Bitcoin Trades Around $67,000 as Analysts Warn of Potential Bull Trap – On-Chain Data Signals Ongoing Bear Market Phase

Key Takeaways

Willy Woo Flags Potential Bull Trap Based on Liquidity Trends

On-chain analyst Willy Woo has warned that Bitcoin could experience a short-term rally that may mislead investors before the broader downward trend resumes. In a recent post on X, Woo described the current setup as a potential bull trap, referring to a temporary breakout that creates the impression of a sustained uptrend.

According to Woo, such a move could extend toward the end of April. His analysis is not based on price targets but on liquidity conditions. He stated that if capital returns in force and is driven by long-term investors, he would reassess his outlook. For now, he sees the current structure as vulnerable to further downside.

For market participants, a bull trap can have practical implications. If you are evaluating entry points or managing risk exposure, a short-lived rally followed by renewed selling pressure may increase volatility in the near term.

Bitcoin Remains in Middle Phase of Bear Market, Says Woo

From a longer-term liquidity perspective, Woo said Bitcoin is solidly in the middle of its bear market. He noted that after rapid downward movements, Bitcoin typically trades sideways and stages a rally that tests resistance levels before determining the next direction.

Bitcoin has declined approximately 46.82% since reaching its October all-time high of $126,000. At the time of publication, the asset was trading at $67,012, according to CoinMarketCap data cited in the report. Over the past 30 days, Bitcoin has gained 3.74%.

Despite this recent monthly increase, Woo stated that the current level does not represent a confirmed market bottom. He indicated that further downside remains possible before a true cycle low forms.

Whale Selling and Retail Buying Highlight Diverging Flows

Market behavior among different investor groups also reflects mixed signals. Crypto sentiment platform Santiment reported that large holders, often referred to as whales, have been selling aggressively while retail investors have been buying below the $70,000 level.

Santiment stated that when retail participants buy while whales sell, it typically signals that a correction is not yet over. This divergence suggests that although smaller investors are stepping in at current price levels, larger holders may be reducing exposure.

Woo, however, also noted that investor flows have been in consistent recovery since the middle of February. He pointed out that Bitcoin failed to maintain levels in the mid-70,000 range after rising to $74,000 on Wednesday, but underlying flows have shown improvement during recent weeks.

For those monitoring liquidity and participation trends, this combination of recovering flows and distribution by larger holders presents a complex market structure.

Other Analysts and Data Providers Echo Bear Market View

Woo is not alone in characterizing the current environment as a bear market. Crypto analyst Benjamin Cowen recently described 2026 as a bear market year for Bitcoin and said new all-time highs are unlikely within that timeframe.

On-chain analytics firm CryptoQuant also stated that Bitcoin remains in a bear market despite the recent rally. This assessment aligns with Woo’s broader view that the market has not yet reached a definitive bottom.

In addition, the Crypto Fear and Greed Index, a widely used gauge of investor sentiment, has returned to extreme fear levels. The index had briefly recovered earlier in the week but subsequently fell back, indicating persistent caution among market participants.

For traders and long-term holders, sentiment indicators such as the Fear and Greed Index can influence short-term positioning and volatility, particularly when combined with large price swings.

Market Context for Crypto Users and Platform Participants

Bitcoin’s current position in what several analysts describe as a bear market has broader implications across the digital asset ecosystem. Price volatility and liquidity conditions affect trading volumes, collateral values, and risk management strategies across exchanges and crypto-based platforms.

For users who rely on Bitcoin for payments, including within crypto betting or iGaming environments, price movements can influence deposit values and bankroll management. A market characterized by potential short-term rallies followed by renewed declines may lead to rapid changes in asset value over a limited timeframe.

At the same time, diverging behavior between retail investors and large holders adds another layer of uncertainty. If whale selling continues while smaller investors accumulate, price stability may remain limited in the near term.

Our Assessment

Based on statements from Willy Woo, CryptoQuant, Benjamin Cowen, and data referenced from Santiment and the Crypto Fear and Greed Index, Bitcoin is currently described by multiple analysts as being in the middle phase of a bear market. Although short-term rallies are possible, including what Woo characterizes as a potential bull trap, there is no confirmation that a cycle bottom has formed. Price levels remain significantly below the October all-time high, and sentiment indicators reflect elevated caution among investors.

US Court Dismisses Terrorism Lawsuit Against Binance – Judge Finds No Plausible Link to Specific Attacks

Key Takeaways

US District Court Dismisses Claims Under Anti-Terrorism Laws

A judge at the US District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed a lawsuit that accused Binance, its former CEO Changpeng Zhao, and Binance.US operator BAM Trading Services of assisting terrorist organizations through cryptocurrency transactions.

