakout trigger in analysis from CoinGabbar. It remains contextual rather than near-term while HBAR is still below $0.1094, $0.1230 and the $0.1310 swing high.

HBAR price prediction: reclaiming $0.1094 would test whether the rally can extend

The near-term HBAR outlook is conditionally constructive, but not yet a clean continuation signal. HBAR remains above its supplied daily EMAs, and the enterprise, AI and tokenization narrative cited during the surge provides a current backdrop for renewed interest. Hedera’s participation in Sibos and The AI Conference through October 1 also keeps its enterprise and AI positioning visible, according to its events page.

That backdrop does not remove the technical constraint. The 76.59 daily RSI was already overbought before the reversal, while the decline from $0.1310 showed sellers were active at higher prices. A move back above $0.1094 would be the first evidence that HBAR can rebuild upside momentum; a subsequent clearance of $0.1230 would make a retest of the $0.1310 rally high a live scenario.

Conversely, inability to retake $0.1094 would leave the rebound case unproven. A sustained failure of the $0.1010-$0.1007 support area would weaken the bullish setup and shift focus to $0.0940. The elevated $843.65 million 24-hour volume reported after the reversal makes the reaction around these nearby levels especially important, because it shows the market is still actively repricing the September surge.

Hedera has also announced a project-specific policy change: from September 2026, atomic batches may contain no more than one smart-contract call, with smart-contract calls to be removed from atomic batches entirely in March 2027. The announcement sets out a network change, but the available information does not establish it as a driver of HBAR’s short-term price action.

In this HBAR price prediction, the rally can extend only if buyers regain $0.1094 and then overcome $0.1230 despite the stretched RSI backdrop. Defending the $0.1010-$0.1007 zone would preserve that possibility. Losing it would favour a deeper retracement toward the next supplied support instead of an immediate return to the September spike.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Ripple released 1 billion XRP from escrow on October 1 in four transactions of 400 million, 300 million, 200 million and 100 million XRP, according to Blockchain.News. That is a gross escrow unlock, not proof that the full amount immediately entered circulation; Ripple has explained that unused XRP can be returned to escrow.

For an XRP price prediction in October 2026, the focus is whether the bullish daily structure can carry price through the nearby resistance levels rather than treating the unlock as automatic selling pressure. XRP was above all eight tracked moving averages on the October 1 reading, and the 50-day average was above the 200-day average. The source classified the moving-average group as a Buy signal, while shorter-term momentum readings were less decisive.

XRP daily trend remains bullish, but momentum signals are not fully aligned

The broader daily setup remains constructive on the supplied readings. XRP was above all eight tracked moving averages at the October 1 observation, while the 50-day average stood above the 200-day average. The source classified the moving-average group as a Buy signal, a configuration consistent with a positive daily trend rather than a market in a broad technical breakdown.

That trend evidence matters because XRP is trading close to $1.49, where relatively small moves could determine whether it escapes its recent consolidation. A separate recent assessment likewise described a strong bullish daily bias, while stressing that price was still below nearby resistance and that RSI remained neutral.

Momentum does not yet give an unqualified confirmation. The daily RSI was 56.0 at 02:50 UTC on October 1, which places it in neutral territory rather than an overbought or oversold extreme. A September 30 reading from CoinDCX put RSI at 55.72, below its 57.89 signal line. In that assessment, momentum remained above 50 but the reported cross pointed to a bearish turn.

The intraday picture is softer still. Hourly MACD was reported at -0.002460, below its -0.001466 signal line, a bearish alignment that suggests short-term momentum had not fully matched the bullish daily moving-average structure.

These readings can coexist without contradiction. Moving averages tend to describe the underlying trend over a broader period, while RSI and hourly MACD can flag hesitation or a pullback within that trend. For XRP, that means the daily backdrop supports a bullish case, but an immediate advance still needs price confirmation at resistance rather than relying on the moving-average signal alone.

XRP levels to watch: $1.4852 support and $1.501 resistance

With spot at $1.4893, XRP was effectively positioned between its nearest quoted daily support at $1.4852 and first resistance at $1.501. That narrow interval is the initial decision area. A close above $1.501 would strengthen the bullish technical case, while a close below $1.4852 would weaken it.

LevelTechnical roleWhat it would indicate$1.4852Nearest daily supportHolding it preserves the immediate bullish setup; a close below weakens it.$1.456420-day EMA and nearby intraday-floor areaNext reported support if the first floor gives way.$1.4255Second daily pivot/supportA deeper retracement level within the supplied daily map.$1.501Nearest daily resistanceA close above would strengthen the upside case.$1.55Immediate swing-high/neckline resistanceA break is identified as the next important upside test.$1.6185Daily resistance clusterHigher resistance involving several reported technical references.

On the upside, $1.501 is the first hurdle, but $1.55 is the more consequential nearby barrier. Recent coverage placed XRP’s trading range around $1.48 to $1.55 and identified a break above $1.55 as a potential trigger toward the $1.60-$1.70 resistance zone. That area includes the separately reported $1.6185 daily cluster, associated with Fibonacci, upper Bollinger-band, upper Donchian-boundary and swing-high references.

Consequently, a move through $1.501 alone would improve the near-term chart, but would not by itself resolve the larger supply area. XRP would still need to clear $1.55 before the market could test the higher resistance cluster and the broader $1.60-$1.70 zone.

The downside map is equally clear. Failure to hold $1.4852 places $1.4564 in view, described as the 20-day EMA and a nearby intraday-floor support zone. Below that comes $1.4255, the second daily pivot/support level. The wider $1.25-$1.32 area is the supplied broader September daily demand zone, but it is not the immediate level for a market still trading near $1.49.

This stacked structure explains why the first few cents around spot matter. XRP has room for a bullish continuation only if buyers can turn the nearby resistance ladder into support; conversely, a loss of the first daily floor would shift attention toward the lower supports before any larger demand area becomes relevant.

XRP price prediction after the 1 billion-token unlock

The conditional near-term XRP outlook is cautiously constructive, not decisively bullish. Price at roughly $1.49 sits above a daily moving-average structure that is uniformly positive, with the 50-day average above the 200-day average. Yet neutral-to-mixed RSI readings and a bearish hourly MACD show that momentum has not provided a clean confirmation at the point where XRP must overcome resistance.

Ripple’s 1 billion XRP escrow release does not, by itself, settle that question. The release is a scheduled gross unlock mechanism, and Ripple has stated that XRP not used can be placed back into escrow. It would therefore be inaccurate to equate the 1 billion-token event automatically with 1 billion XRP of fresh market supply or assume that it independently determines the next price move.

For the title’s $1.49 scenario, the available evidence supports treating that level as XRP’s current consolidation area rather than a technical destination. Holding around $1.49 and defending $1.4852 would keep the constructive daily setup intact. A sustained move above $1.501 would provide the first improvement, while a break through $1.55 would offer materially stronger evidence that buyers can challenge the reported $1.60-$1.70 supply zone, including resistance at $1.6185.

By contrast, a close below $1.4852 would weaken the bullish setup and put $1.4564, then $1.4255, into focus. The daily moving-average alignment means the upside case remains credible, but it is conditional on price clearing resistance rather than merely remaining near $1.49. With short-term MACD bearish and daily RSI neutral, the chart still requires that confirmation.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Blackboard, a non-custodial trading terminal for onchain markets, today announced a trading competition with Aster, a leading perpetual decentralized exchange (DEX).

The first trading competition will run from October 10 to November 10, 2026 (UTC). The competition begins with a guaranteed $17,000 prize pool, which can grow to as much as $100,000. Registration is now open for waitlisted users.

Participants will compete across two leaderboards: Volume and PnL. The Volume leaderboard ranks traders by volume executed, while the PnL leaderboard ranks traders by positive net profit and loss. A single registration enters participants into both leaderboards.

Traders must generate at least $50,000 in qualified volume during the competition to be eligible for rewards. The Volume leaderboard will distribute up to $70,000 across as many as 50 winners, while the PnL leaderboard will distribute up to $30,000 across as many as 25 winners. 

The total prize pool will increase across seven levels based on the combined volume of qualified traders. The current prize pool and leaderboard standings will be available on the Blackboard x Aster Trading Competition page throughout the competition.

About Blackboard

Blackboard is a non-custodial onchain trading terminal that gives users access to perpetual futures, prediction markets, trading cards, and other onchain markets through a single interface. Users retain control of their assets at all times.

About Aster

Aster is a privacy-first onchain trading platform backed by YZi Labs, with unique features like Hidden Orders to protect user trading activity. It pioneers the frontier of on-chain trading through perpetual futures, spots, and earn products for top-trending assets, including RWAs, memes, and core crypto markets. It is powered by Aster Chain, a Layer 1 blockchain built to power the future of decentralized finance.

ContactBlackboard PR Teamsupport@blackboard.fi

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The immediate test comes on October 3, when roughly 23.38 million SUI tokens are scheduled to unlock. That allocation equals 0.2% of total supply and about 0.6% of market capitalisation, according to Tokenomics.com. Price is holding close to support, but remains below the first nearby resistance, making the market’s response to that supply event central to the short-term SUI price prediction.

Daily momentum readings lean constructive rather than conclusive. For bulls, the issue is whether that momentum can carry SUI through the $1.1858 barrier and then the $1.20-$1.21 area before attention shifts to Sui’s Basecamp event in Singapore next week.

SUI’s daily RSI, MACD and moving averages remain constructive

The daily RSI (14) stood at 67.3 at 02:43 UTC on October 1. Coinotag classified that reading as bullish and in a “strong” zone. It shows buying momentum had the upper hand at the time of observation, although the indicator alone does not settle whether buyers can absorb selling around a scheduled unlock.

MACD also pointed upward. Investing.com showed a daily MACD (12,26) reading of 0.004 at 03:56 GMT and labelled the signal “Buy.” The positive reading aligns with the RSI signal, giving the short-term technical picture a bullish tilt heading into October 3.

Trend positioning offers a second layer of support. CoinMarketCap’s October 1 analysis said SUI was trading above its seven-day moving average near $1.17 and its 30-day moving average near $1.16. Remaining above both averages would preserve that constructive setup; a move back below them would make the bullish readings less persuasive.

The signals therefore describe a market with positive daily momentum, not one that has already confirmed a breakout. Spot was only marginally above the nearest $1.1717 support and below $1.1858 resistance. That narrow range leaves little room for error as the unlock approaches, particularly because a momentum indicator can remain positive while price fails at overhead supply.

SUI support at $1.1717 and resistance from $1.1858 to $1.21

SUI’s nearest levels are tightly clustered around the prevailing spot range. The $1.1717 level is the first daily support identified by Coinotag, which cited confluence from a high-volume node, Fibonacci, pivot-point and MACD-cross measures. Directly beneath it sits the $1.16 area, corresponding to the 30-day moving average in CoinMarketCap’s analysis.

LevelRoleBasis$1.1858Nearest resistanceCoinotag daily resistance$1.20Near-term resistanceCoinMarketCap retest area$1.21Swing-high resistanceRecent high cited by CoinMarketCap$1.2625Higher resistanceCoinotag daily confluence level$1.1717Nearest supportCoinotag daily confluence level$1.16Secondary support30-day moving average$1.10Key lower supportCoinMarketCap near-term outlook$1.0428Further supportCoinotag daily support

On the upside, buyers would first need to establish a break above $1.1858. That would put $1.20 into focus, followed by the $1.21 swing high. CoinMarketCap said a potential retest of $1.21 was in view if support held, while $1.2625 is the next supplied daily resistance beyond that range. None of these levels guarantees that a move will extend; they mark the barriers that must be cleared for the technical structure to improve.

The downside path is clearer at the outset. A loss of $1.1717 would put the $1.16 moving-average level under scrutiny. If price could not hold there, the next listed downside references are $1.10 and then $1.0428. For now, $1.1717 is especially important because it sits immediately beneath the reported spot range and is the first test of whether the latest advance has retained support.

October unlock absorption will determine SUI’s near-term bullish case

The near-term SUI price outlook is cautiously bullish, conditional on the market absorbing the October 3 unlock without surrendering $1.1717. The scheduled release is approximately 23.38 million tokens, or 0.2% of total supply, so it is a defined event rather than an unknown source of supply. Still, the token is trading in a compressed range just below resistance, meaning even a relatively small shift in order flow could decide whether momentum is extended or interrupted.

The technical case rests on a daily RSI of 67.3, a positive MACD reading, and price above the seven-day and 30-day moving averages. If price can sustain a hold above $1.1717 and reclaim $1.1858, the setup would strengthen for a revisit of the supplied $1.20 and $1.21 resistance levels—but only more clearly if the first resistance becomes support rather than a level price briefly trades through.

Conversely, rejection below $1.1858 alongside a break under $1.1717 would weaken the immediate bullish case. In that event, $1.16 becomes the crucial next support, with $1.10 the lower key level cited in CoinMarketCap’s outlook. Such a move would not erase the significance of the broader moving-average structure by itself, but it would show that buyers had not maintained control through the unlock window.

There are also two scheduled developments around the event. 21Shares announced a $0.052939-per-share staking distribution for its Sui Staking ETF, paid September 30 after a September 29 ex/record date, indicating continuing institutional staking-related activity around SUI exposure. Separately, the Sui Foundation has scheduled Basecamp 2026 in Singapore for October 7-8 alongside TOKEN2049. Those events can draw attention, but the chart still places the immediate decision at $1.1717 support and $1.1858 resistance.

For now, bulls have the better daily momentum signals, but not a confirmed breakout. Holding support through the October 3 supply event and clearing $1.1858 would keep the path toward $1.20-$1.21 open. Failure to do so would shift focus back to $1.16, making unlock absorption—not the indicators alone—the decisive short-term test.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Each has a price today that reflects what traders expect. Read together, those autumn 2026 prediction markets form a rough map of the crowd's view of the next three months.

Below: the resolution calendar through December, the patterns across the board, and how to read a snapshot as a snapshot, not a forecast.

The Resolution Calendar, October to December

Every figure below comes with its own date and source, since prices move daily.

Date

Question

Where the crowd stood

Source and date

26 October

Ballon d'Or winner

Ballon d'Or odds make Harry Kane the favourite, with Rodri and Mbappé close

Bookmakers, late September

28 October

Fed decision

Fed decision odds leaned toward a quarter-point rise, near 63%

Kalshi, 24 September

3 November

US House control

About 92% for Democrats

Kalshi and Polymarket average, 29 September

3 November

US Senate control

About 63% for Democrats

Kalshi and Polymarket average, 29 September

19 November

GTA 6 console release

Date set; PC questions still open

Rockstar, June 2026

6 December

F1 Drivers' Championship

Antonelli 66 points clear after Baku

Standings, 26 September

9 December

Fed decision, with new projections

Futures point to rates near 4.2% by year end

CME futures, late September

31 December

Bitcoin 2026 high above $100,000

About 45%

Kalshi, late September

Last verified: September 2026

Several longer questions fall outside the calendar, from the Champions League final on 5 June 2027 to the US presidential election on 7 November 2028. Their prices drift more slowly and react most to milestones such as the midterms.

Three Patterns on the Board

Across categories, the snapshot shows a few repeat shapes.

• Near-certainties next to open races: some questions trade above 90%, such as House control in the midterm odds, while others split the crowd almost evenly, such as Bitcoin above $100,000

• Macro turns reprice everything: the Fed's September hike flipped rate markets from cuts to hikes, and questions that pay on cut counts now trade near zero

• Long-dated markets move on milestones: the 2028 race barely shifts week to week, then jumps around events such as the midterms and early primaries

These shapes matter for anyone who trades. Prices near 92% leave little upside and real downside if an upset comes, while a near coin flip offers a larger payoff for a correct call.

Four Habits for a Snapshot

Snapshots age quickly, and a few habits keep them useful.

1. Note the date on every price. Figures from late September can look very different by mid-October

2. Compare venues where possible. Kalshi and CME FedWatch disagreed by more than 10 points on the October hike, which shows how crowds differ

3. Check the resolution terms. Two contracts on one Fed decision can pay out differently if one asks about direction and the other about size

4. Separate price from opinion. Prices show where money stands, not what will happen

Settlement rules also differ by platform, and on-chain settlement makes the final payout visible on crypto venues once a result is confirmed.

Autumn Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport covers most of this calendar across five prediction market categories: sports, crypto, economy, politics and other. Its board lists questions on the Ballon d'Or, Formula 1, Fed decisions, US elections, Bitcoin price targets and game releases, among others.

Across Dexsport prediction markets, positions settle in stablecoins, and each page states its close time, deadline and resolution source. Its heaviest-traded question, the race for the 2028 Republican ticket, had passed $60 million by September.

The mechanics behind Dexsport's prediction markets are covered in a separate explainer. Anjouan licenses the operator.

Conclusion

This autumn's prediction markets settle in quick succession: the Ballon d'Or on 26 October, Fed decisions on 28 October and 9 December, the US midterms on 3 November, the GTA 6 launch on 19 November, the F1 finale on 6 December and year-end crypto questions on 31 December.

The board mixes near-certainties with close contests, and the Fed's recent turn shows how one event can reprice a whole category.

Treat every figure as a dated snapshot, not a forecast. Confirm the rules where you live, spread a modest budget across the season, and join only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters in a busy season.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a forecast or recommendation. It does not endorse any candidate, party or outcome. Prices quoted reflect the dates shown and change constantly, so check current figures before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Beyond the deposit currency

A licensed UK casino can accept crypto. The Gambling Commission does not prohibit it. Its guidance says a licensee that adds a crypto payment method has to notify the change and show it has reduced the risk "to the same level that we would expect from other payment methods", which in practice means source-of-funds checks on the deposits. A crypto-native casino is one built so that it never has to ask where the bitcoin came from, and everything else about its architecture follows from that choice: an offshore licence that permits it, custody of balances on the operator's own terms, and fairness evidenced by cryptography as well as, or instead of, by an inspector. 

The two are not exclusive; several large crypto-native operators hold licences of their own and stock the same certified supplier catalogues as the regulated sites. What varies is what they are obliged to do. Offering facilities for gambling to people in Great Britain without a Commission licence is an offence under section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005, and the regulator's disruption programme serves offshore sites with notices requiring geo-blocking within 48 hours, backed by test purchases from GB IP addresses. The Binance perpetuals litigation this site covered in July turns on the same question from the finance side: whether an offshore platform can be said to have kept UK users out.

Regulatory overhead vs Web3 anonymity

Looking at the regulated UK market, Betway casino has held a remote casino licence from the Gambling Commission since November 2014 under account number 39372. The obligations that follow form the legal baseline for any British licence - requirements that crypto-native casinos may not carry. Its own site states that customer money is held at what the Commission calls its high protection level, which means a formal trust account, legally separate from the company and verified by an independent trustee or external auditor. Anti-money laundering checks are a condition of the licence rather than a policy the operator adopted. "Segregated funds" means different things on each side. 

The Commission's three-tier rating is explicit that funds which are merely segregated are "not protected": they sit in a separate account and still form part of the business's assets in an insolvency. Only the high tier puts the money beyond the company's reach. A proof-of-reserves attestation, the crypto sector's usual answer, shows that assets existed at a point in time; without a matching proof of liabilities it does not show solvency, and it does not put anything in trust.

On the other side, Curaçao, the jurisdiction behind many crypto-native licences, brought its online gaming under a new national ordinance that took effect on 24 December 2024, and the bar there is rising. The Financial Action Task Force counted 99 jurisdictions that had passed, or were passing, travel-rule legislation in its June 2025 update; the rule binds exchanges rather than a self-custodied wallet paying an operator directly, so it narrows the on-ramps rather than the rails.

Software auditing and RNG integrity

A remote casino licensee has to put its games through one of the Commission's approved test houses, and the testing is invasive: the test house reads the random number generator's source code, runs statistical tests on its output, then checks the game's maths and rules and measures the actual return to player against the theoretical figure. The report goes to the regulator before release. The question answered is whether the game, across its whole population of players, behaves as advertised.

Provably fair asks something else: was this specific round altered after the bet was placed? Before a round, the server commits to a hash of a secret seed; the player supplies a client seed; a nonce counts the rounds; the outcome is derived from all three, typically through HMAC-SHA256. When the server seed is later revealed, anyone can recompute the round and confirm the operator did not change the result after seeing the bet. The guarantee is real, and a licensed casino does not offer one at the level of the individual bet, though it covers RNG games only; live tables are the same certified studio feed under both models. It is silent on the house edge, the advertised return and whether the operator can pay out.

The friction trade-off

Every protection in the regulated model is a delay: identity verification before the first bet, source-of-funds questions past a threshold, a complaints route that runs through the operator and then to an independent adjudicator the customer does not pay for. Each is how a guarantee above gets delivered, so removing one removes a guarantee.

The crypto-native model removes them, and gets speed, privacy and a per-bet proof in exchange. What it gives up is recourse. Funds sit on the operator's balance sheet, a self-exclusion covers that site only, and while the licensing jurisdiction has a regulator and a complaints route on paper, a British customer pursuing it is enforcing against a company outside the reach of any court they can afford. Which trade is worth making depends on which failure the player thinks is likelier: an operator that cannot fund a withdrawal, or a dispute with no adjudicator to hear it.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored article and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

ADA traded near $0.2514 on October 1, 2026, up 2.6% over 24 hours after ranging from roughly $0.2418 to $0.2563, according to CoinGecko. Its market-news panel attributed part of the move to the Petrobras fuel-tracking announcement, leaving ADA just below a nearby resistance band that begins at $0.2580.

The news provides a tangible enterprise traceability use case, but it is not the same as a disclosed source of direct token demand: the announcement does not say Petrobras will make payments in ADA or purchase ADA. That distinction puts the immediate Cardano price prediction question on market structure—whether improving daily momentum can carry the rebound into, and potentially through, the $0.2580–$0.2655 overhead supply area.

ADA daily indicators show constructive momentum, not an overbought breakout

Daily technical readings point to a constructive recovery rather than a fully confirmed breakout. ADA was trading above both its 50-period and 200-period exponential moving averages on October 1, a configuration that CoinLore classified as bullish. The cited summary did not publish the exact EMA values, so the useful signal here is price’s position above both trend measures rather than any unreported moving-average threshold.

That positioning matters because it places the current rebound above the two reference points used in the daily assessment of the broader trend. It does not, by itself, settle whether ADA can overcome the supply immediately above the market. The coin’s reported $0.2514 spot reference was still below the first edge of that resistance zone, while its intraday high of about $0.2563 approached it without clearing it.

The daily 14-period RSI stood at 59.68, which the source labelled neutral. That supports a reading of positive, not overbought, momentum—but not a conclusion that a fresh upside leg has begun. The reported rebound had yet to reach the overbought condition identified in the supplied analysis.

The daily indicators therefore point to a possible test of higher prices, not a completed move through resistance. The MACD contributed to that constructive reading at 0.011723 versus a 0.010920 signal line, a relationship CoinLore treated as bullish because MACD was above its signal line. CoinLore nevertheless characterised the signal as not strong, leaving less evidence for a completed break.

The combination is therefore more measured than emphatic. Price above the 50- and 200-period EMAs, a positive MACD relationship and a neutral RSI form a supportive technical backdrop. Yet the modest MACD assessment and the proximity of overhead supply mean ADA would still need to convert a nearby resistance test into a sustained move before the daily picture could be described as a stronger breakout.

ADA support at $0.2410–$0.2380 and resistance at $0.2580–$0.2655

The most relevant levels sit relatively close to the reported spot price. A September 29 analysis from Block2Learn identified $0.2380–$0.2410 as the key breakout-retest pivot, with $0.2580–$0.2655 marked as the main overhead supply zone. At $0.2514, ADA was between those two areas, making the next directional test more important than more distant reference levels.

LevelRole in the current setup $0.2410Upper edge of the breakout-retest pivot; a level buyers need to defend. $0.2380Lower edge of the pivot; a break below weakens the recovery view. $0.2070Published daily classic S1 support reference. $0.2580Lower edge of the nearby overhead supply band. $0.2655Upper edge of that supply band; a close above it was described as strengthening the bullish case. $0.2729Published daily classic R1 resistance reference.

On the upside, $0.2580 is the first meaningful hurdle because it is the lower boundary of the stated supply band. A move into that zone would put the title’s $0.26 area in play, but $0.26 itself should be read as a point within resistance rather than a separately sourced breakout level. For continuation to carry greater technical weight, ADA would need to clear the band and, specifically, sustain a close above $0.2655 under the cited analysis.

Below spot, the $0.2410–$0.2380 range is the market’s immediate line of defence. Holding this pivot would preserve the recovery structure described by Block2Learn. Losing $0.2380 would weaken that structure and shift attention to the farther published $0.2070 S1 reference from DappRadar.

The zone-based framing is important. Neither $0.2410 nor $0.2580 should be treated in isolation when the underlying analysis defines ranges: $0.2410–$0.2380 is a retest area, while $0.2580–$0.2655 is an area where overhead supply may emerge. The reported 24-hour range shows that ADA had already traded near both sides of the nearer setup, touching approximately $0.2418 at the low and $0.2563 at the high.

Cardano price prediction: Can Petrobras news send ADA back toward $0.26?

ADA can conditionally retest $0.26, but the available evidence frames that level as a near-term resistance test rather than a confirmed destination. At the reported $0.2514 spot price, $0.26 falls inside the $0.2580–$0.2655 overhead supply zone. The Petrobras announcement coincided with renewed attention and a reported 2.6% daily gain, while the daily chart inputs were constructive: ADA stood above its 50- and 200-period EMAs, RSI was 59.68, and MACD remained above its signal line.

For the bullish case to strengthen, ADA would need to hold the $0.2410–$0.2380 pivot and push through $0.2580. That would place a move toward $0.26 within the supplied resistance band rather than beyond it. A close above $0.2655 would provide the clearer confirmation identified in the technical analysis, with $0.2729 the next published resistance reference.

There is also a limit to what can be inferred from the Petrobras development. The applications concern verification and traceability of fuel-lifecycle data on Cardano, a potentially notable use-case narrative, but the disclosed announcement contains no commitment to use ADA for payments or to buy the token. Any market response therefore remains distinct from a stated, direct source of ADA purchasing demand.

The downside condition is clearer: a break below $0.2380 would weaken the recovery setup cited in the recent analysis. Until either that pivot fails or the $0.2580–$0.2655 supply zone is decisively cleared, ADA’s move is best characterised as a technically supported rebound facing nearby resistance. The Petrobras news has supplied a fresh catalyst for attention; the chart still needs to establish whether that attention can translate into a durable move through supply.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

XRPL is being added as a layer for querying, verification and auditing ownership data. CSD BR will retain the authoritative market record and continue handling registration, custody and settlement.

That division keeps the deployment controlled: the project introduces a blockchain record for the specified fund shares while established registry and regulatory processes remain in place.

BTG Pactual fund shares are mirrored on XRPL

The partnership with Ripple initially covers BTG Pactual investment-fund shares, according to Ripple’s September 29 announcement. The companies describe the deployment as a mirrored ownership record on the public XRP Ledger, not a transfer of the shares to a new official registry.

The mirrored shares use XRPL’s Multi-Purpose Token standard. Access is limited to authorised corporate and banking participants subject to know-your-customer and anti-money-laundering controls, making the arrangement a permissioned system rather than an open retail-facing market.

CSD BR’s conventional systems remain the official source of record for registration, custody and settlement, the operator said. The XRPL copy is intended to operate alongside those systems as a complementary querying and auditing layer, giving authorised users another point at which to check ownership changes.

CSD BR retains the official registry and settlement role

CSD BR’s systems remain the official source of record for registration, custody and settlement, the operator said. XRPL provides a complementary querying and auditing layer, with the blockchain copy giving authorised users another point at which to check ownership changes.

That does not make XRPL a replacement for CSD BR’s legal and operational recordkeeping, an alternative authoritative registry or a competing settlement venue. CoinDesk reported that approved institutions will be able to perform those checks against the copy in near real time, while CSD BR remains in control of official records and regulatory processes.

The launch therefore integrates audit and verification functions into existing market infrastructure rather than transferring them wholesale to XRPL.

The BRL 22 trillion figure describes CSD BR’s existing infrastructure

CSD BR said it has more than BRL 22 trillion in registered assets and can process millions of transactions within minutes. The figure gives a sense of the infrastructure operator’s existing scale, but it should not be read as the value of assets placed on XRP Ledger through this initiative.

The announced deployment begins with mirrored records for BTG Pactual fund shares. CSD BR’s broader registered-asset total refers to its overall infrastructure, not to a wholesale transfer of its asset base onto the blockchain.

That boundary matters when assessing the development. A mirror can make selected information available for institutional verification without changing the location of the official record or implying that all instruments registered by the operator have been tokenised.

Validation could lead to native issuance of receivables

CSD BR and Ripple said they plan to explore native issuance and trading of assets on XRPL after the mirroring phase has been validated. The assets identified for that potential later stage include Brazilian real-estate and agribusiness receivables.

No timetable or commitment for that next stage was included in the announcement. For now, the operative deployment is the BTG Pactual ownership-record mirror, with CSD BR retaining the official registry, custody and settlement functions as the parties test the verification and audit layer.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The retreat puts attention on a nearby technical barrier at $120.91, where multiple attempts to close higher have failed. That makes the latest move less a settled trend reversal than a test of whether buyers can absorb supply just above the market.

There is constructive demand context behind that test. U.S. spot Solana ETFs recorded $188.21 million of net inflows across September 21–25, a weekly record, with Bitwise’s BSOL accounting for roughly 68% of the total, CoinDesk reported. The daily chart, however, shows positive underlying momentum alongside a stalled MACD signal.

SOL’s daily indicators show a bullish trend with stalled momentum

At the September 30 close, SOL’s daily RSI was 62.11. The stochastic oscillator showed %K at 75.11 and %D at 60.09, with %K above %D in a bullish crossover. Both readings were constructive, although TradingPedia characterised the stochastic signal as late-cycle confirmation while SOL tested resistance that had repeatedly rejected higher daily closes.

The more decisive restraint came from the MACD histogram, which registered zero as the 12- and 26-period EMAs converged. Momentum had therefore stalled rather than accelerated. The Bollinger reading added range context: placement was 0.70, in the upper half of the envelope, below the $128.88 upper band and above the $111.48 middle band.

The 50-day SMA was $101.22, well below spot and consistent with a broader daily uptrend. These technical readings and levels were published by TradingPedia. Taken together, they leave the trend favourable, but do not establish that immediate resistance has been overcome or confirm an immediate renewed advance above $120.

SOL support at $116.58 and resistance at $120.91 define the next break

With spot at $119.17, the first meaningful levels are tightly packed around the market. The closest downside reference is $116.58; overhead, $120.91 is the immediate resistance. The gap between them is the near-term decision range.

LevelRoleTechnical basis $120.91Immediate resistanceMultiple failed closes above the zone $123.47Higher resistanceMajor clustered supply area $128.88Higher resistanceUpper daily Bollinger Band $116.58First supportFirst significant downside support $114.81Critical supportLevel bulls need to defend on a daily close $111.48Trend floorMiddle Bollinger Band $101.22Medium-term support50-day simple moving average

A bullish continuation would first require SOL to reclaim and close above $120.91. That would put $123.47, the next major supply area, into focus. Clearing that area would leave the $128.88 upper Bollinger Band as the supplied near-term upside reference. These are sequential hurdles, rather than evidence that price is destined to reach any of them.

On the downside, a failure to hold $116.58 would expose $114.81, the level identified as critical on a daily close. Below it, $111.48 is the key trend floor and middle Bollinger Band. The 50-day SMA at $101.22 sits substantially lower as medium-term trend support, but a move toward it would represent a materially weaker structure than the present pullback.

The recent 24-hour range reinforces why $120.91 matters. SOL traded as high as $122.52 during that period, yet the identified resistance remains a level where durable daily acceptance has been absent. A brief move above the threshold and a confirmed close above it are therefore not equivalent signals.

Solana price prediction: reclaiming $120 depends on a break through nearby supply

The near-term Solana price prediction is conditional rather than directional: SOL has a credible technical basis to retest and reclaim $120, but it needs to convert $120.91 from resistance into support before that case gains confirmation. The daily RSI, stochastic crossover, price position above the middle Bollinger Band and the distance from the 50-day SMA all support a constructive broader setup. The flat MACD histogram is the counterweight, showing that bullish momentum has not yet re-engaged.

Market and network developments provide a supportive backdrop without resolving that chart test. Solana’s DeFi total value locked rose from $4.7 billion to $6.7 billion over two months, while stablecoin balances on the network reached a record $17.3 billion, according to TradingPedia. The record ETF inflow week adds another recent measure of demand, though flows alone do not establish a price direction.

There have also been mainnet changes. Solana’s September 18 engineering update activated Transaction V1, rent reduction and a 250-millisecond slot-time reduction on mainnet, the Solana Foundation said. Alpenglow, which targets a reduction in transaction finality from about 12.8 seconds to 150 milliseconds, is live on public testnet rather than mainnet, so it should not be treated as an already-deployed mainnet catalyst.

For now, holding $116.58 while breaking and closing above $120.91 would strengthen the case that SOL’s move below $120 was a temporary setback. A subsequent clearance of $123.47 would be the next technical confirmation, with $128.88 the higher supplied resistance. Conversely, loss of $116.58 would weaken the reclaim scenario and turn attention to $114.81, followed by the $111.48 trend floor. SOL’s latest price action is therefore best read as an execution test at nearby levels, not a definitive verdict on the wider daily trend.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Those objectives shape League of Legends markets far more than kills alone. Teams that control the map usually win it, and prices reflect that control.

Below: how a map is won, the Worlds calendar, the markets for LoL crypto wagers, and how Fearless Draft changes a five-game series.

How a Map Is Won

Each game, called a map, ends when one team destroys the enemy Nexus. The path there leads through a handful of neutral and structural objectives.

• Towers and inhibitors: towers guard the base along each lane, and destroyed inhibitors send stronger minions down that lane

• Dragons: elemental drakes spawn from early in the game, and the first team to take four earns Dragon Soul, a permanent team bonus

• Elder Dragon: once a team claims a soul, the Elder Dragon appears, and its powerful short-term buff often decides a close game

• Baron Nashor: from around the 20-minute mark, Baron grants a buff that helps a team push structures, and it frequently swings a game

• First blood and gold: the first kill and early gold leads signal momentum, though games often turn later

Objective control matters more than raw kills. Teams can trail on kills yet win the map through dragons, Baron and towers.

Worlds 2026 at a Glance

The championship returns to the United States this year.

Item

Detail

Dates

15 October to 14 November 2026

Play-in stage

Los Angeles

Main stages

Allen, Texas

Final

Barclays Center, New York, 14 November

Teams

19

Prize pool

$5 million

Knockout format

Five-game series, first to three wins, under Fearless Draft

MSI 2026 champion

Hanwha Life Esports

Last verified: September 2026

Korea's LCK and China's LPL send four teams each, while other regions send fewer, which shapes the favourites before a ball, or rather a minion, moves.

Market Types for League of Legends

Crypto sportsbooks price LoL through a familiar set of markets, split between whole series and single maps.

• Match winner: the team that wins the series

• Map handicaps and totals: a series score such as 3-1, or whether a five-game series goes the distance

• Kill markets: totals and handicaps on kills within a map

• First blood and early kills: which team scores the first kill, or reaches a set kill count first

• Objective markets: where offered, totals or first takes for towers, dragons and Baron

• Map duration: whether a game lasts longer or shorter than a set time

• Gold lead: which team holds more gold at set minute marks

Objective markets vary more than any other type between sportsbooks, so check the list for each match. Similar structures apply across other MOBAs, as markets on mobile esports show.

Fearless Draft and the Odds

Worlds knockout series use Fearless Draft, which bars a team from a second pick of any champion it has already played in the same series. The rule forces deeper champion pools as a series goes on.

This rule matters for game four and game five markets. Teams strong on a few comfort picks may fade late in a series, while teams with broad pools can grow stronger.

Series handicaps and total-maps markets often reflect that shift, and Dota 2 rankings of crypto platforms show how much esports depth varies between books.

League of Legends on Dexsport

Dexsport lists six Dexsport League of Legends market types: victory, totals, handicaps, first blood, first to 10 kills on a map, and the highest net worth at set intervals. Totals and handicaps cover map duration, destroyed structures, kills and maps.

Its rulebook shares one section between League of Legends and Dota 2 and uses Dota terms such as Roshan, so read each market's description to see how it maps to dragons, Baron and towers. Bets start from $1, stake limits vary by event, and Anjouan licenses the operator.

Conclusion

League of Legends games turn on objectives: towers and inhibitors, dragons and Dragon Soul, the Elder Dragon and Baron Nashor. Markets follow that logic, from map handicaps and kill totals to first blood and gold leads.

Worlds 2026 moves across the United States from 15 October to the final in New York on 14 November, with five-game knockouts under Fearless Draft.

Check the market list for each match, since objective markets differ between books. Check what your country permits, set a budget for the whole tournament, and bet only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters across a long event.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Tournament details, game mechanics, and market lists change with patches and schedules, so check current details before you bet. Esports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

More than 27.5M $CON have now been sold across 200+ wallets, while the Phase 3 presale, which launched at $0.007, approaches its close. But this is no longer simply a presale waiting for a future product.

CoinConAI is simultaneously expanding its AI-advisor ecosystem, partner infrastructure, and information platform.

Among investors watching out for crypto presales to hop into, ConCon AI ($CON) continues to spark conversations.

CoinMarketCap Listing Gives $CON a New Market Milestone

$CON has been listed on CoinMarketCap since September 23. For an early-stage crypto project, visibility on a major market-data platform gives investors another way to monitor the token and follow its development as the presale progresses toward public trading.

Market participants can now track $CON through an established crypto-data destination while the project continues building toward its planned Uniswap launch.

For retail traders and larger investors assessing emerging tokens, increased market visibility is another development worth watching.

27.5M $CON Sold as the ConCon AI Community Expands

More than 27M $CON have now been sold across 200+ wallets. The project has moved from its first presale phase through multiple stages while continuing to attract significant capital.

For larger buyers, the number of tokens already sold also matters from an allocation perspective. As more of the presale supply is absorbed, the amount remaining at each stage becomes smaller.

At the time of writing, about 80% of phase 3 is sold, leaving investors only a few hours to access $CON at the $0.007 price. At phase 4, the price increases to $0.008.

The next major date is already fixed. ConConAI's presale ends on November 9, 2026, at 12:00 UTC.

Then comes the next milestone. Token claim and the first Uniswap v3 pool are scheduled for November 12, 2026, at 12:00 UTC, with a planned listing price of $0.01. According to the project's stated terms, both dates are fixed in the smart contract.

Crypto investors have seen projects announce launches that subsequently move dates or leave timelines open-ended.

ConConAI is presenting a different structure: a presale deadline and claim/listing time encoded in the smart contract.

The Partner Console Brings the Commercial Side Closer

The most crucial development is what is happening alongside the presale. ConConAI is expanding its platform around a central idea: AI can become a decision layer between consumers and the products or services they eventually choose.

Its specialist AI advisors are designed around particular categories rather than operating as one generic chatbot.

One of the project's newer developments is the ConConAI Partner Console, where businesses can apply to list with the AI advisors.

That is an important addition because it addresses the other side of the ecosystem. AI advisors need users. But businesses need reasons to participate.

ConConAI's model is designed to allow relevant partners to access consumers at the point where they are actively making decisions. The token's utility, by design, is tied to actual ecosystem activity rather than AI branding alone.

The Development Tracker Adds More Transparency

ConConAI has also introduced a live development tracker showing what the team is currently building. For investors, this creates another useful checkpoint.

Instead of judging the project solely on future roadmap promises, the tracker allows the community to monitor development activity as the ecosystem evolves.

A visible development pipeline gives investors another way to measure that progress. As such, ConCon AI involves its holders in the development process, increasing confidence in the project.

Final Remarks

ConConAI is no longer simply an early presale with a future roadmap. It has moved through three presale phases, reached over 27M $CON sold, secured a CoinMarketCap listing, and entered the final stretch toward its planned public launch.

At the same time, the project is expanding the infrastructure around its AI advisors. The partner console is designed to bring businesses into the network. And the development tracker gives investors a clearer view of ongoing work.

The central theme remains the same: merge AI-driven decision-making, real-world commerce, and crypto utility into one network.

For traders and early-stage crypto investors watching the AI sector, $CON is becoming hard to ignore.

VISIT CONCONAI OFFICIAL WEBSITE

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

For players who already keep coins on the exchange, that turns a multi-step transfer into a few taps. It also changes the fee, the speed and the checks involved.

Below: how the service moves money, on-chain vs Binance Pay step by step, and what to confirm before you use a Binance Pay casino option.

How Binance Pay Moves Money

Binance Pay works as a transfer between accounts on the same exchange, not a blockchain transaction.

• Internal ledger: Binance updates balances on its own books, so the payment skips miners, validators and gas fees

• Identifiers in place of addresses: payments go to a Binance Pay ID, an email, a phone number or a QR code

• Coin range: Binance lists more than 300 cryptocurrencies for person-to-person transfers and 80-plus for merchant payments

• Merchant reach: Binance reported over 21 million merchants on the service as of March 2026

• Eligibility: the feature is open to eligible Binance.com users whose accounts meet the exchange's verification requirements

Some Binance Pay features have platform fees, and Binance displays them before you confirm. Transfers between users typically avoid any network fee.

Side by Side With an On-Chain Deposit

Both routes fund a casino balance, and the differences show up at almost every step.

Binance Pay

On-chain deposit

What you enter

An amount, then a confirmation in the Binance app

The destination address plus the chain

Network choice

Handled by Binance

Chosen by you, and easy to get wrong

Network fee

Typically avoided

Paid on every transfer

Speed

Confirms inside Binance within moments

Depends on block times and confirmations

Coins at the casino

Only those the casino enables for Binance Pay

Any coin and network the cashier lists

Identity checks

Binance's account verification applies

Depends on the casino and your wallet

Last verified: September 2026

The trade-off is clear. Binance Pay lets you fund a crypto casino without deposit address details, which rules out the two most common transfer slips, the wrong chain and a copy error in the address, while an on-chain deposit offers a wider coin choice and works from any wallet.

Four Checks Before You Use It at a Casino

Casinos that list Binance Pay may still limit how you can use it.

• Supported coins: casinos often enable only one or two assets through Binance Pay, commonly USDT

• Binance Pay withdrawals: confirm whether the casino pays out through Binance Pay as well, or only accepts deposits that way

• Account access: Binance Pay depends on your Binance account, so any restriction there also blocks the route

• Local rules: Binance's availability varies by country, and a casino's own terms still apply to every deposit

Players who compare USDT sportsbooks will notice that USDT Binance Pay support is the norm, since it is the asset most exchanges and casinos share.

Binance Pay on Dexsport

Dexsport offers Dexsport Binance Pay in both directions, for deposits and withdrawals, with USDT as the only supported asset on that route. It is the only rail at the cashier that works outside a blockchain.

Its flow is short: select Binance Pay in the cashier, type the USDT figure, and the platform sends you to Binance for confirmation. The rest of the cashier covers more than 50 assets across over 25 networks for players who prefer on-chain transfers.

USDT from Binance Pay also suits Dexsport's prediction markets, which settle in stablecoins. When it comes time to cash out winnings, the same route can return USDT to your Binance account. Account terms, the deposit play-through rule among them, apply as usual, and Anjouan's regulator licenses the platform.

Conclusion

Binance Pay moves money into a casino account through Binance's own ledger, so the address, the chain choice and, usually, the network fee drop out of the process. Anyone who already holds USDT on the exchange gains the most.

The route has limits: casinos tend to support one or two coins through it, and your access depends entirely on your Binance account and your country.

At Dexsport, Binance Pay handles USDT deposits and withdrawals, alongside a cashier of more than 50 on-chain assets. Confirm the rules where you live, cap your deposits, and sign up only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters, however you fund the account.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Payment options, supported assets and fees change, so check current details on Binance and on the platform before you pay. Casino games and sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Candidates have yet to declare, the midterms are still ahead, and polls remain early. Election market prices still move every day with news, speeches, and rumours.

These markets measure trader sentiment, not votes. Below: the nominee vs winner market split, how the prices fit together, and what the long road to November 2028 means for traders.

Two Markets, One Election

Prediction platforms usually split the race into separate questions. Nominee markets ask who each party will choose; winner markets ask who takes the White House.

Market

Front names and prices

Source and date

Republican nominee

J.D. Vance near 51%, Marco Rubio near 16%

Polymarket, late August 2026

Presidential winner, average of three venues

J.D. Vance 21.3%, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 12.1%, Jon Ossoff 11.1%

Polymarket, Kalshi and PredictIt, 29 September 2026

Presidential winner, Kalshi

Vance first, then Rubio, Gavin Newsom and Jon Ossoff

Kalshi, 24 September 2026

Last verified: September 2026

The Democratic side looks more fragmented, with several names in the low double digits and a front-runner yet to emerge. Market figures change constantly, so treat the table as a snapshot.

Nominee and Winner Prices Together

Candidates can only take the presidency after they win the nomination, so the two markets connect through simple arithmetic.

Divide a candidate's winner price by their nominee price, and the result shows how the market rates their chance in a general election once nominated. With the 2028 Republican nominee odds above, 21.3% divided by 51% gives roughly 42% for the front-runner.

Because the table mixes venues and dates, treat that figure as an illustration of the method.

The same division works for any candidate with prices in both markets. It helps separate two questions that a single winner price blends together: how likely a candidate is to be chosen, and how strong they would be once chosen.

The Road to November 2028

Several milestones will reprice these markets long before election day.

• 3 November 2026: US midterm elections, the first large test of both parties since 2024

• 2027: formal campaign declarations and early finance reports

• Early 2028: state primaries and caucuses, where nominee markets often move fastest

• Summer 2028: party conventions confirm the nominees

• 7 November 2028: election day, when winner markets settle

Nominee markets typically resolve once each party formally selects its candidate, while winner markets wait for the election result. Check each market's own resolution terms, since dates and sources differ between platforms.

Long-Dated Markets Tie Up Capital

Positions on the 2028 election can stay open for more than two years. The wait has a cost: funds locked in one question cannot work elsewhere, and prices may swing sharply along the way.

Two habits help. Size long-dated positions smaller than short ones, and remember that most platforms let you sell before resolution, at the current price, provided buyers exist. Stablecoin deposits keep the dollar value of an open position steady while you wait.

2028 Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport lists the 2028 Republican nomination in the Politics category of its prediction market board, where trades had topped $60 million by September, more than any other market among Dexsport prediction markets. Its longest cycle lasts until November 2028.

The Politics category also covers other national elections, among them French, Brazilian and Russian races, plus questions on Israeli leadership, ceasefires and nuclear talks.

Every name on the ballot question has a Yes and No line of its own, paid out in stablecoins, and the market page names its resolution source. For the share mechanics behind these markets, see Dexsport's prediction markets in detail.

Rules on election markets differ widely between countries, so confirm the position where you live. Its licence comes from Anjouan, and the terms may change.

Conclusion

The 2028 US presidential race already trades heavily. Polymarket's Republican nominee market had J.D. Vance near 51% in late August, a three-venue average put him at about 21% to win the presidency, and Democratic prices remain spread across several candidates.

Nominee and winner markets connect through division, which separates a candidate's chance of selection from their strength once selected.

Milestones from the November 2026 midterms to election day will reprice every contract. Check local law, size long-dated positions carefully, and trade only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters over a market that stays open for years.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and it does not endorse any candidate or party. Prices quoted reflect the dates shown and change constantly, so check current figures before trading. Election markets are restricted or prohibited in some jurisdictions. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

A hot or cool Core PCE print?

The PCE Price Index (Personal Consumption Expenditures) is what the Federal Reserve uses to measure inflation, hoping to see this figure come down to the Holy Grail of 2%. The index tracks the prices of U.S. household goods and services, with ‘Core PCE’ (excluding food and energy) the figure the Fed relies on most.

A hotter than expected Core PCE figure could lead to higher bond yields and a stronger dollar, while a cooler than expected print would likely spark a rally in stocks. Bitcoin bulls will be hoping for the latter outcome.

U.S. 10-year bond yields coming down

Source: TradingView

U.S. bond yields accelerated over the last week, with the 10-year yield hitting 5.293, thereby making a 19-year higher high in the process. It looks as though the 10-year yield may be on its way back down again now, with 5% a possible target, although the current volatile phase may not be over just yet. That said, if the support at 5.2% gives way, this could do wonders for stocks, gold, and the $BTC price.

$BTC price maintains narrow range

Source: TradingView

The 4-hour chart for $BTC illustrates that the price is maintaining within a smaller channel which it entered 9 days ago. After initially climbing to the top of this channel the price has since kept to the lower half, which has kept it in a narrow range for the last week.

Buffeted by the strong winds of rising bond yields over this time, the $BTC price has held firm - more so than has been the case for stocks and precious metals. The $82,840 horizontal support, also the bottom of the parallel channel, is very important here. If the bulls are going to continue their rally, this support floor has to hold.

A bearish descending triangle?

Source: TradingView

In the daily time frame it has to be acknowledged that the price action could be trading within a descending triangle. This would put the $BTC price into more of a bearish setup given that descending triangles break to the downside more often than not. Be that as it may, if the price does break to the upside, this will make the breakout even more bullish. 

The daily Stochastic RSI has its indicators passing the halfway point so it may only be a few more days before the indicators hit the bottom and start to make their way back up again, signalling upside price momentum as they pass back above the 20.00 level.

The RSI has its indicator still finally balanced. Falling through the descending trendline would likely signal a breakdown in price action, while bouncing higher from the trendline would probably signal a breakout.

A huge inverse head and shoulders pattern could play out if price collapses to $73K

Source: TradingView

The weekly chart for the $BTC price shows that there is absolutely nothing to worry about at all - as long as the horizontal support at $83K holds. The price coming back to test this level is perfectly normal and a bounce into next week could be the next move.

If we theorise that the $83K level does break down and the price corrects to the big support level at $73,600, this would likely form the right shoulder of a huge inverse head and shoulders pattern - a king of bottoming patterns. If this played out, the measured move could send the $BTC price up to $108K. Whichever way you look at it, this is the early stages of the bull market. It just requires patience.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Four months ago, Brez Scales had never traded crypto in his life. No charts, no watchlists, no idea what a market cap even meant in practice. Like a lot of people, he'd just watched from the sidelines while everyone else seemed to be making money. So he decided to stop watching and actually put money in, on fomo, the social trading app where every entry, exit, and position is public and live for anyone to see.

It did not go well at first. At one point, he was down $132,000 in a single week. That's not a typo, and it's not a small dip, that's the kind of number that makes most people close the app and never open it again. A lot of traders would've called it there.

He didn't. He kept showing up, kept making trades, kept building a public track record even while it was ugly. And this week, that patience paid off in a way that's hard to script: one trade alone turned a $996 position into a six-figure win. It wasn't even his only big one.

The trade: Effective Accelerationism

On September 26, Brez Scales put $996 (basically the price of a nice used couch) into a token called Effective Accelerationism, at an average entry market cap of $116.3K. That's about as early as it gets. The token's market cap has since climbed to $18.3M, turning that $996 into a position worth roughly $109,500, an unrealized gain of +$108,497.31, up 10,897.70%. For context, that's turning less than a grand into more money than most people make in a year, off one trade.

Brez Scales' live Effective Accelerationism position on fomo: $996 in, +$108,497.31 unrealized.

Mid-trade, he left a note that says a lot about where his head was at: he'd add more to the position but didn't want to risk disturbing his own $100K entry. That's the moment a fun little bet turns into something you're genuinely careful with. A few weeks earlier, $996 was money he could afford to lose. Now it's a position he's protecting.

A second big winner: $PAID

Effective Accelerationism wasn't a one-off. Over the past week, Brez Scales also built a much bigger position in $PAID, investing $148,353.51 at an average entry market cap of $9.4M. This one wasn't a lottery ticket, it was a real, sized bet. $PAID's market cap has since risen to $38.1M, putting his position at $288,471.51, a gain of +$324,653.31 (+218.84%) in just 7 days.

Brez Scales' $PAID position on fomo: $148,353.51 invested, +$324,653.31 gain over 7 days.

Put the two trades side by side and you get a picture of how this actually works in practice: a small, early bet on a coin nobody's heard of, and a much larger, more deliberate one on a token that already had some traction. Different sizes, different risk levels, same trader, same week.

Where he stands now

Between those two trades, Brez Scales turned a rough, expensive start into one of the standout runs on fomo right now. He currently sits at No. 5 on the platform's leaderboard, with total profit of +$461,301.02, ahead of traders with far bigger followings and far longer track records.

The fomo leaderboard: Brez Scales (@brezscales) ranked No. 5 with +$461,301.02.