The case was brought by hundreds of victims and relatives of victims of terrorist attacks. According to the court filing, the plaintiffs represented 535 individuals connected to 64 attacks that occurred between 2016 and 2024. The attacks were attributed to groups including Hezbollah, Hamas, ISIS, al-Qaeda and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

The plaintiffs sought damages under the US Anti-Terrorism Act and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. These laws allow victims to pursue claims against entities alleged to have provided assistance to terrorist acts.

Judge Jeannette A. Vargas dismissed the case at the pleading stage. In her ruling, she found that the complaint did not sufficiently establish a connection between Binance’s operations and the specific attacks that caused the plaintiffs’ injuries. While the filing described alleged compliance failures and illicit activity on the platform, the court concluded that it did not plausibly link the exchange’s conduct to the terrorist incidents in question.

The judge stated that any amended complaint must be filed within 60 days.

Plaintiffs Alleged Exchange Facilitated Fund Transfers

The lawsuit argued that attackers or affiliated organizations benefited from cryptocurrency transactions conducted through Binance. According to the complaint, terrorist groups were able to move funds using the exchange’s infrastructure.

However, the court determined that the allegations, as presented, did not meet the legal threshold required to proceed. The decision effectively ends the case in its current form, unless the plaintiffs submit a revised complaint within the timeframe set by the court.

For users of centralized exchanges, the ruling highlights the legal standards required to hold platforms liable under US anti-terrorism legislation. Courts require a direct and plausible link between an exchange’s conduct and specific acts of terrorism, rather than general allegations of illicit activity on a platform.

Changpeng Zhao Responds to Court Decision

Following the dismissal, Changpeng Zhao commented publicly on the case. In a post on X, he stated that centralized crypto exchanges have “zero motive” to assist terrorist organizations.

Zhao argued that the economic structure of crypto trading makes such activity commercially illogical for exchanges. He wrote that terrorist actors are unlikely to generate meaningful trading revenue and would typically deposit funds only briefly before withdrawing them.

His comments addressed the broader question of incentives for centralized exchanges, which generate revenue primarily from trading activity. Zhao’s statement did not introduce new evidence but framed the issue in terms of business incentives.

Ongoing Scrutiny Over Sanctions Compliance

The court ruling comes as Binance faces additional scrutiny in the United States related to transactions involving sanctioned entities.

A group of 11 US senators recently raised allegations that the exchange facilitated transactions linked to Iranian entities. According to media reports referenced in the inquiry, Binance allegedly processed more than $1 billion in cryptocurrency transactions connected to Iranian entities Hexa Whale and Blessed Trust. The reports also claimed that employees who raised concerns internally were dismissed.

In a letter sent to Senators Richard Blumenthal and Ron Johnson, Binance rejected the allegations. The company stated that the February inquiry relied on reports that were “demonstrably false” and lacked credible evidence.

These developments illustrate the regulatory and political scrutiny that large crypto exchanges continue to face in the United States, particularly in relation to anti-terrorism financing rules and sanctions enforcement.

Implications for Crypto Platforms and Users

The dismissal of the lawsuit clarifies that, in this instance, the court did not find sufficient grounds to hold Binance liable under US anti-terrorism statutes based on the claims presented.

For crypto users, including those who use digital assets for trading or payments on online platforms, the case underscores the legal complexity surrounding centralized exchanges. Allegations of illicit finance can lead to significant legal proceedings, even when a case does not proceed beyond the initial stage.

For exchanges operating internationally, the ruling demonstrates the importance of compliance frameworks and the evidentiary standards required in US federal courts when claims relate to terrorist financing.

Our Assessment

The US District Court’s decision dismisses the terrorism-related claims against Binance, Changpeng Zhao and Binance.US at the pleading stage due to insufficient linkage between the platform’s operations and specific attacks. Plaintiffs have 60 days to amend their complaint. At the same time, Binance continues to face separate scrutiny from US lawmakers regarding alleged transactions involving sanctioned Iranian entities, which the company denies. Together, these developments reflect ongoing legal and regulatory examination of large centralized crypto exchanges in the United States.

USDC Surpasses Tether in Monthly Transfer Volume – Stablecoin Activity Reaches $1.8 Trillion Record

Key Takeaways

Stablecoin Transfer Volume Hits All Time High in February

Stablecoin transaction activity reached a new monthly record in February, with total transfer volume climbing to $1.8 trillion, according to data from Allium. The figure represents the highest monthly level recorded for stablecoins, which are cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a stable value, typically pegged to fiat currencies such as the US dollar.

Stablecoins operate across multiple blockchains and are widely used for trading, settlement and transferring value within the digital asset ecosystem. The February data highlights a sharp increase in onchain movement of these dollar-pegged tokens.