The part worth sitting with is that none of this is a screenshot pulled from some private Discord or a claim you have to take on faith. Every number here, the entries, the exits, the running P&L, is public and verifiable on fomo, updated live as it happens. You don't have to trust Brez Scales' word for any of it. You can just watch.

The takeaway

The traders worth watching aren't always the ones who never lose. Sometimes they're the ones who kept their feed public through the losing week and were still there for the winning one.

If you want to watch Brez Scales' next move, or just see how a trader actually builds a position in real time instead of hearing about it after the fact, his whole history is sitting there on fomo, open for anyone to follow.

Download fomo, search @brezscales and hit follow. It takes under a minute, and you'll see his next trade live instead of reading about it after.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Each XCFPU unit contains two components: 1.0 Series S Component, representing economic participation linked to a designated restricted XCF share unit, and 0.5 Series W Component, a warrant-linked component with a fixed strike and a capped payoff. The unit is available through app.pipo.vc to approved eligible investors who pass the platform's eligibility and KYC screening.

XCF Global operates the New Rise facility in Reno, Nevada, permitted for a nameplate capacity of up to 38 million gallons of renewable fuel a year, and has begun commercial deliveries. The company is advancing the facility toward producing sustainable aviation fuel, one of the few available routes to lowering emissions in commercial aviation.

For most investors outside the United States, a small-cap industrial company listed on Nasdaq sits out of practical reach. Brokerage access, minimum sizes and settlement arrangements are built for a narrow set of participants. XCFPU is designed to change who can take part, not what the underlying business is.

Igor Lipovetsky, Co-Founder and CEO of PIPO.VC, said:

"Access alone was never the problem in private and small-cap markets. The problem is what investors actually hold once they get in. We built PIPO around instruments issued by a named, accountable entity, with rights written down and a structure an investor can read before committing. XCFPU is the first issue on that model, and we want it to be judged exactly on those terms."

Sergei Goriachev, Co-Founder and COO of PIPO.VC, said:

"The bottleneck in tokenization has never been capital. It is the cost of verifying who can participate and what they are entitled to. Screening, eligibility and settlement are the unglamorous parts, and they are the parts we spent the most time on. If they work quietly, investors see a simple purchase. That is the standard we hold this launch to."

Availability

XCFPU is offered under Regulation S and is available only to non-US persons. It is not available to US persons or to residents of the United Kingdom. The platform's screening process confirms eligibility. Offering documents, including risk factors, are available on app.pipo.vc and should be read in full before any decision.

Holding XCFPU makes an investor a holder of the unit issued by Capital Rights Holdings I Ltd. It does not make the investor a direct shareholder of XCF Global. Any secondary trading of the unit is subject to applicable approvals and partner availability.

About PIPO.VC

PIPO.VC is a technology platform that gives approved eligible investors access to issuer-sponsored tokenized instruments linked to companies before and after listing. PIPO provides the technology interface, eligibility screening, and purchase experience. PIPO does not issue, offer, place, or underwrite securities, does not hold client funds, and does not provide investment advice. More at pipo.vc.

Important information

XCF Global, Inc. is the reference issuer and is not the issuer of XCFPU. This release was not prepared by XCF Global, Inc. Information about XCF Global in this release is drawn from the company's public disclosures. This release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Instruments of this kind carry risk, including the possible loss of the entire amount invested. The warrant-linked component may expire without value. This release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction where such an offer or solicitation would be unlawful.

Media contact

Roman Wiligut, PIPO.VCmarketing@pipo.vc

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The route suits anyone who already manages coins in a self-custody wallet. It also brings responsibilities that an email account spreads differently, from network choice to the security of your keys.

Here is the full path from a connected wallet to a settled bet, followed by the terms that come with a wallet account.

Before You Connect

Five minutes of preparation prevents most first-time problems.

• Pick a supported wallet: Dexsport lists MetaMask, TronLink, Trust Wallet, Bitget, Halo and WalletConnect, which links many other wallets

• Know your network: decide which chain you will fund from, since each coin can exist on several networks

• Keep a little gas: hold some of the chain's native coin, such as ETH, TRX or BNB, to pay transfer fees

• Have an email ready: the sports welcome offer and the Sports Club require a verified address, which a wallet sign-in may not supply

Seven Steps From Wallet to Settled Bet

The sequence below follows the platform's own flow, from the header button to a payout.

1. Open the sign-up window. Click "Sign up" in the upper right corner of any page, and choose your wallet from the six icons, MetaMask among them

2. Approve the connection. Your wallet asks you to confirm the site; check the address in the prompt before you approve

3. Choose a welcome track, or skip it. Pick the casino offer, the sports offer or "I'll choose later", and add a promo code if you have one

4. Deposit on the right network. Select the coin, then the network, which the deposit screen labels as BEP-20, TRC-20, ERC-20, ARB1 or similar, and try a small transfer before the full amount

5. Check your balance. The wallet section shows a game balance and a withdrawable figure separately, so you can see what is ready to cash out

6. Place a bet. Open the sportsbook, add a selection to the slip and confirm, with stakes from $1

7. Collect the result. Once the event settles, winnings join your game balance, and the withdrawable figure updates as withdrawal conditions are met

Minimum deposits differ between funds sent straight from a Web3 wallet and deposits into the platform's internal wallet, so read the figure shown for your chosen route.

The Withdrawal Rule to Know First

One condition catches most newcomers. Under Dexsport's terms, each deposit must go through sports bets priced at 1.3 or more, or twice through casino games, before you can withdraw it.

Bets settled early through Cash Out do not count toward that requirement. The split between game balance and withdrawable balance on the wallet screen shows your progress at a glance.

What a Wallet Account Means Under the Terms

Wallet sign-in changes where responsibility lies, and Dexsport's terms spell that out.

• Your keys stay yours: the terms state that the platform is not responsible for private keys or assets stored in your wallet

• Actions bind the wallet holder: everything done from a connected wallet counts as your action, even when someone you gave access to acts on it

• Report problems quickly: suspected unauthorised use must be reported within 24 hours

• One profile per person: the terms prohibit multiple accounts controlled by the same person

• Checks can still apply: the platform does not request ID documents at sign-up, yet its terms allow a request at any point

Guides to wallet options can help you decide which of the supported wallets suits your habits before you connect.

Keep the Wallet Clean

Every connection leaves traces. Token approvals granted to a site stay active until you revoke them, and old permissions can outlive your interest in a platform.

Review approvals every few months, disconnect sites you have stopped using, and keep your seed phrase offline. Good wallet hygiene matters as much as any platform feature.

Using Your Wallet on Dexsport

Dexsport handles dozens of coins over many chains, and a connected wallet can fund the sportsbook, the casino and, with a stablecoin, the prediction markets, much like a MetaMask sportsbook built for crypto users.

Stakes start at $1 on the sportsbook, and weekly cashback pays in stablecoins every Monday.

Anjouan's regulator licenses the operator, age limits of 18 or the local age of majority apply, and residents of Russia and Belarus cannot use the platform. Terms change, so read the current version before your first deposit.

Last verified: September 2026

Conclusion

Wallet sign-in on Dexsport takes a few clicks: open the sign-up window, pick one of six wallets, approve the connection and choose a welcome track or skip it. From there, deposit on the right network, check the game and withdrawable balances, and place a bet from $1.

Two rules deserve attention before the first deposit. Deposits need play on sports bets priced from 1.3 before withdrawal, and everything done from the connected wallet binds its owner.

Add a verified email if you want the sports offer or the Sports Club. Check local law, set a budget, and bet only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling starts with a clear limit.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Supported wallets, networks and terms change, so check current details on the platform before you connect or deposit. Crypto transfers can be irreversible. Sports wagers and casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The title still favours Antonelli, yet each of the last eight venues brings its own character, from Malaysian storms to a Saturday night in Las Vegas. Those differences shape race markets far more than the championship table does.

Below: the standings after Baku, the F1 calendar 2026 has left, and the F1 race markets a crypto sportsbook offers each weekend.

The Championship After Baku

Russell's third win of the season, from pole, kept the fight alive while Antonelli recovered from 16th on the grid to finish fifth.

Driver

Team

Position

Deficit to the leader

Kimi Antonelli

Mercedes

1st

Leader

George Russell

Mercedes

2nd

66 points

Lewis Hamilton

Ferrari

3rd

103 points

Lando Norris

McLaren

4th

116 points

Last verified: September 2026

Mercedes also moved 160 points clear of Ferrari in the constructors' standings. With eight Grands Prix and one sprint left, the Antonelli Russell title race is the only live contest.

F1 Final Races 2026: Eight Rounds Left

The run-in opens with a relocated race and closes with two Middle Eastern rounds.

Round

Race

Venue

Dates

16

Bahrain Grand Prix in Malaysia

Sepang

2 to 4 October

17

Singapore Grand Prix, with sprint

Marina Bay

9 to 11 October

18

United States Grand Prix

Austin

23 to 25 October

19

Mexico City Grand Prix

Mexico City

30 October to 1 November

20

São Paulo Grand Prix

Interlagos

6 to 8 November

21

Las Vegas Grand Prix, Saturday race

Las Vegas

19 to 21 November

22

Qatar Grand Prix

Lusail

27 to 29 November

23

Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

Yas Marina

4 to 6 December

Formula 1 moved the Bahrain Grand Prix to Sepang after its April date was cancelled, the circuit's first race since 2017. Earlier reports flagged uncertainty over the Middle Eastern rounds, so check the official calendar close to each race.

Four Venues That Shape the Odds

Several of the circuits still to come reward a close look before you price a race.

1. Sepang

Malaysia's tropical climate brings sudden rain, and an afternoon storm can scramble a race that looked settled on the grid. Weather forecasts deserve as much weight as pace over a single lap here.

2. Singapore

Marina Bay hosts the season's final sprint, which puts eight more points on the table on Saturday. Its tight street layout makes safety cars common and passes hard, so grid position matters more than usual.

3. Las Vegas

The race takes place late on Saturday night, local time, on a long, quick street layout with cool track temperatures. Tyre warm-up often decides who can attack, which can upset form from the previous rounds.

4. Qatar and Abu Dhabi

The final two races close the season back to back. If the title remains open, strategy and team orders at Mercedes could shape results as much as raw speed.

Race Markets to Know

Race weekends support several markets besides the winner, and the same types tend to repeat across crypto sportsbooks.

• Race winner: the driver who takes the chequered flag first

• Final position: a driver to finish inside a set range, such as the podium or the points

• Finish or retire: whether a driver reaches the flag, useful at chaotic tracks such as Baku, where six cars failed to finish

• Quickest lap: the fastest single lap of the race

• Head-to-head: which of two drivers finishes higher, in the race or in qualification

• Team battle: which of two teams scores the better result

• Qualification winner: the driver who takes pole position

Head-to-heads often suit the run-in well, since they reward a view on two cars without the need to call the whole race. Our guide to Formula 1 markets covers each type in more depth.

Formula 1 on Dexsport

Dexsport lists eight Dexsport Formula 1 and motorsport market types in its sportsbook rules, the same list as above, from race winner to qualification head-to-heads. Bets start from $1, and stake limits vary by event tier.

Its prediction market board adds a season-long question on the 2026 Drivers' Championship, which settles in stablecoins after the finale. One account covers both the race-by-race markets and the title question.

Prices differ between books, so it pays to compare odds before a race. Its licence comes from Anjouan, and terms can change between races.

Conclusion

Antonelli leads Russell by 66 points after Baku, with Hamilton 103 back and eight rounds left. The run-in visits Sepang, Singapore, Austin, Mexico City, São Paulo, Las Vegas, Qatar and Abu Dhabi, and it ends on 6 December.

Each venue shifts the odds in its own way, from Sepang's rain and Singapore's sprint to a Saturday night race in Las Vegas. Head-to-head and finish-or-retire markets often suit these weekends better than the outright winner.

Check the official calendar before each race. Check what your country permits, fix one budget for the whole run-in, and bet only once you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters over a long finale.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Standings reflect the position after 26 September 2026, and calendars and market lists can change, so check official sources and current details before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Dexsport avoids that problem by design. Dexsport prediction markets accept and pay out only in stablecoins, so a correct share is worth a dollar when you buy it and a dollar when it settles.

The rule looks restrictive at first. Below: why stablecoins, what the rule protects, and what it means for anyone who holds other coins.

A Share Is a Promise of One Dollar

Every prediction market share rests on a simple promise. If the outcome happens, the share pays one unit; if it doesn't, the share expires at zero.

This promise only works if the unit holds still. Shares priced at 40 cents imply a 40% chance, but only when the payout is a fixed dollar. Pay them in a coin that moves 5% in a day, and the price drifts away from what traders think it means.

Dollar-pegged payouts keep the unit fixed. The price in cents then reads cleanly as a probability, and a correct forecast returns exactly what the market promised.

One Trade, Three Settlement Currency Choices

Take 100 Yes shares bought at 40 cents, a $40 position, on a market that resolves Yes a month later. The table compares the dollar value of the payout under different settlement assets.

Settlement asset

Coin price at payout

Value of the payout

Profit in dollars

Stablecoin

Steady at $1

$100

+$60

Bitcoin, price down 10%

10% lower

About $90

About +$50

Bitcoin, price up 10%

10% higher

About $110

About +$70

Figures are illustrative.

Only the stablecoin row ties the result to the forecast alone. Both Bitcoin rows add a second, unrelated bet on the price of Bitcoin, which can help or hurt regardless of whether you called the event correctly.

Four Reasons the Rule Makes Sense

The design protects traders and keeps the market mechanics clean.

• Prices mean what they say: a 40-cent share implies a 40% chance only when the payout holds a fixed value

• Crypto questions stay separate from the currency: a market on whether Bitcoin rises would tangle with its own payout if it settled in Bitcoin

• The liquidity pool stays balanced: a shared pool that pays winners needs a stable unit to match what it owes

• Results stay comparable: gains and losses across dozens of markets add up in one steady currency

Prediction market payouts on Kalshi come in US dollars and on Polymarket in USDC, for the same reasons. Stablecoin settlement is the crypto-native way to reach the same fixed unit, and many players already prefer it for stablecoin play across casino and sports products.

How the Rule Works on Dexsport

Dexsport applies the rule at the order panel. The Predict panel shows your balance and stake in the active stablecoin, and a wallet that holds only other assets sees a prompt to switch before it can trade.

Its sportsbook and casino accept a much wider range of coins, so the stablecoin rule applies to prediction markets alone. Players who fund an account with Bitcoin or Ethereum can keep using those for sports and casino play, and switch to a stablecoin when they want to trade a market.

Payouts reach you at the same fixed value you traded at, once the platform's team confirms the result, which it aims to do within a day of the event.

Its prediction market product covers shares and exits in more depth. Anjouan licenses the platform, and eligible stablecoins can change, so check the current list on the board.

Conclusion

Dexsport's prediction markets settle only in stablecoins because each share promises one dollar, and only a dollar-pegged unit keeps that promise intact. Prices of 40 cents then read cleanly as a 40% chance.

Settlement in a volatile coin would add a second bet on that coin's price, so a correct forecast could still lose value before payout. Kalshi and Polymarket follow the same logic with dollars and USDC.

Hold a stablecoin for prediction markets, and keep other coins for sports and casino play. Know the rules where you live, cap what you hold in open markets, and take part only once you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling applies to every market.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Eligible settlement assets and platform terms change, so check current details on the platform before you trade. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The number arrived alongside a sharper political challenge for the stablecoin issuer. Democratic staff on the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations reviewed 846 Iran- and proxy-linked wallets and found that 84% transacted exclusively or almost exclusively in USDT, according to Reuters. Taken together, the figures expose a central tension in the debate over USDT: issuer-level control can immobilise identified balances, but the available figures do not say how much suspect value had already moved before a freeze.

USDT in the Senate sample

The 84% figure is striking because it points to the extent of USDT’s presence within the wallet set examined by Senate investigators. It supports the contention that USDT was an important rail for the Iran- and proxy-linked wallets under review. Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s investigation went further, characterising USDT as a major channel in Iran’s shadow-banking system.

That wording matters. The inquiry is not simply asking whether sanctioned actors held a stablecoin. It seeks records concerning Tether’s sanctions-compliance practices, wallet freezes, suspicious-activity reporting and dealings with Iranian exchanges. In other words, the scrutiny is directed at the operational relationship between a large dollar-pegged token and a network of wallets and venues that U.S. authorities have identified as a sanctions concern.

But the Senate staff statistic is a wallet-usage measure, not a measure of illicit transaction volume. A wallet that transacts almost entirely in USDT counts toward the 84%, irrespective of the size, direction or outcome of the transfers reflected in the underlying history. The figure therefore demonstrates reliance within the reviewed sample; it does not independently quantify the total value of sanctions evasion, financing or other activity conducted through USDT.

That distinction is more than technical. Wallet counts can reveal concentration in a particular asset, while dollar volumes answer a different question: how much value flowed through it. Neither should be substituted for the other. The evidence available from the inquiry nonetheless helps explain why attention has settled on Tether rather than on crypto markets in the abstract. The concern is focused on a token whose issuer can take action at the address level.

What the freeze total shows

The reported figures are specific: Tether said more than $344 million was frozen across two addresses in April and more than $130 million across four TRON wallets in July, forming the great majority of its approximately $550 million Iran-linked USDT total. The company gave those figures in a September 28 statement.

What the number records is balances that Tether says became immobilised after particular addresses were identified. An address freeze can stop the affected USDT from being transferred through the issuer-controlled system, making the intervention countable without making it a complete account of disrupted activity.

The missing dimension is what happened before the freeze. The balance on identification is a point-in-time measure; it does not show whether value had already passed through the address, moved elsewhere, or belonged to a wider set of related transactions. TipRanks accordingly distinguished the freeze total from the Senate’s wallet-reliance statistic: neither establishes the amount of illicit value moved before intervention.

That distinction leaves both measures limited in different ways. The freeze total cannot prove that every related flow was stopped; historic USDT use in linked wallets cannot prove that issuer controls failed. The central question is timing—when activity occurred relative to identification, reporting and freezing—and, beyond that, how quickly and comprehensively Tether used its address-level control.

Iranian exchanges and execution

The Senate investigation puts named exchanges at the centre of that question. Blumenthal’s June inquiry focused on Nobitex, Wallex, Bitpin and Ramzinex. The senator said the Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned those exchanges on June 2, 2026, for supporting Iran’s regime, sanctions evasion and money laundering linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Those allegations turn the matter into an execution test for compliance systems. The requested materials concern more than the eventual outcome of a freeze. They cover what Tether knew about dealings with the exchanges, its sanctions processes, its suspicious-activity reporting and the handling of wallet restrictions. A freeze after an address has been identified is one visible result; screening, escalation and reporting procedures determine how an issuer reaches that result.

The public record supplied with the inquiry does not establish a transaction-by-transaction chronology for the exchanges or the wallets in the Senate sample. It also does not set out a measure of how quickly individual addresses were identified and frozen. That absence leaves a meaningful gap between the investigation’s broad description of USDT as a major channel and any conclusion about the effectiveness of particular controls in a particular case.

Still, naming the exchanges narrows the policy issue. This is not solely a general argument about whether stablecoins can be used by bad actors. It concerns whether the entities operating a widely used stablecoin can detect, document and restrict exposure connected to specifically sanctioned venues. The records sought by the senator are relevant precisely because the public freeze total cannot answer those process questions by itself.

Partial measures and a minority inquiry

Tether said its worldwide law-enforcement cooperation has involved more than 2,900 investigations and more than $4.9 billion in frozen assets, including over $2.4 billion connected to U.S. authorities. The company-reported totals put the Iran-related freezes in a broader enforcement context, but they do not break down alleged conduct, jurisdiction, wallet history or the timing of restrictions. Because they provide no denominator for total Iran-linked USDT flows, they cannot show what share of that activity was frozen.

The Senate inquiry is also narrower in institutional terms: Democratic minority staff are conducting it, rather than presenting it as a bipartisan committee finding. The committee’s subcommittee library lists the September 28, 2026 report among the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations’ documents.

Its wallet finding and Tether’s freeze total measure different things. The former concerns Iran- and proxy-linked wallet activity; the latter concerns balances frozen after specific wallets were identified. Neither measurement alone reveals how much potentially illicit value moved before intervention.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Proposed acquisition would bring a gold-backed decentralized financial ecosystem, including decentralized financial infrastructure targeting retail, institutional, and blockchain markets.

• A retail and institutional platform designed for the rapidly growing stablecoin industry, delivering compliance-focused infrastructure for payments, yield, lending and open-ecosystem, industry-wide decentralized financial applications.
• Institutional gold-based infrastructure spanning gold as a currency, gold-collateralized USD products and gold-backed financial products, anchored to an Ethereum-based Layer 2 network designed as a stable foundation for the next generation of industry products.
• Proprietary yield engines designed to power institutional products targeting competitive returns by bridging traditional and decentralized markets.

Amaze Holdings, Inc. (NYSE American: AMZE) (“Amaze” or the “Company”) today announced it has entered into a binding Letter of Intent (“LOI”) to acquire the assets of BullionFX, including its core platform Alchemy (collectively, the “BullionFX Assets”), for stock valued at approximately $155 million.

The BullionFX Assets comprise the technology, infrastructure and intellectual property behind a blockchain financial ecosystem built around auditable physical gold. If completed, the acquisition would mark a strategic expansion for Amaze beyond creator commerce and into gold-backed digital-asset infrastructure. The transaction comes amid a broad resurgence in cryptocurrency markets, rapid growth in volume within the stablecoin industry, renewed institutional engagement with digital assets, and continued strength in gold as a long-established store of value. Adjusted stablecoin transaction volume hit $1.79 trillion in June 2026, up 125% year on year, according to Visa Onchain Analytics (Allium). 

“Crypto’s renewed momentum and gold’s enduring role as a store of value have opened a rare window for infrastructure built on both,” said Joel Krutz, Interim Chief Executive Officer of Amaze. “Alchemy is a full-stack, gold-backed financial ecosystem, and we believe bringing it into the public markets can create meaningful long-term value for our stockholders.”

The acquisition gives Amaze the technology, infrastructure and intellectual property behind a comprehensive decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem in which every unit of digital value is tied to physical gold held by independent custodians. The platform's architecture supports lending and borrowing protocols, yield products, cross-chain interoperability, and an Ethereum-based Layer 2 network that links traditional and decentralized finance while offering the rapidly growing market of gold- and USD-backed stablecoins users’ broad functionality, including access to yield opportunities.

Following closing, Amaze intends to prioritize activation of the self-custody retail wallet and yield engines and, as an initial institutional application, to pursue a listed Stable Asset Treasury (“SAT”) vehicle for gold and USD, subject to applicable regulatory approvals.

“We have seen traditional financial markets adopt blockchain, and more recently stablecoins, as a direct result of retail users seeking more control, custody, and transferability of their own assets. We believe traditional finance will increasingly bridge with decentralized finance to extract the ideal attributes of both industries. Alchemy is well-positioned to compete in bringing to market a range of bridged traditional and decentralized financial products to introduce innovative financial offerings on a retail and institutional level while seeking to mitigate certain risks associated with traditional stablecoin models,” said Stephen Moss, Founder, BullionFX. "Joining a publicly listed company gives Alchemy the access and institutional credibility to accelerate our mission. That mission is a stable, transparent financial ecosystem for retail users that bridges traditional and decentralized finance."

INSIDE THE ALCHEMY PLATFORM

$GOLD, Backed by Physical Gold. Alchemy’s core $GOLD token is designed to be backed one-to-one by vaulted, independently custodied and audited physical gold, with reserves intended to be subject to real-time attestation through third-party, institutional-grade audit mechanisms. $GOLD is designed to serve as the network’s settlement asset, combining the stability of a hard asset with the speed and transparency of blockchain settlement.

Built for the Stablecoin Industry. Alchemy is a retail and institutional platform designed for the rapidly growing stablecoin industry. Its compliance-focused architecture is built to support gold-linked payments, yield, lending and borrowing, cross-chain interoperability and open-ecosystem DeFi applications that third-party developers can build on.

Institutional Gold Infrastructure on Ethereum Layer 2. For institutions, Alchemy provides gold-based infrastructure spanning gold as a currency, gold-collateralized USD products and gold-backed financial products. Running on an Ethereum-based Layer 2 network, it is designed to bring gold’s stability on-chain as a foundation for future industry products.

Proprietary Yield Engines. Alchemy’s proprietary yield engines for gold and USD are designed to power institutional products targeting competitive returns by bridging traditional and decentralized markets.

Self-Custody for Retail. A planned self-custody retail wallet is designed to give users direct access to gold-linked payments, yield and DeFi applications while keeping control of their own assets.

“Stablecoins have proven the demand for digital money. The next question is what that money is anchored to,” said Simon Rahme, Co-Founder and CTO, BullionFX | Alchemy. “We engineered Alchemy’s Layer 2 so that gold sits inside the settlement layer itself rather than on top of it. That gives developers and institutions a base for payments, lending and yield products, with reserves designed to be verifiable on-chain.”

Transaction Terms

Under the LOI, which contains certain binding provisions, the parties will work toward definitive agreements. The transaction, if consummated, will result in significant issuance of Amaze common stock to BullionFX. Final terms are subject to due diligence, regulatory review, approval by each party's board of directors and other customary closing conditions.

About Amaze Holdings, Inc. (NYSE American: AMZE)

Amaze Holdings, Inc. is an end-to-end, creator-powered commerce platform offering tools for brand development, product creation, advanced e-commerce, audience growth and scalable managed services. By helping people turn what they know, create and share into sustainable income, Amaze enables creators to build deeper audience relationships and more flexible paths to a better life. Discover more at www.amaze.co.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This news release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements regarding the proposed acquisition of the BullionFX Assets; the anticipated benefits, capabilities and potential of those assets; the parties’ ability to negotiate and enter into definitive agreements; the ability to successfully integrate the BullionFX Assets and realize anticipated synergies and value creation; the ability to generate anticipated yields or returns from proprietary yield engines or other platform features; the timing and success of planned product launches, including the self-custody retail wallet and Stable Asset Treasury vehicle; and expectations regarding the adoption and growth of decentralized finance, stablecoins, and gold-backed digital assets. Forward-looking statements often contain words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “may,” “designed to,” or “targeted.” These statements are based on management’s current views and assumptions and are not guarantees of future performance. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include, without limitation: the ability of the parties to negotiate and execute definitive agreements; the completion of due diligence; the receipt of required regulatory, stockholder and board approvals and the satisfaction of other closing conditions; the occurrence of any event that could give rise to termination; the significant dilution to Amaze stockholders in connection with the transaction; the continued availability of capital and financing; the ability to commercialize and operationalize the BullionFX Assets; Amaze’s lack of operating history in digital asset infrastructure and decentralized finance; the performance and security of blockchain-based technology and digital assets; risks related to smart contract vulnerabilities, software bugs, cyberattacks, hacking incidents, and operational failures affecting blockchain-based systems; evolving federal and state laws, regulations and guidance applicable to digital assets, stablecoins, decentralized finance platforms and related custodial arrangements, including potential classification of tokens as securities; the creditworthiness, performance and regulatory status of third-party custodians holding physical gold reserves; the ability to maintain one-to-one gold backing and real-time attestation as described, and the risk that reserves may not be verified as anticipated; competition from established and emerging participants in the digital asset, stablecoin and decentralized finance industries; the ability to protect and enforce intellectual property rights in the acquired technology; the volatility of cryptocurrency and gold markets; prevailing market, regulatory and business conditions; and other risks and uncertainties described in Amaze’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this release. Amaze undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement except as required by law.

ContactAmaze Investor RelationsAmaze Holdings, Inc.ir@amaze.co888-672-0365

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

AB 2409 targets public-official memecoins

The new law places a direct prohibition on California public officials issuing memecoins. It also reaches companies that list memecoins using an official’s likeness or image, according to the Office of the Governor of California.

The measure puts official-linked tokens at the centre of the state’s approach rather than imposing a general restriction on memecoins. Its practical reach extends beyond issuers because the legislation also sets conditions for digital-asset service providers serving California residents.

2027 listing restrictions for providers

Under AB 2409, digital-asset service providers are restricted from listing qualifying memecoins for California residents if the tokens are issued on or after January 1, 2027 and are offered by, or partnered with, a federal, state or local public official, Decrypt reported.

Civil enforcement and Newsom’s rationale

California’s attorney general, district attorneys, city attorneys and county counsels are authorised to bring civil enforcement actions under the law. Available remedies include injunctions and disgorgement, according to Decrypt.

Newsom framed the legislation as an anti-corruption measure, saying public officials should not profit from their office. In the announcement, his administration explicitly connected the bill to scrutiny surrounding President Donald Trump’s memecoin activities.

The law therefore combines a conduct rule for California officials with a platform-facing restriction for certain official-linked tokens. Its enforcement structure gives multiple state and local legal offices the ability to pursue civil cases rather than leaving oversight solely with the attorney general.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Network fees from personal data reads now fund staking rewards, buybacks and ecosystem development under a fixed protocol split; public dashboard launches at token.vana.org

The Vana Foundation today announced that expanded staking as part of the Vega upgrade to the Vana network is complete and published the paper "VANA: The Asset Behind an Open Data Economy", which sets out the VANA token economics. A public dashboard at token.vana.org reports network reads, fee income, buybacks, burns and token supply, with the on-chain record behind each figure.

Vana is a network for moving personal data under the permission of the person it belongs to. Under the network's fee model, an application that reads a person's data with a granted permission pays one cent per scope read. Fees are allocated by protocol rule: 60 per cent to stakers through staking pools, 20 per cent to the purchase and burn of VANA, and 20 per cent to ecosystem development. Each buyback and burn is published with its transaction hash.

With expanded staking, staking runs through three staking pools, each with a 5 per cent operator commission. Staking rewards are paid from network fees, accrue to the staked position and may be claimed as they accrue. Existing staked positions may be moved into one of the three pools in a single transaction at stake.vana.org by midnight UTC on 31 October 2026. Principal can be withdrawn at any time, with no deadline. After 31 October, a position that has not moved no longer earns rewards.

"Every read of a person's data on the network is a paid transaction, and the fees pay the node operators and stakers who make that movement possible," said Art Abal, Managing Director of the Vana Foundation. "The split is written into the protocol, and every figure is published on chain."

Applications on the network have produced 2,937,447 verified reads to date, as of 28 September 2026.

Total VANA supply and release schedules remain unchanged.

The paper "VANA: The Asset Behind an Open Data Economy" and the whitepaper addendum "The Vega Upgrade: Data Portability and Transformations" are available at token.vana.org.

About Vana

Vana is an open network for personal data portability. Its standard, the Personal Data Portability Protocol, was contributed to Linux Foundation Decentralized Trust as a Community Specification. vana.org

About the Vana Foundation

The Vana Foundation is a non-profit foundation that supports the development and adoption of the Vana network and is a member of Linux Foundation Decentralized Trust.

About OpenDataLabs

OpenDataLabs builds and operates the products that governments and industry run on the Vana network. www.opendatalabs.com 

This release is for information only and does not constitute an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any token or security.

ContactManaging DirectorArthur AbalVana Foundationpress@vanafoundation.org

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

10-year yield in touching distance of 19-year high

Source: TradingView

The 4-hour chart for the US Government 10-year bond yield reveals just how close the yield is to reaching a 19-year high. The 5.29% level could be reached on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Up then back down for the yield?

Source: TradingView

Zooming right out into the monthly time frame the last high can be seen. Is the 10-year yield about to surpass this high? The answer is quite possibly yes, although would the yield continue to climb? The Stochastic RSI indicators have reached the top of their limit, plus we have the double top. Therefore, at least from a technical analysis perspective, a descent to at least the descending trendline, and perhaps to the top of the triangle pattern, would be a next logical move.

$BTC price funnels into a descending triangle

Source: TradingView

While the $BTC price is possibly in another channel, it also looks to be within a descending triangle. The price is currently being funnelled into the last third of this triangle and a breakout in either direction is probably going to happen soon. Given that the triangle is descending, it is generally bearish, although we will wait and see in which particular direction the price goes. It it’s to the downside, the top of the previous parallel channel will be support, while if it’s to the upside, first stop would be at the midpoint of the channel (dotted line), and then horizontal resistance at $86,700 and the opportunity to break out of the top of the channel.

If the 10-year yield continues its drive up to 5.29%, stock markets, gold, and risk assets like Bitcoin are probably going to suffer. Therefore, any trades would need to bear this in mind. In fact, trading in this environment would probably be a lot more unpredictable than usual.

$BTC at decision point for breakdown or breakout

Source: TradingView

In the daily time frame the triangle pattern looks more apt than another parallel channel, given the lack of touch points for the top of the channel. Therefore, the $BTC price is very close to the next decision point of a collapse through the strong support, or a breakout that heads back up to $86,700.

The Stochastic RSI indicators still have a way to go to come back down and fully reset. This is while all the lower time frame indicators are on their way back up.

The RSI is probably the best indicator here. As can be seen, the indicator line is holding above a descending trendline. If this trendline gives way, this could be the signal that price action is also going to fall.

$BTC tests $83K as new support

Source: TradingView

The weekly chart shows that the current weekly candle has come back down to test and confirm the previous resistance, which will be new support as long as the $BTC price holds above by the end of the week.

The question to be answered now is will bond yields come back down? If they don’t, this could be a difficult environment for risk assets to rise into.

It will be interesting to see how Bitcoin copes with this particular wall of worry.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The company paid an average of $85,681 for the latest tranche, according to Strategy’s announcement. While the purchase adds to one of the largest corporate bitcoin positions, the allocation of funds is notable because the STRC repurchases exceeded the amount directed to BTC during the period.

Strategy adds 1,665 BTC at an $85,681 average price

The latest 1,665 BTC purchase cost about $142.7 million. Strategy said the average price was $85,681 per bitcoin, a transaction-specific figure that differs from the average cost of its entire bitcoin position.

Following the purchase, Strategy held 847,666 BTC acquired for approximately $63.95 billion, inclusive of fees and expenses. That puts the company’s portfolio-wide average cost at $75,437 per bitcoin, according to its September 28 Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The difference between the $85,681 paid for the new coins and the $75,437 all-in average reflects the accumulated cost of Strategy’s full holdings rather than a change to the terms of the latest purchase.

Common-stock sale funded bitcoin purchase and STRC repurchases

Strategy raised approximately $246.2 million in net proceeds by selling 1,469,165 shares of its Class A common stock during the period covered by the filing. It allocated $142.7 million of that sum to bitcoin and $103.5 million to repurchases of STRC, its preferred stock.

That division makes the BTC acquisition only part of the company’s concurrent financing and capital-return activity. The filing indicates that common-stock issuance supplied the funds for both uses, rather than presenting the bitcoin purchase as a standalone deployment.

Of the $246.2 million raised, the stated bitcoin allocation represented less than the amount Strategy spent in total on STRC buybacks. The remainder of the buyback funding came from the company’s USD Cash balance.

STRC buyback exceeded the bitcoin allocation

Strategy repurchased 1,534,530 STRC shares for approximately $151.7 million during the period, roughly $9 million more than the $142.7 million allocated to bitcoin.

Of the repurchase funding, $103.5 million came from Class A stock-sale proceeds and $48.1 million from Strategy’s USD Cash balance, according to the SEC filing. The buyback therefore combined equity-sale proceeds with cash already held by the company.

Strategy increased its bitcoin holdings while reducing outstanding STRC shares through the larger dollar commitment to the repurchase.

Holdings approach $70.6 billion in market value

Independent coverage by The Block put the value of Strategy’s bitcoin holdings at roughly $70.6 billion at the time of publication. That market-value estimate is separate from the company’s reported aggregate acquisition cost of about $63.95 billion.

With 847,666 BTC on its balance sheet after the latest purchase, Strategy’s reported position has moved closer to 850,000 bitcoin. The September 21–27 activity added 1,665 BTC while pairing the acquisition with a $151.7 million preferred-stock repurchase programme.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The design shifts CCIP toward an additive, selective verification model: an issuer can require an extra verifier for particular transfers instead of applying identical conditions to every transaction.

CCIP 2.0 also adds configurable transfer speeds and compliance functionality. Chainlink says those controls are intended to support institutional digital-asset distribution, where security, timing and eligibility requirements can differ by asset or transaction.

CCVs add issuer-controlled checks to Chainlink’s verifier network

CCVs independently verify and cryptographically sign transfers alongside Chainlink’s default verifier network, according to the Chainlink developer changelog. Chainlink’s example is an approval requirement for transfers above $1 million.

The CCV configuration is additive. The default verifier remains in place, while issuers can attach an additional approval layer and select checks for transfers meeting their own criteria.

The release does not establish a universal threshold or prescribe the checks every issuer must use. Instead, it describes a system intended to let issuers set transaction-specific security requirements; CoinDesk likewise reported that applications can implement custom security checks on top of Chainlink’s existing verifier network.

For developers, the result is a choice between using the baseline as the only approval path and combining it with an independent signer.

Default committee and transfer speeds

Chainlink said the default Chainlink Committee Verifier comprises 16 independent, security-reviewed node operators. CCIP 2.0 retains that committee as its standard verifier while allowing issuers and institutions to add supplementary verification and security controls selectively.

Those controls can require additional approval for transfers that meet a chosen threshold, such as $1 million, while leaving lower-value activity subject to a different policy. The $1 million example illustrates the mechanism rather than a network-wide operating requirement.

CCIP 2.0 also supports configurable finality speeds. Chainlink’s documentation says faster-than-finality transfers are available, while full source-chain finality remains the default security setting; verifier requirements and transfer timing are therefore separate configuration choices rather than one fixed policy for every asset and route.

Capabilities of CCIP 2.0, including additive security, configurable transfer speeds, and built-in compliance. — Source: Chainlink

Automated Compliance Engine

Chainlink said CCIP 2.0 includes built-in compliance functionality through its Automated Compliance Engine. According to a release carried by PR Newswire, the engine supports know-your-customer checks, anti-money-laundering controls, sanctions screening and transaction limits.

The compliance tooling is part of a broader package that combines a 16-operator default committee verifier, optional independently signing Cross-Chain Verifiers and configurable finality speeds.

Chainlink has described CCIP 2.0’s focus as the distribution of institutional digital assets across blockchains. Issuers can configure additional checks and transfer-speed settings, shaping the security and operational policies applied to their transfers.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The arrangement places a tokenized investment product into the collateral workflow for institutional trading. The pledged assets remain in custody outside the exchange and continue generating yield, according to Bybit's announcement.

The service is limited to eligible institutional clients. Neither the announcement nor the information provided with the collaboration specifies the terms on which credit is extended, the amount of credit available, or the fund-share valuation parameters used in the collateral arrangement.

Benji fund shares become off-exchange collateral on Bybit

Eligible institutional clients can pledge Benji-issued fund shares through ByCustody as off-exchange collateral for trading on Bybit, receiving credit lines denominated in USDT or USDC. The shares are not converted into those stablecoins; they are pledged to support the credit facility while remaining in custody off the exchange.

Cointelegraph reported that institutions can use the tokenized shares as collateral without transferring them onto Bybit, expanding their use beyond holding them as an investment.

From idle collateral to yield-bearing collateral

The central feature of the structure is that institutions can seek trading credit without giving up off-exchange custody of the underlying Benji fund shares. Bybit said those assets continue to generate yield while they are pledged.

That distinction matters because collateral can otherwise sit apart from an investor's income-producing allocation while it supports trading activity. Here, the collateral and the credit line perform different functions: the fund shares remain the pledged investment asset, while USDT or USDC credit is supplied for use on Bybit.

For eligible institutions, the arrangement creates a different collateral pathway: tokenized money-market-fund shares can serve as the basis for collateral without an on-exchange transfer of those shares. The announced arrangement specifically concerns the shares issued through Franklin Templeton's Benji system and the ByCustody route; it does not claim that trading is risk-free or that collateral values are fixed.

It also gives tokenized fund units a role beyond a buy-and-hold position. Cointelegraph characterized the development as an expansion of tokenized fund shares into collateral use, with the off-exchange custody component preserving the distinction between where the assets are held and where trading takes place.

Franklin Templeton's Benji platform supplies the fund infrastructure

Franklin Templeton’s Benji Technology Platform is the infrastructure behind the collateral referenced by Bybit. It supports blockchain-based recordkeeping and transfer-agency functions for tokenized investment products, according to a Franklin Templeton release.

The product is the Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund, represented by the BENJI token. Franklin Templeton says it launched in 2021 as the first U.S.-registered mutual fund to use a public blockchain as its official system of record.

Under the Bybit arrangement, those Benji-issued fund shares are pledged through ByCustody for the exchange’s trading-credit mechanism. The fund assets stay in custody off Bybit and continue generating yield; the institution instead accesses USDT or USDC credit for trading on the exchange.

That makes the collaboration an extension of tokenized fund shares into institutional trading collateral, with the custody of the underlying assets separated from the trading-credit access.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Alongside Coinbase’s stablecoin-payment infrastructure, the release describes a bank-led account and settlement layer. Its stated aim for businesses is to support the receipt or acceptance of stablecoin-linked payments through familiar payment and fiat-settlement processes, without requiring them to operate a digital-asset treasury function.

Citi Virtual Account Wallet powers Coinbase Virtual Accounts

Under the newly announced integration, Citi’s Virtual Account Wallet will power Coinbase Virtual Accounts, according to Coinbase. The exchange said the product will provide businesses with functionality resembling a bank account, while incoming fiat is converted automatically into stablecoins.

Virtual accounts generally provide a way to organise payment flows through distinct account identifiers without requiring a separate traditional bank account for every use case. Coinbase’s announcement frames the integration around that operational model: businesses can use the accounts for payment functionality while the conversion between fiat and stablecoins is automated within the offered workflow.

The distinction matters because stablecoin payments have often required businesses to decide whether they will directly receive, store and reconcile digital assets. Coinbase and Citi are presenting their arrangement as infrastructure that moves those steps into an integrated payments process. The companies have not detailed additional capabilities beyond saying they are expected in the following months.

Coinbase said the first deployment is planned for the US. That is a rollout plan rather than confirmation of availability in other markets, and the announcement did not specify a timetable for further geographic expansion.

Spring by Citi keeps merchant settlement in fiat

Citi describes Spring by Citi as an end-to-end digital payments service for global e-commerce and business-to-business flows, including payment acceptance, settlement and reconciliation.

Institutional clients using Spring by Citi can accept stablecoin payments through Coinbase Payments, according to Bloomberg Law. The digital assets are automatically converted into fiat. Citi settles the funds as the bank of record.

Coinbase handles the stablecoin-payment component; Citi handles the banking and settlement role. Merchants do not need to hold or manage stablecoins under the described model.

In practice, the arrangement places stablecoin payments behind existing commercial payment operations while leaving the merchant’s settlement process fiat-based.

Official Coinbase-Citi partnership graphic. — Source: Coinbase

Expansion of the 2025 institutional payments work

The September announcement extends a Coinbase-Citi collaboration first disclosed on October 27, 2025. At the time, the companies said their work would focus on fiat-to-digital-asset conversion, stablecoin payment solutions and institutional payment infrastructure.

The new products closely align with those earlier priorities: Citi’s Virtual Account Wallet is being used for fiat-to-stablecoin conversion, while the Spring by Citi integration addresses stablecoin payment acceptance and fiat settlement for institutional clients.

Coinbase’s description of the initial US launch and planned additional capabilities suggests the companies view the release as a staged build-out rather than a finished global product. Whether the service expands beyond its first market, or adds features in the coming months, will determine how broadly the partnership reaches Citi’s institutional payments network.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Independent audit underscores Bybit’s long-term commitment and continued investment in providing secure, reliable, and resilient digital asset services.

Bybit, the New Financial Platform trusted by more than 80 million users worldwide, today announced the successful completion of its SOC 2 Type II audit, independently conducted by Deloitte. 

Holding Security to High Global Standards

SOC 2 Type II provides rigorous, internationally recognized independent assurance over an organization’s security and operational safeguards. Developed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), it is recognized by leading financial institutions and global enterprises as a trusted benchmark for security governance, operational resilience, and the protection of sensitive information.

Completing the SOC 2 Type II audit marks an important milestone for Bybit, providing independent assurance of its security and risk-management capabilities. Bybit’s security framework brings together governance, technology, processes, and people, translating strategic security objectives into clear responsibilities and coordinated action across the organization. Management oversight supports consistent execution, ensuring that security priorities are reflected in daily decisions and operations. The audit assessed whether the measures supporting these objectives operated effectively throughout the review period.

This achievement reflects the commitment of Bybit’s leadership to holding the organization accountable to demanding security standards. That expectation extends across the organization, making user protection a shared, lasting priority at every level.

Building Trust with Users and Partners

The report supports Bybit’s ongoing efforts to earn the trust of users and partners across three key areas:

• Reinforcing users’ trust: Demonstrating Bybit’s commitment to protecting sensitive information and delivering reliable services through independent validation of its security capabilities.
• Increasing transparency: Giving institutional clients and partners a clearer view of Bybit’s security and risk management to support informed decisions and due diligence.
• Upholding compliance standards: Putting Bybit’s compliance commitments into action through adherence to established assurance criteria and undergoing independent review。

Strengthening Security and Compliance

The SOC 2 Type II report complements Bybit’s existing ISO/IEC 27001 certification and PCI DSS compliance validation. Together, these achievements demonstrate Bybit’s commitment to meeting demanding international standards across information security, data protection, and operational reliability. Each assessment brings a distinct perspective, contributing to a more comprehensive view of security.

Bybit will maintain these standards and continue strengthening its security capabilities as its services and customers’ needs evolve, using insights from independent assessments to guide further improvements. The company remains committed to putting users first and upholding high standards of security and compliance across its global platform.

#Bybit / #NewFinancialPlatform  

//ENDS

About Bybit

Bybit is The New Financial Platform.

We believe every person should have access to every financial opportunity on earth. That's why we're building the first intelligent platform that connects anyone, anywhere to the world's finance.

Trusted by more than 80 million users worldwide, Bybit brings together investing, trading, payments, and wealth-building in a single secure and intelligent ecosystem. Through the combination of AI-powered technology, deep global liquidity, robust security, and transparent operations, Bybit makes global finance more accessible, efficient, and empowering for everyone.

Built for everyone. Powered by intelligence. Open to the world.

Learn more at Bybit.com. 

For more details about Bybit, please visit Bybit Press

For media inquiries, please contact: media@bybit.com

For updates, please follow: Bybit's Communities and Social Media

ContactHead of PRTony AuBybittony.au@bybit.com

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Coinbase said its clearinghouse will use USDC collateral and support 24/7 settlement, describing the operation as a USDC-native clearinghouse within its US derivatives business.

CFTC Registers Coinbase Clearing as a Derivatives Clearing Organization

Coinbase Clearing’s registration is as a derivatives clearing organization, or DCO. The CFTC order covers fully collateralized futures, options on futures and swaps; it does not, on the information released, set out a timetable for particular contracts to begin clearing.

Clearing is the post-trade function that sits behind derivatives transactions. In this case, the regulatory permission is limited by the CFTC’s stated product scope and the requirement that the instruments be fully collateralized.

USDC Collateral and 24/7 Settlement

Coinbase described Coinbase Clearing as its first USDC-native clearinghouse, designed to support USDC as collateral and provide settlement around the clock.

That description sets out Coinbase’s intended operating model, not a broader CFTC finding on stablecoin use. The agency’s registration record authorizes Coinbase Clearing to clear fully collateralized futures, options on futures and swaps.

Coinbase said the DCO registration completes its CFTC-regulated derivatives stack, combining a futures commission merchant, a designated contract market and the newly registered clearing organization.

Official Coinbase Clearing graphic. — Source: Coinbase

Coinbase’s CFTC-Regulated Derivatives Stack

Coinbase said the DCO registration completes its CFTC-regulated derivatives stack. The company said that structure now combines a futures commission merchant, a designated contract market and the newly registered clearing organization.

The three components cover distinct parts of a derivatives operation: customer-facing futures intermediation, a regulated market venue and clearing. With Coinbase Clearing registered, Coinbase has added the clearing element to the framework it says it has assembled under CFTC oversight.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

At the same time, XRPLF’s September 17 release of xrpld version 3.4.0 brought LendingProtocolV1_1 to the ledger, while Evernorth and Armada Acquisition Corp. II are due to put their proposed transaction to a shareholder vote on September 30. If approved and completed, the combined company is expected to list on Nasdaq as XRPN and run an XRP-focused treasury, according to the SEC filing.

Those catalysts frame the XRP price prediction question, but they do not amount to a technical breakout. XRP was near $1.48 on September 28, leaving it below the closest hourly resistance and inside a narrow range where the next direction still depends on whether buyers can recover nearby levels.

XRP indicators show balanced momentum near $1.48

The hourly and daily snapshot as of September 29 points to balance rather than a confirmed directional trend. On the one-hour chart, XRP’s 14-period RSI stood at 54.88, a neutral reading that indicates neither notably stretched buying nor selling pressure. The daily RSI was similarly neutral at 56.71, according to CoinLore’s technical data.

Momentum is therefore constructive enough to leave room for an upside attempt, but it has not supplied an emphatic signal. The one-hour MACD was listed at -0.003491, against a -0.005051 signal line, and was classified as neutral with no clear buy or sell indication. Traders looking for proof that the news backdrop is translating into price follow-through would need to see the market resolve this neutral condition rather than simply remain range-bound.

Short-term trend references reinforce that caution. The 20-hour EMA was $1.49, just above the reported $1.48 spot price. That puts XRP close to its short-term trend reference, rather than clearly above it. A recovery and hold around that area would improve the immediate structure; continuing to trade below it would leave the market without a clear short-term advantage.

The hourly Bollinger Bands also describe compression around current prices rather than an extreme move. Their upper band was $1.52 and lower band $1.47, with price inside both boundaries. The upper band sits close to the first explicit resistance at $1.53, so an advance through the $1.52-$1.53 area would be the first technical sign that XRP is moving beyond its recent contained range. Conversely, a move back through the lower band would draw attention to the established support levels below.

None of these readings independently determines the next move. Taken together, however, they show that the ETF-flow and XRPL headlines are meeting a market with neutral momentum, not one already in a fully developed breakout. That distinction matters for $1.55: it remains a level to be reclaimed rather than a destination validated by current indicators.

XRP support at $1.49 and $1.45 versus the $1.53-$1.55 barrier

The actionable XRP range is compact. With spot reported at $1.48, the supplied $1.49 hourly support is unusually close and also aligns with the 20-hour EMA. The price being marginally below that level highlights the fragility of the current position: XRP needs to recover it to restore the nearest support reference, rather than treating it as firmly secured.

LevelTechnical roleWhat it would signal$1.49Strong hourly supportA recovery and hold would reinforce the immediate range structure.$1.45Strong hourly support and lower edge of the immediate consolidation zoneHolding it would preserve the nearby base; losing it would weaken the short-term setup.$1.41Next strong hourly supportThis is the next supplied downside marker below the immediate zone.$1.53Strong hourly resistance and upper short-term range boundaryBuyers would need to clear it before a $1.55 retest is in view.$1.55Strong hourly resistance and recent consolidation ceilingThis is the title’s scenario level and the key barrier for an upside extension.$1.60Next daily resistanceIt becomes relevant only after a sustained move beyond $1.55.

On an upward path, $1.53 is the immediate hurdle. It is the upper boundary of the short-term range and sits just above the $1.52 upper Bollinger Band. Clearing $1.53 would not itself establish $1.55 as support, but it would open a direct test of the stronger $1.55 ceiling. A decisive move through that second barrier would shift attention to $1.60, the next supplied daily resistance.

The downside path is equally defined. XRP has the $1.45-$1.50 area as its immediate support zone, as Crypto Daily reported on September 28. Since $1.49 is the nearest cited hourly support, an inability to regain it would keep pressure on $1.45. A loss of $1.45, the lower edge of the consolidation area, would leave $1.41 as the next strong hourly support in the supplied map.

This structure makes the $1.53-$1.55 area more than a round-number objective. It is a two-step resistance sequence. For the $1.55 scenario to gain credibility, XRP would first need to reclaim the short-term range boundary at $1.53 and then overcome the consolidation ceiling, while avoiding a deterioration through the $1.49 and $1.45 support structure.

Can ETF demand and XRPL catalysts put $1.55 back in focus?

Yes, $1.55 can return to focus, but the available evidence supports it as a conditional retest scenario rather than a confirmed call. The $22.65 million of September 25 net inflows into U.S. spot XRP ETFs provides a supportive demand data point, particularly alongside cumulative inflows of about $1.79 billion. It does not, by itself, demonstrate that buying will persist or force a break through resistance.

There are additional event-driven reasons for market attention. XRPLF said its xrpld 3.4.0 upgrade adds LendingProtocolV1_1 features including closed-ended vaults and cash-basis accounting, and that node operators need to upgrade for service continuity, as set out in the release notes. Separately, the September 30 Evernorth shareholder vote is a defined corporate milestone; the proposed Nasdaq listing and XRP-focused treasury remain contingent on approval and completion.

For price, the technical confirmation threshold is clearer than the headline narrative. XRP would need to regain $1.49, clear $1.53 and then challenge $1.55. Neutral hourly and daily RSI readings leave that route open, while the price’s location inside the hourly Bollinger Bands suggests the market has not yet made the move. A sustained break of the $1.55 resistance would put $1.60 into view, but $1.60 is a separate daily resistance rather than an implied forecast.

The case weakens if the market cannot reclaim $1.49 and instead loses $1.45. That outcome would move attention to $1.41 and indicate that the catalysts have not been sufficient to overcome the immediate technical range. XRP was reported near $1.48, with $1.55 identified as the nearest resistance and consolidation ceiling, in Crypto Daily’s September 28 market assessment.

In short, ETF inflows, the XRPL lending upgrade and the pending Evernorth vote give XRP a timely catalyst backdrop. The chart still demands evidence: $1.53 is the initial gate, and $1.55 is the decisive test. Until those levels are cleared while $1.49 and $1.45 hold, the XRP price outlook remains a balanced range scenario rather than a confirmed upside breakout.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Roulette still draws big crowds. The difference comes from how each game handles players: a roulette wheel can serve thousands of bettors at once, while a classic blackjack table seats seven.

Studio economics, stake bands and branded tables push the numbers further apart. Below are the reasons behind the split, then six crypto casinos where live blackjack leads roulette.

Seats Set the Count

Capacity explains most of the difference.

Standard live blackjack tables deal to seven seats. Once those seats fill, other players can only bet behind or look for another table. Casinos that want thousands of people at blackjack during peak hours therefore need hundreds of tables live at once.

Roulette works differently. One wheel and one dealer can take bets from an unlimited number of players, because every bettor wagers on the same spin. Five or six busy roulette streams can serve the same crowd that needs dozens of blackjack tables.

Studios have answered the seat limit with shared-hand formats such as Evolution's Infinite Blackjack and Pragmatic Play Live's ONE Blackjack, where every player uses the same first two cards. Those tables absorb large crowds, yet classic seven-seat tables still make up most of the count.

Four More Forces Behind the Split

Capacity opens the divide, and four other factors widen it.

• Stake bands: studios run separate tables for low, mid and high stakes, and blackjack players care strongly about a table at their level

• Dedicated tables: operators can rent branded tables with their own logo and dealers, and most choose blackjack for that purpose

• Language and region: studios staff tables for specific languages and markets, and each language often gets its own set of blackjack tables

• Speed and rule variants: speed blackjack, early payout, side-bet versions and VIP tables each count as separate entries

Roulette variants exist too, such as speed, multiplier and single-zero wheels, but each one serves an unlimited crowd, so fewer copies do the job. The spread of live roulette tables across crypto casinos shows how few wheels a lobby needs.

Crypto Casinos Where Live Blackjack Leads Roulette

Every lobby below relies on the same multi-studio model, so blackjack tables outnumber roulette wheels in each. These crypto casinos ranked on blackjack depth, stake range and lobby clarity also appear in comparisons of casinos with 100+ live games, and counts vary by region.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport lists 648 live blackjack tables against 161 roulette tables, inside a Dexsport live casino section of around 870 in total.

Two live dealer studios, Pragmatic Play Live and Evolution, supply most of them, from low-stakes seven-seat tables to VIP and shared-hand formats. Baccarat adds 238 card tables, under an Anjouan licence.

2. Stake

Stake operates a large live casino built on major studios, and its blackjack section spans casual tables through high-limit rooms.

Shared-hand formats stand beside classic seven-seat games, which keeps seats open at busy times. Roulette covers the main variants with far fewer tables, in line with the capacity pattern.

3. BC.Game

BC.Game draws live tables from several studios, which gives its blackjack section a wide spread of stakes and languages. Speed and side-bet versions add to the count. Its roulette section offers plenty of variants, yet each wheel serves a large crowd, so the table total stays well below blackjack.

4. Vave

Vave's live lobby leans on mainstream studios and follows the same shape, with blackjack tables in far greater number than roulette. The mix suits players who want a seat at mid-range stakes. Published detail on table rules is lighter than above, so check payouts at each table before you play.

5. Mega Dice

Mega Dice brings a live casino into a Telegram-first product, with blackjack tables from established studios across several stake bands. Roulette appears in smaller numbers.

The phone-friendly layout suits quick sessions, though documentation on individual table rules is thinner than at the platforms ranked higher.

6. Cloudbet

Cloudbet offers a live section focused on mainstream studios, with blackjack tables that cater well to higher stakes. Its overall live catalogue is smaller than the leaders', yet blackjack still outnumbers roulette, and a track record since 2013 appeals to players who value an established brand.

Last verified: September 2026

Conclusion

Live blackjack outnumbers roulette because of capacity. Classic blackjack tables seat seven players, while one roulette wheel serves an unlimited crowd, so casinos need far more blackjack tables to meet the same demand.

Stake bands, branded tables, language-specific dealers and rule variants widen the divide. Dexsport leads the list with 648 live blackjack tables against 161 roulette tables, ahead of Stake and BC.Game.

Choose tables by rules, not only by availability, and check payouts before you take a seat. Look up the law in your country, fix a limit for each session, and join a table only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters at quick live tables.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Table counts, studios and rules change and vary by region, so check current details on each platform before you play. Casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

For players, DESU on MEXC changes how they can acquire and move the Dexsport token. The casino, sportsbook, and prediction markets work as before, and DESU remains optional for all three.

Below: what DESU is, what a centralised exchange adds, and what to weigh before you buy or deposit it.

DESU at a Glance

The token dates back to Dexsport's early years, well before its prediction markets and esports partnerships.

Item

Detail

Role

Dexsport's native token, accepted as a deposit and withdrawal asset

Network

BNB Chain, as a BEP-20 token

Total supply

1,000,000,000, described as limited

Token sale

12 to 16 November 2021 at $0.02, across several launchpads

Main venues

PancakeSwap, with MEXC added in June 2026

Audits

CertiK and Pessimistic, on the token contract

Data sites

CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko

Last verified: September 2026

Those token audits examined the DESU smart contract. They did not audit the wider Dexsport platform, its games or its cashier, a distinction to remember whenever audits come up.

Gains From a Centralised Exchange

Decentralised and centralised exchanges serve players in different ways, and MEXC fills gaps that PancakeSwap leaves.

• Order book access: MEXC matches buyers and sellers on a traditional order book, familiar to anyone who trades on centralised platforms

• Simpler entry: players who already hold funds on MEXC can buy DESU there, without a self-custody wallet or a swap on BNB Chain

• Two liquidity pools: activity now splits between PancakeSwap and MEXC, so prices can differ slightly between them at any moment

• Exchange rules: MEXC applies its own account checks, withdrawal limits and network options, separate from Dexsport's

CryptoDaily reported the MEXC launch in June, alongside the community campaign that accompanied it.

From MEXC to Dexsport in Four Steps

The route from exchange to casino follows a few clear steps.

1. Check the network on MEXC's withdrawal screen and choose BNB Chain BEP-20, the network Dexsport accepts for DESU

2. Copy the Dexsport deposit address for DESU on BNB Chain, not the address for any other asset

3. Try a token-sized transfer first, and confirm it credits before you move the rest

4. Keep a little BNB in any self-custody wallet you use along the way, since BNB Chain charges fees in BNB

Wallet-based access brings its own upkeep. Every connection to a dApp can leave token approvals in place, so review them and revoke the ones you have stopped using.

Inside the Dexsport Cashier

Dexsport accepts DESU on BNB Chain as one of its Dexsport deposit assets, in a cashier that spans several dozen coins and chains. Players can fund a balance with it, just as they would with USDT or BNB.

The platform also names several ways to earn DESU, among them stake rewards, referral commissions, contests and events, lottery-style draws and a Wheel of Fortune. Terms for each route appear on the platform's own pages and can change.

DESU is one option among many at the cashier, not a requirement. Prediction markets on Dexsport settle in stablecoins, so a DESU balance cannot fund them directly. The operator holds an Anjouan licence, so confirm current terms before you deposit.

Points to Weigh Before You Buy

New venues bring visibility, and DESU still faces the same risks as any small-cap token.

• Price volatility: DESU can move sharply in either direction, and a casino balance held in it rises and falls with the market

• Separate platforms: MEXC and Dexsport run independent accounts, rules and support teams

• Audit scope: the published audits cover the token contract, not the platform as a whole

• Personal decision: any token purchase is a financial choice, separate from how you play

Conclusion

MEXC's June 2026 addition gave DESU a centralised venue next to PancakeSwap, backed by a $40,000 community campaign. Players can now buy the token on an order book and withdraw it to Dexsport over BNB Chain.

DESU remains optional on the platform. It works as one deposit asset among many, prediction markets still settle in stablecoins, and the CertiK and Pessimistic audits cover the token contract alone.

Treat any token purchase as a financial decision, separate from play. Confirm what your country allows, set a limit on deposits, and sign up only once you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters whatever asset funds the account.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any token. Token listings, network support and platform terms change, so check current details on each platform before you transfer. Crypto assets are volatile and transfers can be irreversible. Casino games and sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

This shift reshaped every rate question on the boards. Cut-count markets that once looked lively now trade near zero, while hike and hold contracts draw the action.

Two FOMC sessions are left this year, on 27 to 28 October and 8 to 9 December. Below: the current rate, trader expectations, and how these markets settle.

Rates After the September Hike

The September decision reset the outlook for the rest of the year.

Measure

Latest figure

Federal funds target range

3.75% to 4.00%

September vote

12 to 0 for a 25-basis-point hike

Officials who expect another 2026 hike

16 of 19 on the dot plot

Average projection for end-2026

About 4.1%, up from 3.8% in June

August CPI inflation

3.4% year on year

August unemployment

4.1%

Last verified: September 2026

Chair Kevin Warsh's committee cited persistent inflation and a firmer economy. Four policymakers pencilled in two more hikes this year, and every projection ruled out a cut.

Rate Hike Odds for October and December

Prediction markets and futures tell a similar story, with small differences in confidence.

• Kalshi Fed markets, 24 September: about 63% for a 25-basis-point hike in October, 34% for a hold, and low single digits across larger moves or cuts

• CME FedWatch, 25 September: about 76% for an October hike, based on fed funds futures

• Futures path: near 4.2% by December, consistent with one more quarter-point rise this year

• December session: brings a fresh dot plot, so it can move longer-dated markets even if October delivers a hike

Kalshi's slightly lower hike probability reflects a separate crowd and a different market structure, not a different data set. Both readings put a hike as the base case.

How a Fed Market Settles

Rate markets resolve on the official decision, and the exact question decides which contract pays.

1. The decision comes out at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time on day two of each FOMC session, followed by a press conference at 2:30

2. The market checks the new target range against its question, such as a hike of 25 basis points, a hold, or a move of 50 or more

3. Each outcome pays separately, so a 50-basis-point hike settles a "hike of 25" contract as No if the terms specify the size

4. Cut-count markets tally the number of reductions across a year, and a hike leaves the tally unchanged

Read the size and direction in every question before you trade. Markets on "any hike" and on "exactly 25 basis points" can settle differently from the same announcement.

The Fed's Reach Into Crypto

Rate decisions reach crypto through several channels. Higher rates tend to strengthen the dollar and raise the return on cash, which can weigh on risk assets such as Bitcoin. They also lift the interest that stablecoin issuers earn on reserves held in short-term Treasuries.

For anyone with a crypto bankroll, the Fed calendar deserves a place in the diary. Stablecoin deposits in place of volatile coins remove most of the price swing around a decision day.

Fed Questions on Dexsport

Dexsport places rate questions in the Economy category of its board, alongside markets on recession odds, IPO dates and major acquisitions. Fed decisions and cut counts rank among its core Dexsport prediction markets on the economy.

Payouts go out in stablecoins, and the rules box names the question, cut-off and source, usually the Fed's own statement.

Cut-count markets deserve extra care after September, since a hike changes the context but leaves the tally where it was. Dexsport's broader prediction market product explains shares and prices in more depth.

Anjouan's regulator licenses the platform; reread the question before each position, since terms can change.

Conclusion

The Federal Reserve raised rates to 3.75% to 4.00% on 16 September, its first increase since 2023, and 16 of 19 officials expect another hike this year.

Prediction markets agree. Kalshi priced about a 63% chance of a quarter-point rise in October, CME FedWatch about 76%, and futures point to roughly 4.2% by December.

Match every contract's terms to the outcome you expect, since size and direction decide which one pays.

Know the rules where you live, cap what you commit before each decision day, and trade only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling covers macro questions as much as sport.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a forecast or trading recommendation. Probabilities and projections quoted reflect late September 2026 and change with new data, so check current figures before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The Crypto Side: 86 Contracts, Sorted by Sector

The crypto lineup starts where every perp venue starts, with BTC-USDT and ETH-USDT at up to 100x leverage, and then fans out across the sectors that define the current market. The platform's own categorisation groups the contracts into Layer 1s (SOL, BNB, XRP, ADA, SUI, AVAX, NEAR, APT, HBAR, XLM), Layer 2s (ARB, OP, MNT), DeFi (LINK, AAVE, UNI, ONDO, ENA, PENDLE), AI (TAO, VIRTUAL), infrastructure, gaming, and memes (DOGE, 1000PEPE, WIF, PENGU, FARTCOIN). Newer additions include HYPE, ASTER, ZEC, WLFI, PUMP, and PAXG, the tokenised-gold contract that gives crypto traders a hard-asset hedge without leaving the perp account.

Leverage is set deliberately rather than uniformly. Beyond the two majors at 100x, roughly three-quarters of the crypto contracts run up to 50x, while the meme cohort (DOGE, 1000PEPE, 1000BONK, WIF, POPCAT, MOODENG, SPX) is capped at 25x, a straightforward reflection of the volatility those markets carry. All of it runs on a central limit orderbook with up to 10,000 transactions per second of throughput and zero gas fees on orders.

The TradFi Side: 39 Markets, 22 of Them Around the Clock

The second half of the menu is what most perp DEXes do not have. Since November 2025, ApeX Omni has offered perpetual futures on traditional assets, priced by Chainlink's institutional RWA oracle feeds and settled in USDT. The lineup now spans major US equities (Apple, NVIDIA, Tesla, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Coinbase, Palantir, Micron, Intel), index and sector ETFs (SPY, QQQ, the South Korea ETF EWY, the 3x leveraged semiconductor ETF SOXL), commodities (gold, silver, WTI and Brent crude, natural gas, the USO oil fund), a memory-sector DRAM basket index, and a growing set of international and private-market names: Samsung, SK hynix, memory maker CXMT, Cerebras, robotics company Unitree, and SpaceX.

Every TradFi contract offers up to 50x leverage, and 22 of the 39 now trade 24 hours a day, seven days a week, including the pre-IPO names, the chip cohort, and the energy contracts, while the remainder follow a 24/5 schedule with weekend closures. Per platform data, TradFi perpetuals turned over more than $13.8 billion in their first nine months.

Leverage as a Dial, Not a Setting

The number on a contract is a ceiling, not an instruction. ApeX Omni lets traders adjust leverage per contract before or after opening a position: raise it for more exposure, or lower it at any time to widen the buffer to liquidation. Positions are cross-margined, so unrealised profit on one contract offsets unrealised loss on another, and risk limits scale the maintenance margin requirement up as position size grows, which keeps the largest positions the most conservatively margined.

Two design choices shape how that leverage feels in practice. Cross-Collateral means the margin pool can be funded with USDC, WBTC, WETH, ETH, cmETH, mETH, cbBTC, or USDe alongside USDT, each valued at its live index price, so a trader does not have to sell assets to take a position. And TradFi perpetuals live in a separate account with its own margin pool: a liquidation on a stock position can never cascade into crypto positions, or vice versa. High leverage on one side of the platform is structurally quarantined from the other.

The Order Toolkit Behind Every Pair

Breadth of markets is only useful with breadth of execution. Every USDT perpetual on ApeX Omni supports limit, market, conditional market, conditional limit, and take-profit / stop-loss orders, with the advanced flags professionals expect: time-in-force options (Good-Till-Time, Fill-or-Kill, Immediate-or-Cancel), Post-Only to guarantee maker status, and Reduce-Only to ensure an order can only shrink a position. TP/SL orders can trigger on last, mark, or index price and close positions in stages, and cancelling an unfilled order costs nothing. 

Charting is powered by TradingView, so the analysis toolkit matches the one most active traders already use.

Beyond Perpetuals

The perpetual menu sits inside a wider set of instruments that share the same account. Prediction markets synced from Polymarket's order books add thousands of live spot markets across politics, sports, and crypto, with no leverage and no liquidation; the platform's Political Markets Season, running September 7 to October 4, 2026, is built around four of the most actively traded political contracts. Event adds short-window up-or-down markets on Bitcoin, Ethereum, gold, silver, and crude oil. A Grid Bot can automate range strategies on any of the 86 crypto perpetuals.

A Menu That Keeps Moving

The list is not static, and the platform treats listings and delistings as a discipline. New contracts arrive regularly, with recent additions on both sides of the menu, including TAO, CHZ, CHIP, and MEGA on the crypto side and oil, gold, and silver contracts on the commodity side. Delistings follow a published mechanism: advance announcement, phased trading restrictions, automated settlement at the average mark price over the final 30 minutes, and persistent trade history after removal. For a trader, that means the contract they are in today will not vanish without warning tomorrow.

Put together, the pitch is simple: one account, one margin pool per asset class, and more than 120 things to trade on it, from the most liquid asset in crypto to a robotics company that has not gone public yet.

About ApeX Protocol

ApeX Protocol is a decentralized, non-custodial trading platform for perpetual derivatives, incubated by Davion Labs. ApeX Omni is the protocol's flagship platform, consolidating crypto perpetuals, TradFi perpetuals, prediction markets, and yield products into a single multi-chain interface. Its mission is straightforward: deliver the speed and depth of a centralized exchange without asking traders to give up custody of their assets.

To explore the full market list, visit ApeX Omni or read the documentation at the ApeX Protocol GitBook.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

At launch, the dedicated Aave market supports tokenized versions of Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla shares, but its design is deliberately narrow: USDC is the sole asset borrowers can draw, and the equity tokens can only be posted as collateral.

Aave’s Equities Hub lists seven Coinbase tokenized tech stocks

Eligible collateral comprises AAPLc, AMZNc, GOOGLc, METAc, MSFTc, NVDAc and TSLAc, which represent Coinbase tokenized stocks on Base. Aave’s announcement frames the launch as an extension of the V4 deployment’s lending market, not as a venue for trading the underlying equity tokens.

According to Aave’s governance risk assessment, the assets are Coinbase B20 certificates over shares held in segregated custody. That structure matters to the protocol’s treatment of the tokens: users are supplying certificates representing the listed equities, not depositing conventional onchain versions of a company’s stock issued by Aave.

Base has separately described Coinbase Tokenized Stocks as B20 tokens issued against 1:1 share backing in regulated custody. The availability restriction means the Equities Hub is not an access route for US users, even though it is deployed on Base.

The seven-name initial list is concentrated in large US technology and consumer-internet companies. Aave has not presented the launch as a broad tokenized-equities market; the listed tokens and the single available debt asset define the market’s initial perimeter.

USDC is the only debt asset in the collateral-only market

Chainlink provides the onchain price feeds for the tokenized equities, according to Aave.

Within the Equities Hub, users can deposit those equities as collateral and borrow USDC. AAPLc, AMZNc and the other listed stock tokens are not borrowable there, and the hub does not support equity-against-equity positions, Aave Labs said.

The arrangement places the tokenized shares entirely on the collateral side of the market and USDC on the borrowing side. It is narrower than the broader Base proposition for Coinbase Tokenized Stocks: Base says B20 tokens can be lent, borrowed or used as collateral across participating DeFi protocols, whereas Aave’s launch demonstrates only the collateral use case and does not make the stock tokens borrowable at launch.

Collateral factors and caps limit the initial rollout

Aave V4 on Base has launched a tokenized-equities collateral market limited to seven Coinbase tokenized equities for users in eligible jurisdictions. Users can deposit the tokens as collateral to borrow USDC, the market’s only debt asset; they cannot borrow the equities themselves or open equity-against-equity positions.

The Block reported an aggregate collateral cap of about $29 million, a $32 million cap on USDC supply and a $21 million cap on USDC borrowing.

The Block also reported initial collateral factors of 65% to 79%, depending on the stock, rather than one uniform setting across all seven tokens. Those caps and stock-specific factors define the size and terms of the initial phase.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

StealthEX, an instant non-custodial crypto exchange, is celebrating its eighth anniversary on October 6, 2026. To mark the occasion, the company is running a community giveaway on X (formerly Twitter) with a total prize pool of $800.

The campaign runs from October 6, 2026, to October 13, 2026. StealthEX will publish two giveaway posts on its official X account, @StealthEX_io, both on October 6. Eight participating crypto projects are split between the two posts. Eight winners will each receive $100 worth of cryptocurrency, and the winners will be announced on October 13, 2026.

The giveaway is an anniversary event for the community. It gives StealthEX users and other crypto enthusiasts a chance to engage with StealthEX and to learn about the participating projects and their communities.

Giveaway Details

The campaign has two separate giveaway posts on X, each featuring four projects.

First Giveaway Post

• Beldex (BDX) – @BeldexCoin: A privacy-focused blockchain ecosystem that covers private transactions, messaging, and browsing.

• Zcash (ZEC) – @Zcash: A privacy-focused cryptocurrency that uses zero-knowledge proofs to support shielded transactions.

• Mantle (MNT) – @Mantle_Official: An Ethereum Layer 2 network and onchain finance ecosystem. MNT is used for governance and for gas fees.

• eCash (XEC) – @eCash: A Layer 1 cryptocurrency built for peer-to-peer electronic cash payments.

Second Giveaway Post

• Shiba Inu (SHIB) – @Shibtoken: A community-driven token and ecosystem that began as a meme cryptocurrency.

• Pudgy Penguins (PENGU) – @pudgypenguins: The token of the Pudgy Penguins ecosystem, which started as an NFT collection in 2021.

• Cash Cat (CASHCAT) – @cashcat_token: A community memecoin on Robinhood Chain.

• Pump.fun (PUMP) – @Pumpfun: The native token of Pump.fun, a platform for creating and trading tokens.

How to Participate

Participation takes place on X only. Each of the two giveaway posts has its own entry requirements. To enter a giveaway, participants must:

1. Like the relevant StealthEX giveaway post on X.

2. Retweet the giveaway post.

3. Follow the StealthEX X account, @StealthEX_io.

4. Follow the X accounts of the participating projects named in that giveaway post.

The two posts feature different projects, so participants should follow the instructions in whichever post they are entering. The original posts on the StealthEX X account are the definitive source for participation instructions and any campaign terms.

Prize Pool and Winners

• Total prize pool: $800

• Number of winners: 8

• Prize per winner: $100 worth of cryptocurrency

• Campaign period: October 6, 2026 – October 13, 2026

• Winner announcement: October 13, 2026

Winners will not all receive the same asset. Each of the eight winners will receive a $100 prize in the cryptocurrency of one of the participating projects. Details on how winners will be chosen are set out in the official giveaway posts on X.

About StealthEX

StealthEX is an instant non-custodial cryptocurrency exchange. It supports more than 2,000 cryptocurrencies and tokens. Users can swap supported digital assets without creating an account.

The service is non-custodial: users do not deposit funds into an exchange account. Instead, swaps go directly from wallet to wallet, and users keep control of their funds and private keys throughout.

StealthEX is built for simple crypto-to-crypto swaps across a wide range of assets and trading pairs. To make an exchange, a user picks the assets they want to swap, enters the amount, and provides a wallet address to receive the exchanged funds. StealthEX offers both fixed and floating exchange rates. Users can lock in a rate when they start the swap, or use a rate that follows market conditions while the exchange is processed.

More information is available on the official website: https://stealthex.io/.

Eight Years in the Crypto Industry

StealthEX has been operating since 2018, and its eighth anniversary marks eight years in the cryptocurrency industry. Over that time, the platform has grown to support a broad range of digital assets, from established cryptocurrencies to newer tokens across multiple blockchain networks.

The anniversary giveaway reflects that range. The eight participating projects include privacy-focused networks, Layer 1 and Layer 2 blockchains, and community-driven tokens.

StealthEX designed the campaign as a community celebration that brings together the exchange, the participating projects, and the wider crypto community. Participants can discover projects they may not know yet, follow their official channels, and interact with their communities on X.

Join the Anniversary Giveaway

StealthEX invites readers to visit its official X account, @StealthEX_io, to take part in the anniversary campaign. Both giveaway posts will be published on October 6, 2026.

Key details:

• Campaign start: October 6, 2026

• Campaign end and winner announcement: October 13, 2026

• Winners: 8, each receiving $100 worth of cryptocurrency

• Total prize pool: $800

• Where to participate: The two official StealthEX giveaway posts on X

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The user journey is shifting along with that scale. Receiving a digital asset is increasingly just the first step. Next comes holding it, verifying an address, sending part of it to another user, swapping one asset for another, waiting for the right rate, or checking past activity.

When each of those actions needs its own service, the hard part stops being any single operation. It becomes managing the whole sequence.

001k.bot is a crypto-financial platform for managing digital assets through web and Telegram interfaces. Its product logic is built around the connections between a user's actions, not around any single function.

One Workflow Instead of Several Services

Picture a user who regularly gets paid in USDT. Part stays in the balance, part gets converted to USDC for the next transaction, and part goes to a contractor. Before sending funds, they need to verify the address, and at the end of the month, they need to review the history and reconcile everything.

In that scenario, no single wallet, swap, or transfer solves the problem on its own. The value comes from moving through the entire route in one system.

Balance as a Starting Point, Not an End Function

Holding digital assets is only the first step in managing them. Users need to see more than a total figure; they need to see the structure of that balance: which assets they hold and what they can do with them next.

That's why a balance becomes more useful when it connects directly to other functions. On 001k.bot, users can move from their balance straight into a transfer, a swap, or another operation, without shifting assets between separate services.

Fast access to receiving addresses matters just as much, especially for anyone who regularly accepts assets from clients, counterparties, or partners.

A modern crypto wallet is no longer just a place where funds "sit." It's the starting point for whatever comes next.

Transfers: When the Same Action Becomes Routine

Transfers are one of the most common operations with digital assets, whether that means sending funds to an external address or receiving assets from someone else.

Before confirming a transfer, users need to understand the basics: which asset is moving, which network it's on, which address it's going to, and under what conditions. Double-check the network and the recipient's address before confirming, since a mistake at that level usually can't be undone.

For regular transfers, an Address Book helps: it saves the addresses users rely on so they don't have to re-enter them every time. That matters especially for contractors, freelancers, or partners, where the same details get used month after month.

Beyond transfers to external addresses, the platform supports internal transfers between 001k.bot users, a fast way to settle up within the same ecosystem without touching the blockchain.

Withdrawals to fiat are the natural next step: 001k.bot lets users withdraw digital assets when the end goal isn't a crypto balance but money they can spend directly. That covers a practical case where receiving a stablecoin is a step along the way, not the destination.

Swaps Without Leaving the Platform

A swap changes the makeup of a user's assets within the same workflow: instead of leaving the platform to exchange one asset for another, the user does it where their funds already live and move.

People swap for different reasons. Sometimes a user wants to shift part of their balance into a more stable asset. Sometimes they need to prepare funds for a specific transfer or withdrawal that calls for a particular token. Either way, the exchange terms (the rate, the fee, the amount received) must be clear before confirmation, not described vaguely as "a good rate."

A common example is swapping USDT for USDC. Both are dollar-pegged stablecoins, but they can differ in network availability, transfer fees, or compatibility with certain services. A swap between them inside 001k.bot lets a user move from one stablecoin to the other without withdrawing to an outside service, so there are no extra fees for withdrawing and re-depositing. For anyone who works with stablecoins regularly, that's mainly a way to save on fees.

Whatever comes out of a swap lands on the same balance, so the user can move straight into holding, transferring, or withdrawing it, without breaking the flow.

Limit Orders: Set a Condition Instead of Watching the Rate

A limit order is an alternative to swapping instantly at the current rate. A user doesn't have to exchange an asset right now; they can set the terms they want, such as the rate they're willing to accept, and wait for the market to meet those terms.

That removes the need to track rate changes manually. The user sets the condition once and comes back to the result.

A limit order doesn't guarantee execution or promise a profit; it only defines the condition under which a swap can happen. That's what turns the platform from a simple exchange tool into a system where users set their own terms instead of just reacting to whatever the rate happens to be.

AML Checks Before the Transaction

AML checks on addresses and transactions are another piece built directly into the platform's interface. They help assess the risk tied to a specific address or incoming assets: its on-chain history and any markers of suspicious activity.

Where assets came from and an address's history can matter before the funds are used further, which is why the check happens early rather than after the fact. It doesn't replace other safeguards like 2FA, Passkey, or access controls; it adds another layer alongside them.

Building AML checks into the interface means users don't need a separate external service. The check happens right where the transaction does.

A History That Shows Where the Funds Went

Transaction history tracks everything that's happened to a user's assets, not just a list of transactions.

A single history view covers the operation type, asset, amount, date, status, and address, which is enough to reconstruct any action without contacting support. Say a user receives a stablecoin, sends part of it to a contractor, swaps part of it, and holds the rest: the history lets them retrace that whole sequence in one place.

Clear status on every operation reduces uncertainty: users can see exactly where an action stands without waiting for support to confirm it. The more types of operations a user runs (transfers, swaps, limit orders), the more valuable a single unified history becomes.

When Volume Grows: Mass Payments and API

Telegram remains one way to access 001k.bot: fast and familiar for repeat actions.

The web version is built for more complex scenarios: reviewing balances, history, addresses, and operation details is simply easier on a larger screen. For business users managing multiple payouts, mass payments, or an API integration, the web platform offers more control than sending commands one at a time in a chat.

Both interfaces run on the same product logic: whatever a user can do in Telegram, they can do on the web, and vice versa. Users pick the format that fits the task at hand: a quick action in chat or focused work in a browser.

Who Needs a Platform Rather Than a Standalone Crypto Service

001k.bot is built primarily for people for whom digital assets have already become part of their regular financial routine.

That includes users who consistently receive and send stablecoins, freelancers and business owners who get paid in digital assets, and teams that need to organize payouts or fold crypto operations into their own processes.

Crypto market experience isn't the deciding factor here. What matters more is how many different tasks a user has to handle once a digital asset lands on their balance.

What Actually Defines a Connected Workflow

A modern platform for managing digital assets isn't defined by how many features sit in its menu. Its value shows up when individual actions come together into a coherent workflow:

Receive an asset → hold it → verify it → transfer or swap it → track the outcome in the transaction history.

001k.bot is a standalone crypto-financial platform, where web and Telegram aren't separate services but two ways to access one system for managing digital assets.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored article and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Data Snapshot

MetricCurrentPreviousChangePeriodAs ofSourceU.S. spot bitcoin ETF net inflows$2.4 billion——week ending September 25, 20262026-09-25The BlockMonday net inflows$999.0 million——Monday, September 21, 20262026-09-21The BlockTuesday net inflows$714.7 million——Tuesday, September 22, 20262026-09-22The BlockWednesday net inflows$347.0 million——Wednesday, September 23, 20262026-09-23The BlockThursday net inflows$190.6 million——Thursday, September 24, 20262026-09-24The BlockFriday net inflows$134.5 million——Friday, September 25, 20262026-09-25The Block

September 21–25 inflows were front-loaded

Monday, September 21 accounted for $999.0 million of net inflows, the largest daily reading since October 6, 2025. That opening-day figure set the pace for the week and was followed by a smaller, though still substantial, $714.7 million on Tuesday, September 22.

Net inflows then eased to $347.0 million on Wednesday, September 23, before falling to $190.6 million on Thursday, September 24. Friday, September 25 brought a further $134.5 million, extending the funds' positive run to seven straight days.

Each day from Monday through Friday remained positive, but the descending sequence shows how heavily the $2.4 billion weekly result relied on Monday’s exceptional intake. The daily figures are net flow readings—money entering and leaving the funds over a period—not the value of their holdings.

Bitcoin ETF inflows news graphic. — Source: The Block

The $2.4 billion week reversed ETFs’ 2026 flow position

The week ending September 25 was the strongest for U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs since October 2025. It was surpassed only by the $2.7 billion recorded in the week ending October 10, 2025, based on the comparison reported by The Block.

The $2.4 billion addition also left the products about $934.1 million positive for 2026. That year-to-date position reflects cumulative net flows during 2026, while the weekly figure captures activity only for the period ending September 25.

Cumulative net inflows reached $57.6 billion

Cumulative net inflows since launch stood at $57.6 billion as of Friday, September 25, 2026. Net assets across the funds totaled $108.4 billion on the same date.

The two measures are not interchangeable: cumulative net inflows track net investor subscriptions since launch, whereas net assets represent the value held by the funds at a given time. The reported asset total therefore provides a current balance-sheet snapshot alongside the longer-run flow figure.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

AlgoQuant will deploy Liquid Mercury's institutional-grade trading technology to scale its multi-strategy investment platform and enhance execution capabilities across global digital asset markets.

Liquid Mercury, a leading technology provider for digital asset marketplaces and crypto trading, announced today that it has been engaged by AlgoQuant Asset Management, an investment manager focused on solving inefficiencies in fast-evolving markets, to provide trading technology and infrastructure services.

The engagement will enable AlgoQuant to leverage Liquid Mercury's institutional-grade trading technology and infrastructure to enhance its multi-strategy investment platform. AlgoQuant will gain access to deep liquidity, advanced execution capabilities, and professional-grade trading tools that support the firm's commitment to quantitative excellence, risk integrity, and operational resilience.

Liquid Mercury's battle-tested platform combined with AlgoQuant's sophisticated quantitative strategies provides a powerful foundation for executing complex digital asset trades across global markets. This technology integration allows AlgoQuant to maintain 24/7 trading operations while scaling talent, capital, and technology without compromising precision.

With a team spanning key global financial and digital asset markets, AlgoQuant operates as a multi-strategy investment platform designed to perform across diverse market environments. Through Liquid Mercury's platform, AlgoQuant will benefit from access to top-tier liquidity providers, low-latency infrastructure, and comprehensive middle and back-office tools designed to meet the demands of institutional asset managers operating in digital asset markets.

"AlgoQuant came to us with very specific infrastructure requirements that are unique to their sophisticated quantitative strategies," stated Liquid Mercury CEO, Tony Saliba. "What sets Liquid Mercury apart is our ability to shape our tech stack to meet each client's distinct needs. This level of customization isn't something firms can always find off the shelf, but our battle-tested platform was built with the flexibility to adapt while maintaining institutional-grade standards. We're honored to provide the tailored technology infrastructure that will support AlgoQuant as it continues to scale its investment platform."

“Liquid Mercury has been an excellent technology partner for AlgoQuant Asset Management,” said Alexander Goncharov, President of AlgoQuant Asset Management. “We are very pleased with their sophisticated technology stack, collaborative approach, and willingness to tailor the platform to our specific needs. Their infrastructure delivers the speed, reliability, and precision required in today’s digital asset markets while integrating seamlessly with our proprietary systems and workflows.”

About AlgoQuant Asset Management

AlgoQuant is an investment manager with a clear mission: to solve inefficiencies in fast-evolving markets. From day one, the firm has been focused on building a platform that can scale talent, capital, and technology without compromising precision. At the heart of AlgoQuant's model is a commitment to quantitative excellence, risk integrity, and operational resilience.

AlgoQuant operates as a multi-strategy investment platform with global reach, featuring team members and trading teams based in key global financial and digital asset markets. The firm's structure supports 24/7 execution, oversight, and engagement with global allocators.

Further information can be found at www.aq.io

About Liquid Mercury

Liquid Mercury powers professional crypto trading and digital asset marketplaces. Founded by legendary trader Tony Saliba, who was featured in Jack Schwager's "Market Wizards," Liquid Mercury is the #1 choice for sophisticated buy-side and institutional sell-side trading professionals moving into crypto.

Mercury Pro is an institutional-grade trading platform designed specifically for professional traders navigating crypto derivatives and spot markets. The platform offers sophisticated trade execution tools including DMA routing, staging, execution algorithms, and anonymous multi-dealer RFQ to source block liquidity. Traders can manage all orders and trade data in a single platform with real-time views of balances and account positions.

Key capabilities include access to crypto derivatives at leading onshore and offshore exchanges, institutional-sized pricing with top OTC liquidity providers, and a wide range of spot products across leading exchanges. The platform supports both single-leg and multi-leg orders in net price structures, with low-latency infrastructure built for high-frequency and algorithmic trading strategies.

Liquid Mercury integrates with world-class custodians including Fireblocks, Gemini, and BitGo, and provides comprehensive APIs (FIX, WebSocket, and REST) for automated trading and workflow customization. Built by professionals for professionals, Liquid Mercury combines battle-tested trading technology with deep liquidity access and best-in-class workflow automation.

For more information about Liquid Mercury and the $MERC token, users can visit www.liquidmercury.com or merc.liquidmercury.com. 

Disclaimer

This press release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, any securities or fund interests in any jurisdiction. Any offer or solicitation of interests in any fund managed by AlgoQuant Asset Management Corp will be made only by definitive offering documents, and only to eligible investors in accordance with applicable law. No statement in this press release is, or should be construed as, a representation as to the past or future performance of any fund or strategy managed by AlgoQuant.

ContactDirectorKent EganLiquid Mercurysales@liquidmercury.com

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Aster, the privacy-first onchain trading platform backed by YZi Labs, today announced the launch of its Liquidity Pool Mining campaign, a four-week incentive campaign featuring a total reward pool of up to 140,000 $ASTER and running from September 28 to October 25, 2026 (UTC). To celebrate the launch of Perpetual Grid 2.0, the program is open to all Aster users running Perpetual Grid strategies on eligible trading pairs.

Rewards will be distributed hourly based on each eligible Grid’s share of trading volume. The base reward pool is set at 10,000 $ASTER per epoch, with additional rewards available based on market conditions and trading activity on the platform. Participation is automatic, with no registration required.

“As Aster continues to bring more emerging assets and opportunities onchain, we’re also focused on building the tools traders need to navigate increasingly dynamic markets. Perpetual Grid offers a flexible way to capture opportunities amid market volatility, and Grid 2.0 takes this experience further with greater flexibility and independence. This upgrade is another step toward our broader vision of building the frontier of onchain trading,” said Leonard, CEO at Aster.

Incentivizing Automated Perpetual Trading

The campaign builds on Aster’s expanded Perpetual Grid infrastructure, giving users a new way to participate in automated trading while earning additional $ASTER rewards from eligible Grid activity. Both Maker and Taker volume count toward the campaign, while manual trading and activity outside the Grid strategy are excluded.

An Estimated Bonus APY is also displayed to provide an indication of potential annualized $ASTER rewards based on recent campaign activity. The estimate can change as trading volume, participating Grids and other campaign conditions change, and does not guarantee future rewards or returns.

Grid 2.0 Separates Automated and Manual Strategies

Alongside the campaign, the newly upgraded Perpetual Grid 2.0 enables Grid strategies to operate independently from users’ regular Perpetual trading. Each Grid runs through a dedicated Grid Bot subaccount, keeping its positions and margin separate from the main Perpetual account.

With support for both Cross and Isolated Margin, users can run automated Grid strategies while continuing to trade Perpetuals manually, including on the same trading pair. Isolated Margin supports up to 50 independent Grid strategies per account, with no per-pair limit.

Discover Strategies Through Grid Marketplace

Aster’s Grid Marketplace further simplifies strategy discovery by allowing users to browse active Grid strategies and review metrics such as PnL, ROI, runtime, price range, leverage and trading activity.

Users can use an existing strategy as a starting point through Copy, or switch its direction through Reverse, turning a Long strategy into Short or vice versa. Copied or reversed strategies remain independent from their source and do not automatically synchronize with the original Grid.

The Liquidity Pool Mining campaign is available on designated eligible trading pairs, with the Week 1 eligible pairs including OURA/USD1, POLYMARKET/USD1, and META/USD1. The reward pool is shared across participating pairs. Individual rewards are determined by each Grid’s eligible trading volume relative to the total eligible volume generated during the relevant hourly period.

More eligible trading pairs may be added in subsequent weeks to reflect the latest market trends. For more information about the campaign, eligible trading pairs and current campaign parameters, please visit the official campaign page.

About Aster

Aster is a privacy-first onchain trading platform backed by YZi Labs, with unique features like Hidden Orders to protect user trading activity. It pioneers the frontier of on-chain trading through perpetual futures, spots, and earn products for top-trending assets, including RWAs, memes, and core crypto markets. It is powered by Aster Chain, a Layer 1 blockchain built to power the future of decentralized finance.

Users can learn more about Aster on the official website or follow Aster on X.

ContactMarketing ManagerLola Chenlola.chen@asterdex.com

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The finding was published by pseudonymous onchain analyst Wazz and reported by The Block on September 27. The attribution is based on blockchain activity and wallet-funding patterns rather than a disclosed identity for the people behind the wallets.

53 Robinhood Chain launches tied to a single alleged operation

Wazz’s analysis links 53 Robinhood Chain memecoin launches during a little over two months of the network’s early life to one alleged operation, with a reported minimum extraction total of $18.43 million.

The alleged activity involved Pons V2 launches. Its anti-sniping charge applies to purchases made immediately after launch, and the configuration described by Wazz gave selected wallets an advantage at the opening of trading by exempting them from that charge.

Funding and transaction flows among wallets tied to successive deployments supported the alleged link, according to the report. The pattern therefore extended beyond similarities between token launches and was presented as evidence of recurring operations rather than an isolated token.

Pons V2 tax exemptions enabled concentrated opening supply

Pons V2’s documentation describes a 99% snipe tax on purchases made in the first seconds after launch; the tax decays during that opening period, and creators can exempt a limited number of wallets.

The Block independently matched the reported launch pattern in 10 tokens listed in Wazz’s research: creators exempted groups of wallets from the anti-sniping tax, then bundled purchases acquired most of the respective supplies.

That finding is distinct from the protocol feature itself. The allegation, as reported by The Block, is that coordinated exemptions and opening purchases were repeatedly used to concentrate supply among wallets connected through funding flows. In the reviewed launches, exempt wallets could buy without the stated tax, while linked buyers acquired a dominant share.

DEED funding trail shows wallets and proceeds being recycled

The Block reported that 179.88 ETH was swept from 98 wallets tied to an earlier launch, sent through intermediary wallets and used to fund 50 addresses before DEED launched 40 minutes later. After the opening purchase, the creator wallet and tax-exempt wallets held 86% of the token’s supply, according to The Block’s report.

The DEED sequence links an earlier launch’s wallet activity to buyer funding for a later launch, including proceeds routed through intermediary addresses and redeployed before DEED’s launch. The Block independently matched the launch pattern in 10 tokens, but that does not independently verify all 53 cases cited by pseudonymous analyst Wazz; the broader analysis alleges recurring funding flows, preselected tax-exempt buyers and concentrated opening allocations.

Memecoin activity became an early Robinhood Chain revenue driver

Robinhood launched Robinhood Chain on July 1, 2026. The network is an Ethereum layer-2 built with Arbitrum technology, according to Robinhood Markets investor materials.

The company’s materials said memecoin activity became a major driver of early trading and fee generation on the chain. That makes the alleged campaign relevant beyond the individual tokens: the launches occurred within one of the main sources of activity on a newly launched network.

Wazz’s reported timeframe begins nine days after Robinhood Chain went live and runs through September 21. The investigation therefore places the alleged activity across much of the chain’s initial period of memecoin-led trading and fee generation.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The shift would redefine Ethereum’s “world computer” ambition. Instead of requiring every participant to download and re-execute all computation, specialised computers would perform workloads and produce compact cryptographic proofs for others to check. Data-availability sampling and SNARK verification would support that model, allowing the network to establish that computation was performed correctly without making every verifier perform it again.

Proof systems and data availability are intended to weaken the link between the amount of computation being verified and the cost borne by verifiers. The unresolved issue is whether Ethereum can distribute trust across specialised infrastructure without concentrating operational control there, particularly while current rollups still rely heavily on centralised sequencers.

Proof-based verification over universal execution

In Buterin’s model, Ethereum moves away from requiring every node to download and re-execute transactions. Data-availability sampling and SNARK verification would allow specialized computers to execute workloads and produce compact cryptographic proofs that other participants can check.

The result is a different division of labour, not an abandonment of broad participation. Verification remains accessible without universal duplication of execution because participants need to establish data availability and proof validity, rather than reprocess the full workload. Blockchain consensus, privacy and cryptographic verification remain the architecture’s trust anchor for powerful off-chain components; Ethereum’s base layer settles the conditions under which their claims can be accepted.

That direction is already visible in Ethereum.org’s scaling roadmap: rollups have reduced costs through blob storage, and future data-availability sampling is intended to let validators check small portions of large datasets instead of downloading everything. The 2030 vision extends an architecture Ethereum is already pursuing, though Buterin says efficient, safe proof generation remains difficult and that managing and parallelizing access to very large state may be the more complex system-level problem.

A modular world computer

The technologies Buterin associates with the period after Ethereum’s planned Hegotá upgrade show how expansive this model is meant to be. He identifies recursive STARKs, automated formal verification, optimised proof-of-stake consensus, multi-party block construction and quantum-safe cryptography as defining elements of that post-Hegotá environment.

Recursive STARKs are central to the logic of compact verification. If proofs can themselves be aggregated and verified through further proofs, a verifier can assess a large body of computation through a much smaller object. In practical architectural terms, that creates a path for Ethereum to secure more computation than its individual nodes could feasibly run in full.

The other items on Buterin’s list point to a broader engineering programme rather than a single scaling upgrade. Formal verification concerns confidence in the systems producing and checking these cryptographic claims. Optimised proof-of-stake consensus concerns the network coordinating around them. Multi-party block construction addresses a part of the transaction-production pipeline where control can otherwise be concentrated, while quantum-safe cryptography speaks to the durability of the security assumptions behind the design.

That combination is why the phrase “cryptographic world computer” is more precise than a generic claim that Ethereum will become faster. A monolithic chain makes one execution environment the centre of the system. Buterin’s endpoint envisages a network in which specialised layers and machines can undertake differentiated tasks, provided their outputs can be verified under Ethereum’s security framework.

The modular design also makes data availability a first-order concern. A proof may attest that a computation produced a result correctly, but users and other systems may still need access to the underlying data needed to reconstruct or exit from a system. Ethereum’s roadmap places data-availability sampling at the centre of making that access verifiable at scale, rather than treating it as an auxiliary storage problem.

Privacy enters the verification architecture

Privacy is not presented as a separate application feature in Buterin’s account. He places cryptographic privacy alongside consensus and verification, making it a property Ethereum wants its underlying architecture to support.

The roadmap gives that objective several forms: shielded ETH and ERC-20 transfers, private proving, zkVM-based execution and research into fully homomorphic encryption, which would enable computation over encrypted data. Ethereum’s privacy roadmap therefore points to a system that can establish whether rules were followed without requiring every observer to see the underlying information.

Verification still has to be efficient and credible. Buterin’s framing leaves privacy-preserving systems carrying the added cost and complexity of proof generation, while the same infrastructure is expected to support scalable computation, private activity and decentralised participation. That combination increases the risk of a bottleneck at one layer.

Illustration explaining how a lightweight wallet could verify Ethereum’s cryptographic proofs without repeating all network computations. — Source: CoinDesk

State growth and sequencer control

In Buterin’s account, efficient and safe proofs remain difficult, while managing and parallelising access to very large state may be the more systemically complex challenge. Proof-based verification does not remove the need to maintain and access the state required by computation. As applications and rollups create more activity, safely organising that state and allowing concurrent access without breaking the system’s guarantees becomes a deeper design problem.

Rollups are a major route for Ethereum scaling, and blob storage has reduced their costs. Yet current rollups still rely heavily on centralised sequencers, according to the roadmap materials cited by Buterin.

Ethereum Foundation roadmap materials caution that timelines are targets rather than guarantees. The proposed 2030 architecture would shift Ethereum from universal transaction re-execution towards specialised computation verified through compact proofs.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bitmine is 98% of the way to the 'Alchemy of 5%' in just 15 months

ETH is the best performing macro asset in Q3 of 2026 to date, outperforming the S&P 500 by 6,728bp

Tom Lee to deliver the keynote at KBW on September 30, 2026

Bitmine was added to the Russell 1000 Large-cap index on June 26, 2026

Bitmine's Series A Preferred Stock is trading on the NYSE under the symbol BMNP

Bitmine has 5,067,309 staked ETH, representing $13.7 billion at $2,698 per ETH. MAVAN (Made in America VAlidator Network) is a premier Ethereum staking destination for BMNR and institutional investors

Bitmine owns $115 million of Eightco (NASDAQ: ORBS), now one of the only publicly listed equities in the world to provide investors indirect exposure to OpenAI

Bitmine Crypto + Total Cash Holdings & Marketable Securities + "Moonshots" total $17.2 billion, including over 6 million ETH tokens, total cash & marketable securities of $672 million, and other crypto holdings

Bitmine remains supported by a premier group of institutional investors including ARK's Cathie Wood, MOZAYYX, Founders Fund, Bill Miller III, Pantera, Kraken, DCG, Galaxy Digital and personal investor Thomas "Tom" Lee to support Bitmine's goal of acquiring 5% of ETH

NORWALK, Conn., Sept. 28, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- (NYSE: BMNR) Bitmine Immersion Technologies, Inc. ("Bitmine" or the "Company") a Bitcoin and Ethereum Network company with a focus on the accumulation of crypto for long term investment, today announced Bitmine crypto + total cash & marketable securities + "moonshots" holdings totaling $17.2 billion.

As of September 27, 2026 at 3:00pm ET, the Company's crypto holdings are comprised of 6,001,302 ETH at $2,698 per ETH (per Coinbase NASDAQ: COIN), 213 Bitcoin (BTC), $180 million stake in Beast Industries, $115 million stake in Eightco Holdings (NASDAQ: ORBS) ("moonshots") and total cash & marketable securities of $672 million. Bitmine's ETH holdings are 4.9% of the ETH supply (of 122.1 million ETH).

"Bitmine's total ETH holdings now exceed 6 million. This is a tremendous achievement, accumulating this total in under 15 months. We are already seeing the synergies and positive network effects from our accumulating nearly 5% of ETH total supply." stated Thomas "Tom" Lee, Chairman of Bitmine.

"Moreover, we continue to see affirming signs that a crypto bull market is underway, having started in late June. In our view, institutions are still underweight crypto and we expect them to be adding to their exposure in the final months of 2026. With only a little more than a week left in calendar third quarter (3Q26), the outperformance of Ethereum as a macro asset continues to strengthen. For the calendar quarter to date, ETH is outperforming by 6,728bp, dwarfing other macro assets." stated Lee.

Tom Lee will also deliver the keynote at Korea Blockchain Week 2026 on September 30 at 11:20 a.m. (KST) at Walkerhill Hotels & Resorts in Seoul. The 25-minute keynote is part of Korea Blockchain Week, one of Asia's leading blockchain and digital asset conferences. Additional information is available on the Korea Blockchain Week website.

"Over the past week, we acquired 17,362 ETH. Bitmine's track record of consistent buying of crypto is unmatched by any public company in the world. Bitmine has bought ETH each and every week since the inception of the ETH Treasury Strategy on June 30, 2025," stated Lee.

On July 16, 2026, Bitmine released the latest Chairman's Message (link here) for July 2026, entitled "ETH is the cure for the Uncanny Valley of Wealth."

Earlier in 2026, Bitmine launched MAVAN (the Made in America VAlidator Network), the institutional-grade staking platform. While MAVAN was originally developed to support Bitmine's own Ethereum treasury, MAVAN has expanded to serve institutional investors, custodians, and ecosystem partners seeking best-in-class staking infrastructure. A portion of Bitmine's ETH is already staked on the MAVAN platform.

As of September 27, 2026, Bitmine's total staked ETH stands at 5,067,309 ($13.7 billion at $2,698 per ETH). "Bitmine has staked more ETH than other entities in the world. At scale (when Bitmine's ETH is fully staked by MAVAN and its staking partners), the projected ETH staking reward would be $424 million on an annualized basis (using 2.62% 7-day BMNR yield)," stated Lee.

"Annualized staking revenues are now projected at $358 million. And this 5.1 million ETH is 84% of the 6.00 million ETH held by Bitmine. Bitmine's own staking operations generated a 7-day yield of 2.62% (annualized)," continued Lee.