The record volume reflects aggregate transfers across major stablecoins, with two issuers accounting for the majority of activity: Circle’s USDC and Tether’s USDt.

USDC Accounts for 70 Percent of Monthly Stablecoin Volume

USDC recorded $1.26 trillion in transfer volume in February, representing 70 percent of all stablecoin transactions during the month. This marks a new milestone for the second largest stablecoin by market capitalization since its launch in September 2018.

By comparison, Tether’s USDt registered $514 billion in transfer volume over the same period. Despite USDt maintaining a significantly larger market capitalization, USDC has overtaken it in terms of transactional activity.

USDC currently has a market capitalization of $77.4 billion, while USDt stands at $184 billion. The divergence between market capitalization and transfer volume indicates that USDC is being moved onchain more frequently relative to its size.

According to Simon Dedic, founder at Moonrock Capital, USDC has consistently surpassed USDt in transfer volume over the past few months. The February data continues that trend and underscores a shift in transactional dominance, even though USDt remains the larger asset by total supply.

USDC Supply Expands as New Tokens Are Minted

Recent issuance data points to accelerated growth in USDC supply. Market intelligence firm Arkham reported that more than $3 billion in new USDC was minted in the first week of March alone. During the same period, USDt supply remained relatively unchanged.

One reported mint included $250 million in USDC issued on the Solana blockchain. The continued expansion of circulating supply corresponds with the elevated transfer activity recorded in February.

Circle Internet Group, the issuer of USDC, previously reported strong earnings for the fourth quarter of 2025. The company attributed its performance to rapid growth in USDC-related business and expanding payments operations. While detailed financial figures were not disclosed in the available data, the earnings report aligns with the observed increase in usage and supply.

Rising Stablecoin Supply Signals Increased Market Liquidity

Beyond individual token performance, aggregate stablecoin data indicates a broader rise in market liquidity. The Stablecoin Supply Ratio, or SSR, which measures the ratio between Bitcoin’s market capitalization and the total stablecoin market capitalization, has been steadily recovering after declining in February, according to CryptoQuant analyst Sunny Mom.

A lower SSR generally reflects higher relative stablecoin supply compared to Bitcoin’s market value, which can indicate greater available capital for crypto purchases. The recent recovery in the ratio coincided with increased stablecoin inflows to exchanges.

On March 5, approximately $5.14 billion in stablecoins were transferred to exchanges, compared with $1.14 billion on March 1. By Friday of the same week, total stablecoin supply held on exchanges had risen to $66.5 billion, a three week high.

The increase in exchange balances occurred alongside Bitcoin’s latest move toward $74,000. Historically, higher stablecoin balances on exchanges have provided additional buying power for cryptocurrencies, as these tokens are frequently used as base trading pairs.

Implications for Crypto Markets and Platform Users

For market participants, including users of crypto trading and betting platforms that rely on stablecoin liquidity, the shift in transfer volume highlights changes in how capital moves across the ecosystem. USDC’s higher transaction share suggests that it is currently playing a central role in onchain settlement and exchange activity.

The rise in total stablecoin volume and exchange balances also reflects renewed capital movement within the crypto market. Stablecoins often serve as an entry point for trading, hedging and transferring funds between platforms. Higher transactional activity can therefore influence liquidity conditions across exchanges and services that accept crypto payments.

At the same time, the data shows that market capitalization alone does not determine transactional dominance. Although USDt remains the largest stablecoin by supply, USDC led in actual transfer volume during the latest reporting period.

Our Assessment

February marked a record month for stablecoin activity, with $1.8 trillion in total transfer volume. USDC accounted for the majority of that activity, surpassing USDt despite having a smaller market capitalization. At the same time, new USDC issuance and rising stablecoin balances on exchanges coincided with Bitcoin’s move toward $74,000. The data indicates increased onchain activity and higher stablecoin liquidity within the crypto market.

Bitcoin Holdings Turn Profitable After Three Years – Historical Data Highlights Impact of Long-Term Strategy

Key Takeaways

Historical Cycle Data Shows Sharp Contrast Between Two and Three-Year Holding Periods

Bitcoin’s price history since 2017 shows a consistent pattern in how entry timing and holding duration affect returns. Investors who purchased Bitcoin near major cycle peaks experienced significant drawdowns within the following two years. However, extending the holding period to three years materially changed the outcome in most cases.

During the 2017 market peak, investors who bought at high levels recorded a 48.6 percent loss after two years, as the 2018 bear market unfolded. When the same position was held for three years, the loss converted into a 108.7 percent gain.