Bitmine is one of the most widely traded stocks in the US. According to data from Fundstrat, the stock has traded average daily dollar volume of $1.1 billion (5-day average, as of September 25, 2026), ranking #94 in the US, behind Twilio Inc (rank #93) and ahead of Philip Morris International (rank #95) among 5,704 US-listed stocks (statista.com and Fundstrat research).

Bitmine's crypto holdings reign as the #1 Ethereum treasury and #2 global treasury, behind Strategy Inc., which reportedly owns 845,080 BTC valued at approximately $75 billion. Bitmine remains the largest ETH treasury in the world. 

Bitmine management believes the GENIUS Act and the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Project Crypto are as transformational to financial services in 2026 as the US action on August 15, 1971, which ended the Bretton Woods system and took the U.S. dollar off the gold standard 55 years ago. This 1971 event was the catalyst for the modernization of Wall Street, creating the iconic Wall Street titans and financial and payment rails of today. These proved to be better investments than gold.

The Chairman's message can be found here:

https://www.Bitminetech.io/chairmans-message

The Fiscal Full Year 2025 Earnings presentation and corporate presentation can be found here: https://Bitminetech.io/investor-relations/ 

To stay informed, please sign up at: https://Bitminetech.io/contact-us/ 

About Bitmine

Bitmine Immersion Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: BMNR), together with its subsidiaries ("Bitmine" or the "Company"), is a blockchain technology infrastructure company operating across institutional digital asset staking and validation services, bitcoin mining, and strategic digital asset management. As the world's leading Ethereum Treasury company, it implements an innovative digital asset strategy for institutional investors and public market participants. The Company provides institutional-grade staking and validation infrastructure—through which it earns staking rewards and validation income—alongside bitcoin mining activities. Bitmine holds digital assets strategically, generating yield on those holdings to support liquidity and capital formation. Since 2025, the Company has expanded its blockchain infrastructure capabilities, including developing and deploying MAVAN, its institutional staking and validation platform. The Company's activities further include investments in early-stage blockchain opportunities ("moonshot" investments) and ancillary mining, hosting, and consulting services.

For additional details, follow on X:

https://x.com/bitmnr

https://x.com/fundstrat

Cautionary Note on Forward Looking Statements

This press release contains statements that constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. Forward-looking statements include all statements that are not purely historical and can generally be identified by terms such as "expects," "projects," "intends," "plans," "believes," "anticipates," "estimates," "forecasts," "targets," "goals," "may," "will," "would," "could," "should," "view," "see," or similar expressions, or the negative of such terms, or other comparable terminology. This press release specifically contains forward-looking statements regarding, among other things: (i) the Company's goal of acquiring 5% of the total ETH supply (the "Alchemy of 5%" initiative) and statements that the Company is 98% of the way to achieving this goal in 15 months; (ii) the Company's digital asset accumulation and treasury strategy, including statements regarding continued weekly ETH acquisitions since the inception of the ETH Treasury Strategy on June 30, 2025 and the Company's status as the largest ETH treasury in the world; (iii) the Company's staking operations, including projected annualized ETH staking rewards of approximately $424 million at scale (assuming Bitmine's ETH is fully staked by MAVAN and its staking partners using 2.62% 7-day BMNR yield) and currently projected annualized staking revenues of approximately $358 million; (iv) MAVAN's expansion to serve institutional investors, custodians, and ecosystem partners seeking best-in-class staking infrastructure, and its intended position as a premier Ethereum staking destination for BMNR and institutional investors; (v) statements regarding ETH's performance as the best performing macro asset in Q3 2026 to date, outperforming the S&P 500 by 6,728bp; (vi) management's belief that institutions are still underweight crypto and the expectation of institutional investors adding to their crypto exposure in the final months of 2026; (vii) management's belief that a crypto bull market is underway, having started in late June; (viii) management's belief that the GENIUS Act and SEC Project Crypto are as transformational to financial services in 2026 as the end of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 and that investments resulting therefrom will prove better than gold; (ix) statements regarding the Company's investments, including that its investment in Eightco Holdings (NASDAQ: ORBS) provides investors indirect exposure to OpenAI and its $180 million stake in Beast Industries; and (x) statements regarding the value of the Company's crypto, cash, marketable securities, and "moonshot" holdings, including aggregate holdings of $17.2 billion and ETH holdings representing 4.9% of the total ETH supply.

These forward-looking statements involve substantial risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: the extreme volatility and unpredictability of digital asset prices, including ETH and Bitcoin, and the speculative nature of digital asset investments; the risk that historical ETH price movements and relative performance versus other macro assets will not recur or are not indicative of future performance; the Company's reliance on third-party pricing sources (including Coinbase) and reported market values in calculating the value of its crypto, cash, marketable securities, and "moonshot" holdings, and the risk that such values fluctuate materially after the date and time referenced in this release; changes in market conditions affecting the trading price and trading volume of the Company's common stock and Series A Preferred Stock, and the risk that the Company's inclusion in the Russell 1000 index does not produce anticipated benefits; the Company's ability to successfully execute its digital asset acquisition strategy, continue its record of weekly ETH acquisitions, and achieve its ETH accumulation targets, including the "Alchemy of 5%" goal; the Company's ability to finance its business operations, Ethereum treasury operations, and MAVAN expansion; operational, security, and technological risks associated with the Company's staking and validation operations, including network failures, slashing events, cybersecurity breaches, and protocol changes; the risk that actual staking participation, yields, rewards, and revenues differ materially from the projected amounts described in this release, which are based on a 7-day yield and assume ETH is fully staked at scale; competition in the digital asset treasury, staking, and mining industries; the Company's dependence on key personnel, including executive leadership; regulatory developments affecting digital assets, blockchain technology, and staking activities in the United States and globally, including the ultimate enactment, implementation, and interpretation of the GENIUS Act and other pending legislation and regulatory initiatives; actions by the SEC, CFTC, and other regulatory bodies affecting digital assets and related businesses; risks related to the Company's investments in early-stage blockchain opportunities ("moonshot" investments), including the investments in Eightco Holdings (including the nature and extent of any indirect exposure to OpenAI) and Beast Industries; macroeconomic factors, including inflation, interest rates, Federal Reserve monetary policy, labor market conditions, war risks, rising yields, and general economic conditions affecting investor sentiment toward digital assets; the unpredictability of cryptocurrency market cycles and the accuracy of management's expectations regarding institutional participation; changes to the Ethereum protocol, including staking mechanics, validator requirements, and reward structures; the performance of third-party service providers, exchanges, custodians, and staking partners; risks related to the concentration of the Company's assets in digital currencies, particularly Ethereum; and the other risk factors described in the Company's filings with the SEC.

The forward-looking statements contained in this press release are based on information available to management as of the date of this release and reflect management's current expectations, estimates, forecasts, projections, views, and beliefs concerning future events and circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements based on a number of factors, including those described above and in the Risk Factors section of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2025 filed with the SEC on November 21, 2025, the Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and the Company's other filings with the SEC, as amended or updated from time to time. Copies of these filings are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov and on the Company's website at https://Bitminetech.io/investor-relations/. The Company cautions readers not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date on which they are made. Bitmine expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to update, revise, or supplement any forward-looking statements to reflect any change in its expectations or any change in events, conditions, or circumstances on which any such statements are based, except as required by applicable law or regulation.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

A fall through the bottom of the channel or bounce?

Source: TradingView

The 4-hour chart illustrates how the $BTC price moved up and out of one channel and is now in a second range just above. The midpoint of the current channel clearly delineates between the price action above it and the price action below. As can be seen, the price fell through the midpoint and this has acted as resistance since.

It now remains to be seen whether the $BTC price will hold fast at the bottom of the channel and eventually bounce, or if the price will fall through and come back to test the top of the bigger channel below.

Indicators suggest that the $BTC price is fairly oversold in the short to medium time frames, so a bounce could be the more probable outcome. If the bears do win this particular battle, the top of the channel at $81,250 is the next strong support below.

RSI could signal a breakdown

Source: TradingView

The daily time frame gives us a clearer view of the price action currently. It does look like there could be a bounce from here, but being prepared for a breakdown at the same time is the best strategy.

Looking left, underneath the wick up to the $82,840 horizontal support level, there is a clump of price action that would also act as support if the price came down. This also lines up roughly with the top of the parallel channel. 

At the bottom of the chart, the Stochastic RSI indicator line looks as though it is about to fall through the first trendline. With the rest of the day still to play out, it is not certain that this will happen. If it does, the next trend support is a fair bit lower. If the indicator line starts to descend to this level this would be a signal that the price action was breaking down, with the possibility of the $BTC price reentering the bigger parallel channel.

Macro view suggests that a bounce is more likely but keep an eye on bond yields

Source: TradingView

Are we making too much of this latest pullback? Looking at the price action from a macro perspective, all that has really happened is that the $BTC price has broken out of the parallel channel, and the price has simply come back to test the very important $82,840 horizontal support level. This makes perfect sense and is technical analysis 101.

Therefore a bounce from here is the far more likely outcome, even if there is a quick candle tail down to the top of the channel, to perhaps confirm the breakout.

While acknowledging that a sizable correction will have to occur at some point, the probable trajectory, maybe into the next two or three weeks, is to the upside. The RSI in this weekly time frame looks as though it can bear this thesis out.  

On the other hand, if there is a bearish factor that can weigh down the chances of a $BTC rally igniting again, it’s bond yields. The U.S. 10-year bond yield is breaking out on Monday morning. The current level is at 5.223%, but look out for the yield hitting 5.3% as early as the end of this week.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The timing is notable for an XRP price prediction today. Evernorth and Armada Acquisition Corp. II have scheduled a September 30 shareholder vote on their proposed transaction; if shareholders approve it, the combined company is expected to list on Nasdaq under the ticker XRPN, according to an SEC filing.

A push to $1.55 would therefore require XRP to rebound from the current support zone while reversing a bearish short-term trend structure. The vote is a defined event on the calendar, but the available market readings do not show a confirmed upside reversal yet.

XRP’s hourly RSI is oversold, but EMA trend signals remain bearish

The most constructive element of the short-term setup is XRP’s hourly relative strength index. CoinLore placed the hourly RSI at 29.55 on September 28, an oversold reading that reflects strong recent selling pressure. Oversold conditions can coincide with a relief bounce, but they do not independently establish that a decline has ended.

Other hourly measures are less supportive. XRP remained below both its 50-period and 200-period exponential moving averages in the same CoinLore technical analysis, leaving the immediate trend bearish. Price would need to recover those averages for that particular trend signal to improve; their precise values were not provided in the source data.

Momentum is not offering a decisive counter-signal. The hourly MACD showed no clear buy or sell signal, which leaves direction inconclusive rather than confirming either a recovery or a renewed breakdown. That neutrality matters because XRP is sitting close to support: an oversold RSI can invite buyers, but neutral MACD and price below both key hourly EMAs leave the market without broad technical confirmation.

A separate 15-minute reading adds another layer of caution. Stoch RSI stood at 93 on September 27, which Crypto Analysis AI characterized as a short-term bounce that was already overbought. This is a much shorter timeframe than the hourly readings, so it should not be treated as a definitive signal. It does, however, suggest that any rebound had encountered near-term exhaustion before XRP returned toward $1.48.

XRP support at $1.45-$1.50 and resistance at $1.55

At the September 28 spot price of $1.48, the closest technical area is the $1.45-$1.50 support band. U.Today described the zone as immediate support and the upper portion of XRP’s prior consolidation range. Its proximity makes it the first practical test for the near-term bullish case.

LevelRoleWhat it represents$1.45-$1.50Immediate supportUpper portion of the prior consolidation range$1.28Lower supportCoinLore’s first listed hourly support level$1.55Nearest resistanceRecent consolidation ceiling$1.60-$1.65Overhead resistanceZone tied to the recent rejection and liquidation pressure$1.65-$1.70Key higher barrierBarrier to a new high after the late-August rally

For buyers, holding the $1.45-$1.50 area is the first requirement. From there, $1.55 is the immediate obstacle. CoinLore identifies that price as nearby resistance and a recent consolidation ceiling, so a move through it would be more meaningful than a brief approach from below. It would also bring the $1.60-$1.65 resistance zone into focus.

The market has recent evidence of supply above current prices. XRP traded near $1.66 on September 23 before declining toward $1.48 by September 28, based on historical Coinbase Pro data carried by Investing.com. The $1.60-$1.65 zone is associated with that recent rejection and liquidation pressure, while $1.65-$1.70 remains the larger barrier cited after the late-August rally.

On the downside, a failure to hold $1.45-$1.50 would weaken the argument that the pullback is stabilising at prior consolidation. The next supplied support is $1.28, CoinLore’s first listed hourly support level. That does not make $1.28 a forecast; it is the next identified reference point if the immediate range is lost.

Can XRP break $1.55 before the Evernorth shareholder vote?

XRP can test and potentially break $1.55 before the September 30 Evernorth vote, but the evidence supports a conditional rather than high-conviction upside case. The catalyst is close, and the hourly RSI at 29.55 shows selling has been strong enough to push the token into oversold territory. A sustained defence of $1.45-$1.50 would give a rebound a firmer technical base.

That rebound still has to contend with bearish hourly positioning. XRP is below its 50- and 200-period EMAs, while MACD provides no clear directional confirmation. In practical terms, a move above $1.55 would be stronger if it followed a hold of support and an improvement in those short-term trend signals, rather than a short-lived oversold bounce.

The $1.55 level is not merely the editor’s scenario target: it is also the nearest supplied resistance and consolidation ceiling. Clearing it would shift attention to $1.60-$1.65, where the prior rejection makes follow-through important. Conversely, another rejection at $1.55, or a loss of the $1.45-$1.50 support band, would weaken the near-term breakout case and leave $1.28 as the next supplied support reference.

The pending vote may concentrate attention on XRP and the proposed Nasdaq listing under XRPN if the transaction is approved, but the SEC filing establishes the vote timetable and expected post-approval listing only. It does not establish a market outcome for XRP. Ahead of that event, the price question comes down to whether buyers can defend the current range and overcome the bearish hourly structure at $1.55.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bitget scheduled a phased return of withdrawal services beginning with Bitcoin at 08:00 UTC on September 28, four days after the incident was detected.

Bitcoin withdrawals restart first on September 28

Bitcoin will be the first asset available for withdrawal under Bitget’s recovery timetable. The exchange said ETH withdrawals are due to follow on September 29, with USDT scheduled for September 30.

The October 2 timetable covers withdrawals for other tokens, fiat withdrawals and P2P services. It restores customer access by asset and service category, rather than through a single reopening of all withdrawal functions.

Bitget published the dates in a September 26 support update, which did not say whether individual withdrawal limits or other conditions would apply as services return. The stated timetable is set out in the exchange’s withdrawal-resumption announcement.

Bitget’s loss estimate rose to $387.5 million without a new breach event

Bitget revised its estimate of funds transferred to attacker-controlled addresses from $351.6 million to approximately $387.5 million after including additional Zcash and TRON transactions, according to its September 25 incident update.

The exchange said the higher figure did not represent further unauthorized transfers. Instead, it was a reassessment of the September 24 incident rather than disclosure of a second breach.

Hot-wallet exposure prompted the withdrawal halt

The disruption was tied to exchange custodial wallets used in Bitget’s hot-wallet infrastructure. Hot wallets are connected to the internet to support operational transfers, unlike cold-wallet storage that is kept separate from online systems.

The Block reported that Bitget’s separate self-custodial Bitget Wallet product was not affected, alongside the exchange’s cold wallets. Trading and deposits remained available during the pause, even as customers could not withdraw assets.

The distinction narrows the incident’s operational scope without changing the significance of the withdrawal suspension for exchange customers. It separates the affected custodial exchange environment from the company’s standalone self-custody product.

Remediation claim and ongoing Mandiant-SlowMist investigation

Bitget said it had identified and remediated the vulnerability behind the incident. The company also said Mandiant and blockchain security firm SlowMist were continuing to support forensic work and efforts to trace the funds.

The remediation statement is Bitget’s own assessment, while the forensic investigation and fund-tracing work remain ongoing. No further findings from Mandiant or SlowMist were detailed in the exchange’s September 26 update.

The next operational milestones are the scheduled restoration dates: Bitcoin withdrawals on September 28, ETH on September 29, USDT on September 30, and the remaining token, fiat and P2P services on October 2.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Sixth Circuit overturns Tennessee relief and upholds Ohio denial

The appeals concerned Kalshi’s effort to stop Ohio and Tennessee from applying their sports-betting rules to its sports-event contracts. In Ohio, the Sixth Circuit left in place the lower court’s refusal to grant a preliminary injunction. In Tennessee, it set aside the preliminary injunction previously obtained by Kalshi.

Preliminary injunctions are temporary measures issued while litigation continues. The ruling does not end the underlying disputes, but it changes the parties’ positions while the cases proceed in the lower courts.

Court rejects swap-jurisdiction and preemption arguments

Kalshi had argued that its contracts fell within the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s exclusive jurisdiction because they qualified as swaps. The Sixth Circuit held that the company had not shown that its sports-event contracts met that standard.

The court also rejected Kalshi’s alternative argument that the Commodity Exchange Act overrides state gambling law. It held that the federal commodities statute neither expressly nor impliedly preempts the gambling laws of Ohio and Tennessee, allowing the states to enforce their sports-betting regulations against the company.

Those holdings address both central parts of Kalshi’s bid for preliminary relief: exclusive federal oversight through the CFTC and federal preemption of state restrictions.

Third, Sixth and Ninth Circuits diverge

The ruling adds to a growing divide among federal appeals courts over Kalshi’s challenge to state-level sports-betting regulation. The Third Circuit previously granted Kalshi preliminary relief, while the Ninth Circuit reached the opposite result in litigation involving Nevada, according to The Block.

A Fourth Circuit appeal remains pending, leaving another federal appellate court to weigh the legal status of Kalshi’s sports-event contracts and the reach of state gambling rules.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

This walkthrough follows a single swap from the order form to the payout. It also notes what can go wrong along the way, and how to avoid it.

Key points

• You need a Monero receiving address and BTC in a wallet you control.

• Choose a floating rate that follows the market, or a fixed rate with a timer.

• Send the exact amount in one transaction, with a normal network fee.

• Keep the order ID. It is the reference for tracking and for support.

• The Bitcoin payment stays visible on the Bitcoin chain. The Monero payout does not.

Before you start: an address and the coins

You need two things. The first is a Monero wallet with a receiving address. The official wallet from getmonero.org works, and so do other open-source wallets. A fresh subaddress, which starts with 8, keeps this payout apart from earlier ones.

The second is BTC in a wallet you control, or on a platform that lets you withdraw to any address. Your own wallet is the better option, because the fee setting and any refund stay in your hands.

HiddenSwap (hiddenswap.com) is a no KYC crypto exchange for crypto-to-crypto swaps: no account, no email and no ID are needed to swap. The steps below use its order flow as the example.

Before anything is sent, the BTC to XMR exchange page lists the live rate, the minimum and maximum amounts and the payout fee. Check it before you open the order form.

Steps 1 and 2: set up the BTC to XMR swap

Step 1 is the pair. Select BTC on the Bitcoin network as the coin to send and XMR as the coin to receive. Paste your Monero address, copied from your wallet, and check that its opening and closing characters match the ones in your wallet.

Step 2 is the rate. A floating rate is set at the moment the Bitcoin network confirms your deposit, so the XMR amount can rise or fall until then. A fixed rate keeps the quoted price, provided the exact amount lands in one transaction before the order timer ends.

A refund address for your BTC is optional, but useful. If the swap cannot finish, the coins go there instead of back to the address they came from. Use an address from a wallet you control, not a platform deposit address.

Step 3: send the exact BTC amount

The order page shows a deposit address made for this order and the exact amount to send. Pay that amount as one transaction. Splitting it, or reusing the address for a later swap, causes problems.

Set a normal network fee. New Bitcoin blocks are found roughly every 10 minutes, and a payment with a low fee can sit unconfirmed through many of them. On a fixed rate, a slow deposit can miss the timer.

This payment is public. Bitcoin transactions stay visible on the Bitcoin chain, including the amount and the addresses. The privacy of this swap begins with the Monero you receive.

If you send from a platform account, check that it sends the full amount after its own withdrawal fee. Some platforms take the fee out of the amount you enter, and the deposit then arrives short.

Step 4: track the order and receive the XMR

Keep the order ID shown on the order page. It lets you reopen the page to follow the swap, and support needs nothing else to find it.

The page shows each stage: the deposit, the confirmations, the swap and the payout. When the payout is sent, the XMR appears in your wallet after it syncs. Monero locks newly received coins for 10 blocks, around 20 minutes, before they can be spent.

HiddenSwap shows a time estimate for each pair in the swap form, but the real time depends on the Bitcoin network. No one can promise an exact finish time for a swap.

What can go wrong, and how to avoid it

A low network fee is a common cause of delay. The deposit waits in the mempool until miners include it, and a fixed-rate timer can expire meanwhile. The normal fee setting in your wallet avoids most of this.

A different amount is the second issue. The result varies with the rate type and with the minimum for the pair, and the HiddenSwap FAQ covers each case. Sending the exact amount avoids the question.

The market can also move. On a fixed rate, a price move of 3% or more before your BTC confirms can mean a choice between a new rate and a refund.

A wrong payout address is the hardest problem to fix. Monero payments cannot be reversed, so compare the address with your wallet once more before you create the order.

Frequently asked questions

Do I need an account or an email?

No. The swap needs the pair, the amount and your XMR address. The order ID takes the place of a login.

What if my Bitcoin payment is stuck?

Wait for it to confirm, or raise the fee if your wallet supports fee bumping. Never pay the same deposit address a second time. If a fixed-rate timer runs out, contact support with the order ID.

Is the XMR payout private?

Yes. Once the XMR is in your wallet, later payments with it keep the payer, the payee and the amount private by default. The BTC deposit before it stays visible on the Bitcoin chain.

With the address checked and the fee set right, moving from Bitcoin to Monero is a short, clear process.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Award Recognition for Trading Infrastructure

In a highly competitive industry, being recognized as the Best Emerging Broker highlights our operational standards and commitment to advancing trading technology. By consistently delivering sub-12ms execution, maintaining raw spreads from 0.0 pips, and holding fully segregated client funds, Aurra Markets is rapidly positioning itself as a broker of choice for active market participants.

Meeting Global Market Demands

"We are pleased to receive the Best Emerging Broker award at Forex Expo Dubai," stated a spokesperson for Aurra Markets. "This recognition is a direct result of our mission to build a multi-asset ecosystem that prioritizes the trader's success by combining Tier-1 liquidity with technical stability. Winning this award in a major financial hub like Dubai proves that our transparent, high-performance infrastructure meets global market demands."

Showcasing Technology at Booth 21

Throughout the expo, our Diamond Sponsor space at Booth 21 served as a primary focal point for investors, media buyers, and financial professionals reviewing modern trading technology.

Volume-Based Rebates for Affiliates

Our dedicated affiliate managers held continuous consultations with introducing brokers and network builders. These professionals were eager to review our Partnership Programme, specifically our highly competitive volume-based rebates and comprehensive partner tracking portal designed to scale affiliate revenue.

Interactive On-Booth Networking

To complement the high-level business discussions, Booth 21 featured a lively atmosphere driven by our interactive activities. Expo attendees participated in these networking sessions, resulting in hundreds of visitors walking away with exclusive Aurra Markets merchandise, further establishing our brand presence in the region.

Building on Global Momentum

Aurra Markets extends its gratitude to the organizers of Forex Expo Dubai, our dedicated global team, and the thousands of traders and partners who visited our booth. We look forward to leveraging this momentum as we continue to push the boundaries of financial technology.

For more information about our award-winning forex platform and multi-asset ecosystem, please visit www.aurra.markets.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Place terms set how many positions pay on a place bet, and the number depends on the field size at the start of the race.

Bitcoin adds one more factor: races start on a fixed clock, and a deposit needs time to confirm. Below: markets, place terms, settlement rules, and when to deposit.

Three Racing Markets

Crypto sportsbooks usually keep the racing menu short, built around three core bets.

• Win: the horse must finish first

• Place: the horse must finish inside the paid places, at its own place price

• Fixed Top 2: the horse must finish first or second, at a fixed price taken at the time of the bet

Place bets pay less than win bets because more outcomes count as a success. The market sets a separate place price for each runner, so the return on a placed horse depends on that price, not on a fraction of the win odds.

Place Terms by Field Size

Field size decides how many places pay. The table sets Dexsport's published terms beside the standard terms many UK bookmakers use.

Runners at the start

Places paid on Dexsport

Fixed Top 2 on Dexsport

Common UK terms

16 or more

3

Available

4 in handicaps, 3 in other races

8 to 15

3

Available

3

5 to 7

2

Available

2

Under 5

Win only

Void

Win only

Last verified: September 2026

Two details stand out. Dexsport pays three places even in fields of 16 or more, where many UK firms pay four in handicaps. And a late withdrawal can drop a race below a threshold, which changes the place terms for bets settled after it.

Rules That Change a Settled Bet

Three situations alter a racing bet after you place it. The details below follow the Tattersalls framework common in UK and Irish racing, and each operator's own rules decide the final settlement.

Non-Runners and Rule 4

When a horse withdraws after you take a fixed price, the other runners gain a better chance, so the price you took now looks too generous. Rule 4 corrects that with a deduction from winnings, scaled to the withdrawn horse's price.

The scale goes from 5p in the pound when the non-runner was priced between 10/1 and 14/1 up to 90p when it was 1/9 or shorter. Horses priced above 14/1 do not trigger a deduction. Several withdrawals add together, capped at 90p, and the deduction applies to winnings only, never to the stake.

Dead Heats

When the judges cannot split two horses, the dead heat rule divides the stake between them. Back a 4/1 shot with $10 to win, and a dead heat for first settles as $5 at 4/1, which returns $25, while the other $5 loses.

The same principle applies to places. If two horses tie for the final paid place, a place stake on either one settles on half the stake at full odds.

Withdrawals Before the Market Forms

Day-of-race bets on a horse that does not run usually return the stake. Ante-post bets, struck days or weeks before the race, usually settle on an all-in basis, so the stake is lost if the horse never starts.

When to Send a Bitcoin Deposit Before the Off

Races start at a fixed time, and the market closes when they do, so Bitcoin's block time matters.

1. Check the off time in your own time zone before anything else.

2. Allow for confirmations. Bitcoin targets one block per ten minutes, and sportsbooks often credit after one to three, so a deposit can take half an hour or more on a busy network.

3. Fund ahead of the card, ideally an hour before the first race you plan to back.

4. Consider a quicker chain for last-minute deposits, since stablecoins on Tron or Solana confirm in seconds.

The choice between BTC or USDT also affects your balance while it waits between races, since Bitcoin's price can move during a long afternoon of racing.

Racing Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport offers three markets under Dexsport horse racing: Win, Place and Fixed Top 2. Its terms cover thoroughbred, harness and greyhound racing, and bets start from $1, which suits small stakes spread across a full card.

Place terms follow the field-size table above, with three places for eight or more runners and win-only markets below five. Fixed Top 2 bets void on races with fewer than five runners. Stake limits vary by event tier, and Anjouan licenses the operator.

Its dedicated horse racing rules page governs non-runners and dead heats on the platform. Read it before a big race day, since conventions can differ from the Tattersalls defaults, and traditional sportsbooks handle some of these cases in their own way too.

Conclusion

Racing bets settle on rules that football and tennis bettors rarely meet. Field size sets the place terms, and Dexsport pays three places from eight runners upward, even in the biggest handicaps.

Non-runners can trigger Rule 4 deductions of up to 90p in the pound from winnings, dead heats split the stake, and ante-post bets usually settle all-in.

With Bitcoin, fund well before the off, since confirmations can take half an hour or more. Confirm what your country permits, fix a budget for the whole card, and bet only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters on a busy race day.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Racing rules, place terms and deductions vary by operator and jurisdiction, so check the current rules on the platform before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Monthly freebet clubs, also called turnover clubs, sort players into tiers by total sports stakes over a calendar month and credit a freebet at the start of the next. Results do not matter.

The headline rewards look generous at the upper end. Against the stakes behind them, most tiers return well under 1%, and freebet conditions cut that further.

How a Turnover Club Works

The mechanics follow a common pattern across crypto sportsbooks.

• Turnover counts, not profit: every eligible stake adds to the monthly total, win or lose

• Tiers set the reward: each threshold unlocks a fixed freebet, and higher tiers unlock larger ones

• Eligibility rules filter bets: minimum stakes and minimum odds decide which bets count

• Freebets come with their own terms: bet-type rules, odds limits and an expiry

This last point matters because freebets pay winnings only, without the stake itself. Freebet value therefore falls below the number printed on it, and the shortfall widens at short odds.

Dexsport's Sports Club Tiers

Dexsport offers a nine-tier Sports Club, and Dexsport freebets reach accounts on the first day of each month.

Tier

Monthly sports turnover

Freebet reward

Freebet bet type

Novice

$200 to $999

$5

Combo of 3 to 4 events, odds 1.3 to 5.0

Base

$1,000 to $4,999

$20

Combo of 3 to 4 events, odds 1.3 to 5.0

Player

$5,000 to $14,999

$50

Combo of 3 to 4 events, odds 1.3 to 5.0

Champion

$15,000 to $24,999

2 × $50

Combo of 3 to 4 events, odds 1.3 to 5.0

Expert

$25,000 to $99,999

2 × $75

Single bet, odds 1.8 to 3.0

Genius

$100,000 to $249,999

2 × $250

Single bet, odds 1.8 to 3.0

Hero

$250,000 to $499,999

5 × $200

Single bet, odds 1.8 to 3.0

King

$500,000 to $999,999

5 × $600

Single bet, odds 1.8 to 3.0

Legend

$1,000,000 to $10,000,000

5 × $2,000

Single bet, odds 1.8 to 3.0

Last verified: September 2026

The promotions page describes these turnover tiers, although one FAQ entry on the site describes the club in terms of a month in the red. Confirm the current rules with support before you plan around a tier.

The Reward as a Share of Turnover

Divide each reward by the turnover behind it, and sports turnover rewards look far smaller.

Tier

Reward at the tier's entry point

Reward at the upper end of the band

Novice

2.5%

0.50%

Base

2.0%

0.40%

Player

1.0%

0.33%

Champion

0.67%

0.40%

Expert

0.60%

0.15%

Genius

0.50%

0.20%

Hero

0.40%

0.20%

King

0.60%

0.30%

Legend

1.0%

0.10%

Three points stand out. Each tier's entry point gives the highest rate, so a player just over a threshold earns the most value for that band. Rates fall steadily through each band. And the lowest tier, at $200 of monthly stakes, gives the highest share of all.

Set against the built-in margin on a typical sportsbook line, often 4% to 5%, the reward offsets only a small part of the cost of the stakes. It pairs more naturally with weekly cashback, which responds to losses where a turnover club does not.

Conditions That Shape the Value

Several rules decide which bets count toward the total and how you can use the freebet.

• Eligible bets: a minimum stake of $5 and minimum odds of 1.3, across all sports

• Combos: a combo counts if at least one event has odds of 1.3 or higher

• Entry: a confirmed email address on the account

• Freebet balance: freebets stay in a separate balance and go on the slip through Place Freebet

• Esports: freebets do not apply to esports bets

• Odds caps: the maximum freebet coefficient is 5 from Novice to Champion and 3 from Expert to Legend

The combo requirement for lower tiers shapes the outcome most. Freebets on three or four legs pay only when every leg wins, so its expected value drops further than a single-bet freebet at the same face value. Combo bets multiply the margin as well as the odds.

Conclusion

Monthly freebet clubs reward turnover, not results. At Dexsport, nine tiers stretch from $200 of monthly sports stakes for a $5 freebet to $1 million or more for five $2,000 freebets.

Measured against the stakes, most tiers return less than 1% of turnover, and the highest rates come at each tier's entry point. Freebets pay winnings without the stake, which lowers their value again.

Treat a club reward as a small rebate on activity you would place anyway, not a reason to stake more. Check local law, set a monthly limit, and bet only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters most near a tier threshold.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip. Promotional tiers, rewards and terms change and can be withdrawn, so check the current rules on the platform before you rely on any programme. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The update was issued by the CFTC’s Market Participants Division, Division of Market Oversight and Division of Clearing and Risk, according to the agency’s announcement. It addresses both futures commission merchants, or FCMs, and derivatives clearing organizations, while setting out how firms may use distributed-ledger systems for records that regulations require them to retain.

The FAQs are staff views rather than binding rules. Their practical importance therefore rests on how firms can meet the underlying investment, record-preservation and regulatory-access standards while adopting tokenized or on-chain systems.

Tokenized forms of Regulation 1.25 investments

For customer funds, the CFTC’s FAQ permits an FCM or derivatives clearing organization to use a tokenized form of an investment otherwise allowed under Regulation 1.25. That permission is available only where the tokenized form satisfies all applicable requirements.

The FAQ applies to both FCMs and derivatives clearing organizations. It leaves Regulation 1.25’s investment categories unchanged: tokenization does not create a new permitted category, and the underlying investment must already be eligible.

The requirements that apply to the investment and the customer-fund framework also apply to the tokenized structure.

Blockchain records must remain accessible during disruptions

The staff addressed blockchain and distributed-ledger technology for required records, stating that CFTC Regulations 1.31 and 45.2 are technology-neutral. A Lowenstein Sandler review said those systems may be used if they provide authenticity, reliability, prompt production and regulatory access.

A blockchain-based system may therefore serve as the recordkeeping system, but the records must remain promptly producible and available to regulators when required. The relevant standard is continued usability, not the particular technology used to store the records.

Firms do not necessarily need separate off-chain copies of records held through blockchain infrastructure. They must preserve and produce the required records during disruptions involving a network, a block explorer or other relevant infrastructure, as reported by Unchained. A ledger’s existence alone is insufficient if the system cannot maintain those recordkeeping capabilities during an interruption.

September update extends the March crypto FAQ initiative

The September additions build on a CFTC FAQ initiative launched on March 20, 2026. The initial release covered crypto assets, tokenized collateral and digital assets accepted as margin collateral, according to the agency’s March announcement.

The latest material extends that work into two adjacent areas: the treatment of tokenized versions of investments permitted for customer funds and the recordkeeping standards for blockchain systems. In both cases, the staff did not frame the answers as a new rulebook for digital assets. The update applies existing investment and records obligations to newer forms of infrastructure and representation.

For regulated firms, that leaves operational resilience and regulatory access at the centre of implementation. The ability to use a tokenized investment or an on-chain record does not displace the requirement to satisfy the conditions attached to customer funds and required records.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

All three platforms sell the same kind of contract, a share that pays one dollar if an event happens, yet they differ in regulation, currency, market model, and cost.

Those differences decide who can use each platform and what a trade costs. Below: a Dexsport vs Polymarket vs Kalshi table, then fees, oversight, and Dexsport's place.

Three Platforms Side by Side

Each row reflects the platforms' own published rules and fee schedules as of late summer 2026.

Kalshi

Polymarket (international)

Dexsport

Oversight

CFTC-designated contract market in the US

Offshore, with a separate CFTC-licensed Polymarket US

Anjouan licence

Settlement

US dollars

USDC on Polygon

Stablecoins

Deposits

Bank transfer, cards, PayPal and similar

Crypto wallet

Crypto wallet or account balance

Market model

Central order book

Off-chain order book, on-chain settlement

Single Buy button against a shared liquidity pool

How cost appears

Taker fee on each trade

Taker fee by category, with makers free

Built into prices, with pairs at 101 to 102 cents

Resolution

Kalshi's regulated rulebook

UMA optimistic oracle

Dexsport team, within 24 hours

Other products

Event contracts only

Event contracts only

Sportsbook and casino in the same account

Last verified: September 2026

Prediction Market Fees Compared

All three platforms take their cut differently, and the difference matters most at 50 cents, where uncertainty peaks.

• Kalshi applies a taker fee of 0.07 × price × (1 − price) per contract, which comes to about $1.75 per 100 contracts at 50 cents and falls toward zero near the extremes

• Polymarket uses a similar curve under its fee schedule effective 30 March 2026, from about $0.75 per 100 shares on sports up to about $1.75 on crypto, while geopolitics markets stay fee-free and makers trade free

• Dexsport does not charge a separate fee per trade; its cost lives inside each Yes and No pair, which typically sums to 101 or 102 cents, roughly 1% to 2% of the stake

Fee schedules and real costs differ, because thin order books add slippage on large orders. Polymarket also asks users to deposit USDC on Polygon, so exchange fees on the way in can matter more than the fee per trade itself.

Access and Oversight

Regulation shapes who can trade and what protection they receive.

Kalshi operates as a federally regulated US exchange, and New York and Massachusetts had each sued it over sports contracts by August 2026. Its market mix leans heavily on sports, which account for the large majority of its volume.

In the Polymarket vs Kalshi contest, Polymarket operates two venues. Its international platform stays blocked for US users under a 2022 settlement with the CFTC.

Polymarket US launched on 3 December 2025 as a separate regulated exchange with identity checks and dollar deposits. The international venue leads on politics and world events.

Dexsport operates outside US regulation, under an Anjouan licence, and serves a crypto-native audience. Its prediction markets share one account with a sportsbook and casino, and the team validates results within 24 hours of an event.

Dexsport's Place in the Field

Dexsport offers the simplest market model of the three, and the order book vs liquidity pool contrast explains why. Each market offers one purchase button per side without limit orders, so every trade accepts the price shown, and a shared pool pays out winners.

Five categories make up Dexsport prediction markets, from sport and crypto to politics, the economy and pop culture. The largest, on the 2028 Republican nomination, had passed $60 million in volume by September, and short crypto price cycles reopen every few minutes.

Our guide to Dexsport's prediction markets covers the product in depth.

The trade-off cuts both ways. Traders who want limit orders, deep books and regulated protection will favour Kalshi or Polymarket US.

Crypto users who already hold stablecoins and use a sportsbook may prefer one account for everything. Resolved bets appear on Dexsport's public desk, where on-chain settlement leaves a visible record.

Conclusion

Kalshi, Polymarket and Dexsport sell the same one-dollar contract through very different structures. Kalshi offers a regulated US exchange in dollars, Polymarket an order book in USDC with a separate US venue, and Dexsport a pool-based product inside a crypto sportsbook.

Costs follow the same split. Kalshi and Polymarket charge taker fees that peak near 50 cents, while Dexsport builds roughly 1% to 2% into each price pair.

Pick the model that matches how you trade and where you live. Know the law in your country, limit how much you commit to open positions, and trade only once you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling applies to every venue.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Fee schedules, regulatory status and platform features change often, so check each platform's current documentation before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

USDe’s first equity basis-trade venue is Binance

Ethena described Binance as the first venue for the equity extension of USDe’s basis trade in its announcement.

The trade holds tokenized equity exposure and sells a corresponding perpetual futures contract to hedge against directional moves in the underlying share price. Binance provides both legs on one venue: tokenized stock exposure and USDT-settled derivatives tied to equities.

Previously, Ethena’s Risk Committee approved a framework for incorporating tokenized-equity basis trades into USDe’s allocation strategy, according to The Block. The framework positions equities as an additional potential source of basis-trade exposure, not a replacement for USDe’s existing strategy.

How bStocks and USDT equity perpetuals form the hedge

Under the announced structure, bStocks provide the spot side of the position and matching equity perpetuals provide the short hedge. A rise or fall in the referenced share price is therefore intended to be offset between the long tokenized-equity holding and the short derivatives position, while the trade seeks to capture the basis between them.

Binance launched bStocks on June 11, 2026. The exchange says each token is backed 1:1 by an underlying share held with a regulated custodian, and that bStocks can be converted into the underlying equity around the clock, subject to product and jurisdictional restrictions.

The ownership and conversion structure is relevant to Ethena’s use of the assets as collateral. The Block reported that bStocks represent interests in securities held by BTech Holdings Limited and may be converted into the underlying securities where applicable laws permit. Those terms mean the tokenized exposure is not presented simply as an unconstrained substitute for direct share ownership across every jurisdiction.

Ethena did not disclose an allocation size or identify particular equities in its announcement. The company’s stated significance is the venue choice and the addition of tokenized-equity basis trades to the set of strategies available for USDe backing.

Article image accompanying The Block’s report on Ethena’s expansion of USDe’s basis trade into Binance bStocks and equity perpetuals. — Source: The Block

Binance’s market depth behind the allocation

Ethena selected Binance as the first venue for extending its strategy into equities, against a derivatives market with more than $2.9 billion in open interest across equity perpetual futures, according to figures supplied by Ethena. The Block reported that open interest grew at a 105% compound monthly rate during 2026.

Binance also reported more than $565.9 million in outstanding bStocks tokenized-equity value by the end of July and said the product crossed $500 million in assets under management less than seven weeks after launch in an August update.

The figures provide context for the venue choice but do not show the depth of every individual contract or how much capacity Ethena will use, and the bStocks growth data predates the September announcement. Binance says the tokens are backed 1:1 by shares held with a regulated custodian and can be converted into the underlying equities 24/7, subject to applicable product and jurisdictional limits.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The SEC Division of Corporation Finance’s crypto-asset FAQ was last updated on September 25, 2026. It says a buyback announcement for a non-security crypto asset generally is not a promise of essential managerial efforts when the system is functioning. The analysis changes where the system is not functional and the buyback is marketed as a source of yield or returns for token holders.

Read together, those positions make the FAQ a fact-specific compliance map, not an unconditional safe harbor for familiar crypto practices.

Staking receipts and custody

The staff’s distinction begins with what the purported receipt actually does. A genuine staking receipt evidences ownership of deposited assets without changing the rights or benefits attached to them. That formulation places the legal emphasis on the underlying holder’s continuing claim, rather than on the increasingly common label of “liquid staking.”

Custody is equally important. The receipt issuer cannot transfer, lend, pledge, rehypothecate or otherwise deploy the deposited assets. Those restrictions matter because they separate a token that records a depositor’s existing position from an arrangement in which an intermediary can put customer assets to work for its own account or through discretionary activity.

The FAQ also draws a classification distinction that is easy to miss. A staking receipt for a non-security digital commodity may be treated as a digital tool. A receipt issued by a protocol-based liquid-staking provider, meanwhile, may itself be a digital commodity where its value is linked to the programmatic operation of a functional crypto system and supply-and-demand dynamics.

Neither result follows merely from issuing a transferable token after a user stakes assets. The conditions tie the analysis to the system’s functionality, the mechanics of the receipt and limits on the issuer’s control of customer property. That is a narrower proposition than a general endorsement of liquid staking.

Continuity with earlier staking guidance

Continuity with the SEC’s earlier staking guidance is clearest in the agency’s treatment of qualifying receipt structures. The August 2025 staff statement described staking receipt tokens as receipts for deposited covered crypto assets and said they generally lacked the characteristics of options, security futures or security-based swaps. Its conclusion was not an unconditional safe harbor, however.

The March 2026 interpretive release extended the same legal backdrop to specified transactions involving the generation, issuance, redemption or trading of staking receipt tokens for non-security crypto assets, saying those transactions do not require Securities Act registration or an exemption in the circumstances described. The interpretive release and the August 2025 statement therefore frame the FAQ as a refinement rather than a blanket approval.

What matters remains the structure’s facts: whether the underlying crypto system is functional and whether custody, redemption and the mechanics of the token preserve its character as a receipt. The staff is not treating a product’s economic name as dispositive, and the FAQ does not create an unconditional safe harbor.

Kraken and the intermediary boundary

The SEC’s 2023 case against Kraken remains a limiting precedent: the agency alleged that Kraken’s staking-as-a-service programme involved unregistered securities transactions, and Kraken settled without admitting or denying the allegations, according to the February 2023 release.

The FAQ is directed to materially different features—functional protocol operation, what a receipt represents, limits on custody and asset use, and promotional claims. Calling an instrument a receipt or making its associated token transferable does not by itself bring a centralized staking product within that treatment.

Its receipt description requires that the issuer lack the ability to transfer, lend, pledge, rehypothecate or otherwise use deposited assets. For protocol-based liquid-staking receipts, the relevant value may be linked instead to a functional system’s programmatic operation and market supply and demand, rather than continuing managerial efforts. The FAQ still leaves line-drawing questions for intermediaries, and products marked by discretionary custody, opaque asset deployment or promoter-led return narratives are less readily comparable to the structures discussed by the staff.

Buybacks in a functional system

Buybacks receive similarly qualified treatment. For a non-security crypto asset, the staff said that an announcement of a buyback generally would not amount to a promise of essential managerial efforts when the crypto system is functional. In that setting, a repurchase programme is not automatically transformed into the kind of managerial-return representation relevant to an investment-contract analysis.

That qualification matters because the same commercial act can be framed in two different ways. Where the system is not functional, presenting the buyback as creating yield or returns for holders changes the analysis; a company might describe the act as management of an immature project for holders’ expected gain or as an activity involving an asset in a functioning system.

The FAQ thus avoids treating buybacks as inherently benign or inherently suspect. The question is whether the announcement is part of a broader promise that purchasers will benefit from essential managerial efforts. Issuers marketing repurchases in early-stage systems will have less room to rely on the more accommodating functional-system example.

Marketing claims after launch

The most consequential thread in the FAQ may be its treatment of issuer communications. The staff says that formal definitions in the interpretive release are used to classify crypto assets. Yet issuer-defined claims about functionality or decentralization remain relevant to whether the issuer has fulfilled the representations it made. Promotional language can therefore retain legal significance after a token has launched.

That is not a contradiction. Where a functional crypto system has no central party, the staff says issuer statements about it are unlikely to create a new investment contract, because neither the issuer nor another person controls the system in a way that can affect its success or failure. But a statement that a network is functional or decentralized still invites scrutiny of whether those represented conditions are true.

For crypto issuers, the practical constraint is not simply to avoid return-focused language. It is to ensure that claims about launch status, decentralization, custody and programme mechanics match the structure being offered. The FAQ’s more accommodating outcomes depend on those facts, not on a product’s branding.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The right coin balances three things: how long a deposit takes to credit, what the network charges, and how much the balance moves while it stays in your account.

Stablecoins solve the third problem, quick chains solve the first two, and Bitcoin remains the most widely accepted. Below, six options compared, then sportsbooks ranked on coin support.

How Six Crypto Sportsbook Coins Compare

Each network behaves differently at the deposit screen. Figures describe typical conditions and change with network traffic.

Coin and network

Typical block time

Fee level

Price swings

Suits

Bitcoin (BTC)

About 10 minutes, with one to three confirmations common

Varies with congestion

High

Larger, less frequent deposits

Ethereum (ETH)

About 12 seconds

Varies, can climb when busy

High

Players already on Ethereum

USDT on Tron

About 3 seconds

Low with staked energy, higher without

Stable

Regular stablecoin deposits

USDC on Solana

Under a second

A fraction of a cent

Stable

Small, frequent deposits

Litecoin (LTC)

About 2.5 minutes

Low

High

Bitcoin-style transfers at lower cost

XRP

3 to 5 seconds

A tiny amount, burned

High

Quick transfers, with a destination tag

Dollar-pegged tokens keep a bankroll steady, while volatile coins add a second bet on the price itself.

Stablecoins for sports wagers also take the currency guesswork out of bankroll plans. Low-fee chains suit players who deposit small amounts often, which explains the growth of Solana casinos this year.

Four Questions That Narrow the Choice

Answer these before you pick a coin, and the table above does the rest.

• Do you want the balance to hold its value? Stablecoins do, while BTC, ETH, LTC and XRP move with the market

• How large is each deposit? Network fees weigh heavily on small deposits and barely register on large ones

• Which networks does the cashier list? A coin appears on several chains, and each chain uses its own address

• What are the withdrawal minimums? Minimums vary by coin and network, and a small balance may fall below them

Network support varies more between platforms than coin lists suggest, so check the network menu, not just the coin logo.

Crypto Sportsbooks Ranked on Coin Support

Rankings weigh the number of assets and networks, stablecoin options and how clearly each cashier explains network choice.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport handles dozens of coins over more than two dozen chains, displays Bitcoin in mBTC, and takes USDT through Binance Pay without a deposit address.

EURC is available on Solana, while native USDC and bridged USDC.e appear as separate entries. Bets start at $1, and weekly cashback pays in stablecoins. Anjouan licence.

2. Stake

Stake supports one of the largest coin selections among crypto sportsbooks, and it publishes withdrawal minimums for each asset, which helps players who move small amounts.

Its sportsbook covers a very wide range of events. Balances stay with the operator between sessions, and the licence that applies depends on your market.

3. BC.Game

BC.Game lists an unusually long run of coins, with many smaller tokens that rarely appear at rival sportsbooks. Its network documentation lets a player confirm a route before a deposit. Reformed Curacao licences name its ultimate owners, which adds accountability for players who move larger sums.

4. Cloudbet

Cloudbet focuses on core coins such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and major stablecoins, not long token lists. This narrower menu suits players who stick to established assets and value a Curacao-licensed operator active since 2013. Higher stake limits make it a fit for bigger single positions.

5. Vave

Vave covers the familiar coins across several chains, handy for anyone who switches between assets. Guidance on which network to pick, and on the smallest amount each coin allows, is sparse next to the books above, so ask support to confirm both before a first transfer.

6. Rollbit

Rollbit takes a short list of major coins and places its sportsbook beside a crypto futures desk under one login. Traders who already use that desk gain convenience, while players after a broad menu of deposit assets will find more choice at the five books above it.

Conclusion

The right coin depends on how you play. Stablecoins keep a bankroll steady, Solana and Tron keep fees low, and Bitcoin remains the most widely accepted option at the cost of slower, pricier transfers when the network is busy.

Among crypto sportsbooks, Dexsport coin support leads the field, thanks to its long coin and network menu, Binance Pay, EURC and clearly separated network entries. Stake and BC.Game follow on breadth.

Match the network to the cashier before every transfer. Look up the law in your country, decide a spend limit first, and sign up only once you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters whichever coin you choose.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Network speeds and fees vary with traffic, and platform coin lists and terms change, so check current details before you transfer. Crypto transfers can be irreversible. Sports wagers and casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Accumulator boosts, also called combo multipliers, raise the combined odds of an eligible combo by a fixed factor once it reaches a set number of legs. Sportsbooks offer them to make crypto sportsbook combos with more legs more attractive.

Boosts rarely erase the extra cost of a long combo. Some tiers close most of it, while others close only part, and the table further down shows the difference in numbers.

How a Combo Boost Works

Build a combo of several independent selections, and the sportsbook multiplies their odds together. The boost then adds one more multiplier, scaled to the number of legs.

• Qualification: the boost starts at a minimum leg count and grows at higher counts

• Payment: the boost pays only when every leg wins, just like the combo itself

• Calculation: the multiplier usually counts as one more odd in the combined price

• Limits: maximum payout rules still cap what a successful combo can return

Football accumulators are the most common home for boosts, since weekend fixture lists make six or eight legs easy to assemble.

Combo+ on Dexsport

Dexsport calls its boost Combo+ and applies it automatically to eligible combos at four fixed steps.

Legs in the combo

Combo+ multiplier

4

1.08

6

1.15

8

1.2

10

1.5

Last verified: September 2026

The steps jump sharply at ten legs. Dexsport's rules treat the multiplier as a regular odd within the combined price, and bets on the platform start from $1, which keeps long combos cheap to try. Operator terms change, so check the current Combo+ table before a large combo.

Margin Multiplies With Every Leg

Every leg includes the bookmaker's margin, and a combo multiplies those margins together. The illustration below assumes each leg is a fair coin flip priced at 1.91, a common two-way price, so each leg returns about 95.5% of its stake on average.

Legs

Combined odds at 1.91

Expected return without boost

Expected return with Combo+

4

13.3

83.2%

89.8%

6

48.6

75.9%

87.2%

8

177.1

69.2%

83.0%

10

646.2

63.1%

94.7%

Three patterns stand out. Each boost narrows the extra cost but leaves some of it in place; the ten-leg tier comes closest to a single bet's return, and eight legs is the weak spot where the boost trails the added margin per leg.

Real prices vary by market, and Premier League odds differ between books, so read the table for its proportions, not as a promise.

Five Rules That Change the Payout

Boost terms decide more than the headline multiplier, and Dexsport's rules spell out several of them.

• Cash Out cancels the boost. Close a combo early and Combo+ disappears from the settlement

• Partial results recalculate it. Legs that settle as half won, half lost or refunded change the multiplier

• Refunds can reset it. Once more than two legs end as refunds, the multiplier falls to 1

• Payout caps still apply. Successful combos cannot pay more than the maximum for a single bet, which is $5,000 on the largest events and $500 on others

• Same-event legs cannot mix. Two different outcomes from one event cannot share a combo

The cap matters most at ten legs. Stake $10 on ten legs at 1.91 with the 1.5 boost, and the slip shows a potential return near $9,690, above the $5,000 limit for the biggest events, so any return past that point never pays.