A comparable development occurred in the next cycle. Buyers who entered near the 2021 high saw a 43.5 percent loss after two years. By the third year, that position showed a 14.5 percent profit.

These figures underline that two-year holding periods historically exposed investors to high volatility, especially when purchases were made near market tops. In contrast, extending exposure to three years has, in past cycles, shifted most positions into positive territory.

For you as a market participant, this distinction between shorter and longer time frames is critical. Historical data suggests that Bitcoin’s volatility has had a different impact depending on how long positions were maintained.

Bear-Market Entries Produced the Strongest Multi-Year Gains

The data also shows that buying near bear-market lows resulted in substantially higher returns over similar holding periods.

Investors who entered close to the 2019 bottom recorded returns of 871 percent after two years and 1,028 percent after three years. A similar pattern followed the 2022 cycle low. Positions initiated near that period generated roughly 465 percent returns after two years and about 429 percent after three years.

In both cases, bottom entries delivered significantly stronger percentage gains than positions opened near cycle highs. While three-year holding periods improved outcomes for high-level entries, the largest expansions occurred when purchases were made during deep market drawdowns.

Taken together, the cycle comparisons indicate two recurring characteristics: short-term exposure around peaks has historically carried higher downside risk, and accumulation during depressed price phases has been associated with stronger multi-year growth.

Onchain Realized Price Metrics Identify Historical Accumulation Zones

Onchain valuation metrics provide additional context for where long-term accumulation has historically occurred. One such metric is Bitcoin’s realized price, which reflects the average acquisition price of coins based on their last onchain movement.

Deeper market drawdowns have frequently extended toward what is known as the shifted realized price. This forward-adjusted metric smooths price data and has highlighted stronger value zones over time.

Since 2015, realized price bands have repeatedly coincided with cycle lows. Recoveries from these zones have historically marked the beginning of multi-year rallies. At present, Bitcoin’s realized price is near 55,000 US dollars, while the shifted realized price stands around 42,000 US dollars.

Historically, investors who accumulated when Bitcoin traded around or below these valuation bands were positioned near bear-market lows. These entry points align with the earlier data showing that bottom buyers captured the most substantial returns over two to three years.

For users evaluating long-term exposure to Bitcoin, realized price metrics have served as reference points for identifying past accumulation phases.

Probability of Loss Declines Sharply Over Longer Time Horizons

Research cited by Bitwise further quantifies how holding duration has influenced risk. A review of Bitcoin data from July 2010 through February 2026 found that the probability of loss drops to 0.7 percent when Bitcoin is held for three years. Over a five-year period, that risk falls to 0.2 percent. Across ten-year holding periods, the data shows zero instances of loss.

Shorter time frames show materially higher uncertainty. Day traders have historically faced a 47.1 percent chance of losses. Even over one-year holding periods, the probability of being underwater stands at 24.3 percent.

Separate research cited by Bitwise chief information officer Matt Hougan indicates that adding Bitcoin to a traditional 60 40 portfolio increased cumulative and risk-adjusted returns in every three-year period studied. The win rate across two-year periods was 93 percent, with an allocation of roughly 5 percent producing the strongest balance between return and risk in the study.

These findings do not eliminate volatility, but they quantify how risk exposure has shifted across different time frames in past data.

Implications for Crypto Users Monitoring Market Cycles

Bitcoin’s double-digit drawdowns have often deterred new buyers, particularly those entering during late-stage rallies. The historical record since 2017 shows that such entries frequently led to temporary losses over two-year windows.

However, the same data demonstrates that extending the investment horizon to at least three years has, in prior cycles, significantly reduced the probability of loss and increased the likelihood of positive returns. Bottom entries, particularly those near realized price bands, have historically produced the strongest gains.

For users who interact with crypto markets through trading, long-term holding, or as part of broader portfolio strategies, these time-based differences are central to understanding past performance patterns.

Our Assessment

The data presented shows a consistent historical pattern: two-year holding periods exposed Bitcoin investors to substantial drawdowns when buying near market highs, while three-year or longer horizons significantly reduced the probability of loss. Entries near bear-market lows generated the strongest multi-year returns, often aligning with realized price valuation bands. Statistical reviews from 2010 to 2026 indicate that the likelihood of loss declines sharply as holding periods extend, with the lowest historical risk observed over five to ten years.

Pakistan Passes Virtual Assets Act 2026 – New Law Formalizes Crypto Oversight and Licensing Framework

Key Takeaways

Parliament Approves Virtual Assets Act 2026

Pakistan’s parliament has passed the Virtual Assets Act, 2026, creating a formal legal framework for the country’s digital asset sector. The bill was approved by both the Senate and the National Assembly and now requires the signature of President Asif Ali Zardari to enter into force.

The legislation legally formalizes oversight of Pakistan’s crypto industry and confirms the Pakistan Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority, or PVARA, as the central regulatory body for digital assets. PVARA had already been established in July 2025. With the new act, its role and powers are now anchored in law.

For crypto users and companies operating in or evaluating the Pakistani market, the passage of the act signals a transition from policy announcements to a structured regulatory regime backed by legislation.

PVARA Granted Licensing and Enforcement Powers

Under the new framework, PVARA is authorized to enforce licensing requirements and exercise oversight over digital asset service providers. This includes the power to regulate entities operating within Pakistan’s crypto ecosystem.

The authority is also tasked with setting and enforcing anti money laundering rules and ensuring compliance with international sanctions obligations. According to PVARA Chairman Bilal Bin Saqib, the regulator has already issued no objection certificates and is developing banking rails in coordination with the State Bank of Pakistan.

Bin Saqib stated that the country is moving toward a comprehensive licensing framework aligned with global anti money laundering and financial integrity standards. This indicates that regulatory supervision will extend beyond registration to ongoing compliance obligations.

For exchanges, custodians, and other service providers, licensing and compliance requirements are expected to become central operational conditions once the law takes effect.

Shift From Previous Resistance to Formal Integration

The passage of the Virtual Assets Act follows a broader policy shift that began in November 2024. At that time, the government moved to regulate cryptocurrencies as legal tender, reversing earlier resistance from regulators who had stated that crypto would not be legalized or integrated into the financial system.

Since that reversal, Pakistan has taken additional steps that signal institutional engagement with digital assets. These include the announcement of a Bitcoin strategic reserve and the allocation of 2,000 megawatts of electricity for Bitcoin mining and AI data centers.

At the Bitcoin MENA conference in December 2025, Bin Saqib described digital assets as a new financial rail for the global south and referred to blockchain technology as critical infrastructure. These remarks align with the government’s decision to formalize oversight through legislation.

Pakistan also ranks near the top of the 2025 Global Crypto Adoption Index published by Chainalysis, reflecting high levels of crypto usage relative to other countries.

International Cooperation and Stablecoin Exploration

In January, Pakistan signed a memorandum of understanding with SC Financial Technologies, an affiliate of World Liberty Financial. The decentralized finance platform was founded by the sons of US President Donald Trump.

The collaboration aims to explore the use of the USD1 stablecoin for digital payments, including cross border transactions and remittances. While the memorandum does not in itself create binding regulation, it reflects Pakistan’s interest in integrating stablecoin based payment solutions into its financial ecosystem.

Such initiatives are taking place alongside the development of domestic regulatory structures under PVARA. For users and service providers, this combination of legislative action and international cooperation indicates that digital assets are being addressed at both policy and operational levels.

Outlook for Pakistan’s Position in the Digital Asset Sector

Changpeng Zhao, co founder of Binance, has stated that Pakistan could emerge as a global hub for digital assets by 2030 if it continues its current pace of development and regulatory progress. While this statement does not constitute official policy, it reflects external attention to Pakistan’s regulatory developments.

With the Virtual Assets Act now passed by parliament, the immediate next step is presidential approval. Once signed, the law will provide the formal legal basis for licensing, compliance monitoring, and enforcement actions by PVARA.

For international crypto businesses, payment providers, and platforms assessing market entry, the existence of a defined regulator with statutory authority reduces uncertainty around oversight structures. For users, the introduction of licensing and anti money laundering standards may affect how platforms operate, particularly in relation to onboarding, verification, and transaction monitoring.

Our Assessment

The passage of the Virtual Assets Act, 2026 establishes a formal legal framework for digital asset regulation in Pakistan and confirms PVARA as the central supervisory authority. The law introduces licensing requirements and mandates anti money laundering and sanctions compliance for digital asset service providers. Combined with earlier steps such as recognizing cryptocurrencies as legal tender, announcing a Bitcoin strategic reserve, allocating energy for mining, and exploring stablecoin based payments, the act marks a structured move toward regulated integration of digital assets into Pakistan’s financial system.

Utexo Raises $7.5 Million Seed Round – Aiming to Enable Native USDT Settlement on Bitcoin

Key Takeaways

Seed Funding Backed by Tether and Institutional Investors

Utexo, a startup focused on Bitcoin-native stablecoin settlement infrastructure, has secured $7.5 million in a seed funding round. The round was co-led by Tether, Big Brain Holdings, and Portal Ventures. Additional participants included Franklin Templeton, Maven11 Capital, Fulgur Ventures, Alchemy VC, Ethereal Ventures, Auros Ventures, Arcanum Capital, Paper Ventures, Axia8, FlowTraders, Plan B, Gate Ventures, Sats Ventures, and strategic angel investors from companies such as Ledger, Hyperion, BTC Turk, Echo, Legion, and SOLV.