Conclusion

Combo boosts reward longer accumulators with a fixed multiplier, and on Dexsport, Combo+ rises from 1.08 at four legs to 1.5 at ten.

The maths shows why that matters. With legs priced at 1.91, expected return falls from 83.2% at four legs to 63.1% at ten without a boost, and Combo+ lifts those figures to 89.8% and 94.7%. Every tier still leaves a combo below the return of a single bet.

Check the Cash Out, refund, and payout-cap rules before a long combo. Know the law where you live, fix a stake limit for combos, and wager only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters most on long odds.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Figures in the worked table are illustrative and assume a fixed price on every leg. Boost terms, limits and rules change, so check current details on the platform before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Price markets on Bitcoin let traders buy Yes or No on whether it reaches a set level by a deadline, and each price in cents doubles as a probability.

The crowd prices $100,000 as a real possibility this year and $150,000 as a small one. Below: the numbers, what the target takes, and how rules decide a Yes.

Bitcoin Price Odds in Numbers

Several Bitcoin prediction market 2026 contracts track the same question, and together they show where traders stand.

Signal

Figure

Source and date

Bitcoin price

About $86,200

Late September 2026

Chance of $100,000 or more in 2026

About 45%

Kalshi, late September

Forecast 2026 high

About $97,000

Kalshi, late September

Chance of $150,000 or higher

3% or less

Polymarket, 7 September

Chance of $200,000 or higher

About 1% or less

Polymarket, 7 September

Year's low so far

Below $62,000 on 5 June

Polymarket market notes

U.S. bitcoin ETFs took in about $1.7 billion across 21 and 22 September, which helped lift longer-dated bets. Short-dated September contracts cooled at the same time, a sign that traders expected the move to take months, not days.

What $150,000 Would Take

The arithmetic explains why the target trades so cheaply.

• Price gain: about 74% from roughly $86,200, in the final quarter of the year

• Time left: roughly 14 weeks between late September and the 31 December deadline

• Record territory: the price would need to clear every level reached in 2026 so far

• Durability: a spike that fades before the deadline still counts on some markets and not on others

Moves of that size have happened before, but rarely in one quarter from a flat start. Markets price the possibility in low single digits, above zero, which reflects how volatile the asset can be.

Touch, Close or Average

The rules behind each market matter as much as the target, and three designs dominate.

• Touch markets resolve Yes if the price reaches the target at any moment before the deadline. Polymarket's 2026 market uses the high of any Binance one-minute BTC/USDT candle, so a brief spike counts

• Close markets resolve on the price at a fixed time, such as the year-end Bitcoin price, so a spike that fades does not pay

• Range markets split the year-end price into bands and pay the band that contains the final figure

Touch markets on $150,000 always trade above close markets on the same number, since they pay in more scenarios. Compare like with like before you judge whether a price looks cheap.

Price Questions on Dexsport's Board

Dexsport lists a "When will Bitcoin hit $150,000?" market in the crypto category of its board, next to a ladder of 2026 upside and downside targets.

Across Dexsport prediction markets, short Up or Down cycles on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and XRP give an alternative to year-long questions.

Payouts come in stablecoins, and the rules box on every question spells out which exchange feed counts, the cut-off and what happens on a tie. Prediction market basics explain the share mechanics in more depth.

Board prices shift by the minute, so read the live figure before you act; Dexsport's licence comes from Anjouan. Your choice between BTC or USDT for the bankroll also changes your exposure while a long-dated position stays open.

Conclusion

To reach $150,000 before the year ends, the price needs to climb about 74% from late-September levels. Prediction markets price that outcome in low single digits, while $100,000 stands near a coin flip on Kalshi and the forecast 2026 high stands around $97,000.

The resolution rule matters as much as the target: touch markets pay on any brief spike, close markets only on the year-end price, and range markets on the final band.

Treat every figure here as a snapshot. Confirm what your country allows, cap the amount tied up in long-dated questions, and take part only once you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling applies to price markets too.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a price forecast or trading recommendation. Prices and probabilities quoted reflect the dates shown and change constantly, so check current figures before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The denial followed data analysis by CoinDesk that found a substantial share of sampled Ether perpetual volume clustered near a single price level. Kalshi’s account is that the repeated transactions reflect how fixed-size resting orders interact with its liquidity arrangements.

Kalshi says no CFTC examination is underway

In comments reported by CoinDesk, Kalshi said the CFTC had not approached the company as of September 23 and that it therefore did not believe a formal examination was under way.

The statement speaks to whether Kalshi had received contact from its federal regulator, not independently to the CFTC’s internal view of the trading. Kalshi attributed the activity to incentive programmes that compensate liquidity providers for maintaining orders.

CoinDesk’s analysis described repeated Ether trades with a nearly fixed dollar value rather than simply high contract turnover. The number of contracts changed as Ether’s underlying price moved.

Ether perpetual volume clustered near $5,499

CoinDesk examined 3,450 Ether-perpetual trades across 23 one-hour samples collected between September 17 and September 20. Trades executed within $2 of $5,499 accounted for $7.7 million of the $13.5 million in sampled volume, or 57%.

The concentration near that level provides a more specific picture than an aggregate volume figure. More than half of the volume in the sample was tied to trades occurring in a narrow $4 price band around $5,499, according to the outlet’s analysis.

CoinDesk reviewed 46 hourly samples spanning June 19 to September 20 and reported recurring fixed-dollar Ether trades in 43 of them. As Ether’s price moved, the number of contracts changed while the transactions’ intended notional amount remained nearly constant.

The four-day September sampling window captured only part of a pattern that extended over months. The analysis documented both the repetition and the concentration of activity in the narrower September dataset, without determining why participants placed the orders.

Kalshi’s visual explanation of the recurring Ether perpetual trade patterns and liquidity-incentive programs. — Source: Kalshi

Kalshi points to fixed-fee liquidity programmes

Kalshi set out its explanation in a September 22 statement, saying market makers were posting fixed-size orders under programmes designed to pay flat fees for keeping resting liquidity available. The company said those payments were not based on trading volume.

Under that description, a market maker’s incentive is linked to maintaining an order rather than generating more transactions. Kalshi said the recurring Ether perpetual trades were produced by those fixed-size orders, which it presented as the source of the repeated fixed-dollar pattern identified in the trade data.

Kalshi said its self-clearing-member fee-rebate programme began in July. A related filing took effect on September 16, according to a CFTC filing. The company said the programme prevents participants from receiving net-negative fees on a trade.

The timing places the programme’s July start within the period reviewed by CoinDesk, which began on June 19. Its broader findings, however, cover trading before the stated launch date as well as activity after the September 16 filing took effect.

Kalshi’s public position remains that the behaviour reflects the mechanics of liquidity provision and its fee structure. The company said it had not been contacted by the CFTC and did not believe a formal examination was under way as of September 23.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The transaction remains subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions. If completed, North Capital will become a wholly owned MoonPay subsidiary, according to MoonPay’s announcement.

MoonPay’s proposed acquisition

MoonPay did not disclose the financial terms of its agreement. Cointelegraph, citing a person familiar with the matter, reported that the transaction is an all-stock deal valued at more than $60 million. That valuation has not been confirmed in MoonPay’s public announcement.

The distinction matters because the deal is still proposed, rather than a completed integration of North Capital’s operations. The disclosed agreement gives MoonPay a route to acquire an established set of private-market functions, but the parties must first satisfy the conditions attached to closing.

For MoonPay, the proposed acquisition extends beyond the payment and access services commonly associated with crypto platforms. The target’s businesses span the process through which private securities can be issued, administered and traded, including capital raising, clearing, custody, investor onboarding, escrow and secondary trading.

North Capital’s private-securities stack

North Capital says it provides infrastructure for exempt and tokenized securities. Under the proposed acquisition, its SEC-registered broker-dealers, alternative trading system, transfer agent and investment adviser would be added to MoonPay’s financial infrastructure platform.

MoonPay identified those regulated businesses as supporting its expansion into tokenized real-world assets and onchain capital markets.

Official MoonPay announcement image for its proposed acquisition of North Capital. — Source: MoonPay

PPEX’s secondary-market scale

North Capital’s PPEX trading page describes PPEX as its SEC-registered alternative trading system for secondary trading in private securities, including digital and tokenized instruments, and lists more than 1,250 approved assets and 625,000 secondary trades. MoonPay said North Capital’s broader platform has processed more than $8.7 billion in primary and secondary transaction volume, a figure covering activity across the platform rather than only the PPEX secondary venue. MoonPay also said the proposed acquisition would add a secondary-market component alongside North Capital’s capital-raising, custody, clearing and onboarding services.

Tokenized-RWA strategy

Tokenization can place representations of financial or real-world assets on blockchain-based systems, but the acquisition announcement is focused on the regulated infrastructure surrounding securities rather than on a technical tokenization product. MoonPay’s description centres on combining North Capital’s private-markets capabilities with its own financial infrastructure platform.

That makes the proposed deal a move toward assembling rails for securities activity across an asset lifecycle: investor onboarding and capital raising on one side, followed by custody, recordkeeping and potential secondary trading on the other. North Capital’s existing focus on exempt and tokenized securities is particularly relevant to MoonPay’s stated onchain capital-markets ambitions.

Whether that strategy takes shape inside MoonPay will depend first on the transaction closing. For now, the clearest disclosed outcome is that MoonPay has agreed to acquire a regulated private-securities business whose PPEX platform spans more than 1,250 approved assets and whose wider infrastructure has handled more than $8.7 billion in transaction volume.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The reported aim is to reinforce the dollar’s reserve-currency role and raise demand for U.S. Treasuries. Separately, CoinDesk said the administration is weighing a global plan to encourage use of U.S. dollar-backed tokens abroad as a way to strengthen dollar dominance.

Those reports describe a proposal still under consideration, not a final programme that has been established as approved.

Reported plan links overseas distribution to dollar and Treasury demand

The proposal would place stablecoins within a broader strategy for extending the dollar’s reach in international finance. A dollar-backed token used outside the United States can give users access to a digital claim pegged to the U.S. currency, while the assets held behind that token may sit within the U.S. financial system.

That second part is central to the reported Treasury-demand rationale. If issuers expand the supply of qualifying stablecoins, they must hold corresponding reserves. Under the federal framework enacted in 2025, those reserves can include dollars and specified short-dated Treasury assets. The administration’s reported focus therefore connects overseas token distribution with the market for the underlying instruments used to back issuance.

Bloomberg’s report described possible government-private-sector joint ventures, rather than identifying a completed arrangement or naming participating companies. CoinDesk’s account likewise framed the effort as a plan being weighed by the administration. The available reporting does not set out a timetable, target jurisdictions, funding model or eligibility criteria for any potential initiative.

The distinction matters because stablecoin adoption abroad can take many forms, from use in payments and transfers to trading or settlement. The reports support the administration’s broad strategic objective, but do not specify which uses a future programme would prioritise.

Trump’s 2025 order set worldwide stablecoin policy

An overseas stablecoin initiative would build on policy set out early in Trump’s second administration. In a January 23, 2025 executive order, the White House established a policy of promoting and protecting the U.S. dollar, including through actions supporting the development and growth of lawful dollar-backed stablecoins worldwide.

The wording of the executive order made international growth part of the administration’s stated digital-finance agenda. The newer reporting suggests officials may now be considering a more direct vehicle for pursuing that objective, potentially alongside private companies.

The policy framing also goes beyond backing domestic crypto-sector activity. By tying lawful dollar-backed stablecoins to protection of the dollar, the order presented digital tokens as part of the United States’ international financial posture. That is the same strategic thread cited in the reports on the prospective overseas push.

GENIUS Act reserves create the Treasury link

The reserve rules in the GENIUS Act provide the clearest connection between stablecoin expansion and demand for dollar assets. The law, signed on July 18, 2025, created a federal framework for stablecoins and requires qualifying issuers to maintain reserves on at least a one-to-one basis.

According to a July White House fact sheet, permitted reserve assets include dollars and certain short-term U.S. Treasury assets. In practical terms, the structure means that additional issuance by qualifying providers must be matched by reserve holdings rather than simply by an issuer’s promise to maintain a peg.

That does not mean each token necessarily translates into a newly purchased Treasury bill. The permitted reserve mix includes dollars as well as certain short-term Treasury assets. But it explains why officials could view wider use of regulated dollar tokens as relevant to Treasury demand: the reserve requirement links outstanding tokens to holdings of specified dollar-denominated assets.

The White House summary of the framework describes the one-to-one reserve standard as applying to qualifying issuers. The reported global initiative has not, based on the available accounts, detailed how it would interact with particular issuers or reserve portfolios.

Dollar-pegged tokens dominate the stablecoin market

The scale of dollar-linked tokens helps explain the administration’s interest. A July 2025 White House digital-assets report said there were more than $258 billion in stablecoins outstanding as of that month, with dollar-pegged stablecoins accounting for more than 99% of the total.

That composition gives a U.S. policy push an unusually direct link to the currency itself. A global distribution effort centred on dollar-backed products would be aimed at the part of the stablecoin market that already overwhelmingly uses the dollar as its reference unit, rather than trying to establish a new monetary denomination.

The White House report described the figures as highlighting stablecoins’ international monetary significance. Its estimate also shows why the reserve question has become a policy issue: at that market size, the assets backing dollar-pegged tokens are relevant both to crypto-market infrastructure and to demand for the dollar instruments held in reserve.

The administration’s January order had already called for worldwide growth of lawful dollar-backed stablecoins. The reported plan would test whether that policy can be translated into an organised overseas distribution strategy, with the dollar’s international role and demand for U.S. Treasuries as the stated goals.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

According to GiaCoin’s CoinGecko-sourced market data, that would be roughly $27 billion above the reported $98.6 billion market value at late-September prices. XRP has traded at substantially higher valuations before, making $2 arithmetically plausible. But a year-end close at that level would require sustained demand, not merely a brief rebound in a volatile market.

A $2 XRP price implies a $126 billion market capitalisation

Price targets can obscure the scale of capital involved. With the circulating supply held constant, every move in XRP’s price translates across tens of billions of tokens. The difference between $1.55 and $2 is only $0.45 per XRP, but it equates to approximately $27.4 billion in additional market capitalisation using the late-September supply estimate.

There is an important comparison point in XRP’s own recent history. On September 9, 2025, CoinMarketCap recorded XRP at $2.9466, with a market capitalisation of $175.65 billion. A return to $2 would therefore restore part of the valuation lost since that period, not take XRP into uncharted valuation territory.

But the comparison cuts both ways. The 2025 figure demonstrates that the market has previously assigned a far larger value to XRP. It also shows that $2 would remain well below the prior high-market-cap regime, rather than confirming a full recovery to it. A target can be reachable in historical terms while still demanding a material repricing over a short period.

The distinction matters for the year-end question. A temporary spike can occur in a thin or fast-moving market without establishing the demand needed to maintain a closing price. The relevant hurdle is not whether XRP can trade through $2 at some point, but whether buyers can support a roughly $126 billion valuation into the final day of 2026.

XRP is recovering from a 48% year-over-year decline, not extending a sustained uptrend

Late-September pricing still sat far below where XRP traded a year earlier. YCharts put the token near $1.53 on September 25, 2026, against $2.93 on the same date in 2025, a decline of roughly 48%.

That backdrop complicates any argument that $2 is simply the next step in an established advance. It would be a recovery from a materially lower base, even though the price is close enough that a 29% move can occur quickly in crypto markets. The market’s prior ability to price XRP above $2 does not determine whether it will do so again before year-end.

September’s trading illustrates both sides of that assessment. XRP rose from roughly $1.28 on September 15 to about $1.57 on September 22, before retreating toward $1.50 on September 23, based on Yahoo Finance historical data. A move of that size over a week makes a further rally mechanically conceivable.

It also cautions against treating spot momentum as durable. The pullback came before XRP approached $2, and the month’s range underlines how rapidly gains can be surrendered. For a $2 year-end close, a late rally would need to survive the same volatility that can make interim price targets appear easier than they are.

There is no supplied evidence of a continuous, broad-based uptrend carrying XRP toward the threshold. The available data instead describe a token that has rebounded sharply within a wider year-over-year decline. That is a different setup from a market already consolidating just below resistance after a sustained advance.

Grayscale and Bitwise create XRP demand channels

U.S. access to XRP exchange-traded products broadened in 2026 when the Grayscale XRP Trust ETF became effective on April 16. Bitwise then filed a post-effective prospectus dated September 18 for an XRP ETF intended to hold XRP and track its value, according to SEC records.

For certain investors, the products offer a regulated exchange-traded route to XRP exposure rather than direct token purchases and custody. That can widen access and simplify allocations for market participants that use listed products.

Bitwise’s September filing says the fund seeks exposure to XRP held by the trust and uses the CME CF XRP–Dollar Reference Rate—New York Variant to price net asset value. The filing establishes an exposure vehicle and valuation method, not how much capital has entered or will enter it.

That distinction matters to a $2 call. ETF availability does not demonstrate the sustained net inflows needed to support roughly $27 billion of additional XRP market value or show that any inflows would persist through year-end. Access is constructive for a higher-price case, but the relevant evidence would be sustained net demand large enough to matter against XRP’s existing market capitalisation, not the existence of the channel alone.

Legal resolution and escrow remain separate constraints

Ripple’s long-running dispute with the Securities and Exchange Commission has become less immediate as a market overhang. The SEC and Ripple jointly stipulated to dismiss their appeals in 2025, while agreeing that the July 13, 2023 summary judgment would not be vacated or amended. The joint stipulation removes a major unresolved appeals process from the picture.

The resolution does not provide a blanket answer for every future question around secondary-market XRP sales, nor does it establish that all such sales are immune from future regulatory scrutiny. For price analysis, the distinction is narrower but meaningful: a major litigation uncertainty has eased, while regulatory certainty is not absolute.

Supply presents a separate issue. Regulatory filings describe Ripple escrow arrangements that can release up to 1 billion XRP each month. Much of any released amount may be re-escrowed, but the mechanism preserves the potential for distribution pressure and remains relevant when assessing how readily fresh demand can lift the market.

The structure is described in a CFTC filing. It does not show that all monthly releases are sold, and it should not be presented as proof of imminent selling. It does mean that a bullish price case has to account for an ongoing supply-side mechanism rather than focusing solely on new access channels.

The evidence supports a conditional answer to whether XRP can reach $2: the move is within the range suggested by both its own history and recent volatility, and ETF structures have improved the routes through which U.S. investors can obtain exposure. A year-end close remains more demanding than the 29% headline gain suggests, because it requires the market to sustain about $126 billion in value while ETF inflows have not been established in the supplied record and escrow releases can continue to shape supply expectations.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Coinbase launches fixed-rate Bitcoin-backed USDC loans

Coinbase’s help documentation says eligible users can choose between variable- and fixed-rate USDC loans. Under the fixed-rate option, borrowers select a fixed term and can borrow up to $5 million.

The fixed-rate structure sets both the interest rate and repayment date at origination, unlike variable-rate borrowing, which does not lock the rate for the loan’s full life. The loans use Bitcoin as collateral and USDC as the borrowed asset.

Morpho described the launch as fixed-rate crypto-backed lending powered by its Midnight protocol, while Coinbase’s loan setup documentation confirms the product choices and borrowing ceiling.

Fixed terms expand Coinbase’s variable-rate loan book

The fixed-rate option arrives alongside a considerably larger variable-rate product. Morpho said Coinbase’s existing variable-rate loans had surpassed $1.4 billion in active loans, backed by roughly $3 billion in collateral, as of the fixed-rate launch announcement.

Coinbase first introduced Bitcoin-backed USDC borrowing through Morpho in January 2025. That initial product offered flexible, open-ended repayment terms and variable-rate borrowing, according to Morpho’s January 2025 launch post.

The addition therefore changes the range of term structures available rather than replacing the earlier model. Borrowers can now choose between an open-ended variable-rate loan and a fixed-rate loan with a selected term, subject to Coinbase’s eligibility requirements.

Morpho’s figure for active loans and collateral indicates the scale of the pre-existing service, but does not break out activity by borrower type, loan size or collateral ratio. The reported $1.4 billion in active loans applies to the variable-rate offering that remains available alongside the new fixed-rate product.

Official Coinbase and Morpho integration graphic for fixed-rate Bitcoin-backed loans. — Source: Morpho

Morpho Midnight supplies the fixed-maturity lending rails

Morpho Midnight is a fixed-rate, fixed-maturity protocol whose isolated markets specify the loan tokens, maturities and collateral assets, according to its whitepaper. That distinguishes it from Morpho Blue’s predominantly variable-rate model and matches Coinbase’s format for specifying a borrowed asset, collateral asset and maturity.

Coinbase’s loan documentation, rather than the Midnight protocol documentation, sets out the consumer terms. Decrypt reported that Coinbase manages the consumer application experience, Morpho supplies the lending infrastructure and Base handles settlement.

Decrypt called the integration the first enterprise-scale deployment of Morpho Midnight. The rollout adds fixed-rate terms to Coinbase’s Bitcoin-backed USDC loan offering alongside its existing variable-rate product.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Casper, Wyoming, USA. 25/09/2026: Moonclave, a Solana-based on-chain prediction market protocol, today announced it has surpassed 12,000 members in its loyalty and rewards program, distributing a $10,000 prize pool and over 76 million experience points (EXP) to early participants. Alongside this growth, the Moonclave team confirmed it is actively working to secure a listing on a new cryptocurrency exchange, with details to be announced in the coming weeks.

The milestone follows a recent community reactivation campaign that generated more than 427,000 impressions and added 4,400 new followers, while the project's Discord community grew from approximately 4,000 to over 10,000 members.

Moonclave enables users to trade predictions on crypto, macroeconomic, on-chain, and real-world events, with outcomes settled directly on-chain.

The platform is live now at predictions.moonclave.fun, alongside a token, $MCV, that anchors the protocol's rewards and community systems.

A Loyalty System Built Around Participation

At the center of Moonclave's growth is its card-based loyalty program, accessible through the project's rewards hub. Members earn EXP through trading activity, content creation, referrals, and community engagement across X and Discord.

As members accumulate EXP, their Moonclave Card progresses through five tiers, New Moon, Waxing Crescent, First Quarter, Waxing Gibbous, and Full Moon, with higher tiers unlocking earlier access to new features and beta releases.

“We built Moonclave around the idea that conviction outlasts noise. Crossing 12,000 members and paying out our first prize pool is proof that people are willing to show up consistently. Expanding where $MCV is accessible is the natural next step, and we're working to get that right rather than rushing it," said Reil Sokolaj, Founder & CEO of Moonclave.

Product Focus Over Price Speculation

Rather than positioning itself around short-term price action, Moonclave has emphasized its core product, an on-chain prediction market mechanic, as the primary draw for new users. The team describes its approach as deliberately unhurried, favoring sustained engagement over hype-driven spikes, a philosophy reflected in the project's own messaging: the platform rewards patience and conviction rather than short-term speculation.

The project's community is organized into five functional groups, HIVE (community and diplomacy), FORGE (technology and engineering), SCOUT (research and exploration), OATH (operations and logistics), and LABS (science and research), each contributing to different aspects of the protocol's development and growth.

What's Next

With its loyalty program scaling and community engagement climbing, Moonclave's near-term roadmap includes expanding exchange access for $MCV alongside continued development of its prediction market product.

The team has not yet disclosed which exchange it is in discussions with, saying further details will be shared once confirmed.

Getting Started

New users can begin engaging with Moonclave by making their first prediction on the live app or joining the loyalty program to start earning EXP from day one, with no minimum token holding required to take part.

For those who want to stay current as the exchange listing and other updates develop, Moonclave's X account (@themoonclave) remains the primary channel for announcements.

About Moonclave

Moonclave is an on-chain prediction market protocol built on Solana, enabling users to trade predictions on crypto, macroeconomic, and real-world events with on-chain settlement. The project is supported by an active community structure and a tiered loyalty program rewarding participation and engagement.

For more information, visit moonclave.fun or join the community on Discord and X.

Media Contact:Reil Sokolaj, Founder & CEO of Moonclave.info@moonclave.fun

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

That comparison is provisional: the 150-millisecond figure is a target for public testing, not a measured mainnet result, according to Crypto.News.

Alpenglow reaches Solana public testnet

Alpenglow’s public-testnet move is a further testing stage, not a completed mainnet deployment of every component. The upgrade is designed to change validator consensus and later block distribution across Solana.

It targets consensus finality of about 150 milliseconds, versus approximately 12.8 seconds under TowerBFT. Finality is when a transaction or block is treated as settled by network consensus; public testing will assess performance beyond the earlier dedicated cluster, and Crypto.News said the 150ms figure is a target rather than a measured mainnet result.

Solana’s staged rollout starts with Votor, which replaces on-chain vote transactions with direct validator votes and aggregate certificates. Rotor—the planned block-propagation replacement for Turbine—comes later.

Votor arrives before Rotor

The initial rollout introduces Votor, which replaces on-chain vote transactions with direct validator votes and aggregate certificates, the Solana Foundation said. Votor is therefore the consensus-facing portion of the early deployment.

Rotor is distinct from Votor. It is planned as a replacement for Turbine, Solana’s block-propagation mechanism, and will arrive later under the Alpenglow plan.

The first phase of the public-testnet migration focuses on the validator-voting changes. In light of that split, it should not be read as the simultaneous replacement of TowerBFT voting and Turbine propagation; the broader networking overhaul remains ahead.

Finality thresholds depend on stake participation

Under the Alpenglow consensus proposal published through Solana Improvement Documents, finalization depends on stake participation: 80% in one voting round enables the fast route, while 60% across two rounds provides a slower route. The public testnet offers a setting to assess these conditions and the 150ms objective before a mainnet feature activation.

Agave schedule shows tentative September 28 milestone

Anza’s Agave v4.3 release schedule lists testnet feature activation as completed on August 19, 2026. It also sets out a September testnet restart and identifies September 28 as a tentative mainnet feature-activation milestone.

Although the September public-testnet migration is an important operational step, it does not confirm a September 28 activation: the schedule explicitly warns that its dates may change, leaving the mainnet timing provisional.

For now, Solana’s rollout sequence is clear: Votor is entering the public-testnet stage first, Rotor follows later, and the advertised 150ms finality figure remains a target awaiting validation. The Agave schedule provides the current mainnet milestone, subject to revision.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

This crypto casino comparison scores seven platforms on library size, coin and network support, and the clarity of their payout rules, using each platform's published information as of September 2026.

Dexsport leads on the combination of all three. Each entry below covers what a player gets and where to read carefully before a first deposit.

How the Scores Work

Each casino earned its place on three measures, weighted equally.

• Library size: the number of titles and studios, since crypto casino game library breadth decides how long a lobby stays fresh

• Coin support: assets and networks at the cashier, since crypto casino coin support and supported coins vary widely between platforms

• Payout rules: how clearly each platform states what a withdrawal requires, from play-through conditions to reviews

Published withdrawal terms weighed most in the third measure, because a clear rule that asks for something beats a vague one that leaves players unsure.

The Rankings at a Glance

Rank

Casino

Library

Coins and networks

Payout rules in brief

1

Dexsport

7,500+ games, 45+ studios

50+ assets, 25+ networks

Play-through rule published in the terms

2

Stake

Very large, with house originals

Wide asset list

Per-asset minimums published

3

BC.Game

Very large, with house originals

Long coin list

Terms vary by coin and account

4

Cloudbet

Mid-sized, mainstream studios

Core coins

Named licensee since 2013

5

Vave

Large third-party library

Multi-coin

Terms less detailed

6

Rollbit

Narrower casino range

Selected coins

Operator-held balances

7

Mega Dice

Around 50 studios

Multi-chain

Documentation lighter

Last verified: September 2026

Seven Crypto Casinos Ranked

Positions reflect the balance of the three measures, not one standout feature.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport offers more than 7,500 games from over 45 studios, with Pragmatic Play Live as its largest live provider at 455 titles.

The cashier takes more than 50 assets across over 25 networks, from Bitcoin to EURC on Solana and USDT through Binance Pay. 

Its terms state the payout rule plainly: stake a deposit at odds of 1.3 or above, or twice through casino games, before withdrawal. The Dexsport casino operates under an Anjouan licence.

2. Stake

Stake operates one of the largest casino catalogues in crypto gambling, and its house-built originals add low-edge games beside the licensed studios.

The cashier supports a wide list of assets, and per-asset withdrawal minimums appear clearly, which helps anyone who plans small cash-outs. 

Balances stay custodial between sessions. Stake operates under different licences in different markets, so the rules that apply depend on which entity serves your country.

3. BC.Game

BC.Game pairs a very large licensed library with its own originals, and its coin list ranks among the longest at any crypto casino.

Reformed Curacao licences now name the people who ultimately own it, a real gain for accountability. 

Withdrawal conditions can vary by coin and by account level, so the terms deserve a careful read before a large deposit. Balances remain with the operator between sessions.

4. Cloudbet

Cloudbet has traded since 2013, and its company appears by name on a Curacao licence, the longest track record on this list.

Its casino library leans toward mainstream studios and trails the largest catalogues in raw size. The cashier focuses on core coins over long lists of smaller tokens. Higher stake and withdrawal limits suit bigger players, and the long record offers comfort that newer brands cannot match.

5. Vave

Vave offers a large third-party library across familiar studios, without a suite of house originals to compare against. Multi-coin deposits cover the common assets, which suits players who hold several currencies and like to switch between them.

Its published detail on withdrawal conditions is lighter than that of the higher-ranked sites, so confirm minimums, review times and any play-through rule with support before you commit a meaningful sum.

6. Rollbit

Rollbit combines a casino with crypto futures products under one account, which appeals to players who move between both. Its casino range is narrower than the catalogues ranked higher, and coin support covers a selected group of assets.

Balances stay with the operator during play, so withdrawals depend on the platform's own review times. The wider product suite suits active traders more than players who want the deepest possible game lobby.

7. Mega Dice

Mega Dice built its product around Telegram, with a catalogue drawn from around 50 studios and multi-chain deposits. The messenger-first design suits players who already live in Telegram and want quick access on a phone.

Documentation on licences and withdrawal rules is lighter than elsewhere on this list, so the terms deserve a close read. The format trades depth of disclosure for convenience of access.

Conclusion

Dexsport ranks first because it combines a library of more than 7,500 games, a cashier with over 50 assets across more than 25 networks, and a payout rule written plainly in its terms. Stake and BC.Game follows closely on library size and coin range.

Further down, Cloudbet trades catalogue size for a long track record, while Vave, Rollbit and Mega Dice publish less detail on withdrawals.

Read the payout terms before any first deposit, whichever platform you choose. Look up the rules where you live, set a limit on deposits, and sign up only if you meet the legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters more than any list position.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Rankings reflect published platform information as of September 2026, and game counts, coin lists and terms change, so check current details on each platform before you deposit. Casino games involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

EURC is Circle's euro stablecoin, redeemable one-for-one with the euro and issued under the EU's MiCA rules. Deposits in it keep a bankroll in the currency you actually spend.

Euro stablecoins remain a small corner of crypto next to dollar tokens, yet EURC at crypto casinos has grown quickly enough to earn a place at the cashier.

Circle's Euro Token, Explained

Circle Mint Europe SAS issues EURC as an e-money token, authorised by France's ACPR, which makes it a MiCA stablecoin. Each token corresponds to one euro held in reserves of cash and short-dated government assets at regulated European banks.

The token launched on Ethereum in June 2022 under the name Euro Coin, then gained native issuance on Avalanche, Stellar, Solana and Base from 2023. Circle's own page shows circulation passed €402 million on 13 August 2026.

EURC also leads its niche. Industry data from late August 2026 put the whole euro stablecoin market at around $835 million, with EURC at up to 63% of it and Société Générale's EURCV in second place.

A Euro Bankroll Against a Dollar One

Here is the difference in a simple example, with illustrative figures.

1. Start with €1,000. At an exchange rate of 1.10 dollars per euro, conversion to USDT gives about 1,100 USDT, before any exchange spread.

2. Play for a few weeks and break even. The balance still reads 1,100 USDT when you finish.

3. Watch the rate move. Suppose the euro strengthens by about 3% to 1.133 dollars.

4. Convert back. Your 1,100 USDT now buys about €971, a loss of roughly €29 without a single lost bet.

5. Repeat with EURC. A €1,000 deposit in EURC that breaks even stays at 1,000 EURC, worth €1,000 when you withdraw.

The effect can run the other way too, since a weaker euro would leave the USDT player ahead. EURC removes the currency bet entirely, which suits anyone who wants results to reflect play alone. Stablecoin deposits follow the same wider mechanics whatever currency the peg tracks.

EURC Across Five Blockchains

Ethereum, Solana and Base together hold more than nine-tenths of euro stablecoin supply, analysis published in September 2026 shows.

• Ethereum: about 69.5% of euro stablecoin supply, with the deepest market liquidity

• Solana: about 14.8%, with EURC on the chain at about 105 million units since June and holder addresses up by more than 9% over the summer

• Base: about 6.9%, with fresh growth through Coinbase integrations

• Avalanche and Stellar: smaller floats, with Stellar used heavily for payments and remittances

Network choice matters at the cashier as much as the coin itself, since each chain uses its own address and fee level. Low-fee chains suit frequent small deposits, while Ethereum suits larger, less frequent transfers.

Dexsport Lists EURC on Solana

Dexsport lists EURC on the Solana network, one entry in a cashier of 50-plus assets. Deposits go to a Solana address, so EURC held on Ethereum or Base needs to move to Solana first.

Solana's low fees suit a euro bankroll built up in small amounts, and the chain's quick finality keeps deposits prompt. Game prices, stake limits and promotions on the platform may still display in dollars, so check how a euro balance appears before your first bet.

Dexsport's prediction markets settle in stablecoins, and the eligible coins for that product deserve a check on the board itself.

Players who weigh BTC or USDT for a balance now have a third option to consider. Anjouan licenses the operator, and the cashier list can change, so reread it before you send funds.

Conclusion

EURC gives eurozone players a way to fund a crypto casino without a currency bet on the side. Circle issues it under MiCA through a French e-money licence, and circulation passed €400 million in August 2026.

Dollar stablecoins expose a euro bankroll to exchange-rate moves on the way in and out, while EURC keeps the value in euros from deposit to withdrawal.

Dexsport handles EURC on Solana, so send it on that network only. Confirm the law in your country, cap what you deposit, and join only once you are old enough, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters in any currency.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Exchange rates, stablecoin supply figures, network support and platform terms change, so check current details before you transfer. Crypto transfers can be irreversible. Casino games and sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Permissible reserves and the two-day redemption standard

Under the Fed’s principal proposal, payment stablecoins would need one-to-one backing by permissible reserve assets. The eligible categories include U.S. dollars, balances held at the Federal Reserve, insured deposits, U.S. Treasuries maturing within 93 days and certain Treasury-backed repurchase agreements, according to the Board’s staff memorandum.

The framework would also require issuers to publish redemption policies providing for redemption within no more than two business days, subject to specified exceptions. It would establish requirements for reserve custodians and address stablecoin-related activities by Fed-supervised banks, Reuters reported.

Capital charges target uninsured deposits, reverse repos and operational risk

The proposal goes beyond asset backing by adding loss-absorption requirements for specified risks. It would apply capital requirements to credit risk associated with uninsured deposits and undercollateralized reverse repurchase agreements, as well as to operational risk.

The proposed credit-risk capital charge is 2%. The operational-risk charge would range from 1% to 2% of outstanding stablecoins, depending on the issuer’s size, the Fed memorandum said. Those charges would sit alongside the proposed reserve standards rather than replace them.

State member banks would need approval for stablecoin-issuing subsidiaries

The second proposal would create a tailored Federal Reserve application process for insured state member banks seeking approval to establish subsidiaries that issue payment stablecoins.

Applicants would need to submit a business plan, financial information, capital-structure documentation and related certifications, according to a separate Federal Reserve Board staff memorandum.

The application process would address the bank subsidiary arrangement separately from the prudential standards applicable to a stablecoin issuer, rather than treating issuer rules as automatic permission for the structure.

Federal Register publication starts the 60-day comment clock

The Fed has requested public input on both proposals; the agency said the comment period will close 60 days after the notices are published in the Federal Register. The September 24 announcement did not specify a calendar closing date because it is tied to that publication date.

The Federal Reserve Board’s announcement frames the two proposals as implementing measures for Board-supervised payment stablecoin issuers under the GENIUS Act.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

In its “The Machine-Native Economy” paper, BlackRock Digital Assets Research argues that agents could autonomously buy data, software services and computing capacity. It presents stablecoins as the likely near-term instrument for those transactions because they can be programmed to settle around the clock between machines.

The important distinction is between a credible payments mechanism and an established new payments market. BlackRock is not saying that today’s stablecoin volumes are mainly agent-driven, nor does its report create immediate buying power for stablecoins. It is setting out a model in which recurring, low-value purchases by autonomous software become easier to execute through programmable digital cash than through workflows built around a human customer.

The $11 trillion stablecoin base is not yet evidence of agent commerce

Stablecoins already have a substantial transactional footprint. Alongside the 2025 volume figure, BlackRock’s paper cited by Decrypt points to a circulating stablecoin market capitalisation above $300 billion by September 2026. Those numbers explain why a large asset manager can plausibly treat stablecoins as payment infrastructure rather than simply as crypto-market collateral.

But the figures aggregate activity with very different purposes. They do not isolate autonomous purchases of compute, application programming interface access or datasets. The jump from broad stablecoin usage to agent-led commerce is therefore an argument about a possible change in payment behaviour, not evidence that the change has already happened at scale.

BlackRock itself acknowledges that agent payments are still at an early stage and that liquid, standardised markets for compute contracts have not developed, as CoinDesk reported. That admission matters because the thesis relies on two developments that should not be conflated: agents must make enough independent purchases to need a specialised payment layer, and the products they purchase must become sufficiently standardised to trade or finance beyond one-off service provision.

The first may emerge without the second. An agent could pay a provider for a small amount of computing capacity without creating anything resembling a financial market for computing claims. Conversely, a market for tokenised capacity would require common terms, credible settlement and participants willing to hold or finance those claims. Stablecoin settlement can support the former without resolving the latter.

x402 illustrates the payment problem agents need stablecoins to solve

BlackRock identifies Coinbase’s x402 as an emerging mechanism through which agents can pay for online resources such as API calls without a human-operated checkout. CoinDesk cites the protocol as an example of small, automated stablecoin payments.

BlackRock’s broader framing calls AI “machine-native intelligence” and crypto “machine-native money.” According to The Bid, its research argues that agents may use blockchain-based monetary instruments instead of conventional bank accounts and rails such as ACH, Fedwire or SWIFT.

The practical appeal lies in transactions that may be too small, frequent or time-sensitive for conventional checkout. An agent purchasing data, software, an API call or computing capacity could operate continuously, without making a consumer card the centre of the process. Account setup, human approval and conventional banking timetables are the constraints this model is intended to address.

The evidence does not establish a mature commercial system. Agent payments remain at an early stage, and adoption, pricing, trust and spending controls remain hurdles for providers and operators.

Stablecoins may complement bank and card rails, not replace them

The BlackRock Investment Institute’s thematic update presents agentic commerce as a combination of blockchain settlement, existing applications, payment details and third-party services—not as a clean break with the current payments system. Different rails can therefore serve different parts of the same transaction landscape.

Stablecoins may be useful when an autonomous agent needs a native, programmable way to pay another online service. Many transactions, however, may remain inside established applications or rely on payment credentials and intermediaries already embedded in merchant systems. The practical question is whether stablecoins offer enough operational advantage in a particular agent workflow to justify changing the surrounding stack.

That framework does not imply that agent adoption would necessarily erode card networks or bank rails. Stablecoins could add machine-to-machine settlement while substantial activity remains on existing infrastructure, complementing transactions that are awkward under human-centred payment design rather than universally replacing established payment systems.

Tokenized compute is the larger financial-market bet—and the least developed link

The potentially larger idea in BlackRock’s framework is not a stablecoin payment for an API call. It is tokenised compute. The firm says standardised claims on computing capacity could eventually be traded, financed or used as collateral, extending the argument from payments infrastructure to a prospective market in an input that AI systems need.

That prospect sits against an enormous possible revenue pool. BlackRock references estimates that Amazon, Microsoft and Google cloud revenue could reach about $1.1 trillion by 2030, according to Ledger Insights. The number gives the thesis its financial ambition: if compute becomes a standardised, transferable claim, an expanding cloud market could support more than straightforward service payments.

Yet scale of cloud revenue is not evidence that capacity can readily be packaged into a liquid instrument. The missing market structure is central, not incidental. Compute services vary by provider, configuration, location, timing and contractual conditions. Turning access to those services into claims that buyers can confidently trade, lenders can finance and markets can accept as collateral requires far more standardisation than a stablecoin transfer itself.

BlackRock’s acknowledgement that such liquid standardised markets do not yet exist puts tokenised compute in a different category from the near-term stablecoin use case. The former is a proposed financial layer atop cloud infrastructure; the latter can begin with a seller, an agent and an agreed payment method. The two ideas reinforce each other conceptually, but their development paths are unlikely to be equally fast.

BlackRock has supplied institutional validation, not new stablecoin buying power

The immediate significance of the report is narrative and institutional, rather than transactional. It is not a new BlackRock product or capital commitment, and therefore does not directly create incremental stablecoin demand. InvestingLive characterised the near-term effect as validation of the AI-agent and digital-asset narrative rather than a direct market catalyst.

That validation is still notable. A firm of BlackRock’s scale is framing stablecoins not only as crypto-market instruments but as a candidate payments layer for a growing class of automated software. But the investable-looking part of the story remains furthest away: a tokenised compute market that can be standardised, financed and used as collateral. For now, the more concrete signal is that the payment experiment has begun before the financial market built around it exists.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The company’s stated uses for the capital are additional regulatory licenses, hiring in New York and internationally, and product expansion into cards and capital markets.

HIFI’s operating model spans bank rails, compliance processes and digital-asset settlement.

Left Lane Capital leads HIFI’s $37 million Series A

Left Lane Capital led the round, with Miller taking a board seat. HIFI did not disclose a valuation, the size of individual investor commitments, or a timetable for the proposed product and licensing work in the announcement.

The company said the proceeds would support its next stage of expansion across regulated financial infrastructure. That includes obtaining further licenses, a practical requirement for a business seeking to extend its reach across payment systems and capital-markets products in multiple jurisdictions.

HIFI’s stated roadmap also includes building its New York and international teams. The company has not specified the number of roles it expects to add or identified the markets in which it will seek new permissions.

HIFI’s existing payment footprint

HIFI says it processes more than $7 billion annually and serves more than 10,000 businesses and 200,000 individuals.

The company’s stated expansion includes adding products and obtaining additional regulatory licenses. It presents the effort as an extension of its existing money-movement business, with bank-connected payment flows and tokenized instruments brought into a common framework.

The Block says HIFI’s platform connects money movement, compliance and settlement across bank rails and digital assets. The company did not provide transaction-composition or revenue details alongside the reported volume.

Bank rails, compliance and digital-asset settlement

HIFI’s platform connects money movement, compliance and settlement across bank rails and digital assets, according to The Block. In practical terms, the company’s proposition is to address the handoffs between established payment infrastructure and transactions involving digital assets, where settlement and compliance processes must work alongside each other.

That focus has appeared in two recent initiatives cited in the report. HIFI participated in DTCC’s July tokenized-asset production trades, placing the company in an effort involving tokenized assets in a market-infrastructure setting.

It also announced a Visa partnership in September for stablecoin-funded payouts. The reported arrangement links the company’s payments ambitions to a use case in which stablecoin funding can support payouts, while HIFI’s broader platform is intended to bridge digital assets and bank-connected systems.

The Series A arrives as HIFI seeks to turn those strands into a broader commercial platform. Its stated priorities suggest that payment execution, regulatory coverage and product distribution will need to advance together if cards and capital-markets services are to become meaningful additions.

Licenses, cards and capital markets

HIFI’s use-of-proceeds plan places additional licensing at its center. While the company has not identified the licenses it intends to obtain, the emphasis indicates that expansion will require more than technical integration: it will also require securing the permissions needed for the markets and products it targets.

Cards represent one of the clearest planned product extensions. The company also intends to move into capital markets, an area that aligns with its participation in DTCC’s tokenized-asset production trades and the financing’s focus on tokenized-money infrastructure.

New York and international hiring will accompany that push. Taken together, the round gives HIFI funding to expand the operational and regulatory foundations of its platform while it develops card and capital-markets offerings around its existing payment footprint.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Champions League prediction markets turn the question "who lifts the trophy on 5 June 2027?" into a set of Yes or No shares, one per club, each priced as a probability. Prices move with every result, injury and draw.

Here is how the season works, where the crowd stands, and what could move the price before the Champions League final 2027 in Madrid.

The 2026-27 Season in Brief

The format keeps the single league table introduced in 2024-25, with 36 clubs in one standings list.

• League phase: each club plays eight matches, four at home and four away, from 8 September 2026

• Final league matchday: 27 January 2027, with all 18 fixtures played at the same time

• Knockout rounds: two-legged ties from February, with the playoff round for clubs placed ninth to 24th

• Final: a single match at the Estadio Metropolitano in Madrid on 5 June 2027

PSG enter as back-to-back champions after a penalty win over Arsenal in the 2025-26 final in Budapest, where the score stood at 1-1 after extra time.

Where the Crowd Stands on the Champions League 2026-27 Favourites

Soon after the league-phase draw on 27 August, Kalshi's outright market showed an unusually flat front group.

Club

Implied chance on Kalshi, late August 2026

Arsenal

20%

Barcelona

20%

Paris Saint-Germain

17%

Real Madrid

16%

Bayern Munich

13%

Manchester City

10%

Bookmakers told a similar story in early September, with Barcelona around 5/1 and PSG and Arsenal close behind. Those six clubs together took almost the whole market, and the other 30 shared only a few percentage points between them.

Prices like these shift quickly. Treat the table as a snapshot of the crowd's view at one moment, not a forecast.

Three Storylines That Could Move the Price

The PSG three-peat stands out first. Three straight European Cups have eluded every club in the modern era, and the market prices that difficulty into a lower chance than their recent record might suggest.

Arsenal's position has a different weight. Clubs that reach a final and lose only on penalties tend to draw steady support, and a strong league phase would likely push its price higher still.

Spanish sides add a third thread. Barcelona lead or share the lead in most markets, and Real Madrid, with 15 titles, rarely drift far from contention. 

With the final in Madrid, any Spanish club that reaches it plays in familiar surroundings, although the Metropolitano belongs to Atlético, not Real.

Squad news can outweigh all three. One serious injury to a key forward can take several points off a club's price overnight, much as a favourite's odds compress or drift through a long tournament.

Prediction Market Prices and Sportsbook Odds

Both formats describe the same question in different units, and UCL outright odds convert neatly into implied probability. 

Fractional odds of 5/1 imply roughly a 16.7% chance, because a stake that wins returns six times its value, while a prediction market share at 17 cents implies about 17%.

The difference between those numbers shows the built-in cost of each format, and it tends to widen for outsiders. Put both into percentages first, and the more generous price becomes easy to spot.

Champions League Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport lists the Champions League in the sports category of its board, alongside questions on the NFL, NBA, the Premier League, La Liga, the Ballon d'Or and Formula 1.

On Dexsport prediction markets, every club gets a separate Yes and No pair, and positions settle in stablecoins. Every market page shows its close time, resolution deadline and source, which for a football outright usually means the official result of the final.

The platform's sportsbook also offers match-level Champions League markets, so one account covers both the season-long question and individual fixtures.

Dexsport liquidity varies from club to club, so check the price on screen before a larger position. Our guide to prediction market basics covers prices, payouts and early exits in more depth, and the operator holds an Anjouan licence. Terms can change, so read the current rules on the market page.

Conclusion

The 2026-27 Champions League opened with one of the most evenly priced title races in years. Arsenal, Barcelona and PSG shared the lead in the market after the draw, with Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Manchester City close behind.

League-phase play lasts until 27 January, and prices will move with every result before the knockout rounds begin in February.

Convert odds into percentages before you weigh one format against another, and read every snapshot as one moment on a long road to June.

Check local law, keep positions within a set budget, and take part only once you reach legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters over a season this long.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Market prices quoted reflect specific dates and change constantly, so check current figures before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Approval phishing exploits that legitimate permission instead of necessarily stealing a recovery phrase or private key. Chainalysis says more than 7,000 leads processed during Operation Spincaster helped investigators pursue cases involving $162 million in losses. A normal approval may be needed when an application exchanges or deposits a token on the user’s behalf. The risk depends on what was authorized, which spender received the permission, how much of the token it could move, and whether it later exercised that authority.

Connection Does Not Grant Token Access

Infographic by the author

Incident reports often compress several actions into one line: a wallet connected, the user signed, and the assets moved. Each verb requires separate evidence. Understanding this often starts with looking at resources such asAlphaWire's crypto news, which covers many of the different elements of sending crypto and managing connections. This kind of site can provide a strong foundational understanding of the crypto world, from which users can build their interactions.

A user may first identify a signature, then add the token, authorized spender, allowance, completed transfer, or revocation as those details are confirmed. Coverage published before that transaction trail is complete may describe only one part of the sequence. “Connected” means the application learned which public address the user selected. “Approved” means the wallet owner granted a spender permission over a particular token. “Transferred” means the spender used that permission. “Revoked” means any remaining authority was removed. A report confirming only the first action has not established the other three. An unchanged balance does not prove that no permission remains open because the spender may not have used it yet. The decisive facts are the token, the spender, the amount authorized, and the order in which approval, transfer, and revocation were recorded.

A connection normally lets an application recognize the selected address and prepare actions for the wallet to review. The wallet owner still has to approve or reject those actions. Disconnecting later can end that direct connection, but it does not alter a token allowance already recorded on the blockchain. Closing a tab or removing a site from a wallet’s connected-app list therefore cannot replace revocation. The approval remains associated with the token and authorized spender until its terms end, its amount is used, or the wallet owner changes it.

Four Actions with Different Consequences

As described above, a wallet incident may contain four separate actions:

1. Connect: The application receives the selected public address. It can read public blockchain data associated with that address, but connection alone creates no token allowance.

2. Approve: The wallet owner authorizes one spender to move tokens within a specified limit. No token normally moves at this point.

3. Transfer: The spender uses some or all of that allowance. Tokens leave the wallet only when this separate action succeeds.

4. Revoke: The wallet owner removes or reduces the unused allowance. The spender then loses the corresponding permission for future transfers.

Wallets also request signatures for purposes that do not create token approvals, including proving control of an address. A report saying that someone “signed a message” has not established that a token allowance changed. Some signed requests authorize token access; others do not. The contents of the request and the resulting blockchain record determine what happened. A transfer can also be approved and completed within one workflow, but the permission and movement remain separate actions with different consequences.

Why an Approval Can Remain Active

A limited approval sets a maximum amount; it is not always a one-use permission. If the spender uses only part of the allowance, the remainder may still be available. A finite allowance normally falls as approved transfers use it. Once it reaches zero, another transfer requires a new approval. A large continuing approval can remain open until the wallet owner changes it. Some signed approvals include a deadline, but ordinary token allowances do not expire automatically.

The practical check is specific: identify the token, spender, and remaining allowance. An unfamiliar contract address may be difficult to recognize from its label alone, so the recorded address matters more than a shortened or incomplete name. The order of events also matters. A revocation recorded after a transfer did not prevent that earlier movement, even if the two actions occurred close together.

What Revocation Cannot Undo

Revocation works on future authority. If the allowance is still unused, removing it prevents that spender from relying on the same permission later. If a transfer has already been confirmed, revocation cannot roll it back. A July 2026 Secjuice analysis describes the same boundary and notes that revocation can become a race when an attacker already holds a signed permission.

Four factual questions separate most wallet-approval incidents. Was the wallet only connected? Which token, spender, and amount were approved? Did the spender complete a transfer? Was the remaining allowance revoked before another transfer? A confirmed connection answers only the first question. A confirmed approval establishes authority but not movement. The transfer shows what left, and the timing of revocation determines whether any unused authority was removed soon enough.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The initiative brings together Barclays, HSBC UK, Lloyds Banking Group, Monzo, Nationwide, NatWest and Santander. Transactions were executed on infrastructure developed by Quant, according to UK Finance.

Live tokenised-sterling transactions included remortgage completions

UK Finance said the live pilots completed two remortgages, locking funds and releasing them automatically at completion, as well as a programmable consumer marketplace transaction.

The results involved customers and interbank execution, not just a technical proof of concept: payment timing and release conditions were set within the transaction flow. CoinDesk likewise reported remortgage and marketplace-payment tests by Barclays, NatWest, HSBC and other major UK banks, describing them as the first interbank customer transactions of their kind.