The funding is intended to support the development and rollout of infrastructure that enables USDT transactions to settle directly on Bitcoin. According to the company, the goal is to address what it describes as a longstanding gap in the cryptocurrency ecosystem: production-ready payment rails for stablecoins operating natively on Bitcoin.

Focus on Native USDT Settlement Over Bitcoin

Utexo’s core objective is to allow USDT, the stablecoin issued by Tether, to settle directly on Bitcoin rather than relying on alternative networks. The company positions its system as a way to route stablecoin transactions over Bitcoin-native rails while maintaining compatibility with existing custody, compliance, and user interface setups.

Paolo Ardoino, CEO of Tether, stated that Bitcoin has been central to the company’s long-term vision for USDT. He emphasized the importance of resilient and open settlement infrastructure, describing Utexo’s technology as a layer that makes Bitcoin-native USDT settlement viable at scale. According to Ardoino, this strengthens Bitcoin’s function as a settlement rail for dollar-denominated transactions.

For platforms that handle significant volumes of USDT, including exchanges, wallets, payment service providers, and high-frequency trading firms, the ability to route stablecoin flows over Bitcoin without altering operational workflows may reduce integration friction. Utexo states that partners integrate its API once and can then route USDT over Bitcoin while retaining control over cost structures.

Technical Architecture: API Abstraction and Atomic Settlement

Historically, technologies such as the Lightning Network and RGB protocols have offered technical capabilities for Bitcoin-based payments. However, their complexity has limited broader production adoption. Utexo aims to abstract these complexities through a single API layer.

According to co-founder Chris Hutchinson, the system is designed to allow USDT to move instantly and with predictable costs. The infrastructure supports atomic settlement, meaning transactions are either fully completed or not executed at all. The company states that settlement occurs in USDT and is anchored to Bitcoin’s security model, with completion times under one second.

Another co-founder, Viktor Ihnatiuk, noted that the system enables wallets to offer free USDT transactions while potentially increasing adoption of Bitcoin-native stablecoins. The infrastructure also supports privacy-preserving execution and predictable fees that remain independent of network congestion.

A distinguishing feature described by Utexo is transaction encryption. The company states that all on-chain transactions are encrypted, preventing disclosure of counterparties and wallet addresses. This differs from public transaction graphs on other networks, where transaction flows can be more easily traced.

Alignment With Tether’s Broader Bitcoin Strategy

The investment in Utexo reflects Tether’s continued focus on Bitcoin-based infrastructure. In February 2026, Tether open-sourced MiningOS, a modular operating system for managing and automating bitcoin mining operations. The system, unveiled at the 2026 Plan B Forum in San Salvador, provides unified control over hardware, energy, and site infrastructure using a peer-to-peer architecture.

By backing Utexo, Tether extends its involvement beyond mining software into settlement infrastructure. The stated objective is to enable reliable and predictable dollar-denominated payments anchored to Bitcoin’s security model. Rather than launching a speculative layer-2 solution, Utexo focuses on routing existing USDT flows over Bitcoin.

For market participants, particularly those handling large USDT volumes, infrastructure that allows stablecoin settlement on Bitcoin without operational restructuring may influence how payment rails are selected. Exchanges, trading firms, and payment providers often prioritize settlement speed, fee predictability, and system compatibility when choosing blockchain infrastructure.

Implications for Stablecoin Payment Infrastructure

Stablecoins such as USDT are widely used for trading, cross-platform transfers, and payment settlement. Infrastructure developments that alter how and where these tokens settle can affect transaction routing decisions for platforms and users.

Utexo’s model centers on predictable fees, atomic settlement, and encrypted transaction execution. If implemented as described, these features could offer an alternative routing option for USDT flows that emphasizes Bitcoin’s base-layer security model.

The company targets institutional and high-volume operators rather than retail users directly. However, infrastructure changes at the operator level can influence transaction costs, settlement times, and network exposure for end users, including those interacting with exchanges, wallets, and platforms that accept USDT.

Our Assessment

Utexo has secured $7.5 million in seed funding, co-led by Tether, to develop infrastructure enabling native USDT settlement on Bitcoin. The system introduces API-based integration, atomic settlement, encrypted transactions, and sub-second completion times. Tether’s participation aligns with its stated strategy to expand Bitcoin-based infrastructure for USDT. The development focuses on routing existing stablecoin flows over Bitcoin rather than introducing a new token or speculative network layer, targeting exchanges, wallets, and high-volume payment operators.