Seven banks used Quant’s shared infrastructure

The seven participating institutions are using a common infrastructure layer developed by Quant, rather than separate systems for each bank. That shared setup is central to the initiative’s interbank element: a tokenised-deposit payment can be executed between participating institutions on the same infrastructure.

The remortgage completions and marketplace payment are identified in UK Finance’s announcement as completed live customer uses, with the automatic release of locked funds at completion demonstrating the programmable settlement mechanism in practice. The announcement does not specify transaction values, volumes or a timetable for broader availability.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bitcoin was around $84,187 when checked on September 25, slightly below the threshold after recently moving above it. A brief move above an average production-cost estimate does not automatically eliminate miner selling pressure or make every operation economical, since miner economics vary substantially by operator.

The practical question is therefore whether realised revenue stays high enough, for long enough, to affect equipment and financing decisions and the amount of BTC miners must sell to meet operating obligations.

The $85,000 threshold is a soft floor

JPMorgan described production cost as a “soft floor”, rather than a hard price floor. That framing is important. Mining does not stop across the network the instant BTC falls below an estimated average cost, nor do miners automatically become cash-generative the instant it rises back above one.

Instead, sustained sub-cost pricing tends to concentrate stress among operators with less efficient fleets, higher electricity costs, weaker access to capital or lower cash reserves. Those companies may sell Bitcoin to finance operations, turn off machines, or leave the market. The resulting reduction in network capacity can eventually lower competition for the remaining miners, but that adjustment is neither immediate nor uniform.

JPMorgan’s estimate therefore provides a useful sector-level reference point. It describes the broad economics confronting mining operators, not the exact break-even price for each business or each piece of hardware. Nor does it establish that BTC must trade at that price: market prices can remain below estimated production costs while miners absorb losses, use cash, sell inventory or reduce capacity.

A sustained recovery above the benchmark could ease those choices at the margin. It could mean fewer BTC sales by miners that had been using holdings as a source of liquidity, particularly if their operating costs are close to the sector average. But the word “sustained” carries most of the analytical weight. At $84,187 on September 25, Bitcoin remained just under the estimate that JPMorgan had identified as the relevant pressure point.

A 280-day sub-cost stretch has already driven capacity out

JPMorgan’s comparison is stark: Bitcoin prices had spent roughly 280 days below production cost, against about 224 days during the 2018 bear market.

The bank also cited a roughly 19% fall in hash rate from its October peak and a roughly 15% decline in mining difficulty. In its reading, some uneconomic capacity had already left the network.

Those figures describe a network that has begun to adjust before any sustained move above the roughly $85,000 production-cost estimate. When high-cost miners sell Bitcoin, shut equipment, or exit, lower capacity can reduce the computational burden for the operators still active and improve their marginal economics.

That is why the estimate functions as a soft floor rather than a hard stop. A recovery above it would arrive after an extended shakeout; lower hash rate can show both the discipline of the survivors and the extent of the capacity loss that preceded them.

Public-miner costs are not one number

CoinShares put publicly listed miners’ weighted-average cash cost at approximately $79,995 per BTC in the fourth quarter of 2025, close to JPMorgan’s $85,000 estimate. That makes JPMorgan’s figure a plausible broad sector benchmark for a sizeable share of listed mining capacity.

Costs vary widely by measure and operator. Riot Platforms reported a first-quarter 2026 cash cost excluding depreciation of $44,629 per BTC, while CoinShares estimated fourth-quarter 2025 all-in costs of $153,040 for MARA and $170,366 for Riot. Riot’s measure excludes depreciation, CoinShares’ figures are all-in estimates, and the reporting periods differ. The variation shows why an industry-wide production-cost estimate is not a company-specific profitability measure.

Miners’ cost structures and financial positions differ, so the data do not support treating every public miner as equally compelled to sell below $85,000 or equally relieved from selling above it. If Bitcoin remains above JPMorgan’s estimated average production cost, selling pressure may ease for miners closest to that margin, but sector-wide BTC sales would not necessarily cease and miners would not necessarily make identical treasury decisions.

Treasury depletion and AI revenue reshape the selling question

Mining economics are only part of the immediate selling calculation. CoinShares said publicly listed miners collectively reduced their BTC treasuries by more than 15,000 BTC from peak levels. It also estimated that roughly 15% to 20% of the global mining fleet was unprofitable at the reported hash price, according to its first-quarter 2026 mining report.

That combination limits the case for declaring a quick end to miner-related supply pressure. Treasury sales already made cannot be reversed by a modest price rebound, and the unprofitable portion of the fleet points to continuing strain somewhere in the network. A miner that has drawn down holdings during a 280-day sub-cost period may still prioritise liquidity even if spot BTC temporarily moves above an average cost estimate.

The sector’s move toward artificial intelligence and high-performance computing introduces a second complication. JPMorgan said miners are redirecting capacity toward AI revenue. In one direction, that can slow Bitcoin hash-rate growth because resources that might have supported mining are allocated elsewhere.

In the other direction, diversified revenue can reduce reliance on selling BTC to fund operations. For companies able to make that shift, the link between Bitcoin’s price and required treasury sales may become less direct, although the effect will depend on each operator’s exposure to those businesses and cannot be assumed across the sector.

JPMorgan’s $85,000 level is consequently best viewed as a conditional relief point after a lengthy industry adjustment. It identifies where aggregate economics may become less punitive. The extent to which that becomes lower BTC selling will be decided by uneven costs, the state of miners’ remaining treasuries and whether non-mining revenue is sufficiently material to change their cash needs.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

W pattern breakout for $BTC against Gold

Source: TradingView

The one week chart for the Bitcoin/GOLD spread illustrates the big plunge taken by the $BTC price while at the same time the gold price rose dramatically. This ended in a low of almost 12 oz of gold to 1 $BTC, which also must be acknowledged as a higher low for Bitcoin.

Once the spread did hit that low, a bullish W bottoming pattern began to form. This pattern completed and broke out earlier this week, also breaking through a resistance level at 19.2 oz. The measured move for the pattern is to around 24 oz - slightly below the 24.5 horizontal resistance.

Fibonacci extension levels have been drawn in from the second of the highs down to the low at nearly 12 oz. Their extraordinary accuracy can be seen with the 0.236, the 0.382, and the 5.0 levels all aligning perfectly with the main resistance levels up to 24.5 oz.

At the bottom of the chart, the RSI indicator line can be seen to have recently broken through a descending trendline that began to form back in March 2024. Look for this indicator line to continue climbing as the $BTC price continues to outperform gold.

Breakout about to happen in short-term time frame

Source: TradingView

The short-term time frame for $BTC shows that since the dip from $87K to $83K, the price has just gone sideways, generally keeping within the limits of a narrow range. Drawn into the chart is a triangle formation, that if valid, would have the $BTC price breaking out in the very near future.

As can be seen, that breakout is possibly even taking place now. If it does happen, and it is successful, the full measured move would take the price up to the $89,250 horizontal resistance level.

$BTC price to climb after retest and confirmation of major support

Source: TradingView

The daily time frame reveals that the correction back to $82,830 in order to confirm that level as support was probably a sound structural move that puts a firm base under the price. It might well be expected that the $BTC price climbs higher from here.

The RSI at the bottom of the chart displays a relatively short downtrend line that was breached when the $BTC price exploded out of the top of the parallel channel. As long as the indicator line stays above this trendline it is likely to signal more upside price action.

Potential for bullish candle close on Sunday

Source: TradingView

The current weekly candle will be analysed intently when it closes at the end of play on Sunday. Some of the long wick to the upside, visible on Thursday, has now been eaten up by the main candle body. This could continue into the weekend, and if the candle body is above $85,000, or even $86,715 at midnight on Sunday, this would be very bullish going into next week.

Bitcoin still has legs in this ongoing rally. It just remains to be seen how far the $BTC price can climb before that first big retracement. On the other side of the bear market trendline it can be seen that the two big bear flags were in the order of 10 weeks and then 17 weeks. So far we’ve just had a 5-week bull flag in this rally. Something much bigger will occur eventually, and it may not be that far off.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The countdown marks a second attempt to deploy permission delegation on the XRP Ledger. An earlier version was stopped before mainnet activation after a vulnerability disclosure identified a way unauthorized transactions could charge fees to another account.

PermissionDelegationV1_1 countdown begins

Current validator support is above 80%, which starts the process but does not by itself activate the amendment.

Under the XRPL amendment documentation, an amendment needs more than 80% validator support for two consecutive weeks. That support must hold for the full 14-day countdown; a drop below the threshold means the amendment does not meet the activation condition.

October 5 is a projected activation date, not a fixed deployment date.

Delegating payment and compliance roles

Permission delegation would let an XRPL account give another account narrowly defined authority to submit particular transactions without sharing its signing keys. The delegating account would retain its own signing credentials, while the specified permissions could provide role-based controls that separate payment operations from compliance-related duties, according to RippleX’s open-source documentation.

The amendment’s mainnet availability depends on validator support remaining above the required threshold throughout the activation countdown.

Original amendment halted over fee vulnerability

PermissionDelegationV1_1 replaces the original PermissionDelegation amendment after a security issue emerged during testing. The vulnerability was reported on September 15, 2025, while the feature was being tested on devnet.

The issue could have allowed unauthorized transactions to charge fees to a different account. Following the disclosure, validators were advised to reject the original amendment, and it was disabled before it could activate on mainnet, the XRP Ledger Foundation’s vulnerability disclosure report said.

V1_1 is intended to correct that flaw, and its activation bid is a revised proposal entering the network’s formal amendment process—not the delayed completion of the original version.

The earlier halt also explains why sustained validator support is particularly consequential in this case. The process gives validators a full two-week period to support the replacement amendment before its rules would become active on mainnet.

Validator support remains the final gate

Twenty-nine of 35 trusted validators supported PermissionDelegationV1_1 when its countdown started. That backing placed the amendment above the required level, but the mechanism requires continuous supermajority support rather than a one-time vote.

The upgrade is expected to activate on October 5 if support remains above 80% for the full period. Otherwise, the activation condition will not be satisfied, and the projected date will pass without the amendment taking effect.

For now, the central development is that XRPL has moved its corrected delegation feature into the activation window. The outcome will determine whether accounts can begin using the proposed model of narrowly delegated transaction authority without sharing signing keys.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The exchange later estimated that approximately $351.6 million in assets had been affected, above early on-chain estimates reported as the incident unfolded.

Bitget said deposits and trading remain operational. It said its cold wallets were secure and that the reported loss is covered by its User Protection Fund, which held more than $464 million.

Unauthorized transfers trigger withdrawal pause

After detecting unauthorized transfers, Bitget said it activated emergency-response procedures in a support update.

The exchange said it paused withdrawals while continuing to accept deposits and operate trading services, and that it had flagged abnormal addresses associated with the transfers.

Bitget said it notified law-enforcement agencies and on-chain security firms. The information provided did not specify when withdrawals would resume.

Affected assets estimated at $351.6 million

Bitget's estimate puts the affected assets at roughly $351.6 million. The total is larger than initial blockchain-based assessments, which had captured a lower amount before additional transfers were identified, according to CoinDesk reporting.

The difference reflects a recurring constraint in the first hours of a wallet-security incident: public transaction data can identify visible movements, while an exchange’s eventual estimate may include further transfers found during its internal review. Bitget has described the $351.6 million figure as an estimate.

Protection Fund cited as coverage

Bitget said the loss was fully covered by its User Protection Fund, whose holdings exceeded $464 million, and maintained that its cold-wallet infrastructure was not affected.

Trading and deposits remained available, while withdrawals were temporarily unavailable. Bitget said its investigation and coordination with law-enforcement agencies and on-chain security firms were under way.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The adapter is intended to let financial institutions use payment messages already used across the banking industry to initiate activity on the ledger. The arrangement links tokenized-deposit workflows with existing payment-messaging and settlement arrangements.

IBM separately announced a beta on-premises deployment of Digital Asset Haven. The adapter and the on-premises deployment are not broadly available production services.

IBM’s ISO 20022 adapter links Digital Asset Haven to Swift’s ledger

Standard ISO 20022 payment messages can instruct tokenized-deposit transactions through IBM’s beta adapter, which connects Digital Asset Haven clients to Swift’s shared ledger. Swift’s ledger supports 24/7 digital-asset movement before final settlement through existing systems, according to IBM.

In practical terms, the integration joins established payment instructions and settlement processes to a ledger-based transaction environment. Digital Asset Haven is the IBM platform on the client side; Swift’s shared ledger is the destination for the tokenized-deposit workflow. The arrangement is therefore presented as a connection to existing infrastructure, not as a wholly separate payment rail.

IBM announced the beta in its September 24 announcement. That announcement did not set out a timetable for general availability or provide transaction-volume figures.

Swift’s shared ledger has moved into first-mover testing

Participating financial institutions have already tested tokenized deposits on Swift’s ledger through Digital Asset Haven, IBM said. The shared ledger was designed with more than 40 financial institutions and is being piloted by 17 first-mover institutions, The Block reported.

Taken together, the figures show that the ledger’s broader design group is larger than its pilot group, while the IBM connection remains in an early testing phase—not a completed industry-wide migration to tokenized deposits.

Swift announced the shared ledger at Sibos 2025. IBM said the project had progressed from concept to activation in less than nine months, a timeline that frames the adapter as part of the ledger’s move from an announced initiative into first-mover testing.

The integration does not alter the division described by IBM: transaction instructions can be made through ISO 20022 messages, digital assets can move on the shared ledger at any time, and final settlement remains routed through current systems. For institutions assessing tokenized-deposit operations, that distinction may matter as much as the ledger connection itself.

IBM Digital Asset Haven interface banner showing wallet and transaction-management dashboards. — Source: IBM Newsroom

IBM Z and LinuxONE deployment keeps asset controls in-house

IBM’s beta on-premises deployment of Digital Asset Haven for IBM Z and LinuxONE lets clients manage stablecoins and tokenized deposits without relying on public-cloud infrastructure, according to the company’s announcement. Cryptographic keys remain in the client environment and are protected by IBM Crypto Express hardware-security modules.

That deployment governs where the platform and its key-management controls run; the separate messaging adapter connects payment instructions to Swift’s shared ledger through standard payment messages.

Together, the beta offerings allow participating institutions to test tokenized-deposit transactions through standard payment messages while retaining an on-premises management option. The supplied materials do not identify users of the deployment model or the scale of the tests.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Securitize is providing issuance and investor infrastructure for the tokenized fund. The launch follows an amended order issued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission three days earlier, permitting the fund to offer shares with ownership recorded through distributed-ledger technology.

ARKVX becomes ARK Invest’s first onchain fund

ARK Invest and Securitize said on September 24 that ARKVX is available to eligible investors as a tokenized fund on Ethereum. Securitize will provide issuance and investor-facing infrastructure, according to the firms’ announcement.

The arrangement tokenizes ARKVX’s ownership and distribution infrastructure without changing its investment strategy or turning it into a separate crypto-focused portfolio; the fund remains in ARK Invest’s existing lineup.

With approximately $1.3 billion in net assets, ARK Venture Fund was ARK Invest’s first fund brought onchain, according to information cited by The Block.

Ownership infrastructure, not a new venture mandate

ARKVX is an actively managed, closed-end interval fund that invests in private and public technology companies. Its portfolio includes OpenAI, Anthropic, Stripe and Databricks.

According to the announcement, tokenization does not alter the fund’s underlying investment strategy: investors receive tokenized shares in the existing fund structure. The change concerns ownership recordkeeping and distribution, with blockchain technology used for shares made available to eligible investors on Ethereum; ARKVX remains a closed-end interval fund.

The announcement specifies that the offering is limited to eligible investors, not an unrestricted public offering of ARKVX tokens or a change in the fund’s investment objective.

SEC order permits tokenized shares and regulated venues

On September 21, the SEC issued an amended order for ARK Venture Fund. The order permits tokenized shares whose ownership is recorded using distributed-ledger technology and provides for trading through regulated alternative trading systems, or ATSs, and other quotation venues.

ARKVX remains a venture fund rather than a cryptocurrency fund. The order’s stated relevance is narrower: it permits the fund’s shares to be represented through distributed-ledger technology under its terms, creating the regulatory route for the Ethereum-based structure announced days later.

Securitize issues the tokenized shares and supports investors. ARK’s announcement makes the offering available to eligible investors but supplies no further details on trading activity, venue availability or participation. Accordingly, the launch should not be read as an unrestricted public offering or as a change in the fund’s investment objective.

ARK’s Securitize investment preceded the launch

ARK Invest’s strategic investment in Securitize, announced in October 2025, came before the ARKVX launch and helped establish the partnership behind it, according to the companies’ September announcement. Securitize now provides issuance and investor infrastructure for ARK’s first onchain fund.

That relationship carries into a specific product rather than introducing a new provider alongside the tokenization. ARKVX remains an actively managed portfolio of private and public technology companies; its ownership is tokenized on Ethereum, while the underlying strategy is unchanged.

With approximately $1.3 billion in net assets, according to fund information cited by The Block, ARK Venture Fund is ARK Invest’s first fund brought onchain.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

New York alleges Polymarket US took unlicensed wagers

According to the state’s petition, Polymarket accepted wagers from New Yorkers on sports, elections and cultural events without a licence from the New York State Gaming Commission. The allegations have not been adjudicated. The attorney general’s office announcement identifies the named defendant as QCX LLC, doing business as Polymarket US.

Petition seeks operating bar and penalties

New York is seeking permanent injunctive relief that would bar Polymarket from operating without a licence. The petition also seeks restitution, disgorgement and damages.

The requested monetary relief includes three times the company’s alleged gains. For sports wagering, the state is seeking a $100,000 penalty for each alleged unauthorised offer or attempt, creating exposure tied to the number of offers cited rather than a single fixed penalty.

The filing does not establish that such penalties will be imposed. It sets out the relief New York is asking a court to grant if its claims succeed.

Prediction-market jurisdiction dispute

Polymarket launched its US platform in December 2025, according to CoinDesk.

New York alleges that the platform operates unlicensed gambling activity and accepts wagers on sports, elections and cultural events. In its petition, the state says a New York State Gaming Commission licence is required.

The lawsuit adds to a broader jurisdictional dispute over whether prediction-market contracts should be regulated federally as financial products or under state gambling laws—a question with greater significance as platforms seek to offer event-based trading products in the US.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

As a crypto sportsbook for beginners goes, the steps look familiar to anyone who has used a traditional bookmaker. Three things differ: you fund the account with crypto, you pick a network at the cashier, and settlement returns winnings to a balance you can withdraw on-chain.

Here is one bet followed from start to finish, with the numbers worked out along the way.

Set Up the Account and the Balance

Crypto sportsbooks usually offer an email signup or a link to a browser wallet you already hold. Pick whichever route you already use to manage crypto.

Next comes the deposit. Choose a coin and a network at the cashier, copy the address, and try a tiny transfer before the full amount. Stablecoins suit a first bet, since the value of the balance stays steady while you learn the ropes, and crypto wallet basics cover the setup side in more depth.

Check the minimum stake before you choose a market. Some sportsbooks accept bets from $1, which keeps a first attempt small.

Read the Odds Before You Tap

Crypto sportsbooks usually quote decimal odds, where the number shows what each dollar staked brings back in total if the bet wins.

At odds of 2.10, a $10 stake returns $21 if it wins: your $10 back plus $11 profit. Divide 1 by the odds to get the implied probability, so 2.10 implies roughly a 47.6% chance.

Shorter odds such as 1.40 mean a likelier outcome and a smaller return. Longer odds such as 4.50 mean the opposite. Odds for the same match differ between sportsbooks, so a quick comparison before you commit is worth the minute it takes.

Anatomy of a Bet Slip

Tap a price and the selection appears on the bet slip, a small panel that holds everything the sportsbook needs to accept the bet.

Work down it line by line. First comes the selection, the outcome you back, such as a home win, then the market, the type of bet, such as match result or total goals.

Next come the odds at that moment, your stake and the potential return, which multiplies the two. One last field shows whether the slip holds a single or a combo.

Check each line before you confirm. Prices can move while the slip stays open, and some sportsbooks ask you to accept the new price before the bet goes through.

One $10 Bet, Start to Finish

Take a Premier League match. You back the home side to win at 2.10 and stake $10 as a single.

After you confirm, the bet appears under open bets with its odds locked in. Your balance drops by $10, and the price you accepted stays fixed even if the market moves afterwards.

The match ends 2-1 to the home side. Shortly after the final whistle, the sportsbook settles the bet against the official result and credits $21 to your balance. From there, you can place another bet or withdraw to your own wallet, subject to any withdrawal conditions in the terms.

Had the away side won, the bet would settle as a loss, and your $10 would stay with the book.

Four Ways a Bet Can Settle

Every bet ends in one of four ways.

• Win: the sportsbook pays stake multiplied by odds

• Loss: the stake stays with the book

• Void: the sportsbook returns the stake, as if the odds were 1.0, usually after a postponement or an obvious error in the price

• Cash Out: you end the bet early at a value the sportsbook offers, which can come in above or below the original stake

Bet settlement on combos works leg by leg. If one leg becomes a void bet, the combo usually continues at reduced odds, and if one leg loses, the whole combo bet loses with it.

Your First Bet on the Dexsport Sportsbook

The Dexsport sportsbook accepts bets from $1, with singles, combos and Combo+ boosts on longer combos. System bets are outside its menu, so a first bet will be a single or a straightforward combo.

Cash Out applies to eligible unsettled bets and covers the whole combo, not individual legs. The rules settle events postponed by more than 36 to 48 hours at odds of 1.0, and claims about a settled bet must reach support within 10 days.

One condition matters before a first withdrawal.

Under Dexsport's terms, a fresh deposit needs to go through sports bets at odds of 1.3 or above before you can withdraw it, and positions ended early through Cash Out stay outside that tally. Its licence comes from Anjouan, and the rules change periodically, so read them before the first deposit.

Conclusion

Your first crypto sportsbook bet follows a short path. You sign up, fund the balance with a coin and network you trust, read the odds, check the bet slip, and confirm.

After that, the sportsbook settles the bet against the official result as a win, a loss, a void, or an early Cash Out, and the balance updates.

Start with a single at a small stake so the process feels routine before you try combos. Look up the law where you live, set a budget before the first deposit, and bet only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling starts with that very first bet.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Odds, limits and terms change, so check current details on the platform before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Dexsport puts all three under a single login. With one Dexsport account, one wallet funds the sportsbook, the casino and the prediction market board, and the same history covers every product.

Shared access still leaves real differences between the three products. Knowledge of those boundaries saves confusion over bonuses, limits and exits.

Shared Features and Separate Rules

Some features follow you across the sportsbook, casino and prediction markets. Others belong to one product alone.

Feature

Sportsbook

Casino

Prediction markets

Deposits

Any supported asset

Any supported asset

Stablecoins only

Early exit

Cash Out on eligible bets

Ends with each round

Sell while liquidity exists

Stake limits

Set per event and competition

Set per game

Separate from sportsbook limits

Welcome offer

Sports freebet track

Casino bonus track

Outside both tracks

Weekly cashback

Counts toward it

Counts toward it

Check current terms

VIP Club

Monthly deposit volume, platform-wide

Same

Same

The pattern is simple. Access, deposits and loyalty programmes live at account level, while exits, limits and welcome offers belong to each product.

One Evening, Three Products

Picture a Saturday. You open the sportsbook in the afternoon and build a three-leg combo on the early football fixtures. Between matches you play a few rounds of live blackjack from the same balance, without a transfer or a second login.

In the evening you check the prediction market board and buy Yes shares on a Formula 1 title question, which first requires a stablecoin in the connected wallet, since stablecoin prediction markets accept only that kind of asset.

Later, one football leg goes against you and you use Cash Out on the combo, while the prediction market position stays open until its own resolution.

Three products, one account history. Each move follows its own product rules, and the account ties them together.

Five Rules That Keep the Products Apart

These Cash Out rules, bonus terms and limits matter in practice, and each one catches newcomers in a different way.

1. Welcome Offers Are Mutually Exclusive

The Dexsport welcome offer comes as a casino track or a sports track. At signup you pick one or skip both, and you can defer the choice to account settings.

2. Prediction Markets Need a Stablecoin

The board accepts stablecoins alone, so a wallet full of other coins has to swap before its first trade.

3. Cash Out Stays in the Sportsbook

Prediction market positions use their own sell route while liquidity exists, separate from sportsbook Cash Out.

4. Sportsbook Limits Stay Put

Stake and win caps on the sportsbook do not apply to prediction market positions, which follow their own terms.

5. Deposits Need Play Before Withdrawal

Under the platform's terms, a deposit becomes withdrawable once you have wagered its full value on sports selections priced at 1.3 or higher, or played it through twice in casino games. Cash Out settlements do not count toward that total.

The rule applies across the whole multi-product account, not to one product alone.

Dexsport Account Setup in Practice

Dexsport lets you in through an email login, a Google or Telegram account, or a wallet like MetaMask, Trust Wallet, TronLink or Bitget.

Wallet and Telegram routes suit players who already manage crypto that way, and Telegram access keeps the whole account inside a familiar app.

The cashier supports more than 50 assets across 25-plus networks, so one deposit can fund every product at once. One balance across products works well when you keep a stablecoin on hand for prediction markets.

More than 7,500 casino titles come from over 45 studios, the sportsbook spans roughly 25 sports, and prediction markets fill five categories. Dexsport's licence comes from Anjouan, and newcomers should read the house terms before a first deposit.

Conclusion

Dexsport joins its sportsbook, casino and prediction markets through a single login and a shared history. Deposits, the VIP Club and the weekly cashback programme work at account level, so activity in one product can count toward the same rewards as activity in another.

Each product still keeps its own rules. Prediction markets settle in stablecoins, Cash Out stays in the sportsbook, and the welcome offer covers either sports or casino.

Confirm the law where you live, set a single budget that covers all three products, and wait until you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling matters more when every product is one tap away.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Product rules, promotions and terms change, so check current details on the platform before you deposit. Casino games, sports wagers and event trades involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Rockstar's silence has become a tradable question. Entertainment prediction markets now let fans take a position on whether Rockstar names a PC date within a set window, and at what price the game finally sells.

Two earlier Rockstar launches offer the most useful guide to the answer.

Rockstar's Console-First Track Record

Rockstar has used a console-first release model for its two most recent open-world games: consoles first, PC later.

Game

Console launch

PC launch

Interval

Grand Theft Auto V

September 2013

April 2015

About 19 months

Red Dead Redemption 2

October 2018

November 2019

About 13 months

Grand Theft Auto VI

19 November 2026

Unannounced

Open question

Release intervals shrank between the two games, and the PC announcement for Red Dead Redemption 2 came several weeks before its PC release. If Rockstar repeats either pattern, a PC date for GTA 6 would come well after the console launch, most likely in 2027 or later.

History shapes expectations, yet it doesn't guarantee the outcome. Take-Two could change the approach for commercial reasons, and a surprise announcement would move any market on the question immediately.

What a PC Market Actually Asks

Headline questions sound simple. Resolution terms decide what counts.

Markets can ask whether Rockstar announces a PC release date before a deadline, or whether the PC version actually launches by then. 

Those questions can resolve differently: an announcement in December for a launch the next autumn would satisfy the first and fail the second.

Read the resolution source as well. Official Rockstar channels, such as the Newswire, and Take-Two investor statements tend to serve as the reference, while leaks and store listings usually do not count until the publisher confirms them.

Signals to Track

Public clues tend to surface in a rough order before any formal announcement, and each one moves a PC market a little further.

1. Take-Two earnings calls, where executives field platform questions and sometimes hint at dates

2. Ratings board entries, which occasionally reveal platforms ahead of a launch

3. Storefront pages, since a PC page on a major store would suggest an announcement is close

4. Rockstar Newswire posts, the channel the studio uses for official dates

5. System requirements, which usually appear shortly before a PC launch

Each signal adds information, but only an official statement settles the question. Markets tend to react to the first credible clue and then settle once the publisher speaks.

GTA 6 Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport lists three GTA 6 questions in the Other category of its prediction market board: the PC release date, the PC system requirements and the launch price. Like other Dexsport prediction markets, each trades as Yes or No shares priced in cents, where the price reflects the crowd's implied probability.

Positions pay out in stablecoins. Every GTA question page lists when the market closes, the date by which an answer must exist and the source that decides it, and the platform says its team checks each outcome within a day.

The same account also covers a sportsbook and casino, and prediction market basics explain how shares, prices and exits work across the board.

Prices on questions like these can stay quiet for weeks and then jump on one headline. On-chain settlement records the payout once the team confirms a result, and Anjouan licenses the operator. Rules evolve, so reread each market page before a trade.

Conclusion

GTA 6 launches on consoles on 19 November 2026, and Rockstar has not yet mentioned a PC version. Its last two major releases reached PC 13 and 19 months after their console debuts, which points to a PC date well after launch.

Prediction markets turn that uncertainty into a price. Before you take a position, check whether a market resolves on an announcement or a release, and which source decides it.

Watch earnings calls, the Newswire, and storefront pages for early signals. Check local law, cap what you put into entertainment questions, and trade only if you are old enough where you live, since KYC or AML checks may apply. Responsible gambling applies to entertainment markets too.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Release plans, prices, and market terms can change, so check official sources and current market pages before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

That makes MemeToro pretty easy to be skeptical about at first. It’s a new project, its $MT token is in presale, some parts of the launch system are still coming together, and the AI model sits right in the middle of the pitch. For anyone who has watched enough crypto launches come and go, that combination can sound too familiar.

There’s a reason for that. Recent AI-crypto projects have shown how quickly a big story can run ahead of the actual product. SIREN, for example, built a huge narrative around an AI agent, an AI-powered exchange and automated trading tools, but some of those products never arrived, and by 2026 it was unclear if the main AI agent had ever really been available to the public.

That’s why the “AI + crypto” part of MemeToro can trigger suspicion before anything else is checked.

MemeToro itself is being built as a memecoin launch platform on BNB Chain. The idea is to create a more structured way for new meme tokens to move from a concept into an actual release, with public funding terms and smart contracts eventually handling the execution side. 

The AI agent comes into that process much earlier. It’s meant to follow trends across news, X, culture and markets, filter possible meme ideas, reject weak ones and turn stronger concepts into more detailed proposals.

The criticism is not hard to understand: how much of that is already real, and how much exists mostly on paper, waiting to be built? That’s where the “AI + meme coin” shorthand starts to miss quite a bit.

Does the AI Agent Actually Have a Job Here?

A low-effort version of an AI memecoin project would be pretty shallow. Take a language model, generate a meme name, maybe make an image, stick AI-powered all over the website and call it a product. 

Well, MemeToro is trying to build something more structured than that.

The AI agent isn’t meant to simply spit out random token ideas. The setup described in MemeToro’s public documentation starts with outside signals, including news and X trends. Those signals are filtered into possible concepts, one can be selected or all of them can be rejected, and the selected idea can then be turned into a fuller proposal with reasoning, evidence, launch parameters and a machine-readable manifest. 

Even the rejected ideas are part of the process. That’s a small detail, but it says quite a lot about what the team is trying to do. Most meme launches only show the finished thing: ticker, logo, token page, done. MemeToro is trying to make some of the thinking before that visible too.

The AI agent is still being built, of course, but its role is already pretty clear: it’s there to do the decision-making before a meme project ever gets near a launch.

How Much of MemeToro Exists Right Now?

A short track record is part of why MemeToro gets rough scores from some website checkers in the first place. Some media coverage has already reviewed that in detail to show that a short track record alone doesn't tell us too much about the project's legitimacy.

What MemeToro does have is a public GitHub repo showing the product as it’s not finalized yet. 

Image source: MemeToro’s GitHub

It isn’t just a README and a roadmap. It has separate folders for the AI agent, contracts, documentation and launch manifests, along with development notes and a security file. The current setup also includes connectors for worldwide news and X trend signals, with Perplexity and xAI referenced in the environment configuration.

There’s an early pipeline MVP behind the AI agent too. The existing build can take incoming signals, work through possible concepts, select one or reject them, and generate a draft launch manifest. That doesn’t mean the whole MemeToro platform is finished, but it does mean there is already something behind the website copy.

More importantly, the repo doesn’t try to blur the line between what works now and what comes later.

MemeToro says there is no hourly autonomous service yet. There is no complete end-to-end launch running today. The fair-launch contracts are still drafts. Some of the wider automation, visuals, persistence and contract interaction sit ahead. That kind of openness matters a lot more for a young project than pretending everything is done.

Even the roadmap is pretty specific rather than just saying AI launchpad coming soon. It includes BNB Chain testnet work, independent contract security reviews by Coinsult, BlockSAFU and SolidProof – all coming back clean, scheduling, market feeds, collision checks and other pieces that have to be in place before the wider system can run properly.

The planned funding model is also fixed-rate rather than based on a bonding curve. The idea is that participants can see the round terms ahead of time, including price, supply, funding conditions and wallet limits, instead of the price moving automatically as more buyers enter. The future fair-launch contracts remain a work in progress and aren’t supposed to handle real funds in their current state. 

Where Does the Presale Fit Into This? 

At the time of writing, $MT is in Stage 8 at $0.00528 per token, with about $154,017.77 raised toward a $176,896.90 round target. That puts the round at roughly 92.5% filled, while the site lists $0.05186 as the planned launch price.

Image source: MemeToro

One concern a few texts have pointed to before is the difference between the amount shown on MemeToro’s website and what could be seen in the public presale contracts. That looks odd at first, although those comparisons were mostly based on the visible BNB and Ethereum contracts. MemeToro also accepts card payments, so not every purchase would necessarily show up there. So it’s a fair thing to question, just not enough by itself to say the fundraising number is off. 

Another part worth clearing up is the difference between how much of the supply is reserved for the presale and how much is actually out there. Around 71% of the 1.2 billion $MT tokens are allocated to the public sale, but that number doesn’t tell us how many have already been bought, claimed or started circulating. It’s simply the size of the public-sale pool.

So Is MemeToro Just AI Branding Around an Unfinished Product?

Not really. MemeToro is new, which explains a lot of the skepticism around it: a short track record, a presale still underway, paid coverage in the mix, and parts of the platform that aren’t finished yet. None of that is especially unusual for a project at this stage, but it does mean there’s more pressure on MemeToro to show that something real exists behind the pitch.

At this point, it does.

The bigger takeaway from going through the project isn’t that everything is ready, because it clearly isn’t. It’s that the ‘’just AI branding’’ criticism starts to feel too simplistic once the public code, the working pieces, the presale setup and the development trail are reviewed together.

So the fairer read is probably this: MemeToro is an early-stage project with a lot left to deliver, but it’s not one that currently looks empty behind the marketing. 

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Familiarity remains limited: 56% of U.S. consumers said they had never heard of stablecoins, according to Visa’s September 23, 2026 release.

Data Snapshot

MetricCurrentPreviousChangePeriodAs ofSourceU.S. stablecoin adoption intent with bank-level fraud protection and deposit insurance56%36%—Hypothetical scenarioSeptember 23, 2026Visa Investor RelationsWillingness to use stablecoins when offered through an existing financial provider45%36%—U.S. consumersMarch 31, 2026VisaU.S. consumers saying trust depends more on who offers a payment method than on the technology itself64%——U.S. consumersSeptember 23, 2026Visa Investor RelationsU.S. consumers who have never heard of stablecoins56%——U.S. consumersSeptember 23, 2026Visa Investor RelationsU.S. adults surveyed2,192 adults——February 24 to March 2, 2026September 23, 2026Visa Investor Relations

Bank-level protections lift intent

Visa said U.S. adoption intent climbed from 36% to 56% when bank-level fraud protection and deposit insurance were assumed. The result does not establish that those protections will be available across stablecoin products, nor does it measure actual use. It does show the scale of the difference in responses when those conditions were included.

For payments companies and financial institutions considering digital-currency offerings, the survey frames fraud protection and deposit insurance as central features of the consumer proposition. Visa’s published finding does not separate the individual effect of each safeguard.

Existing providers raise willingness in a separate test

Visa found that U.S. willingness to use stablecoins rose from 36% to 45% when they were offered through an existing financial provider, a result published in its Money Travels report on March 31, 2026. The 45% result is not directly interchangeable with the 56% figure: the existing-provider scenario tests distribution through an existing financial relationship, while the other combines bank-level fraud protection and deposit insurance. Together, Visa’s findings place established financial relationships at the centre of U.S. respondents’ stated preferences.

Trust concentrates with familiar providers

The survey found that 64% of U.S. consumers said trust depends more on who offers a payment method than on the technology itself. Traditional commercial banks were trusted by 61% of respondents to provide digital currency services, while global payment networks were trusted by 60%.

Those figures help explain why an existing financial provider can alter stated willingness, but they do not identify whether consumers would favour a particular stablecoin issuer or product. The study instead captures broad views of provider categories and payment-method trust.

Awareness remains a constraint

The 56% of U.S. consumers who said they had never heard of stablecoins sits alongside the higher hypothetical adoption-intent reading, suggesting that the survey’s willingness figures describe a market where basic awareness is still far from universal.

Morning Consult conducted the U.S. survey for Visa from February 24 to March 2, 2026, surveying 2,192 adults. The global findings covered 45,445 respondents across 20 markets, though the adoption-intent and awareness figures cited here refer to the U.S. sample.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The Web3 betting platform has launched a freebet offer that will run across the entire tournament, returning 5% of qualifying weekly betting turnover as a freebet. The reward is capped at $5,000 per player each week, according to Dexsport’s promotion announcement.

There is some logic to stretching the offer across the full event rather than concentrating it around the final. Champions closes the 2026 VALORANT Champions Tour and brings together 16 teams from Americas, EMEA, Pacific and China. Riot Games’ own VCT handbook describes Shanghai as the “final and most prestigious event of the year”.

The tournament runs through October 18, leaving almost four weeks between the first matches and the world championship being decided.

The Freebet Resets Each Week

Dexsport has built the offer around that longer tournament schedule.

Qualifying activity is divided into four weekly periods, beginning with September 24–28 before resetting for the following week. Players who reach at least $100 in eligible turnover during a cycle receive a freebet equal to 5% of their qualifying stakes for that period.

Both pre-match and live bets count, as do singles and accumulators. Individual qualifying bets require a minimum $10 stake and odds of at least 1.4; an accumulator needs to contain at least one VALORANT Champions selection.

VALORANT Champions betting markets on Dexsport. Source: DexsportCaption

The maths is relatively straightforward. A player reaching $100 in qualifying turnover receives a $5 freebet, while $4,000 produces $200. The ceiling is $5,000 per player in each weekly cycle.

Only settled real-money bets are included. Cashed-out and voided bets, along with stakes placed using freebet funds, do not count towards the total. Rewards are credited automatically within 72 hours after each cycle closes.

That gives the campaign a slightly different rhythm from a conventional one-off tournament bonus: activity starts again from zero each week, while the promotion itself continues through to the Grand Final.

“Like a lot of VALORANT fans, we’re genuinely excited for the Champions Tour finale in Shanghai,” said Ivan Muller, CEO of Dexsport. “Esports has been a major focus for Dexsport throughout 2026, from our partnership with OG to campaigns around some of the biggest tournaments of the year. VALORANT is another community we’ve wanted to get closer to, and this challenge gives us a great opportunity to be part of the action throughout the event.”

VALORANT Joins a Bigger Esports Push

The reference to OG is not incidental.

In May, Dexsport became the official Web3 betting partner of OG Esports and headline sponsor of its Counter-Strike 2 roster. The team subsequently began competing as OG.Dexsport, with the collaboration extending into tournament activations, content and community campaigns rather than stopping at jersey branding.

Dexsport has also been using individual tournaments as a way into different esports audiences. Recent campaigns have been built around major CS2 and Dota 2 events, while Champions now brings VALORANT into the same mix.

The esports activity has developed alongside a broader change in the product itself. Earlier this month, Dexsport formally introduced Prediction Markets as a third major product area beside its sportsbook and casino, with Yes/No markets covering subjects from sports and crypto to economics, politics and entertainment.

That combination of product expansion and esports activity has already received some recognition. In the 2026 CryptoDaily Awards, Dexsport was Crypto Daily’s choice among the established leaders in iGaming. The Awards highlighted the launch of Prediction Markets, the OG.Dexsport partnership and community campaigns around major sports and esports events among the developments that stood out during the year.

VALORANT Champions adds another major tournament to that 2026 run, but with a format designed around following the competition week after week rather than a single marquee match.

The first promotional cycle begins alongside the opening Champions matches on September 24. The final one closes with the Shanghai Grand Final on October 18.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bitpanda Enterprise will supply the underlying infrastructure for RBI network banks. Bitpanda said the arrangement could enable those banks to offer digital assets to approximately 18 million customers through a progressive, locally tailored rollout.

The framework expands on Bitpanda’s initial Austrian deployment, but availability will be determined market by market rather than launched across the group simultaneously.

Bitpanda Enterprise becomes RBI’s group-wide infrastructure provider

RBI and Bitpanda say Bitpanda Enterprise will provide the infrastructure for a group-wide framework that allows banks across RBI’s CEE network to offer digital-asset services.

The companies described a progressive, locally tailored rollout, with individual local banks determining implementation and offerings. Bitpanda’s announcement estimates the framework could reach approximately 18 million customers, a measure of potential network reach rather than immediate access for all customers.

RBI says it operates subsidiary banks in 11 CEE markets and serves 18.8 million customers through roughly 1,300 branches.

The expansion extends Raiffeisenlandesbank Niederösterreich-Wien’s 2024 model

The broader arrangement builds on a model already used by Raiffeisenlandesbank Niederösterreich-Wien, or RLB NÖ-Wien. That bank launched Bitpanda-powered crypto access within its existing banking environment in 2024.

That earlier launch matters because the new framework is an extension of a bank-integrated approach rather than a newly announced model without an existing deployment. Der Standard reported that the model is being extended gradually across RBI’s CEE subsidiaries.

The announcement hinges on a distinction between infrastructure and distribution: Bitpanda Enterprise is intended to provide the behind-the-scenes service, while RBI’s local banks retain the customer-facing role in markets where they elect to proceed.

Christian Trummer, Co-CEO of Bitpanda, and Michael Höllerer, CEO of Raiffeisen Bank International; photo by Sabine Klimpt. — Source: Bitpanda Group

Local RBI banks control the pace and product offering

The agreement creates a group-level route for expansion, not an immediate network-wide launch. Bitpanda describes a progressive, locally tailored rollout, with each RBI bank deciding whether to offer digital-asset services, when to do so, and which products to make available.

Customers in different RBI markets may consequently receive different access, timetables, and product ranges. The practical next step will be announcements from the relevant local bank.

Bitpanda’s infrastructure is intended to provide access through existing banking relationships, without a separate crypto account or application, according to its description of the framework.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

NEW YORK, Sept. 24, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Ondo Finance today launched a new onchain product category: Ondo Intelligent Portfolios, curated portfolios delivered as single onchain transferable tokens. The three portfolio tokens launched today are based on portfolio strategies powered by BlackRock, developed by BlackRock for Ondo, marking the first time eligible onchain investors can access exposure to such strategies through a single token.

Diversified, professionally constructed strategies have historically required brokerage accounts and traditional fund structures. Now, delivered as peer-to-peer transferable tokens from Ondo, these onchain portfolios become accessible to eligible non-US investors in permitted jurisdictions through the wallets, exchanges, and DeFi applications they already use.

Distribution is only part of the story. Bringing portfolios onchain can unlock novel capabilities: rebalancing that executes automatically at the smart contract level, portfolios that are fully programmable and composable with the broader onchain economy, and the potential to combine asset classes within a single token. Ondo Intelligent Portfolios establishes the infrastructure to bring portfolios based on leading asset managers' strategies onchain.

"Tokenization creates new ways for portfolio strategies to be delivered through digital infrastructure. Diversified portfolio strategies can be incorporated into tokenized investment products, enabling eligible investors to access diversified allocations through a single instrument. It shows how established portfolio construction approaches can be delivered through new channels and technologies." - Lisa O'Connor is Global Head of the Model Portfolio Solutions team and the Co-CIO for Global Solutions within the Multi-Asset Strategies group at BlackRock

Three custom portfolio strategies addressing three specific needs are launched today across income, allocation, and thematic strategies:

• BLKHIon: Ondo High Income Powered by BlackRock
• BLKDIGon: Ondo Diversified Growth Powered by BlackRock
• BLKGRWon: Ondo High Growth Powered by BlackRock

"Portfolios like these have never been available onchain. Now, they are made accessible onchain, transferable at any time, and usable across DeFi. This launch represents an important milestone in the development of onchain investment products. By incorporating strategies drawn on BlackRock's longstanding portfolio construction experience into tokenized investment structures, eligible investors in supported jurisdictions can obtain exposure to diversified portfolio allocations through a single token. " - Ian De Bode, Acting CEO and President, Ondo Finance

Holding a portfolio token provides economic exposure to the portfolio's underlying basket. Each portfolio token is issued by Ondo Global Markets and tokenized by Ondo Finance. Investors mint or redeem a single token to hold a weighted basket of tokenized assets, without buying, weighting, or rebalancing individual positions themselves. Holdings, weights, and every rebalance are visible onchain, and the tokens are transferable peer-to-peer across wallets, exchanges, and DeFi protocols.

Ondo intends to expand the product line with additional onchain portfolios over time.

About Ondo Finance

Ondo Finance is a blockchain-based platform focused on tokenizing real-world assets and bringing institutional-quality financial products onchain. By bridging traditional finance and decentralized infrastructure, Ondo aims to make capital markets more accessible, transparent, and efficient.

About Ondo Global Markets

Ondo Global Markets is an issuance and redemption platform for tokenized publicly traded U.S. stocks and ETFs. It enables investors outside the United States to gain economic exposure to these assets by minting, transferring, and redeeming securities-backed tokens. Each token is fully backed by the corresponding stock or ETF (together with cash in transit).

About BlackRock

BlackRock's purpose is to help more and more people experience financial well-being. As a fiduciary to investors and a leading provider of financial technology, we help millions of people build savings that serve them throughout their lives by making investing easier and more affordable. For additional information on BlackRock, please visit www.blackrock.com/corporate

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Correction retests important support

Source: TradingView

The short-term time frame chart above shows that generally all is pretty sound for the $BTC price thus far. Yes, the price broke down out of a wedge formation that was more bullish than bearish, but this latest correction has been very healthy all round.

The retracement has taken the $BTC price down to perfectly retest the bear market local high at $82,825, horizontal support, the 0.618 Fibonacci level, and a descending trendline. With all those support levels in confluence, a bounce was by far the strongest probability, and this did indeed take place. 

It would not be expected that the $BTC price falls below these supports, especially given the significance of the bear market high. If it does, however, there is strong support at the 0.786 Fibonacci level at $81,700, and then the top of the parallel channel.

Upside price action to resume

Source: TradingView

The daily time frame shows the perfection of the $BTC retracement to the exact tippy top of the second big bear market bear flag. If the price does fall through this level, there is plenty of support just below in the bear flag, and also at the top of the bull flag at the right hand side of the chart. 

The Relative Strength Index (RSI) at the bottom of the chart illustrates how the indicator line has come back down to retest the top of the descending trendline. As long as this trendline holds, the upside price action should continue.

Macro setup remains bullish

Source: TradingView

If you were of a bearish persuasion when regarding the $BTC price, you might say that the current weekly candle has rather a long wick to the upside. You could also possibly say that this rally has climbed really high already and that the market will need more time to digest this incredible surge.

Be that as it may, the setup still looks very bullish. We had the initial huge surge to the upside followed by the flag which enabled this rally to be absorbed. We’ve had a breakout of the flag, and the full measured move for this is to more or less exactly the second of the resistance levels from the top in the above chart - at $94,280.

This is a pretty major resistance, so if there was a big correction from there down to the low $80K area, it wouldn’t be too much of a surprise, or anything that would deviate from a new bull market. 

Nevertheless, It’s probably up first. Expect a renewed impetus to the upside from Friday into the weekend - global bond markets allowing.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Validators restart Cosmos Hub after 24-hour, 48-minute halt

The restart ended an interruption that began in the wake of an attack involving Neutron’s governance process. The Hub’s update said validators had resumed producing blocks and that normal operations had returned.

The episode put Cosmos Hub validators at the centre of a response to an incident outside the Hub itself. The restart restored the chain’s operations, but the subsequent transfer made clear that the response also extended to assets associated with the alleged attacker.

First post-restart block transfers 1,227,121 ATOM

The first block produced after Cosmos Hub restarted included a transfer of 1,227,121.374688 ATOM—about 1.23 million ATOM—from a wallet linked to the Neutron attacker to an address created for the transfer.

PrimeXBT reported that the transaction did not include a signature from the wallet’s owner.

Neutron proposal compromised 11 Astroport and Drop-linked contracts

Approximately $9.4 million in assets were exposed or drained after an expedited Neutron governance proposal gave an attacker control over 11 contracts connected to Astroport and Drop, according to Unchained.

Cosmos Hub validators halted and later restarted the network during the response.

Cosmos Hub said it was not itself exploited and that the affected funds were limited to assets moved from Neutron. The incident was a Neutron-related governance attack rather than an exploit of Cosmos Hub itself.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

A Metalayer Capital strategy backed by an initial institutional allocation uses GLDY as the long leg of a delta-neutral gold trade, creating a new channel for demand for Streamex’s yield-bearing tokenized gold, with follow-on investments anticipated.

Streamex Corp., a Nasdaq-listed a technology company building the future of the commodity markets through tokenization, has secured a commitment of institutional capital, a test of whether tokenized commodities can draw buyers beyond individual investors.

A leading institutional investor has made an initial $1 million allocation, with follow-on investments anticipated, to a relative-value strategy that uses GLDY, Streamex’s gold-backed token, as its long gold position, according to a person with knowledge of the matter who isn’t authorized to speak on behalf of the company. The strategy is run by Metalayer Capital, a systematic investment manager, through its Aureon Relative Value Fund, the person said. Metalayer Capital was founded by former Two Sigma executives. Metalayer Capital declined to comment.

The strategy pairs GLDY with an offsetting short position in gold-linked perpetual futures, so it is designed to be largely indifferent to whether gold prices rise or fall, the person said. It aims instead to earn the yield GLDY pays, which Streamex targets at 3.5% a year in additional gold generated through a gold-leasing program.

For Streamex, the significance lies in the mechanics: money deployed into the long position goes into GLDY, adding to the assets under management on which the company earns fees.

The initial allocation of $1 million is final, with follow-on investments anticipated, and its significance lies in who is buying: it suggests that tokenized securities such as GLDY are drawing interest not only from accredited individual investors but also from the institutional investor community.

In August, Streamex laid out a list of goals for the following 90 days. “Converting the first institutional allocations into GLDY was at the top of that list,” said Henry McPhie, the company’s co-founder and chief executive. He called the arrangement “a fundamentally different growth channel than selling to one investor at a time.”

Beyond the initial $1 million, the rest of the commitment remain at the purview of the investor, and there is no assurance that any additional amount of GLDY will be bought.

The companies have other ties. Metalayer also acts as a liquidity provider for GLDY on certain trading venues and can mint and redeem the token directly with the issuer, the person said. Streamex doesn’t manage or sponsor the fund and isn’t compensated based on money the fund raises.

GLDY is offered only to eligible investors under exemptions from securities registration, and its holders to date have largely been accredited investors seeking yield. Streamex has made six consecutive monthly distributions on the token, most recently in September, and publishes its gold reserves through a Chainlink proof-of-reserves feed.

ContactYaroslav Provadacontact@stratosphere.vip

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The products would add two more digital-asset futures markets to an exchange that reported substantial crypto futures and options activity in the first half of 2026. CME has set out contract sizes and tickers for each proposed product, including smaller Micro versions alongside the standard contracts.

CME targets October 19 for Bitcoin Cash and Uniswap futures

CME said the planned Bitcoin Cash and Uniswap futures launch is scheduled for October 19. The timing is contingent on regulatory review, meaning the products have not yet been confirmed as available for trading.

The Block separately reported the same condition on the launch and the proposed contract sizes. The independent report also described the expansion as adding both standard and Micro contracts for each underlying asset.

The announcement places BCH and UNI within CME's planned crypto futures pipeline rather than referring solely to cash-market support. Futures contracts allow market participants to take positions through the contract specifications set by the exchange, and CME's proposal provides two denomination choices for each asset.

Although CME provided no further timetable for the regulatory review in the materials cited, October 19 remains a stated target date rather than an unconditional launch date.

BCH and UNI contract sizes, tickers and block-trade eligibility

The proposed standard Bitcoin Cash futures contract would represent 250 BCH, while the Micro BCH contract would represent 25 BCH. For Uniswap, the standard contract would represent 10,000 UNI and the Micro contract would represent 1,000 UNI, according to CME's crypto launch page.