Solana ETFs Attract $1.5 Billion in Inflows Despite 57% Token Decline – Institutional Investors Maintain Exposure During Market Downturn

Key Takeaways

Solana ETFs Accumulate $1.5 Billion Since July Launch

Exchange-traded funds tied to Solana have gathered $1.5 billion in net inflows since their launch in the United States in July. This accumulation has occurred despite a sharp decline in the underlying token’s price.

According to Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas, the funds have largely retained these inflows and have “not really given any of it up” even as market conditions turned negative. The performance stands out because Solana has lost more than half of its value during the same period.

Balchunas described the inflow figures as “pretty impressive numbers” given the scale and direction of the underlying market. In typical market cycles, ETFs that launch into a declining asset environment often struggle to maintain investor interest.

Institutional Investors Account for Half of Inflows

Approximately 50% of the capital entering Solana ETFs has come from institutional investors, according to Balchunas. He characterized this as a “serious investor base,” highlighting that professional market participants represent a substantial share of the demand.

Institutional participation is often viewed as a measure of product stability because such investors typically allocate capital through structured mandates and longer time horizons. In this case, the data indicates that a significant portion of ETF exposure to Solana is not driven solely by retail flows.

Balchunas noted that ETFs launched during a 57% drawdown would normally find it “near impossible to get inflows.” He added that most funds would struggle to survive their first year under similar conditions. The ability of Solana ETFs to attract and hold capital while the asset price declines has therefore drawn attention among market observers.

Comparison With Bitcoin ETF Market Size Dynamics

Balchunas also compared Solana ETF inflows to those seen in Bitcoin ETFs at a similar stage of their development. Solana’s market capitalization stands at about $50 billion, while Bitcoin’s is around $1.4 trillion.

After adjusting for market size differences, Balchunas said Solana ETFs have seen the equivalent of $54 billion in net new flows when measured against Bitcoin’s market capitalization. He stated that this is roughly double where Bitcoin stood at the same point in its ETF lifecycle.

A key distinction, however, is that Bitcoin’s price was rising in the months following the launch of Bitcoin ETFs. In contrast, Solana’s price has declined significantly since its ETF products became available. The inflow data therefore reflects investor allocations during a period of negative price momentum for Solana.

Recent Flow Activity Shows First Monthly Outflow Day

While overall inflows remain intact, Solana ETFs recorded their first net outflow day in over a month on Thursday, with $6 million leaving the six listed products. The data was reported by CoinGlass.

This followed a stronger inflow session on Wednesday, when $19 million entered the same group of ETFs. The shift indicates short-term variability in demand, although cumulative flows since launch remain positive.

Short-term flow changes are common across ETF markets and can reflect portfolio rebalancing, profit taking, or broader market sentiment shifts. In this case, the outflow day comes amid continued price pressure on the underlying asset.

Solana Price Down 70% From January 2025 Peak

Solana reached an all-time high of $293 in January 2025 during a period marked by heightened activity around memecoin issuance on the network. Since then, the token has declined 70% from that peak.

At the time of reporting, SOL is trading around $88. The token has fallen 2.7% over the past 24 hours and 11% over the past month, according to CoinGecko data cited in the report. Since the beginning of the year, SOL has dropped nearly 30%.

The 57% decline referenced in relation to ETF performance specifically measures the drop since the US-based Solana ETFs launched in July. The broader 70% drawdown reflects the fall from the January 2025 all-time high.

Implications for Crypto Investment Products

The divergence between ETF inflows and underlying price performance highlights a notable dynamic in crypto investment products. In this case, capital continued to enter Solana ETFs even as the token experienced sustained losses.

Balchunas described this as “defying physics,” referring to the difficulty ETFs typically face when launched into declining markets. Most funds tied to assets that drop more than half within months of launch struggle to maintain investor interest, according to his assessment.

For market participants tracking crypto-linked financial products, the data underscores that ETF flows and spot prices do not always move in parallel. Inflows can reflect strategic positioning, diversification strategies, or institutional mandates independent of short-term price direction.

Our Assessment

Solana ETFs have accumulated $1.5 billion in inflows since their July launch in the United States, even as the SOL token has fallen 57% over the same period and 70% from its January 2025 peak. About half of these inflows originate from institutional investors. Although the products recently recorded their first net outflow day in more than a month, cumulative flows remain positive. The data shows sustained capital allocation into Solana-linked ETFs during a period of significant price decline in the underlying asset.

Zerohash Applies for US National Trust Bank Charter – Move Would Expand Custody and Settlement Services for Digital Assets

Key Takeaways

Zerohash Seeks Federal Trust Status to Expand Crypto Infrastructure Services

Chicago based digital asset infrastructure provider Zerohash has filed an application with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for a national trust bank charter. The move would allow the company to operate a federally regulated trust entity focused on digital assets and related financial services.