ProductContract sizeTickerBlock-trade eligible Bitcoin Cash futures250 BCHBCAYes Micro Bitcoin Cash futures25 BCHMCHYes Uniswap futures10,000 UNIUNIYes Micro Uniswap futures1,000 UNIMUNYes

The BCH contracts would trade under the BCA and MCH tickers for the standard and Micro products, respectively. CME has assigned UNI to the standard Uniswap futures contract and MUN to its Micro counterpart.

All four planned contracts are eligible for block trading. That designation applies to the standard and Micro products alike, rather than being restricted to the larger contracts.

The Micro contracts are one-tenth the size of their corresponding standard contracts in both product lines: 25 BCH compared with 250 BCH, and 1,000 UNI compared with 10,000 UNI. The structure gives the two proposed markets parallel standard and Micro formats while retaining separate tickers for each denomination.

CME's existing crypto derivatives volumes

CME reported that its cryptocurrency futures and options averaged 279,800 contracts in daily volume during the first half of 2026. The exchange put average daily notional value across those products at $8.3 billion.

The 264,600 contracts of average open interest, representing $15.4 billion, refer to CME's cryptocurrency futures and options activity over the same period, according to the exchange's September 22 release—not specifically to the proposed BCH and UNI products.

The planned additions would arrive against that existing activity base if regulatory review is completed in time for the October 19 target. CME's published specifications currently identify four contracts in the proposal: BCA and MCH for Bitcoin Cash, plus UNI and MUN for Uniswap.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bitcoin’s rise of about 35% over the same period, to above $86,000, coincided with the renewed demand. Bloomberg, via TradingView, reported that the recovery revived investor appetite for the US-listed funds.

Data Snapshot

MetricCurrentPreviousChangePeriodAs ofSourceUS-listed spot Bitcoin ETF net flows in 2026about $320 million——2026 year-to-dateSeptember 23, 2026Bloomberg via TradingViewUS-listed spot Bitcoin ETF inflowsroughly $4.6 billion——Since August 19, 2026September 23, 2026Bloomberg via TradingViewBitcoin price performanceabout 35%——Since August 19, 2026September 23, 2026Bloomberg via TradingViewBitcoin priceabove $86,000——September 23, 2026September 23, 2026Bloomberg via TradingViewTotal digital-asset market value$3 trillion——September 2026September 23, 2026Bloomberg via TradingViewPerpetual futures open interest across cryptocurrenciesabout $160 billion——September 2026September 23, 2026Bloomberg via TradingView

The $4.6 billion rebound versus the $320 million year-to-date total

The funds took in roughly $4.6 billion after August 19, when the US Treasury said it would increase buybacks of long-dated bonds. Their cumulative net flow for 2026 year-to-date, however, was only about $320 million.

Earlier in 2026, Bitcoin was under pressure and the ETFs recorded persistent redemptions. Those outflows offset much of the later inflow and left the year-to-date total only recently in positive territory. The timing of the inflows does not, by itself, establish why investors allocated to Bitcoin ETFs.

Bitcoin’s 35% recovery and ETF holders’ $82,000 average cost

Bitcoin has rallied about 35% since August 19 and was above $86,000 on September 23. The price move put the average holder of US spot Bitcoin ETFs back into unrealised profit, with the average Bitcoin cost estimated at $82,000.

That estimate is a cohort-level reference point rather than a measure of every investor’s entry price or return. Still, it places the reported average cost below Bitcoin’s quoted level at the time and provides context for the improvement in ETF demand after the earlier stretch of redemptions.

The recovery also means the ETF flow reversal has occurred alongside a stronger underlying Bitcoin market, rather than in isolation from it. Bloomberg’s account characterised the flow swing as demand reviving as Bitcoin recovered.

Digital assets return to $3 trillion

September’s recovery extended beyond the ETF market: total digital-asset market value climbed back to $3 trillion for the first time since January, according to the Bloomberg report.

Perpetual futures open interest across cryptocurrencies reached about $160 billion, the highest level since late October last year.

Against that backdrop, the return of inflows into US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs coincided with broader activity across spot-linked crypto investment products and derivatives.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

DUBAI, UAE, Sept. 24, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Bybit, the New Financial Platform trusted by more than 80 million users worldwide, today announced "Make Your Move," a new global campaign that marks the next stage in the company's evolution beyond crypto trading.

It reflects a fundamental shift in how Bybit defines its business. Rather than a crypto exchange with additional financial products built around it, Bybit is developing one connected platform across crypto, stocks, gold, forex, indices, and derivatives, alongside payments, spending, wealth, institutional solutions, and intelligent financial services.

The new brand positioning builds on the vision introduced by Ben Zhou, Co-founder and CEO of Bybit in his January keynote: "Built for everyone. Powered by intelligence. Open to the world." The company's vision is a world where every person has access to every financial opportunity on earth, supported by a mission to build the first intelligent platform connecting anyone, anywhere to the world's finance.

"Bybit has evolved considerably since we began as a crypto derivatives trading exchange, and our brand needs to reflect the business we are building today," said Ben Zhou, Co-founder and CEO of Bybit. "Our ambition is to bring more financial opportunities together through one platform and make them more accessible to people around the world."

A New Expression of the Brand

"Make Your Move" brings the new positioning to life by focusing on the choices available to users across a more connected financial platform. It demonstrates Bybit's ambition to give people greater access to financial opportunities across markets and geographies, while putting the individual at the center of the experience.

The new positioning is also reflected in Bybit's visual identity. The orange "I" from the Bybit wordmark has been transformed into a standalone brand mark, representing the individual and the idea of movement within the financial system. The mark also anchors a new visual pattern, where a single orange line stands out from a field of repeated lines, representing the individual making their move within the system.

Built on an Expanding Ecosystem

The new positioning is supported by the scale and breadth of Bybit's growing ecosystem. The company now serves 80M+ registered users across 181 countries and regions, with more than 442 Spot assets and 235 traditional-market instruments available through its TradFi and RWA offerings.

Beyond trading, Bybit's services reach into payments and everyday finance. Bybit Pay enables direct crypto transfers, while Bybit Card connects digital assets to daily spending with unique perks. Bybit P2P provides local fiat and crypto access through a network of 48,000 active merchants, while Bybit Earn enables flexible staking, giving users the opportunity to earn rewards on their assets without a fixed lock-up period.

The evolution of AI technology provides another layer to the user experience. The latest introduction of Bybit AI connects to more than 600 platform services and covers 1,278 support scenarios, helping users navigate the growing range of products and services available through the platform.

Bybit's ambitious pivot to a full-service New Financial Platform addresses a financial landscape in which consumers often use different providers and applications for trading, investing, payments, spending, and earning. Bybit aims to give users a simpler way to access and manage different financial activities through a single platform.

The new identity reflects the scale of Bybit's business today while providing a foundation for its continued expansion across global financial markets and services. The campaign marks the next chapter in Bybit's strategic pivot towards its New Financial Platform vision, reinforcing its commitment to opening global financial opportunities to a new generation of users worldwide.

#Bybit / #NewFinancialPlatform 

About Bybit

Bybit is The New Financial Platform.

We believe every person should have access to every financial opportunity on earth. That's why we're building the first intelligent platform that connects anyone, anywhere to the world's finance.

Trusted by more than 80 million users worldwide, Bybit brings together investing, trading, payments, and wealth-building in a single secure and intelligent ecosystem. Through the combination of AI-powered technology, deep global liquidity, robust security, and transparent operations, Bybit makes global finance more accessible, efficient, and empowering for everyone.

Built for everyone. Powered by intelligence. Open to the world.

Learn more at Bybit.com.

For more details about Bybit, please visit Bybit Press

For media inquiries, please contact: media@bybit.com

For updates, please follow: Bybit's Communities and Social Media

Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Reddit | Telegram | TikTok | X | Youtube

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The scale of the rewrite is clear. Its meaning is not. Coin Metrics said users can backfill the revised data, but its public disclosure did not set out the cause of the recalculation, the old and new values, an aggregate difference, a percentage change, or even whether the changes were predominantly upward or downward, according to CryptoSlate’s account of the update.

That leaves a gap between the operational fact of a correction and the financial conclusions drawn from the data. These are not official fund-flow records. They are on-chain measures built from Coin Metrics’ identification of ETF-controlled wallet addresses. A historical revision may therefore reflect a better address map or a custody-related reassessment rather than a newly discovered change in ETF investor demand.

The 19-month revision reaches 60 Bitcoin ETF network-data series

Coin Metrics’ September 22 status notice describes a correction to Bitcoin ETF-related historical network data, covering the period beginning February 7, 2025 and ending September 17, 2026. The 60 affected series comprise 35 daily and 25 hourly metrics, according to the Coin Metrics status page.

The affected categories matter because they cover several ways analysts may seek to describe ETF activity on Bitcoin’s ledger. Deposits and withdrawals can be used as a proxy for coins moving into and out of identified ETF wallets. Transfer counts and transaction measures can be used to assess operational activity. Net-flow and supply series, meanwhile, can feed broader work on ETF accumulation, distribution and the share of Bitcoin attributed to these products.

A correction across all of those categories is different from a technical amendment to one calculation. The daily data can shape longer-run comparisons and historical narratives, while hourly series are more likely to be incorporated into event studies, short-term market analysis or timing-based research. Revising both means that a dataset downloaded before the correction may no longer align with the currently available version even if a user’s methodology has not changed.

Backfilling gives users a route to replace prior observations, but it does not reveal what changed inside the database. Because Coin Metrics has not published deltas, a researcher cannot tell from the announcement alone whether an apparent historical pattern was slightly adjusted, materially altered, or left broadly intact despite the correction.

Coin Metrics’ ETF flows are address-attribution metrics, not official fund flows

Coin Metrics’ ETF coverage includes identified addresses associated with BlackRock, ARK Invest, Franklin Templeton, Grayscale, Invesco, Valkyrie, VanEck, WisdomTree and Bitwise, as well as aggregate ETF-flow series, according to its ETF network-data documentation.

Within that address universe, Coin Metrics defines deposits as assets sent to addresses it identifies as ETF-owned and withdrawals as assets leaving them. For Bitcoin, the calculation excludes change outputs to reduce double-counting of coins returned to the same ETF cluster, as described in the firm’s methodology documentation.

The series consequently offers a structured view of attributed on-chain wallet movements. Its reading depends on which addresses are included: a blockchain transaction does not by itself say whether the movement was a share creation, a share redemption, an internal custody operation or a newly associated address.

CryptoSlate reported that the revised wallet metrics are not equivalent to official ETF creations, redemptions or fund-accounting records. The historical correction should therefore not be described as a restatement of official ETF flows. Wallet-cluster reclassification or custody changes can alter the series without showing that ETF investors bought or sold shares.

Backfillable data without public deltas limits historical ETF-flow analysis

Coin Metrics made revised Bitcoin ETF-related historical data available for backfill, but its public disclosure did not provide before-and-after values, aggregate BTC changes, percentage adjustments or the general direction of the revisions. The central limitation is therefore not the correction itself, but the inability to measure the historical break from the announcement alone.

Users can replace affected observations if they have access to the backfill, but they cannot fully reassess conclusions drawn from the prior series using the public disclosure alone. The affected daily and hourly data cover a 19-month period and include flow and supply metrics, making data vintage relevant when earlier analysis is updated.

These are attributed on-chain wallet movements, not official ETF creations, redemptions or fund-accounting records. Coin Metrics’ series depend on identified ETF addresses, so changes in address attribution or custody classification can alter the historical record. Interpretations of rising supply as absorption or withdrawals as distribution may consequently need to be retested, without implying that every prior conclusion is wrong.

Coin Metrics provides issuer-specific and aggregate ETF series, allowing comparisons across products. But the public disclosure does not show whether the revisions were concentrated in a particular issuer, metric, frequency or part of the covered period. For prior work, the useful update is a comparison of old and revised outputs rather than a refreshed chart alone.

The stakes rise with ETF holdings near 1.6 million BTC

The importance of precision grows with the scale of the market being measured. A 2026 presentation filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission cited Dune and ETFGI data showing that U.S.-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs held approximately 1.6 million BTC by the first quarter of 2026. The figure is a scale comparison rather than a measurement of Coin Metrics’ revised series, but it shows why ETF supply and flow proxies have become material inputs to Bitcoin market-structure analysis.

At that scale, an attributed-wallet dataset can influence how observers frame questions about available supply, custody concentration and the relationship between ETF activity and Bitcoin’s broader market. A supply metric is not merely descriptive when it is used as an input to such arguments. Its address coverage and revision history become part of the analysis.

Still, the SEC-filed presentation’s cited holding estimate and Coin Metrics’ network metrics should not be treated as interchangeable. The former provides a reported market-scale reference drawn from Dune and ETFGI data; the latter is a suite of on-chain series based on identified addresses. Their proximity in subject matter does not make them equivalent records, and the 1.6 million BTC figure does not reveal the size of Coin Metrics’ historical adjustments.

That unknown numerical impact is the unresolved feature of the episode. Coin Metrics has identified the period and breadth of the correction and made the revised data available for backfill. Until a public explanation provides the cause and size of the changes, however, the revision is best understood as a disclosure and measurement issue—not verified evidence of a 19-month change in Bitcoin ETF investor flows.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

That's the gap a growing number of crypto casinos are trying to close, and it's a big part of what POP.Game has built itself around. Instead of picking a lane, casino, sportsbook, or esports hub, POP.Game puts all three under one account. Not as separate products stitched together for a press release, but as one platform designed with that overlap in mind from the start.

1. A Platform Built Around What Players Actually Want

POP.Game describes itself as a premium, crypto friendly sports betting and casino platform, and that word premium actually means something specific here. Not in the sense of flashy graphics, a bigger bonus than the next site, or the loudest crypto casino no deposit bonus offer running this week. More in the sense of paying attention to the whole player journey rather than just the games sitting on the homepage.

That shows up in some unglamorous ways. A platform that's incredibly seamless to use. Deposits and withdrawals that don't require three confirmation emails. Support that responds like a person is on the other end. Promotions that feel worth claiming rather than a trap with fine print attached. None of these things make a highlight reel, but they're the difference between a platform you keep using and one you forget about after a week.

POP.Game's own framing for this is simple enough to repeat here: the goal isn't to win on game count or promo volume, it's to set a higher standard for what the overall experience feels like.

1. Casino Games for Every Player 

Start with the casino side, since that's usually the first thing people check. Slots make up the bulk of it, spanning different themes and volatility levels, alongside table games like blackjack and roulette and a live dealer section for anyone who wants a more social feel without leaving their chair.

Volatility is worth mentioning because it rarely gets talked about outside of forums. A high volatility slot pays out less often but bigger when it lands. A low volatility one spreads smaller wins more evenly across a session. Having a genuine mix of both, instead of leaning on whichever titles are cheapest to license, says more about a platform's actual investment in its casino library than any headline number ever will.

1. Sports Betting: One Login, Endless Betting Options 

The sports betting side covers the usual spread of markets across major leagues and tournaments. What matters is what you don't have to do: no second signup, no second balance to top up, no repeating identity checks you already did an hour earlier while playing casino games.

Anyone who has juggled two or three gambling accounts at once knows how much friction that removes. Plenty of crypto casino sites still expect you to keep separate logins for casino and sportsbook, which sounds minor right up until you're the one doing it.

1. Esports Stops Being an Afterthought

Sports and casino games have shared a platform often enough that it barely raises an eyebrow anymore. However, Esports is the newer piece, and honestly the more interesting one.

Tournaments in games like Counter Strike, Dota and League of Legends now draw audiences that rival traditional sports broadcasts in plenty of regions, and betting interest has grown right alongside that. The worldwide esports audience grew from 662.6 million in 2020 to 921 million in 2022, a pace of growth few traditional sports have matched in the same window. Most platforms still treat esports as a side note bolted onto the main product. POP.Game folds it into the same account as its casino games and sports betting, which matters most for a generation of fans who grew up watching esports the same way older audiences grew up watching football.

Match schedules for major titles also tend to run through the evening and into the night, filling the gaps between traditional sports fixtures rather than competing with them. A platform already holding a player's attention for a football match is well placed to keep it when a tournament kicks off a few hours later, provided that esports is seamlessly integrated in rather than left out entirely.

1. Crypto as a Convenient Payment Option

POP.Game supports USDT, USDC and its own token, $POPG. The reasoning behind that isn't to make the platform sound more crypto native for the sake of it. It's to make deposits and withdrawals that are genuinely convenient for players who already hold stablecoins and don't want to bounce funds through several conversions just to place a bet. Plenty of platforms calling themselves an online crypto casino still make you jump through hoops just to put your deposits to use. Crypto here is a convenient payment option, not the whole pitch. The entertainment and the player experience are still the point.

1. Where the ‘Built With Players, For Players’ Idea Actually Comes From

You'll see the phrase built with players, for players attached to POP.Game more than once, and it would be fair to roll your eyes at another brand slogan claiming to care about its users. The difference is that POP.Game can point to something specific behind it.

When the platform first launched, the team brought together an early community, several hundred people, and had direct conversations with them about what they truly desired. Not a survey nobody reads. Actual back and forth. A number of the suggestions that came out of those conversations were built into the platform rather than filed away. That relationship hasn't stopped since launch either. Feedback from players still shapes updates, promotions and features, rather than the platform being finished in isolation and simply announced to everyone afterward.

1. Trust Built on Consistency and Transparency

Entertainment is only half of what a gaming platform is responsible for. The other half is whether players feel confident in it, in how their funds are handled, in the support they'll get if something goes wrong, in the platform simply working the way it's supposed to on a normal Tuesday.

POP.Game's stance on this is that trust gets earned through consistency and transparency over time, not claimed in a headline. It's a harder standard to meet than a marketing line, but it's also the only kind of trust that endures once you've been using a platform for months instead of days.

1. Rewards That Follow You Across the Platform

POP.Game sits inside a wider ecosystem called POPG, which also includes POP.VIP, a loyalty layer, and POP.LIVE, a live entertainment arm set to launch later. Activity on POP.Game earns VIP Fan Points, and those points carry benefits across the rest of the POPG ecosystem rather than being locked to whichever game you are currently playing.

Practically, that means a session on the casino side, and a bet placed on a match later that week both feed the same rewards track. It's a small structural choice, but it's one more place where the combined account setup shows up as something more than convenience for its own sake.

1. Responsible Gaming as Part of the Experience

POP.Game's approach to responsible gaming is worth pulling out on its own, mostly because of how it's phrased. Rather than a wall of disclaimer text nobody reads, the underlying message is simple: have fun, enjoy the game, know your limits, and stay in control.

Players are encouraged to set personal limits, take breaks, keep gaming balanced against everyday life, avoid chasing losses, and treat the whole thing as entertainment rather than a way to make money. It's framed as something positive, the idea that the best gaming experience is one you stay in control of, rather than a warning tacked onto the bottom of the page because a regulator required it.

1. A Partnership Built on Shared Values 

POP.Game's brand ambassador is Peter Schmeichel, the former Manchester United goalkeeper and one of the most recognized names in football history. His involvement isn't really about football fans recognizing a face. It's more about what his career truly embodied: preparation, consistency, performing at a high-level time and again rather than relying on one good night. That association fits a platform that's trying to build the same kind of reputation.

1. The Bigger Picture

Whether or not every crypto casino online eventually follows this same structure, the direction seems unmistakable. Players don't experience their interests as separate categories, so platforms that keep forcing separate accounts for casino games, sports and esports are working against how people truly allocate their time.

POP.Game is a live example of what building around that reality looks like in practice, casino games, sports betting and esports together, backed by rewards that travel with you and a brand that's been shaped by actual player feedback rather than assumptions made in a boardroom. If you want to see what that combination feels like for yourself, POP.Game is worth a look.

Play within your limits, treat it as entertainment, and let how a platform’s underlying architecture, not just what it promises, be the thing that makes up your mind.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored article and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

The warning addresses a particularly direct problem for event contracts: the person whose conduct settles the market may be able to influence that outcome. CFTC staff said exchanges seeking to list such products will need to make a stronger case that the contracts meet the Commodity Exchange Act’s anti-manipulation standard.

CFTC defines ‘Mention Markets’

The CFTC advisory calls event contracts based on an individual’s mention, attendance or interaction “Mention Markets,” and says they can settle on an observable act attributable to one person or a small group rather than on a broad economic measure or independently produced event. The advisory says that design can put the settlement trigger within the subject’s control and create heightened manipulation risk. Its letter is directed at exchanges listing event contracts, addressing the showing required before they list contracts relying on individual conduct, rather than setting out a separate enforcement action against an identified platform.

Why individual conduct raises the manipulation presumption

CFTC staff said Mention Markets may be presumptively readily susceptible to manipulation when settlement turns on the discrete conduct of one person or a small group, particularly where the event is not independently generated or externally verifiable. Under Core Principle 3 of the Commodity Exchange Act, an exchange must provide heightened justification before listing such a contract.

The advisory does not categorically bar every contract involving a public figure, candidate or other individual. The exchange instead must show that the market’s structure, settlement process and protections overcome the initial concern, including through independent verification, substantial public scrutiny, constraints on the person controlling settlement, and robust surveillance and prophylactic trading controls.

Staff also said the exchange should consider whether the event is produced independently of traders and the person able to cause the outcome and whether the result can be substantiated from sources beyond the individual conduct itself.

Verification, constraints and trading controls

The division’s assessment turns on more than whether a contract states a plainly worded outcome. CFTC staff identified independent verification, substantial public scrutiny, obligations constraining the person who controls settlement, and robust surveillance and prophylactic trading controls as factors that could help rebut the presumption that these contracts are susceptible to manipulation.

Those factors address different parts of the risk: verification and scrutiny concern how the outcome can be established and observed; constraints concern whether the person controlling settlement can deliberately create it; and surveillance and trading controls concern the exchange’s monitoring of activity.

In its account, The Block reported that the advisory permits the contracts only in limited circumstances and recommends proactive exchange controls. The report also linked the warning to more recent concerns around insider trading in prediction-market contracts.

Recent Kalshi cases illustrate information and participation risks

The CFTC’s February 25, 2026 advisory described two Kalshi-related cases involving improper trading: one in which a candidate traded on their own candidacy and another involving advance access to unpublished YouTube content. The penalties were $2,246.36 and $20,397.58, respectively.

The cases were separate from the CFTC’s September 2026 staff advisory, but they illustrate the risks posed by participant-specific influence over, or non-public knowledge of, a contract’s outcome.

That September position treats event contracts whose settlement depends on an individual’s conduct as potentially susceptible to manipulation and requires exchanges to provide heightened justification before listing them. Independent verification, constraints on the person controlling settlement, and robust surveillance and trading controls are among the factors that can help rebut the concern; a clear settlement question alone is not enough where a participant can directly determine the result.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

1win Markets has launched Crypto Live, a new category for short-term cryptocurrency price predictions. The new format allows users to predict whether the price of major cryptocurrencies will move higher or lower over a selected period, with intervals ranging from five minutes to one day.

Crypto Live turns crypto price movements into a simple two-option prediction. Instead of trying to guess exactly where Bitcoin, Ethereum, or Solana will trade next, users choose whether the price will be Higher or Lower than it was at the beginning of the round.

At launch, Crypto Live features BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP and DOGE, with prediction rounds available across five timeframes.

How 1win’s Crypto Live works

• Pick a coin: BTC, ETH, SOL, BNB, XRP or DOGE
• Choose a timeframe: 5 min, 15 min, 1 hour, 4 hours, or 1 day
• Make the call: Higher or Lower
• Watch the price: follow the market during the round
• Get the result: when time runs out, the closing price is compared with the price at the start of the round

For example, Bitcoin is trading at $110,000 when a five-minute round begins. A user who thinks BTC will be above that price five minutes later selects Higher. If Bitcoin finishes the round above $110,000, Higher wins; if it finishes below, Lower wins.

The same format applies across every available cryptocurrency and timeframe, with new rounds repeating throughout the day.

Crypto Live brings a faster format to 1win Markets. While many prediction markets focus on questions that can take days, weeks or even months to resolve, Crypto Live is built around decisions with near-immediate outcomes. The shortest rounds take just five minutes from the opening price to the final result.

The format also removes the need to predict an exact price target. A user doesn't need to decide whether Bitcoin will reach $112,000 or Ethereum will hit $4,500. The question is simply about direction: will the price be higher or lower when the timer reaches zero?

With crypto trading 24/7, Crypto Live allows users to make predictions across different market conditions and time horizons — from a five-minute BTC move to where SOL, ETH or DOGE could be by the end of the day.

Additional features are planned following the initial launch, including the ability to make predictions on upcoming rounds and manage multiple active positions more easily.

Crypto Live is available as a dedicated category within 1win Markets.

About 1win

Founded in 2016, 1win is a crypto entertainment platform in the global gaming industry. Operating across Asia, Latin America, and Africa, 1win offers a wide range of entertainment products adapted to regional audiences. In 2026, 1win welcomed rapper Tyga, UFC legend Ilia Topuria, reggaeton star Nicky Jam, Olympic champion and UFC fighter Gable Steveson, and Nina Drama, UFC interviewer and content creator, as members of the 1win VIP community.

ContactPress Office1winpress@1win.pro

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

NYSE’s planned digital ATS

Blockchain.com and NYSE said they are exploring 24/7/365 access to tokenized U.S.-listed stocks and ETFs through NYSE’s planned digital alternative trading system, or ATS, according to Blockchain.com’s announcement.

The proposed service is not live. The announcement does not establish that the digital ATS is operating or that Blockchain.com users can trade tokenized shares today, and any such service remains subject to regulatory approval.

The collaboration therefore describes an exploratory project, with continuous availability proposed for tokenized U.S.-listed equities and ETFs, rather than a live retail securities product.

ICE and Blockchain.com data distribution

Blockchain.com said the agreement includes a two-way market-data arrangement: ICE Data Services may distribute its crypto data to clients, while Blockchain.com plans to add ICE and NYSE exchange feeds to its app.

The arrangement concerns data distribution and feed additions; the announcement does not describe completed integrations.

It is separate from the proposed tokenized-stock trading service.

Official Blockchain.com and NYSE collaboration graphic. — Source: Blockchain.com

NYSE data and Blockchain.com’s account base

Blockchain.com said NYSE data could be made available to more than 44 million confirmed accounts. That figure describes the potential reach for market data, not the number of customers who will be able to trade tokenized U.S. securities.

Reuters, via Investing.com, reported that the tokenized-stock service is not yet live and still requires regulatory approval. For now, the partnership combines a proposed NYSE digital trading venue with a concrete plan to broaden the distribution of crypto, ICE and NYSE market data.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The difference comes from the sport itself. Every ball counts as a discrete event, every over forms a natural unit, and every innings works as a contest within the match. Cricket therefore offers far more moments to price than a continuous game such as football.

For crypto cricket wagers, that depth means more ways to express a view and more fine print to read.

Market Types by Sport on Dexsport

Dexsport publishes its market list per sport in its sportsbook rules, and the order shows how far ahead cricket stands.

Sport

Market types listed

Cricket

68

Kabaddi

46

Football

39

Ice hockey

21

American football

13

Tennis

13

Basketball

9

Baseball

8

Last verified: September 2026

Kabaddi in second place stands out too. Two sports with deep followings across South Asia lead the list, well ahead of the sports that dominate most Western sportsbooks. Coverage breadth like this is one of the clearest ways to compare market depth between platforms.

Four Layers of the Cricket Board

Sixty-eight market types sound like a lot until you group them. The Dexsport cricket board stacks into four layers, from the whole match down to a single delivery.

• Match: the winner or three-way result, double chance, a tied match and the toss winner

• Team and innings: team total runs, innings runs, innings dismissals, and fours, sixes and extras per innings

• Over and ball: runs in an over, a wicket in an over, odd or even overs, and each of the first three balls of the match

• Player and specials: standout batter and bowler, player of the match, most fours, most sixes and most run outs in the field

Each layer suits a different kind of bettor. Match markets reward a view on the result, innings markets reward a read on the pitch, and over or ball markets reward close attention during live play.

Format Decides Which Markets Matter

Cricket comes in three main formats, and each one shifts the weight of the board.

T20 matches last about three hours, with twenty overs per side. Boundary totals, over-by-over runs and first-overs totals take centre stage in T20 cricket, since every delivery comes with more aggressive intent. Our franchise T20 coverage looks at how squads, venues and the toss shape those prices.

One-day internationals give each side fifty overs, which leaves room for innings-level markets such as team totals and partnership scores to play out.

Test matches last up to five days and can end in a draw, so Test match markets lean far more on the three-way result. Weather and pitch wear also move prices as the days pass.

How to Find Cricket Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport lists cricket in its sportsbook alongside roughly two dozen other sports. Open the sport list, choose cricket, then pick a match to see its market groups, from the result down to single overs.

Stake limits appear on the slip and vary by competition, so a domestic league match and a major international fixture may allow different maximums.

Combos need the most care. Dexsport's rules forbid two different outcomes from the same event in one combo, so a multi from one match needs a different structure. Combos spread across four or more matches can qualify for the Combo+ boost instead.

Terms and market availability change, so confirm the current rules on the platform before you place a bet.

Conclusion

Cricket leads Dexsport's sportsbook with 68 market types, well clear of kabaddi at 46 and football at 39. The sport's structure explains the depth, since every ball, over, and innings creates something new to price.

Four layers, from match and innings down to over and player, make the board far easier to use, and the format decides which layer matters most on a given day.

Before you bet, check the stake limits and the combo rules for the event. Keep stakes within a set budget, check local laws, and bet only if you are of legal age, since the platform may run KYC or AML checks. Responsible gambling covers every one of those 68 markets.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Market lists, limits and rules change, so check current details on the platform before you bet. Sports wagers involve risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please play responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Both results can be perfectly normal. Each row trades as its own small market, so the rows only need to agree with one another when the question allows just one winner.

The kind of market you face tells you whether a strange total signals an error or simply reflects how the question works.

Several Rows Under One Question

On the page, a multi-outcome market looks like a single question with a list beneath it. Underneath, every row has its own Yes and No prices, and traders buy and sell each row separately.

Picture a question about where an asset will trade by year end. The platform lists several price targets, and each target becomes a separate market: will it reach this level, yes or no? Your position in one row has no effect on any other row.

Because the rows trade independently, nothing forces their prices into a neat total. Whether they should approach 100% depends entirely on how the rows relate to each other.

Two Families of Multi-Outcome Market

Every multi-outcome question falls into one of two groups, and the arithmetic differs sharply between them.

Only One Row Can Win

Questions such as who wins a championship or which candidate secures a nomination produce exactly one winner. Once one row resolves Yes, every other row resolves No.

Here the Yes prices should sum to roughly 100 cents, plus a small margin for the market's built-in cost. On a 2028 nomination market where the leader trades at 51 cents and the next contender at 17, the other names should share the rest.

Totals well above 100 cents mean a wide cost across the rows. Totals well below 100 would suggest underpriced outcomes, although thin liquidity and stale prices usually explain them first.

Several Rows Can Win

Price-target ladders work differently. If an asset touches its highest target during the year, it also passes every lower target on the way, so several rows can resolve Yes together.

These totals can climb far past 100 cents without anything being wrong. The useful check shifts from the sum to the order: a higher target should never cost more than a lower one.

Worked Example: The 2026 Bitcoin Ladder

Prices from a Bitcoin price prediction market on Dexsport's board show the logic in practice. The market asks what price Bitcoin will reach in 2026, with four rows at the time of capture.

1. Read each row alone. Up to $85,000 traded at 81 cents for Yes, up to $90,000 at 60 cents, up to $95,000 at 37 cents and down to $70,000 at 48 cents.

2. Add the Yes prices. The four rows total 226 cents, more than double 100, and the figure still makes sense because the upside rows overlap.

3. Check the order. The upside rows fall as the target rises, from 81 to 60 to 37 cents. Any $95,000 row priced above the $90,000 row would break the logic and deserve a closer look.

4. Treat the downside row separately. Bitcoin could dip to $70,000 in one month and reach $90,000 in another, so the downside row can resolve Yes alongside the upside rows.

5. Find the cost inside each row. Each row's own Yes and No prices sum to 101 or 102 cents, so the platform's margin lives within every row, not across them.

Prices move constantly, so these figures describe one moment and not a forecast.

Where a Mispriced Row Shows Up

Readers often see a multi-outcome market as a simple list of probabilities, but prediction market odds become more useful once you test them.

For a one-winner market, compare the sum with 100 cents. Sportsbooks price outright odds on the same principle, and a favourite's price usually tightens as the field narrows.

With a ladder, scan for rows out of order, since a higher target priced above a lower one is the clearest sign of a stale or thin row. The same cross-check applies when you compare sportsbook odds across platforms, since small inconsistencies are where value, or risk, usually shows up.

Multi-Outcome Markets on Dexsport

Dexsport offers both families, and Dexsport prediction markets cover them across several categories. 

Ladders cover Bitcoin, Ethereum and Zcash price targets, while one-winner questions include the 2028 Republican nomination and the 2026 Formula 1 Drivers' Championship.

Every row settles in stablecoins, and each market page lists its close time, resolution deadline, and source. Positions can be sold before resolution while liquidity exists, which matters on long-dated ladders where your view may change months before the answer comes.

Platform terms and prices change, so confirm the details on the market page before you trade.

Conclusion

Multi-outcome markets look like one question and behave like several. In a one-winner market, the Yes prices should sum to a little over 100 cents, so a large excess points to a wide cost and a shortfall points to stale or thin prices.

In a ladder, the sum can climb well past 100 cents, and the real test becomes order, with higher targets always cheaper than lower ones.

Take each row alone, check how the rows relate, and find the cost inside each row. Check local law, keep positions within a set budget, and take part only once you reach legal age. KYC or AML checks may apply, and responsible gambling matters because every position involves risk.

FAQ

Why Do Multi-Outcome Prices Add Up to More Than 100%?

Each row trades as its own Yes or No market, so nothing forces the rows into a combined total. In price ladders, several rows can resolve Yes together, which lets the sum climb well past 100 cents. In one-winner markets, the sum should stay only slightly above 100, and the excess shows the cost built into each row.

Can Every Row Resolve Yes?

In a price ladder, yes. If an asset reaches its highest target, it has already passed every lower target, and a separate downside row can also resolve Yes at another point in the year. In a one-winner market, such as a championship or a nomination, exactly one row resolves Yes and every other row resolves No.

How Can I Spot a Mispriced Row?

Start with the market type. In a one-winner market, compare the sum of Yes prices with 100 cents and treat a big shortfall as a sign of thin or stale prices. In a ladder, check that higher targets cost less than lower ones. Any row out of order deserves a closer look before you trade.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Prices quoted reflect one moment on the platform and change constantly, so check current figures before trading. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

Organisers expect around 25,000 attendees at Marina Bay Sands, and the first speaker list includes Polymarket founder Shayne Coplan.

For a platform that now offers Yes and No markets beside its sportsbook and casino, the conference comes at a useful moment. Prediction markets look set to feature heavily across the week.

TOKEN2049 Singapore at a Glance

Organisers call the 2026 edition their biggest yet, and the Dubai event's move to 2027 concentrates the industry in one city this autumn.

• Dates: 7 and 8 October 2026, with the AFTER 2049 party on 9 October

• Venue: all five floors of Marina Bay Sands

• Scale: around 25,000 attendees from more than 7,000 companies and 160 countries, organisers say

• Programme: 300 speakers, 500 exhibitors and more than 1,000 side events across Singapore

• Competitions: the Origins hackathon and the NEXUS startup contest, judged by venture firms

Prediction Markets Have Moved to the Main Stage

Prediction markets spent years as a niche corner of crypto. Prediction markets in 2026 grew into one of its busiest categories.

Figures cited in Dexsport's September announcement put combined Kalshi and Polymarket volume at about $45 billion in August, after a record near $51 billion in July. The same announcement cites a Bernstein projection of roughly $240 billion for the full year.

Polymarket's founder now shares a speaker list with the heads of Nasdaq and Franklin Templeton, which shows how far the format has travelled. Crypto platforms increasingly offer prediction markets inside apps that already host sports and casino products, so users can move between them from one balance.

Race Week Adds a Formula 1 Angle

The Singapore Grand Prix follows the conference, from 9 to 11 October around Marina Bay. Hotels and roads near the venue fill up quickly as a result, so visitors should book early and allow extra travel time.

This overlap suits a prediction market platform. Dexsport's board lists a 2026 Drivers' Championship market with more than $13 million in volume, and the Singapore race comes late in the season, when title prices tend to react sharply to each result.

What Dexsport Brings to Singapore

Dexsport goes to Singapore with three products under one account: a casino, a sportsbook and prediction markets. Its markets cover sports, crypto, politics, economics and entertainment, settle in stablecoins and publish resolution terms on each market page.

Its largest market, on the 2028 Republican nomination, has passed $60 million in volume, the platform's own figures show. Bitcoin and Solana Up or Down markets reopen every few minutes, which gives visitors something live to follow between sessions.

September also brought recognition at the CryptoDaily Awards, which adds to the profile built through the OG.Dexsport partnership in Counter-Strike 2. Dexsport holds an Anjouan licence, and platform terms can change, so confirm current details on the site before you trade.

Conclusion

TOKEN2049 Singapore brings around 25,000 people to Marina Bay Sands on 7 and 8 October, with the Grand Prix straight after.

Prediction markets look likely to shape much of the conversation, helped by Polymarket's presence on stage and record volumes across the category this year. The Dexsport TOKEN2049 visit fits that theme.

Dexsport attends with a September launch behind it, a board that spans sports, crypto and politics, and stablecoin settlement on every market.

Anyone who trades on those markets should check local law, take part only once they reach legal age, and expect KYC or AML checks. Responsible gambling applies to event markets too, since every position involves risk and withdrawals may face review.

FAQ

When and Where Is TOKEN2049 Singapore 2026?

TOKEN2049 Singapore, the largest of the October 2026 crypto events, takes place on 7 and 8 October across all five floors of Marina Bay Sands. Organisers expect around 25,000 attendees, 300 speakers and more than 1,000 side events. The AFTER 2049 party follows on 9 October, and the Singapore Grand Prix takes place from 9 to 11 October nearby.

Why Are Prediction Markets a Focus This Year?

Volume in the category has grown sharply in 2026. Figures cited by Dexsport put combined Kalshi and Polymarket volume near $51 billion in July, a record, and about $45 billion in August. Polymarket's founder also appears among the headline speakers, so the format should feature prominently in panels and side events throughout the week.

What Prediction Markets Does Dexsport Offer?

Dexsport offers Yes and No markets across five categories: sports, crypto, politics, economics and entertainment. Every market settles in stablecoins and shows when it closes, when it resolves and which source decides it. Up or Down markets on Bitcoin and other assets reopen on cycles from five minutes to one day.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Event details come from organiser announcements and may change, and platform figures move daily, so check current details before you travel or trade. Trading on event outcomes involves risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please participate responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

The decisive question is why the yield declined. A move lower driven by easing inflation concerns or expectations of less restrictive monetary policy can improve the valuation backdrop. A fall caused by concern about weak growth or recession can simultaneously damage expected company profits, leaving stocks worse off despite a lower discount rate.

What a sub-5% 10-year Treasury yield measures

The 10-year Treasury yield measures the annualised return investors demand on a US Treasury security with roughly 10 years remaining until maturity. It is a market price expressed as a yield, rather than a government-set rate. Treasury constructs its par yield curve from closing market bid prices, with market inputs also used by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as the US Treasury explains.

Price comes first in the market’s mechanics: when demand lifts the price of an existing Treasury, its yield falls; when the price drops, the yield rises. The resulting quote is a continuously changing measure of required return. It does not tell investors what stocks will earn over the next decade.

The maturity helps explain the yield’s role. The 10-year sits in the middle of the curve commonly used to consider longer-run borrowing costs, inflation expectations and economic prospects. It is distinct from the Federal Reserve’s policy rate, even though policy expectations may affect it. Expected inflation, compensation for interest-rate and inflation uncertainty, and demand for Treasuries also feed into long-term yields.

“Below 5%” is a round-number reference point, not a financial threshold that creates automatic consequences. A move from 5.05% to 4.95% matters in context: its size, speed, investor expectations and the economic information behind it all count. A 4.9% yield may still restrict some valuations when expected earnings or risk perceptions have shifted sharply.

How the 10-year yield changes S&P 500 valuations

Share prices are claims on future profits, dividends and other cash distributions, converted into a present value through a discount rate. With all else equal, reducing the long-term risk-free rate reduces that discount rate and increases the present value of future cash flows—the main way a falling 10-year yield can support the S&P 500.

Consider a hypothetical $100 cash flow due in 10 years. At a 5% discount rate it has a lower present value than at 4%, even though the cash flow itself is unchanged. The difference is the return an investor requires while waiting; actual equity valuation adds uncertain cash flows and other risk compensation.

Not all equities have the same exposure to this arithmetic. Expected cash flows that lie farther in the future, as they do for many growth companies, are generally more sensitive to discount-rate changes. Nearer-term, more predictable cash flows may be less sensitive, but broad rate shifts and investor risk appetite can affect every sector. The International Monetary Fund describes the greater sensitivity of long-duration equity cash flows to discount-rate changes.

That is why Treasury yields often appear in discussions of price-to-earnings multiples. A lower required return may lead investors to pay more today for the same anticipated earnings stream, without showing that every company merits a higher multiple. Growth, margins, debt, competition and forecast reliability still shape the calculation.

Earnings yield, real Treasury yields and the equity risk premium

Investors also compare the prospective return implied by equities with the return available from government bonds. One common equity measure is the forward earnings yield: expected earnings per share divided by the share price. It is the inverse of a forward price-to-earnings ratio. A stock index trading at a higher multiple has a lower earnings yield, assuming the same earnings estimate.

The Federal Reserve has measured an equity risk premium in part as the S&P 500’s forward earnings yield minus the expected 10-year real Treasury yield. A real yield is a yield after accounting for expected inflation. This comparison is useful because nominal returns alone can overstate what investors expect to gain in purchasing-power terms.

If the real Treasury yield falls while the S&P 500’s forward earnings yield is unchanged, the apparent extra compensation for holding equities increases. That may make stocks look more attractive relative to Treasuries. The calculation can change from both sides, though: a rising stock market reduces the earnings yield if forecasts do not rise with it, while lower earnings estimates also reduce it. The Federal Reserve’s asset-valuation discussion sets out this framework.

Nor is the equity risk premium a fixed market quote or a guarantee of future performance. Different models use different earnings horizons, inflation assumptions and measures of expected real yields. The metric is best understood as a relative valuation lens, not a timing signal that independently determines whether investors should buy or sell equities.

When falling yields signal an earnings problem instead

Lower yields can be favourable for valuations, but the cause of the decline may be unfavourable for businesses. Investors may demand lower yields because they expect softer economic growth, lower inflation or recession. In a growth scare, the same weaker outlook that pulls Treasury yields down can lead analysts and investors to cut forecasts for sales, margins and corporate earnings.

That produces two opposing forces. The lower discount rate tends to raise the value assigned to each dollar of future earnings. The lower earnings forecast means there may be fewer dollars to value. If the expected deterioration in profits is severe enough, it can outweigh the valuation benefit and pull the S&P 500 lower.

Consider two stylised scenarios. In the first, inflation expectations ease without a material downgrade to demand or company profits. Yields fall, the expected cash-flow stream stays broadly intact, and equity valuations may receive support. In the second, investors move into Treasuries because they expect recession. Yields decline as earnings expectations weaken, and equities can fall even as bonds gain.

The difference is why a headline about the 10-year yield crossing below 5% cannot answer the stock-market question on its own. The IMF notes that yield declines may reflect weaker-growth or recession expectations, conditions under which the damage to projected earnings can offset or exceed the benefit of a lower discount rate.

Why the S&P 500 does not move one-for-one with Treasury yields

The S&P 500 is a broad benchmark of large-cap US equities, covering approximately 75% of US equities. It contains companies with different business models, financing needs, geographic revenue exposure and expected cash-flow profiles. A single Treasury yield cannot capture all of those differences.

Higher yields may weigh more heavily on rate-sensitive valuations and on companies that must refinance significant debt. At the same time, higher yields can arrive alongside stronger economic activity, which may support the profits of cyclical businesses. Falling yields can aid long-duration valuations but can also accompany lower expected demand. Index-level returns reflect the net result of such competing effects.

There is also a difference between a widely anticipated move and a surprise. Asset prices tend to incorporate expectations ahead of an event. A yield decline that was already expected may have little fresh effect on stocks, while an unexpected move can prompt a larger reassessment. Even then, the direction is not mechanically predetermined.

The Federal Reserve has said unexpected interest-rate changes have historically had only modest effects on equity prices relative to the wider variation associated with earnings, risk appetite and other market factors. Lower Treasury yields can encourage shifts toward riskier assets, but that relationship is not one-for-one.

Readers can compare daily S&P 500 closing levels with the daily 10-year constant-maturity Treasury yield through FRED’s combined series. Such charts are useful for identifying periods when the two moved together or apart. They cannot, by themselves, show that one series caused the other to move, since both may be responding to new information about inflation, growth, policy or market risk.

Daily 10-year Treasury constant-maturity yield and S&P 500 index series for comparing interest-rate and equity-market movements. — Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis FRED

Using the relationship in practice

Begin with the move itself: why did the 10-year Treasury yield fall below 5%, and what happened to forward earnings expectations, real yields and S&P 500 valuations? Those checks distinguish a potentially constructive change in discount rates from a warning about the earnings outlook.

The comparison rests on two sides. Treasury yields shape the opportunity cost and discount rate for equities; forward earnings indicate potential shareholder returns. The gap between those measures is one way to assess compensation for bearing equity risk.

That relationship can shift while it is being assessed. Prices, earnings forecasts, inflation expectations and risk appetite may all move at once. A lower long-term risk-free rate can support valuations and, with other inputs stable, widen the apparent equity risk premium—but a lower yield can also accompany weaker growth or earnings expectations.

For that reason, a 10-year yield below 5% supplies context, not a definitive signal for the S&P 500. Whether index prices rise depends on the path of expected earnings and on investors’ willingness to bear risk.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a 10-year Treasury yield below 5% mean the S&P 500 will rise?

No. Lower yields can improve valuation arithmetic, but stocks may decline if the yield fall reflects worsening growth prospects and lower expected corporate profits.

Why do bond prices rise when Treasury yields fall?

An existing bond’s fixed payments become more attractive when the required market return declines. Investors bid up its price, and its yield, calculated relative to that higher price, moves down.

Are the 10-year Treasury yield and the Federal Reserve policy rate the same thing?

They are different. The policy rate is a short-term rate set by the Federal Reserve, while the 10-year yield is market determined and reflects expectations about future rates, inflation and other risks.

Why can growth stocks react more sharply to changes in yields?

Growth companies are often valued on cash flows expected further in the future. Those distant cash flows lose or gain more present value when the discount rate changes.

What does a higher equity risk premium indicate?

In the Fed’s framework, it can indicate greater apparent compensation for owning equities over expected real Treasury returns. It is not a guarantee that equities will outperform, because earnings forecasts and prices can change quickly.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

KuMining, the cloud mining platform developed by KuCoin, has marked its first anniversary with more than $25 million in total sales volume, over 200,000 users and cumulative BTC hashrate sales exceeding 5 EH/s across retail and institutional clients.

One year after launching with Bitcoin mining and DOGE/LTC merged mining, KuMining now supports five Proof-of-Work assets: BTC, DOGE, LTC, ZEC and KAS. ZEC was added in July 2026, followed by KAS in August, expanding the range of mining options available through the platform.

KuMining provides access to computing power from physical mining rigs without requiring users to buy mining equipment or manage operations directly. The platform and its partners handle infrastructure including equipment, electricity, cooling and maintenance, while users purchase hashrate for a selected service period and receive output from the underlying mining activity.

The model is designed to provide both retail and institutional users with access to professionally operated mining infrastructure while simplifying the operational requirements typically associated with mining.

Alongside Bitcoin, DOGE/LTC merged mining remains a core part of the platform. The model uses the same computing power to mine both networks simultaneously, enabling users to receive mining output in DOGE and LTC without separately configuring equipment or mining pools.

Expanding Access to Managed Mining Infrastructure

KuMining introduced KuMining 2.0 in March 2026, adding more flexibility to how users purchase hashrate and manage mining activity.

Through Lite Mode, users select an asset, budget, and available service period, and the platform automatically matches the corresponding hashrate. Pro Mode gives users direct control over their selected hashrate and service period, with terms of up to 360 days depending on the asset.

Hashrate fees are paid upfront, while electricity charges are deducted daily in USDT through a dedicated Mining Account. The account provides records of daily and cumulative mining output, balances, electricity deductions and order history.

Mined assets are also held within the KuCoin ecosystem, where users can trade them or access eligible Earn services without first transferring assets between separate mining, wallet and exchange platforms.

As with other forms of Proof-of-Work mining, output can vary based on network conditions and equipment performance, while electricity costs and token prices can affect profitability. KuMining provides users with visibility into both mining output and associated electricity costs through the Mining Account.

More Than 200,000 Users in the First Year

According to company figures, KuMining served more than 200,000 users during its first year and recorded more than $25 million in total sales of its mining services.

Cumulative BTC hashrate sales exceeded 5 EH/s across retail and institutional segments over the same period.

The platform’s expansion from its initial BTC and DOGE/LTC offering to five supported assets reflects a broader range of hashrate services available to users without requiring them to purchase and operate mining hardware directly.

“Over the past year, we have focused on making mining more accessible through flexible hashrate services and clearer account management,” said Jolie Du, Chief Operating Officer of KuMining. “As we enter our second year, we will continue to strengthen our infrastructure and explore extending this service model to GPU and AI compute offerings.”

Anniversary Campaign Offers More Than 100,000 USDT in Rewards

To mark its first year, KuMining launched its “KuMining 1st Anniversary: Mine, Earn & Celebrate” campaign on September 22, 2026, with rewards worth more than 100,000 USDT.

The campaign includes rewards for new users and cumulative purchases, hashrate and electricity-fee coupons, and a guaranteed-prize draw. Eligible participants can receive draw entries by completing purchase and referral tasks.

Available prizes include USDT, BTC, KAS, ZEC, DOGE and LTC, alongside fee coupons and devices including an iPhone 18 Pro Max, Apple Watch Ultra 4 and AirPods Pro 3.

Eligibility requirements, task conditions, reward distribution and campaign duration are subject to the official campaign terms.

As KuMining enters its second year, the platform plans to continue developing its mining infrastructure while exploring how its managed service model could extend beyond Proof-of-Work mining into GPU and AI computing services.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The agreement places Kakao Group’s payments and banking businesses alongside an institutional digital-asset infrastructure provider. Their work is limited to assessing infrastructure needs and conducting proof-of-concept tests; no product launch or implementation timetable has been announced.

It is consequently an early infrastructure-testing effort rather than a commitment to deploy a stablecoin service.

Kakao Pay, KakaoBank and Fireblocks begin assessment

Fireblocks said the memorandum is intended to explore digital-asset opportunities in Korea through Kakao Pay and KakaoBank, with stablecoins at the centre of the collaboration. The announcement brings payments and banking businesses into the same exploration with a specialist infrastructure provider.

According to Cointelegraph, the partners plan to assess Korean market infrastructure needs and run proof-of-concept tests for solutions that meet local regulatory, security and service requirements. That scope matters because it leaves the eventual form of any offering open: the announced work concerns the infrastructure conditions and testing needed for prospective services, not the launch of a named stablecoin.

No technical architecture, testing schedule or commercial rollout plan was disclosed. The lack of a timetable is a material boundary around the announcement, although the agreement gives Kakao Group another active channel for examining the operational foundations required for stablecoin distribution.

Fireblocks brings institutional infrastructure

Fireblocks said its infrastructure has been deployed by more than 2,500 institutions, including more than 100 banks, and supports digital-asset activity across more than 200 blockchains.

Kakao Pay and KakaoBank are evaluating that infrastructure for a prospective Korean digital-asset use case. Their work with Fireblocks includes assessing local market needs and conducting proof-of-concept tests.

The Fireblocks figures, supplied in the company's announcement, indicate the scale of its existing platform, not the scale of the proposed Korean initiative. The memorandum does not announce issuance, distribution, a service launch or an implementation timetable; any eventual services would depend on the proof-of-concept results and Korea's regulatory, security and service requirements.

Fireblocks, Kakao Pay and KakaoBank logos representing the stablecoin infrastructure partnership. — Source: Maeil Business Newspaper

A second stablecoin-related memorandum for Kakao

The Fireblocks memorandum follows Kakao Group’s July 2026 memorandum with Circle. That earlier agreement explored blockchain-based payment infrastructure, including potential won-denominated stablecoin services.

Under the Fireblocks agreement, Kakao Pay and KakaoBank are assessing secure digital-asset infrastructure and conducting proof-of-concept tests compatible with Korean regulatory, security and service requirements.

The memoranda therefore cover related but distinct parts of potential stablecoin activity: Circle’s work concerns prospective payment services, while Fireblocks addresses supporting infrastructure. Neither sets out a launch or implementation date or confirms a deployed won-denominated stablecoin product.

Stablecoin task force focuses on domestic distribution

Maeil Business Newspaper reported that the Fireblocks partnership is intended to build a domestic digital-asset ecosystem and develop infrastructure suitable for stablecoin distribution. That domestic emphasis connects the technical assessment to Kakao Group's broader effort to consider how stablecoins could circulate through a Korean-market framework.

KakaoBank Chief Executive Yun Ho-young and Kakao Pay Chief Executive Shin Won-keun were also identified in the report as co-heads of Kakao Group's stablecoin task force, placing the group's banking and payments leadership at the centre of the effort. The Fireblocks memorandum, meanwhile, adds an outside infrastructure partner to the work.

The next visible milestone is likely to be the proof-of-concept process described by the companies. For now, the public record establishes an infrastructure assessment tied to domestic stablecoin distribution ambitions, rather than a final implementation decision.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

But there's a bit more going on than that. The odds, the number of cards in play and, importantly, the winning pattern can all make a difference.

You will be glad to know that it is not necessary for you to be a bingo pro before diving into the game. In fact, bingo is probably one of the more simple games to get used to.

Becoming Familiar with the Bingo Ticket

A standard 90-ball bingo ticket has a total of 15 numbers, while the other squares on the ticket, of which there are 45, are left blank.

As the caller announces the numbers, you mark off the ones you have.

That's where the patterns come in.

In a standard 90-ball game, the usual targets are one line, two lines and then a full house. So, you might be trying to complete any one horizontal line first. Once somebody does that, the game continues towards two lines and eventually every number on the ticket.

It sounds simple because it is. But watching your last couple of numbers come up can get surprisingly tense.

Patterns Change Things

Not every bingo game sticks to the traditional line system, either. For example, many of the bingo games online can introduce different patterns. You might need to fill a particular shape, such as a cross, a square or another design on the card.

This is worth checking before you start because the pattern tells you exactly what you're trying to complete.

A game with a more unusual pattern can also feel quite different from standard 90-ball bingo, instead of simply looking for a complete line, you're watching for numbers in specific 

What Are the Odds?

So, where do the odds come into it?

The biggest thing to remember is that bingo doesn't have one fixed set of odds. It depends on how many tickets are playing.

If there are 100 tickets in a game and you have one, you're competing with 99 other tickets. If you have five tickets, you've got five chances in that pool.

That's a very basic way of looking at it, but it explains why the size of the game matters.

More players and more tickets generally mean more competition. A smaller game can mean fewer tickets competing for the same win.

The actual pattern matters too. If everyone is trying to complete one line, the race is pretty straightforward. A more complicated pattern can change how quickly players reach the target.

How Many Cards Should You Play?

This is probably the first decision you'll make.

You can play several cards at once, and plenty of regular players do. Online games can be easier here because your numbers may be marked automatically, leaving you free to concentrate on what's happening rather than frantically scanning every card.

A Good Place to Start

The easiest way into bingo is to pick a straightforward game, check the rules and see what pattern you're playing for.

Bingo is still a game of chance. A card with an interesting-looking spread of numbers isn't secretly more likely to win.

The fun is really in watching the pattern take shape as the numbers are called.

And once you've had that first "one number left" moment, you'll probably understand why people have been playing bingo for so long.

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored article and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

More travel bookings → more member givebacks → more open-market AVA buybacks → more AVA permanently locked. A new matching structure doubles monthly open-market buyback volume, building a reserve Travala has committed never to sell or transfer.

Travala, the leading crypto-native travel booking platform, and the AVA Foundation today announced a new matching buyback structure for the AVA token. The initiative introduces a new Travala-funded buyback operating independently and in addition to the AVA Foundation’s existing rewards-replenishment buyback, doubling monthly open-market buyback volume. The matched AVA will be transferred to a Strategic Reserve that Travala has committed never to sell or transfer.

Each month, the AVA Foundation replenishes the prior month’s AVA givebacks by repurchasing the exact quantity of AVA distributed to AVA Smart Program members on the open market, token for token, and transferring those tokens back into the Ecosystem Incentives Wallet, an established pillar of the AVA rewards model. To date, a total of 4,824,722 AVA has been repurchased through historical buybacks to replenish AVA rewards distributed to AVA Smart members.

Starting now, Travala will independently match that same amount every month, buying back an equal quantity of AVA on the open market and transferring it to the new Travala AVA Strategic Reserve Wallet, secured through multi-signature custody. Travala has committed that AVA held in the Reserve will never be sold or transferred out. Both buybacks are separately verifiable on-chain.

Together, the two mechanisms double monthly open-market buyback volume to 2x the volume of AVA Smart member givebacks, up from 1x previously. While the Foundation’s buyback replenishes the rewards pool, Travala’s matching buyback permanently removes the matched amount from circulating supply under Travala’s commitment never to sell or transfer the tokens.

The inaugural Travala Monthly AVA Buyback has already been completed. Following the AVA Foundation’s September buyback of 369,881.04 AVA for August AVA Smart member givebacks, Travala independently matched the amount with an additional 369,881.04 AVA open-market buyback. Together, the two buybacks resulted in 739,762.08 AVA being repurchased from the open market, with Travala’s 369,881.04 AVA allocation transferred to the new AVA Strategic Reserve Wallet, where it will remain permanently outside circulating supply under Travala’s commitment never to sell or transfer the tokens. The Reserve is publicly verifiable on-chain at 0x7bed1889c21d9eb3560463c14cd74fe29f2d03b6.

“AVA is at the center of everything we’re building at Travala,” said Juan Otero, CEO of Travala. “It’s how our community is rewarded and how they engage with the platform every day. This matching buyback reflects just how integral AVA is to our ecosystem, and we’re proud to make that commitment permanent and fully verifiable for the community that’s built this with us.”

The mechanism scales directly with platform activity: higher AVA Smart member givebacks result in larger AVA Foundation buybacks and, through Travala’s matching structure, larger Travala open-market buybacks and additional AVA being permanently locked in the Strategic Reserve.

Because AVA transferred into the AVA Strategic Reserve Wallet is permanently locked under Travala’s commitment never to sell or transfer the tokens, each monthly allocation is removed from circulating supply and excluded from AVA’s official circulating supply via the AVA circulating supply API. Travala will also submit the Reserve wallet address to CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko for treatment as non-circulating under their respective methodologies.

Every transfer across both wallets is verifiable on-chain, and Travala and the AVA Foundation will report both buyback figures publicly each month going forward. Each monthly Travala buyback will be executed after the AVA Foundation’s giveback figure for the prior month has been published.

This announcement follows AVA’s recent listing on Bithumb’s KRW market, expanding direct access for Korean traders and adding a new venue alongside AVA’s existing exchange footprint.

Travala was also recently named by Amazon Web Services as a customer case study for the general availability launch of its Bedrock AgentCore payments platform, with CEO Juan Otero quoted on how the integration streamlines agentic, conversational booking across Travala’s inventory of more than 2.2 million hotels globally.

About Travala

Founded in 2017 and now backed by industry giant Binance, Travala is the leading crypto-native travel booking service, offering 2,200,000+ properties across 230 countries, 600+ airlines, 50,000+ car rental locations, and 400,000+ activities globally. Travala is a champion of cryptocurrency adoption, accepting over 100 leading cryptocurrencies alongside traditional payment methods. In addition to unbeatable prices via its Best Price Guarantee, Smart members on Travala can also enjoy additional discounts and loyalty rewards for eligible bookings made on the platform. For more information about Travala, visit: www.travala.com.

About AVA Foundation

The AVA Foundation oversees the AVA token ecosystem, including the AVA Smart Program, AVA token, and Travel Tiger NFTs. The AVA token functions as the key to accessing the AVA Smart Program, which provides travel perks and other benefits to Travala customers, such as AVA payment discounts, AVA loyalty rewards, gated access benefits, and more. AVA tokenises the concept of loyalty reward programs using blockchain technology, bringing web3 to traditional loyalty models. For more information, visit: www.avafoundation.org

ContactChief Marketing OfficerSam WoollardTravalasam@travala.com

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

That is the tension beneath an apparently straightforward risk-on session. The index is close enough to its peak for the rally to look intact at the headline level, particularly with semiconductor and artificial-intelligence shares leading the advance. But ChartRow counted only 245 of 498 eligible members, or 49%, above their 200-day averages. In other words, the benchmark is approaching a record without a majority of its components sustaining a long-term technical uptrend.

This is not, by itself, a verdict that the advance must fail. Capitalisation-weighted indices can make new highs with leadership concentrated in a relatively small group of very large companies, and strong earnings can support those leaders for a considerable time. It is, however, a yellow flag on the quality and distribution of the move: the index level says little about how broadly its constituents are sharing in it.

Record proximity and long-term trends

The contrast is unusually stark because both readings refer to the same moment. Associated Press reported that the S&P 500 gained 1.5% on September 21 and finished within 0.4% of the record it set in August. The Nasdaq’s all-time high was led by semiconductor and AI stocks, the very areas capable of moving a market-capitalisation-weighted benchmark disproportionately.

Against that backdrop, the 49% reading from ChartRow’s breadth data matters less as a trading trigger than as a measure of confirmation. A stock above its 200-day moving average is commonly treated as being in a longer-term uptrend. When fewer than half of eligible constituents meet that test, the aggregate market has less participation beneath the index’s advance than the record-adjacent headline implies.

The distinction is particularly important for the S&P 500. A benchmark can be resilient because a handful of the largest stocks rise, even while a large number of smaller index members lag or fall below long-term trend measures. That construction does not make the index signal misleading; it means the index and breadth answer different questions. One tracks the value of the weighted basket. The other asks how many stocks are contributing to, or at least confirming, its direction.

At 49%, long-term breadth does not describe a market in which the overwhelming majority of constituents have broken down. It does show that the foundation is materially narrower than an index near a record would normally suggest to a reader looking only at the headline level.

Breadth deterioration since July

The more consequential feature is the direction of travel. At the end of July, roughly 70% of S&P 500 stocks were above their 200-day moving averages, according to StockCharts. Breadth among mid-cap and small-cap stocks also exceeded 70% at that point. The current sub-50% S&P 500 reading therefore represents a material narrowing from the midsummer backdrop, not merely a persistently uneven market.

A shorter-term measure captured the same loss of participation during a period when the index itself gave little warning. Between August 18 and September 8, the S&P 500 slipped only 0.2%. Over those three weeks, however, the T2108 indicator, which measures the percentage of stocks above their 40-day moving averages, fell from 47.9 to 36.4. That was an 11.5-point deterioration while the benchmark was broadly flat.

CANSLIM Research described the backdrop as a yellow alert, not a complete breakdown. Its latest data showed 269 stocks gaining at least 4% versus 321 declining at least 4%, while the five-day up/down ratio stood at 1.13. The figures point to weakening internal conditions, but they do not establish the indiscriminate selling associated with a market-wide failure.

That qualification is central. Breadth indicators can worsen as investors rotate between sectors, reassess valuations or concentrate in a smaller group of earnings leaders. A declining share of stocks above medium- and long-term averages becomes more troublesome when it persists alongside a material index decline, or when broad participation fails to recover during subsequent advances. The supplied readings show the first element of concern—deterioration concealed by a stable or rising index—without proving the latter outcome.

Still, the speed of the change alters the character of the rally. In late July, long-term participation extended across large, mid- and small-cap shares. By September 21, the S&P 500’s approach to a record rested alongside a long-term uptrend reading below 50%. The issue is not simply that some stocks are lagging; laggards have always existed. It is that a much smaller share of the benchmark is now holding above a widely followed long-term trend line.

Semiconductor, AI leadership and concentration

The September 21 session offers a plausible mechanism for the divergence. Semiconductor and AI stocks led the Nasdaq to an all-time high, according to the Associated Press report. Leadership in those groups can lift the major indices even where performance elsewhere is uneven, because the S&P 500 gives its largest companies the greatest influence over the benchmark.

Evidence from earlier in the year suggests this was not solely a late-summer technical development. First Trust reported that 218 S&P 500 stocks had outperformed the index year-to-date through June 12, compared with 234 over the comparable period a year earlier. The comparison supports the view that gains had become more concentrated even before the subsequent weakening in moving-average breadth.

There is an important difference between concentration and fragility. Narrow leadership can be durable when the leading companies continue to deliver earnings that justify investors’ preference for them. But concentration reduces the market’s margin for disappointment. If fewer stocks are doing the work of supporting the index, weakness among the leaders carries more weight than it would in an advance supported by a broad range of sectors and company sizes.

The current configuration also complicates simple readings of a new high. A fresh record, or a close approach to one, is evidence of demand for the index. It is not evidence that every major industry is participating or that the typical constituent is in a sustained uptrend. For investors and market observers, that gap is the relevant analytical point: the benchmark can remain strong while its internal confirmation grows weaker.

Daily participation and earnings

The bearish interpretation should not be overstated. ChartRow reported that 58% of S&P 500 members advanced in the latest session. That is a better one-day participation reading than the longer-term 200-day measure might lead readers to expect, and it indicates that the September 21 gain was not confined solely to a tiny group of stocks.

One-day breadth and long-term breadth need not move together: a majority of constituents can rise in a given session even as many remain below their 200-day averages after earlier declines or prolonged underperformance. Thus, the 58% figure qualifies the claim that the market is broadly deteriorating without overturning the evidence that only 49% of eligible members were in long-term uptrends.

Fundamentals provide a more substantial reason narrow leadership could persist. First Trust cited 28.6% year-over-year growth in first-quarter 2026 earnings. That pace of earnings growth gives the rally an underpinning that a purely momentum-driven advance would lack, especially if the companies driving the index’s gains are among those producing the strongest results.

It also helps explain why reduced breadth should be treated as a condition to assess rather than a mechanical sell signal. Earnings growth can support valuations and sustain investor demand for a select group of leaders. Yet the same dynamic can leave the index increasingly dependent on those companies: strong aggregate earnings may keep the rally alive without necessarily broadening it.

For now, the data present both sides of that equation. A majority of constituents rose in the latest session, the S&P 500 is within 0.4% of its August high, and first-quarter earnings growth was 28.6%. But the market is trying to reach that high with only 49% of eligible members above their 200-day averages, well below the roughly 70% recorded at the end of July.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Bull pennant suggests more upside

Source: TradingView

As can be seen in the 1-hour chart above, a sideways consolidation has begun again after a quickfire 7.5% surge that took the $BTC price from the top of the parallel channel at $81,300, to the current local top at $87,400 - a gain of $6,100. 

The pattern we have above is a sideways consolidation after a strong rally, therefore this is a flag pattern. Given the channelling of the price into an ever smaller area, this is a pennant - at least so far. The 1-hour time frame may mean that it could still be too early to call the pattern, especially if there is a downside move which could then turn the pattern into a flag with parallel trendlines.

Be that as it may, the Stochastic RSI indicator lines are hitting the bottom of their limit and so the next move is possibly an upside one that takes the $BTC price back to the top of the pennant and a likely breakout.

Bear flags support and resistance

Source: TradingView

This view of the daily chart illustrates the current huge rally on the right, compared with the bear flags in the bear market on the left. These bear flags are still making their presence felt, as some strong support/resistance lines came into being as they developed.

The top of Bear flag 2 was the crucially important higher high that was recently overcome, and which goes a long way towards changing the trend back from bear to bull.

Now, what we have above the $BTC price is a resistance level at $89,250 which runs through the middle of Bear flag 1, where multiple touchpoints were either support or resistance. This is likely the next target for the bulls, unless of course the $BTC price chooses to consolidate a bit deeper and comes down to retest $85K, or even down to retest that higher high of Bear flag 2 ($82,820) in order to officially confirm it as support. 

What goes up…

Source: TradingView

One thing to bear in mind when looking at this incredible looking rally out of the depths of the bear market, is that it cannot keep going up like this indefinitely. A temporary top is going to be found, and then a bigger and longer consolidation period is going to take place. The sharper the incline up, the longer the market will take to digest this.

It may well be that the rally is not over yet, especially given the continuation pattern that could be developing at the top of this candle, but a top will eventually be found, and this is likely to be at one of the three major resistance levels that are overhead, at either $89,250, $93,500, or $97,900. Once this top has been made, look for a considerable retracement before the upside movement can get going again. 

At the bottom of the chart, the RSI reveals a very bullish setup. A two and a half year descending trendline has been broken to the upside. Look for the indicator line to also start taking out the previous higher highs. If we are in a bull market now, the indicator line would not be expected to come back and dip below the trendline.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The decision reverses the rationale behind Trueo’s initial launch on Base in March 2025. At that time, Ethereum mainnet gas fees were higher and parts of the application remained experimental, according to The Block. Trueo is not immediately closing its Base product: trading, settlement and redemption are set to continue during the transition.

Trueo shifts its primary deployment to Ethereum

In its announcement, Trueo framed the move as a choice for Ethereum’s reach and connections across the wider ecosystem. For a prediction-market protocol that describes itself as permissionless and largely immutable, the project said mainnet offered a closer fit with its intended operating model.

The migration marks a changed calculation from the one that led Trueo to Base. Layer 2 networks can reduce transaction costs relative to Ethereum mainnet, and Trueo had selected Base while its application was still being tested and developed. Its latest position is that integration opportunities and network effects carry greater weight for the platform’s primary deployment.

Trueo did not present the announcement as an abrupt replacement of one application by another. Instead, it set out a phased operational path under which the Base application remains available while the Ethereum deployment becomes the protocol’s central venue.

Base markets remain open during transition

Existing activity on Base is due to continue without interruption, including trading, settlement and redemption. That means users with live markets or positions on the Layer 2 are not being asked to stop using the official Base application solely because of the deployment change.

There is, however, a practical boundary for new market creation. Trueo advised users not to create new Base markets that expire after January 31, 2027. Existing Base markets will remain accessible through the official app, according to the transition details reported by The Block.

The date functions as a cutoff for long-dated new markets on Base rather than a stated end date for access to all existing markets. The distinction matters for users who may be considering the duration of a proposed market: markets already created on Base are expected to remain reachable, while the protocol is directing future activity away from expiries beyond that threshold.

TRUE migration and protocol roadmap

TRUE will remain Trueo’s native token after the move. Holders will be able to migrate the token to Ethereum, and the protocol said there will be no deadline for doing so.

That open-ended timetable separates the token migration from the January 2027 guidance on new long-dated Base markets. Trueo has outlined the two changes as parts of a broader transition, but the available details attach different timing terms to each.

Beyond the deployment itself, the protocol identified two execution priorities: bringing in liquidity for key market categories and launching the next generation of its oracle system. Liquidity is central to whether users can enter and exit market positions efficiently, while the oracle system is relevant to how prediction-market outcomes are handled. Trueo did not provide further technical specifications or a launch timetable for those priorities in the material cited.

Buterin welcomes Trueo’s positioning

According to his public X account, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin welcomed Trueo as a decentralized and ethical prediction-market contender focused on meaningful applications.

Trueo is moving its primary deployment from Base to Ethereum mainnet. The protocol has described the model as permissionless and largely immutable, and Ethereum will become the center of its next phase.

During the transition, Trueo’s Base application and markets will remain accessible. TRUE holders will be able to migrate the token to Ethereum without a deadline.

Trueo has also identified attracting liquidity in key market categories and upgrading its oracle system as future priorities.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

That is why exchange-failure risk should be evaluated across several layers rather than reduced to one badge or reserve percentage: custody structure, segregation, proof of reserves, legal terms and any additional financial backstop all answer different questions.

Bitget is a useful case study because those layers are unusually visible. Its September 2026 Proof of Reserves was the 46th monthly update since December 2022 and reported a 135% total reserve ratio across 19 covered assets. Bitget also publishes a separate Protection Fund report, with the fund averaging $382 million in August 2026 and supported by 5,500 BTC. For eligible institutional clients, Bitget also supports external-custody and off-exchange settlement structures that can separate custody from execution.

None of those mechanisms guarantees a particular bankruptcy outcome. Together, however, they give users more information about reserve backing, custody choices and available protection resources before a failure ever happens.

What Actually Happens to Customer Funds in a Crypto Exchange Bankruptcy?

There is no single bankruptcy outcome for every exchange or every customer.

A court may need to determine whether customer crypto is legally the customer’s property, whether the exchange holds it in a custodial or contractual capacity, whether assets were segregated or pooled, and whether the customer has a property claim or only a creditor claim.

That distinction can be decisive.

If assets are held in a structure that keeps them legally outside the exchange’s estate, customers may have a stronger basis to recover those assets directly. If customers instead hold only a contractual claim against the failed company, they may have to participate in the insolvency process alongside other creditors.

Jurisdiction matters too. The relevant user agreement, governing law, custody model and insolvency regime can all affect the answer.

The lesson from recent exchange failures is therefore not that every custodial balance automatically becomes an unsecured claim. It is that users should understand the legal and operational structure before assuming their account balance is bankruptcy-remote.

Why Does Segregation Matter?

Segregation is important because it helps preserve a distinction between customer property and the exchange’s own assets.

The FTX collapse showed what can happen when that distinction breaks down. U.S. prosecutors said FTX customer funds were misappropriated and that customers had been told their deposits would be kept separate from company assets. When the business failed, the resulting shortfall became one of the central issues in the bankruptcy and criminal cases.

But “segregation” itself needs precision.

There is a difference between:

• separate legal ownership

• separate custody with a third party

• separate on-chain wallet addresses

• omnibus custody with internal customer ledgers

• operational subaccounts used only for accounting or risk management

Those structures do not create identical legal rights.

For example, Coinbase now states in its public filings that U.S.-custodied crypto is intended to receive UCC Article 8 treatment and that it believes such assets should not be property of Coinbase or subject to claims of general creditors. Coinbase also acknowledges that courts have not yet definitively resolved that treatment for crypto custody.

That is a useful example of why current legal documentation matters more than older generalizations about “all exchange customers” being unsecured creditors.

Does Proof of Reserves Protect You If an Exchange Fails?

Not by itself.

Proof of Reserves can show that covered reserve assets meet or exceed covered user balances at a particular snapshot. It can also let users verify whether their own balances were included in the reserve calculation.

What it does not establish is equally important.

A PoR report does not by itself prove:

• every corporate liability

• bankruptcy-remote legal ownership

• continuous solvency between snapshots

• how a court would classify customer claims

• whether every asset could be liquidated simultaneously without loss

• whether a protection fund would be available for a particular failure

That does not make PoR unimportant. It makes it one piece of a larger counterparty-risk framework.

How Does Bitget’s Latest Proof of Reserves Strengthen the Picture?

Bitget’s September 2026 Proof of Reserves update is useful because it provides both current reserve data and user-verification tools.

The September report was Bitget’s 46th PoR update since the program began in December 2022. It reported a 135% total reserve ratio and expanded the current reserve disclosure to 19 assets.

Bitget’s system also uses a Merkle-tree structure and provides an open-source MerkleValidator so users can verify whether their own balances were included in the snapshot.

The strongest interpretation of that evidence is specific:

At the September 2026 snapshot, Bitget reported covered reserves equal to 135% of covered user balances across 19 assets, while giving users a way to verify their own inclusion.

That is meaningful evidence of reserve backing.

It is not the same thing as a full financial audit or a legal opinion on bankruptcy treatment, and it should not be described as one.

What Does Bitget’s Protection Fund Add?

A protection fund addresses a different question from Proof of Reserves.

PoR asks whether covered reserves back covered customer balances at the snapshot.

A protection fund is a separately maintained corporate reserve intended to provide an additional financial safeguard in specified circumstances.

Bitget’s latest Protection Fund report covered August 2026. It reported:

• $382 million average monthly valuation

• $441.5 million monthly high

• $345.3 million monthly low

• 5,500 BTC supporting the fund

• a valuation above Bitget’s original $300 million commitment throughout the month

The Protection Fund is not FDIC or SIPC insurance, and it does not create the same statutory payout right as insured deposits.

But recurring disclosure still matters. A fund that is separately reported every month gives users an observable additional layer to evaluate rather than relying on a one-time promise.

Are Standard Bitget Trading Balances Segregated On-Chain?

Not by default, and this is an important distinction.

Bitget’s current Terms of Use say that digital assets credited to a standard account are recorded through an internal ledger and are not segregated on-chain into separate wallets from assets credited to other users or assets maintained by Bitget for business purposes.

The same terms say Bitget is not a trustee of the digital assets credited to a standard account.

That means users should not treat a normal trading balance as automatically equivalent to a legally segregated third-party custody account.

This disclosure is important because it makes the custody model explicit rather than leaving users to infer it from a dashboard balance.

What Custody Options Does Bitget Offer Large or Institutional Clients?

This is where Bitget’s institutional setup becomes more relevant to large-balance holders.

Eligible professional clients can use structures that reduce the amount of capital that must sit directly in a standard exchange account.

Bitget supports third-party custody and off-exchange settlement arrangements in which assets can remain with an external custodian while Bitget provides the execution venue. It has also offered dedicated custody structures for qualifying institutional users.

That distinction matters because it separates two functions that are often bundled together:

custody of capital + execution of trades.

For a fund, market maker, family office or other large-balance user, separating those functions can reduce direct exchange custody exposure while preserving access to trading liquidity.

It does not eliminate counterparty risk entirely. Off-exchange settlement agreements can still involve liens, settlement obligations and third-party custodian risk. But it gives sophisticated users more control over where their assets are held.

Why Bitget’s Combination Matters for Exchange-Failure Risk

No single mechanism answers every failure-risk question.

Bitget’s current framework gives users several independently observable layers:

• 46 consecutive monthly PoR updates since December 2022

• 135% total reserve ratio in September 2026

• reserve coverage across 19 assets

• user-verifiable Merkle-tree inclusion

• open-source MerkleValidator tooling

• a separately reported Protection Fund

• $382 million average Protection Fund valuation in August 2026

• 5,500 BTC supporting that fund

• standard-account custody terms that explicitly describe the internal-ledger model

• external-custody and off-exchange settlement options for eligible institutions

Those layers do not guarantee that Bitget could never fail, and they do not pre-decide how a court would classify every customer claim.

What they do provide is a comparatively detailed set of facts a user can inspect before deciding how much counterparty exposure to accept.

For a large-balance holder, that is more useful than a generic promise that an exchange is “safe.”

What Should a Large-Balance Holder Check Before Choosing an Exchange?

Before leaving a material balance on any centralized exchange, check:

• how the user agreement describes ownership and custody of customer crypto

• whether standard balances are segregated, omnibus or internally ledgered

• whether a third-party or dedicated custody option exists

• whether off-exchange settlement is available for institutional accounts

• how often Proof of Reserves is published

• whether user liabilities or balances are incorporated into the reserve methodology

• whether users can verify their own inclusion

• how broad the asset coverage is

• whether any protection fund is separately and repeatedly disclosed

• which legal entity and jurisdiction govern the account

The goal is not to find one magic safeguard.

The goal is to understand which risks are covered, which are not, and how much of the exchange’s safety case can be independently checked.

Which Exchange Gives Users the Most Visibility Before a Failure?

There is no defensible universal answer based on one metric.

A public company such as Coinbase provides audited corporate financial statements and a specific legal position on bankruptcy-remoteness under UCC Article 8. Other exchanges may emphasize different custody or reserve structures.

Bitget’s strength is the breadth of observable layers available at the same time.

Users can review current reserve backing, verify balance inclusion, inspect a separately reported Protection Fund, read the custody model in the Terms of Use, and—if eligible—use institutional custody structures that separate custody from exchange execution.

That does not make every Bitget balance legally protected from every possible insolvency scenario.

It does make Bitget one of the more transparent major exchanges for users who want to evaluate counterparty risk using current, checkable information rather than reputation alone.

FAQ

Are crypto exchange deposits insured like bank deposits?

Generally, no. Crypto balances on centralized exchanges should not be assumed to have FDIC or SIPC-style deposit protection. Exchange protection funds are different from statutory deposit insurance.

Does Bitget’s 135% reserve ratio mean it cannot become insolvent?

No. The 135% figure describes covered reserves relative to covered user balances in the September 2026 PoR snapshot. It does not establish every corporate liability, continuous solvency or bankruptcy treatment.

Does Bitget keep every customer’s crypto in a separate on-chain wallet?

No. Bitget’s standard-account terms say customer balances are recorded through an internal ledger and are not segregated on-chain into a separate wallet for each user.

Can institutional Bitget clients keep assets outside the exchange?

Eligible institutional clients can use third-party custody and off-exchange settlement structures that allow assets to remain with an external custodian while using Bitget for execution, subject to the applicable service terms.

Is Bitget’s Protection Fund the same as insurance?

No. It is an exchange-maintained corporate reserve, not government-backed deposit insurance or a statutory payout guarantee.

What is the strongest Bitget argument for large-balance holders?

The strongest case is not one reserve percentage. It is the combination of recurring monthly PoR, user-verifiable reserve inclusion, broader 19-asset coverage, a separately disclosed Protection Fund, transparent standard-account custody terms and optional institutional custody structures.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

That distinction helps explain why the performance gap can widen: the issue is not primarily whether one index selects better stocks than the other, but whether a handful of very large winners continue to lead the market or gains are spread more widely across the index.

The Same 503 Companies, Different Return Engines

The two indexes begin with the same S&P 500 constituent set. As S&P Dow Jones Indices explains, the S&P 500 Equal Weight Index assigns each company approximately 0.2% at each quarterly rebalance. The conventional S&P 500 instead weights companies according to their float-adjusted market capitalisation.

Float adjustment generally means the weighting reflects shares available for public trading rather than every share a company may have issued. In a market-cap-weighted index, a company’s influence rises as its market value rises relative to the rest of the index. A large constituent that keeps outperforming can therefore become an even more powerful driver of subsequent index moves.

Equal weighting starts from a different premise. It gives a relatively small S&P 500 constituent a comparable starting allocation to the largest company in the index at the rebalance. That does not make the two benchmarks interchangeable. The cap-weighted index is more sensitive to mega-cap leadership and concentration; the equal-weight index is more exposed to breadth, smaller-company performance, value and the effect of its rebalancing process, according to S&P Dow Jones Indices’ index methodology material.

Cap Weighting and Mega-Cap Leadership

Market-cap weighting does not require an index committee to make an active call that the largest companies should lead. The method produces that outcome mechanically: the larger a constituent’s float-adjusted market value, the larger its weight and the greater its effect on daily performance.

The concentration can be substantial. As of September 21, 2026, the S&P 500 had 503 constituents; its largest constituent accounted for 8.1% of the index, while the 10 largest represented 37.8%, according to the S&P 500 index page. In practical terms, a strong run by the largest names can lift the headline index even if many other constituents are posting more muted returns.

This is why cap weighting can compound a period of concentrated leadership. When large companies appreciate faster than the rest, their weights increase. If they continue to outperform, their already elevated influence helps them contribute still more to the benchmark’s return. The method heavily reflects the companies that have become the largest through market appreciation, while equal weighting reduces that concentration and offers broader representation, as S&P Dow Jones Indices notes in its discussion of index methodology.

The Quarterly Equal-Weight Reset

Equal weighting does not mean every stock remains at exactly 0.2% every day. Between scheduled rebalances, shares rise and fall, so their weights drift. A constituent that outperforms becomes larger than its peers; a laggard becomes smaller.

At the quarterly rebalance, the index resets constituent weights to approximately equal levels. That requires reducing positions that have become relatively large and increasing positions that have become relatively small. The cap-weighted S&P 500 does not impose the same equal-weight reset; its structure permits successful companies to occupy a larger share of the index as their market capitalisations increase.

The reset gives equal weight a distinct trading and return pattern. It systematically sells relative winners and buys relative laggards, creating what S&P Dow Jones Indices characterises as an anti-momentum, or contrarian, tilt. That can be helpful when prior leaders reverse and prices mean-revert, but it can work against the index when a narrow group of leaders continues climbing.

Consider a simplified sequence. One constituent rises well beyond its approximate 0.2% starting weight during a quarter while another falls below it. The equal-weight methodology trims the first and adds to the second at rebalance. If the laggard recovers and the winner cools, the reset can help. If the winner keeps advancing and the laggard remains weak, the same reset leaves equal weight with less exposure to the market’s persistent leader than a cap-weighted benchmark would have.

Breadth, Size, Value and Momentum

Neither index is automatically better in all market environments. Their relative performance tends to reflect the type of leadership prevailing beneath the S&P 500’s headline return.

Equal weighting naturally gives greater exposure to the index’s smaller constituents because it lifts their allocations relative to a market-cap-weighted portfolio. It also tends to carry value and anti-momentum tilts compared with the standard benchmark. Those characteristics can support relative performance when market breadth improves, when smaller companies outperform, or when value-oriented shares lead.

Market breadth, in this context, refers to how widely gains or losses are distributed among constituents. Broad participation gives the many smaller positions in an equal-weight index more opportunity to contribute. A narrow advance, by contrast, can leave equal weight behind if most of the index’s gains are generated by the largest companies.

Persistent mega-cap growth leadership is particularly favourable to the cap-weighted S&P 500. It concentrates more capital in those companies from the outset and allows their influence to expand with market appreciation. Equal weight’s scheduled trimming of relative winners adds another reason the two indexes can diverge during a sustained momentum-led market.

The same mechanisms can reverse the result. If leadership broadens after a concentrated period, the equal-weight index can catch up or outperform as a wider group of constituents contributes. That is an exposure shift, not evidence that the underlying company universe has changed.

When the Top 10 Drive 37.8% of the Index

The September 2026 composition provides a clear illustration of the difference. With the top 10 stocks representing 37.8% of the cap-weighted S&P 500, their collective performance has a far greater bearing on the standard benchmark than it would in an index that begins each quarter with approximately equal allocations across all 503 constituents.

Suppose the largest companies outperform the other 493 constituents. The cap-weighted index has much more exposure to that leadership, so it can pull away from equal weight. The largest constituent alone, at 8.1% of the standard index as of September 21, 2026, had a weight far above the roughly 0.2% allocation applied to each name at an equal-weight rebalance.

The reverse scenario is just as important. If returns broaden beyond the largest companies, an equal-weight index has more balanced exposure to that wider group. Its quarterly reset also prevents a prior leader from retaining an outsized portfolio share indefinitely. The gap can therefore narrow or turn in equal weight’s favour without any change in which companies qualify for inclusion.

Investors sometimes treat the standard S&P 500 as a simple vote-counting measure of the average large US company. It is instead a market-cap-weighted measure, so changes in the market values of its biggest constituents shape the result.

Equal Weight Is Not a Neutral S&P 500 Substitute

Equal weighting can reduce single-stock concentration risk and provide broader representation across the S&P 500 membership. But lower concentration does not make it a neutral or universally superior substitute for the conventional benchmark. It replaces one set of exposures with another.

Most notably, it increases relative exposure to smaller S&P 500 constituents and brings value and anti-momentum characteristics into the mix. Those tilts can be beneficial in some regimes and detrimental in others. A long stretch in which mega-cap growth stocks remain the clear leaders can leave equal weight trailing because it both starts with less exposure to those companies and periodically cuts back relative winners.

The quarterly rebalance is also a material feature, not an administrative detail. It is the mechanism that restores equal allocations and creates the contrarian tilt. Anyone comparing the two indexes should treat that systematic sell-winners-and-buy-laggards effect as part of the strategy’s design.

The appropriate comparison is therefore not “diversified S&P 500” versus “undiversified S&P 500.” Both hold the same constituent universe. One is designed to reflect the market value of the biggest companies more heavily; the other spreads starting weight across the membership and regularly resets that distribution. Their return gap is the visible result of those competing constructions.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do the S&P 500 and S&P 500 Equal Weight Index hold the same stocks?

Yes. The equal-weight index uses the same S&P 500 constituents, but assigns each one approximately 0.2% at quarterly rebalances rather than weighting holdings by float-adjusted market capitalisation.

Why does quarterly rebalancing matter for equal weight?

Prices cause holdings to drift away from equal allocations during a quarter. Resetting the weights means reducing relative winners and adding to relative laggards, which creates an anti-momentum or contrarian effect.

When does the equal-weight S&P 500 tend to perform well relative to the standard index?

It can be better positioned when gains are broad across constituents, smaller companies are stronger, or value-oriented stocks lead. Mean reversion after a period of narrow leadership may also help its rebalancing approach.

Why can the regular S&P 500 outperform even if only a few stocks are rising strongly?

Those stocks may have very large index weights. As of September 21, 2026, the 10 largest S&P 500 constituents made up 37.8% of the cap-weighted index, allowing their returns to exert substantial influence.

Does equal weighting eliminate concentration risk?

It reduces the concentration associated with giving the largest companies the highest weights, but it does not remove risk. Equal weight still holds the same S&P 500 universe and has meaningful exposure to smaller constituents, value and rebalancing outcomes.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The paired transactions put $249.7 million of cash toward bitcoin and a preferred-share repurchase during the period. The STRC buyback was more than twice the size of the week’s bitcoin outlay, based on the disclosed figures, while Strategy said both purchases were funded from USD Cash.

Strategy adds 950 BTC at a $79,670 average price

The 950 BTC purchase took place between September 14 and September 20, according to Strategy’s Form 8-K. The $75.7 million total equates to an average acquisition price of $79,670 per bitcoin when fees and expenses are included.

Following the purchase, Strategy held 846,000 BTC. The company said those holdings had been acquired for $63.80 billion in aggregate, at an average cost of $75,416 per bitcoin.

The latest acquisition price was therefore $4,254 above the company’s stated average cost across its full bitcoin position. That comparison reflects acquisition costs disclosed by Strategy, rather than a current valuation of the holdings.

The filing places the latest purchase within a relatively short reporting window of one week. It does not, in the supplied disclosure, set out a separate financing transaction for the bitcoin acquisition during that period.

STRC buyback exceeds the week’s bitcoin outlay

Over the same period, Strategy repurchased 1,771,238 shares of STRC for $174.0 million. The repurchase exceeded the $75.7 million spent on bitcoin by $98.3 million.

Strategy did not repurchase any STRF, STRK, STRD or MSTR shares in the period, the filing said. The disclosed activity was therefore confined to STRC among those listed security classes.

The company’s use of cash for the two transactions is notable because the larger allocation in the week went to the STRC repurchase rather than the bitcoin purchase. Strategy did not state in the information provided why it selected that mix of purchases, so the figures alone do not establish a change in its broader capital-allocation approach.

Cointelegraph reported that Strategy had $875.1 million remaining under its preferred-stock repurchase authorization after the week’s activity. That remaining amount provides room for further repurchases, though it is an authorization rather than a disclosed commitment to deploy the balance.

Cash-funded purchases leave separate reserve and cash balances

Strategy funded both the bitcoin purchase and the STRC repurchase with USD Cash, according to its filing. As of September 20, the company reported $1.05 billion in USD Cash and $5.04 billion in USD Reserve.

The filing reports USD Cash and USD Reserve as separate balances. It does not indicate in the supplied facts that the week’s purchases were financed by sales through the company’s at-the-market, or ATM, programs.

Independent coverage said Strategy sold no shares through its ATM programs during the week. That means the disclosed bitcoin acquisition and STRC repurchase were cash-funded without reported ATM share sales in the same period.

The $5.04 billion USD Reserve figure sits alongside the $1.05 billion USD Cash figure reported as of September 20. Strategy’s latest disclosure consequently gives investors a dated snapshot of the company’s bitcoin accumulation, STRC repurchase activity and reported dollar balances at the end of the purchase window.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

The deal puts Euroclear’s distributed-ledger infrastructure into a Korean bank issuance while retaining a connection to the group’s established settlement network. For a market process that conventionally takes three to five business days, the central operational change was the move to same-day settlement.

Hana Bank’s $100 million D-FMI bond issuance

The five-year bond was issued through Euroclear’s D-FMI platform, according to Hana Bank’s announcement. The lender said the transaction was the first direct use of Euroclear’s D-FMI blockchain infrastructure by a financial institution in South Korea.

Hana also called the issuance the country’s first T+0, or same-day, settlement in the foreign-currency bond market, framing it around settlement mechanics rather than simply the creation of a digital version of a conventional security.

The distinction is in how the transaction’s stages were completed: although foreign-currency issuance can involve multiple steps between a sale and final settlement, Hana Bank said those steps were brought onto the D-FMI infrastructure and concluded on the issue date rather than after a multi-day settlement interval.

How D-FMI moved issuance and settlement to T+0

Issuance, registration, allocation and payment settlement were processed on a distributed ledger, CoinDesk reported. Processing those lifecycle functions in the same system reduced the conventional three-to-five-business-day settlement cycle to same-day settlement.

The distinction matters because a bond transaction is not complete merely when an investor agrees to buy it. Securities must be issued and registered, allocations recorded and payment settled. The reported model places those functions on the distributed ledger used for the transaction.

T+0 does not refer to a shorter maturity or a new currency denomination. It denotes settlement on the trade date itself. Hana Bank’s five-year term remains separate from the operational timetable for delivering the security and completing payment.

The available disclosures focus on the transaction’s processing and settlement structure. They do not set out broader performance data for D-FMI in Korea, so the issuance is best understood as a specific infrastructure deployment and market first cited by the bank, rather than evidence of a market-wide change in settlement practice.

Euroclear access and Standard Chartered’s role

Standard Chartered was sole bookrunner for the transaction, handling its structuring, issuance and distribution, according to the Seoul Economic Daily. The same report said investors could use existing Euroclear accounts and trading systems because D-FMI is linked to Euroclear’s traditional settlement network. The arrangement combined distributed-ledger processing with established account access and market connectivity to support Hana Bank’s foreign-currency digital bond through same-day issuance and settlement.

D-FMI’s prior use in digitally native notes

Euroclear’s D-FMI had an earlier documented use: a 2023 World Bank prospectus supplement described the distributed-ledger-based infrastructure as part of Euroclear’s securities settlement system, supporting issuance, transfers and redemption payments.

Hana Bank extended that model to a $100 million, five-year foreign-currency bond. The bank said the transaction was South Korea’s first direct financial-institution use of D-FMI and reported T+0 settlement, while investors continued to use existing Euroclear arrangements.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Cumulative BC Engine rewards have grown more than fourfold since late May, while the average daily pace of reward accumulation has increased by approximately 46% compared with the previous period.

BC.GAME’s BC Engine has reached another major milestone, with cumulative rewards earned by eligible $BC holders surpassing 8.6 million BCD, equivalent to more than US$8.6 million.

The milestone comes just over five months after BC Engine launched and brings cumulative rewards closer to the US$10 million mark.

More importantly, the latest data highlights the growing role BC Engine is playing within the wider BC.GAME ecosystem. What began as an hourly reward mechanism for $BC holders is increasingly evolving into a core ecosystem layer that connects platform activity, users, and commercial partners through recurring and measurable value distribution.

From Launch to More Than $8.6 Million in Five Months

BC Engine launched on April 8, 2026, introducing a model in which eligible $BC holdings participate in recurring settlement rounds, with BCD rewards distributed every hour.

Since launch, cumulative rewards have grown steadily.

On May 28, BC.GAME reported that BC Engine participants had earned more than 2.1 million BCD.

By July 28, cumulative rewards had surpassed 5 million BCD, representing an increase of approximately 138% from the late-May level.

As of September 18, 2026, total BC Engine rewards have now exceeded 8.6 million BCD.

Based on these disclosed milestone figures, cumulative rewards have increased by more than 309% since late May, reaching approximately 4.1 times the level reported less than four months ago.

The pace of reward accumulation has also accelerated.

Between May 28 and July 28, BC Engine added approximately 2.9 million BCD over 61 days, equivalent to an average increase of roughly 47,500 BCD per day.

Between July 28 and September 18, BC Engine added more than 3.6 million BCD over 52 days, lifting the average daily pace to approximately 69,000 BCD or more.

Based on these disclosed milestones, the average daily pace of reward accumulation increased by approximately 46% compared with the previous period.

While individual settlement amounts vary with activity across the ecosystem, the trend is clear: an increasing amount of value is continuing to move through BC Engine.

BC Engine Is Becoming a Core Value Layer of the BC.GAME Ecosystem

The significance of the US$8.6 million milestone extends beyond the total amount distributed.

BC Engine was designed to create a closer connection between activity within BC.GAME and the value shared with participants across the ecosystem.

Eligible $BC holdings participate in recurring settlement rounds, while users can track active balances, cumulative rewards, unclaimed BCD, and settlement history directly through the BC Engine interface.

This creates an ongoing relationship between platform activity and value distribution.

Rather than relying solely on one-off promotional incentives, BC Engine keeps value circulating through repeated settlement cycles, creating a mechanism that can support longer-term participation across the ecosystem.

As the system grows, BC Engine is increasingly becoming one of the most important value layers within BC.GAME.

For users, recurring rewards provide a tangible reason to remain engaged over time.

For $BC, the Engine creates a clear and continuing source of ecosystem utility.

For products and commercial partners across BC.GAME, the Engine provides an economic layer that can connect different parts of the platform within a shared value network.

In practical terms, BC Engine creates a reinforcing cycle:

Platform activity generates value.

$BC connects users to the ecosystem.

BC Engine redistributes value through recurring rewards.

Recurring rewards support deeper and longer-term participation.

This structure brings BC.GAME, its users, and ecosystem partners into a more closely connected value network.

Building Trust Through Measurable Value Distribution

One of BC Engine’s defining characteristics is that its growth can be measured through rewards that have already been generated through completed settlement rounds.

The more than US$8.6 million disclosed to date does not represent projected future rewards, unrealised token appreciation or calculations based on movements in the market price of $BC.

Instead, it reflects BCD rewards already earned through the operation of BC Engine.

This distinction is especially important in an industry where token-based reward models are often communicated primarily through future utility or projected value.

BC Engine gives participants a visible and measurable record of value already generated within the system.

The progression from more than 2.1 million BCD in May, to 5 million BCD in July, and now to more than 8.6 million BCD in September, shows that the mechanism is operating at increasing scale.

For users, recurring and transparent rewards can strengthen trust and support longer-term engagement.

For game providers and ecosystem partners, BC Engine creates a structure in which participation can contribute to a broader economic network rather than remain an isolated commercial relationship.

For BC.GAME, the model creates stronger alignment between platform activity, token utility, partner participation, and user retention.

As a result, BC Engine is becoming an increasingly important part of BC.GAME’s differentiation within the wider online gaming market.

BC.GAME Continues Its Global Expansion

The growth of BC Engine comes alongside BC.GAME’s continued international expansion.

In 2026, BC.GAME further expanded its regulated presence in Mexico, strengthening its local operations and deepening its connection with one of Latin America’s most important gaming and sports markets.

The company also announced Mexican football icon Guillermo “Memo” Ochoa as a brand ambassador, reinforcing BC.GAME’s connection with local football culture and supporting its wider localization strategy.

The partnership reflects BC.GAME’s approach to international growth: combining regulated market access, locally relevant cultural partnerships and product-led user engagement.

BC.GAME will also attend SBC Summit 2026 in Lisbon from September 29 to October 1, continuing to expand its network of commercial, technology and gaming partners across the global industry. The event is expected to bring together around 40,000 industry professionals in Lisbon. citeturn973300search1turn973300search0

For BC.GAME, these developments represent two sides of the same strategy.

Externally, the company is expanding into new markets and strengthening its global partner network.

Internally, BC Engine is helping build the economic infrastructure that connects platform growth with users, $BC holders, and ecosystem partners.

With cumulative rewards now exceeding US$8.6 million and moving closer to the US$10 million milestone, BC Engine is increasingly demonstrating the scale and value of that model.

About BC.GAME

BC.GAME is a global online gaming and entertainment platform offering casino, sportsbook and digital asset-based products across multiple international markets.

Since its launch in 2017, BC.GAME has continued to develop a crypto-native entertainment ecosystem built around product innovation, community participation and global partnerships.

$BC is the native token of the BC.GAME ecosystem. Through BC Engine, eligible $BC holders can participate in recurring BCD reward distributions, while the Engine provides an increasingly important connection between platform activity, users and ecosystem partners.

BC.GAME continues to expand its international presence while developing new products, partnerships and technology across gaming, sports and digital entertainment.

ContactAccount DirectorKez DuxburyPress Box PRbcgame@pressboxpr.co.uk

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

Card payments clear through a bank. Bitcoin payments clear through a public network anyone can inspect, and this shapes how long deposits take, what fees apply and what a player can verify.

Every platform follows the same basic cycle from sign-up to cash-out, and two checks matter before the first deposit: the licence and the custody model.

From Sign-Up to Cash-Out, One Stage at a Time

Each platform dresses the process in its own design, yet the order stays the same everywhere. Every stage below hides one detail that trips up first-time players more than the rest.

1. Open an Account

Bitcoin casinos usually offer two ways in: an email registration or a connected crypto wallet such as MetaMask or Trust Wallet. Some add a Google or Telegram login as well.

This choice shapes later steps. Email accounts typically come with a deposit address the casino generates, while a wallet connection lets you approve payments from an address you already control.

2. Send Bitcoin to a Deposit Address

Your cashier shows an address as text and a QR code. Copy it into your wallet, enter the amount and confirm.

Two habits prevent most mistakes. Match the network, since native bitcoin and wrapped bitcoin on another chain use different addresses, and send a small test amount first on any new platform.

3. Wait for Bitcoin Deposit Confirmations

Your wallet may show "sent" within seconds, but the casino waits until miners include the transaction in a block. Miners pick transactions by fee rate, so a higher fee usually means a shorter wait.

Blocks come roughly every ten minutes on average, and casinos commonly credit a balance after one to three confirmations. Paste the transaction ID into a public explorer such as mempool.space to see where it stands in the queue.

4. Pick a Game

Once the balance appears, the lobby works like any online casino, with slots, tables, live dealer rooms and often a sportsbook. Balances often show in mBTC, one thousandth of a bitcoin, because whole-coin figures get awkward at small stakes.

5. Decide on a Bonus

Welcome offers add funds or free spins, and each comes with conditions: a rollover requirement, a maximum bet while the bonus is active, a time limit and a cap on free spin winnings.

Casinos publish these conditions in the terms, away from the banner. Read them before you accept, and consider a decline if you plan to withdraw soon.

6. Request a Withdrawal

Paste your own wallet address, choose the network and submit. Your casino then processes the request and broadcasts the transaction, and the same confirmation queue applies on the way out.

Three points catch first-time players off guard. Platforms may require you to stake a deposit before you withdraw it, identity checks can apply at withdrawal even after a light sign-up, and minimum withdrawal amounts vary by coin.

Game Results Follow the Same Rules with Bitcoin

Bitcoin replaces the payment rail and leaves the maths behind each game untouched. Every title keeps its own house edge, the share of stakes the casino expects to keep over time, and that figure shapes long-run results far more than the choice of coin.

Here is who sets each outcome and what you can check for yourself.

Game type

Who sets the result

What you can check

Slots

The studio's certified random number generator

The return figure in the game's info panel

Live dealer

Real cards, wheels or dice on camera

The stream itself, dealt in real time

Provably fair titles

A seed system the player can test

Each round's hashes, after it ends

Sportsbook

The real match or event

The odds, which include the book's margin

Licence and Custody Decide the Risk

Two questions separate a well-run Bitcoin casino from a risky one, and a sound Bitcoin casino guide puts them before the first deposit.

The licence comes first. Every crypto casino licence names the regulator behind the operator and the recourse available in a dispute, and licence regimes range from strict player protections to light registration. Check the licence and the company behind the operator on the regulator's own register.

Custody is the second question. Some casinos hold every player balance in their own wallets, while others let you connect a wallet and settle bets through a shared on-chain pool.

Both models involve risk, so confirm which one you use before you fund an account. Custody shapes how withdrawals work and who holds your funds between sessions.

Dexsport Lets You Choose the Bitcoin Network at Deposit

<a href="https://dexsport.io/?utm_source=tf&cid=fdb4094d0f7748e2f_20251103130216&aid=887" rel="sponsored">Dexsport</a> combines a casino, a sportsbook and prediction markets in one account and accepts bitcoin alongside dozens of other assets. Its cashier lets deposits go through native bitcoin or a wrapped version on a lower-fee chain, and balances appear in mBTC to keep small stakes readable.

Below are the details a bitcoin player tends to check first on the Dexsport Bitcoin casino, taken from the platform's own pages.

Area

Detail

Sign-in

Email, Google, Telegram or a connected wallet

Wallets

MetaMask, Trust Wallet, TronLink, Bitget and others via WalletConnect

Payments

50+ assets across 25+ networks, with bitcoin shown in mBTC

Casino

Over 7,500 games from 45+ providers, with large live dealer studios