Zerohash provides backend crypto infrastructure to banks, brokerages and fintech platforms. According to its website, clients include prediction markets platform Kalshi and asset manager BlackRock. By obtaining a national trust charter, the firm aims to expand its role in digital asset custody and settlement.

The proposed national trust bank would provide custody for digital assets, fiat currency and other assets. It would also offer custodial staking, transfer agent services and stablecoin management. Stephen Gardner, the company’s chief legal officer, is listed as the proposed chief executive officer of the trust bank.

For users of crypto platforms, custody structure and regulatory status influence how assets are held and administered. A national trust charter would place Zerohash under federal oversight by the OCC, aligning it with other trust institutions that specialize in safeguarding assets rather than operating as full service commercial banks.

What a National Trust Bank Charter Allows and Restricts

A national trust bank differs from a traditional bank in several key aspects. Trust banks cannot accept deposits or issue loans. Instead, their primary function is to hold and administer assets on behalf of clients.

In the crypto sector, this structure has become relevant for firms focused on digital asset custody, settlement and related services such as staking and stablecoin administration. Federal trust status provides a uniform regulatory framework across US states, rather than requiring multiple state level licenses.

Zerohash joins a group of crypto and fintech firms that have recently pursued similar federal charters. In December, the OCC granted conditional approval for trust charters requested by Circle Internet Group Inc., Ripple, BitGo Inc., Fidelity Digital Assets and Paxos. These approvals signal that federal regulators are processing applications from digital asset companies seeking trust status, although final approvals remain subject to regulatory conditions.

For international users evaluating crypto service providers, federal trust status can affect how assets are legally segregated and supervised within the United States. While a trust charter does not permit lending or deposit taking, it formalizes custody and administrative activities under federal banking law.

Mastercard Explored Acquisition as Zerohash Remains Independent

Earlier this year, Mastercard considered acquiring Zerohash in a deal reportedly valued at up to 2 billion US dollars. The company chose to remain independent and rejected an outright purchase.

According to reports, the two companies are now discussing a strategic investment. Such an arrangement would allow Mastercard exposure to Zerohash’s technology and client base while preserving Zerohash’s autonomy.

This context highlights Zerohash’s position within the broader digital asset infrastructure market. Rather than operating a consumer facing exchange or wallet, the company focuses on providing regulated backend services to financial institutions and fintech platforms that integrate crypto functionality for their users.

Kraken Secures Federal Reserve Master Account for Direct Dollar Settlement

In a separate development, crypto exchange Kraken announced that it has secured a Federal Reserve master account. The approval was granted to Kraken Financial by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

A master account allows Kraken to access the US central bank’s core payment infrastructure directly. Through Fedwire, the company can settle US dollar transactions without relying on intermediary banks.

However, Kraken will not receive all the benefits associated with traditional banks. The company will not earn interest on reserves held at the Federal Reserve and will not have access to the Fed’s lending facilities. The arrangement reflects discussions around so called skinny master accounts, which provide limited access to payment systems without full banking privileges.

Access to the Federal Reserve payment system has historically been restricted, and crypto firms have sought similar approvals. Other companies, including Ripple and Custodia Bank, have pursued comparable access, although approvals have been selective.

For users, direct access to Fedwire can affect how efficiently US dollar transactions are processed within a platform’s banking structure. It also reduces reliance on third party correspondent banks for settlement.

Regulatory Positioning Becomes Central for Crypto Infrastructure Providers

Both Zerohash’s trust bank application and Kraken’s master account approval reflect a broader focus on regulatory positioning among crypto infrastructure providers in the United States.

Zerohash is seeking a federal trust structure to formalize custody, staking and stablecoin services under OCC supervision. Kraken, through its banking arm, has secured direct access to the US payment system while operating under limited banking privileges.

For international users of crypto trading, betting or payment platforms, these developments matter because infrastructure providers often sit behind consumer facing services. Custody arrangements, settlement mechanisms and access to fiat payment rails influence how platforms manage client funds and process transactions.

Our Assessment

Zerohash’s application for a national trust bank charter would, if approved, place its digital asset custody and settlement services under federal oversight by the OCC. Trust status would allow the company to hold and administer assets but not to accept deposits or issue loans.

Kraken’s approval for a Federal Reserve master account grants direct access to US dollar settlement infrastructure, while limiting traditional banking benefits such as interest on reserves or central bank lending.

Together, these developments show that major crypto infrastructure providers are pursuing formal regulatory frameworks and direct payment access within the United States, shaping how digital assets and fiat transactions are managed at the institutional level.