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.

New Zealand to Launch Online Casino Licensing in July 2026 – Government Moves to Regulate Offshore-Focused Market

Key Takeaways

Online Casino Gambling Bill Sets Legal Framework

New Zealand is preparing to formally regulate its online casino sector, which has so far been largely served by offshore providers. According to a timeline published by the Department of Internal Affairs, the licensing process will begin in July 2026.

The legal basis for the new system is the Online Casino Gambling Bill. The bill passed its first reading in July 2025 and is expected to become law in May following additional parliamentary stages. Once enacted, it will introduce domestic oversight for online casino operators targeting New Zealand consumers.

Government estimates indicate that more than NZ$750 million, equivalent to about $442.54 million, is spent each year by New Zealand players on offshore online casino platforms. The new framework is designed to bring this activity under national regulation.

Licence Cap and Three-Stage Allocation Process

The number of online casino licences will be limited to 15 operators. These licences will be distributed through a structured, three-stage process aimed at ensuring compliance and competitive fairness.

First, once the bill becomes law, operators will be invited to submit an expression of interest. This window is expected to remain open for one to two months.

Second, a licence auction will take place within one month after the expression of interest period closes. Bidding is expected to last up to two months. Only companies that successfully secure a licence during this auction will move to the final stage.

Third, successful bidders must submit full applications. Authorities will assess these applications based on criteria that include consumer protection standards, financial stability, and operational integrity. The evaluation phase is projected to take between four and six months.

Initial licences will be granted for up to three years. Renewals will depend on continued compliance with regulatory requirements.

Application Deadline and Enforcement Measures

The Department of Internal Affairs has set December 1, 2026 as the deadline for operators to apply for a licence. Companies that fail to do so must stop offering online casino services in New Zealand.

Non-compliant operators may face financial penalties of up to NZ$5 million, equivalent to approximately $2.95 million. Authorities may also remove operators from the market if they do not adhere to the new legal requirements.

For international operators currently serving New Zealand customers without a local licence, this deadline establishes a clear compliance timeline. After December 1, 2026, continuing to operate without approval could result in enforcement action.

Taxation and Community Funding Requirements

Under the proposed framework, licensed operators will be subject to a 12% gaming duty. In addition, the government plans to introduce a community funding guarantee equivalent to 4% of gross gaming revenue.

Officials estimate that the measures could generate between $10 million and $20 million in the first 12 months of operation. Earlier versions of the proposal had faced opposition from sports organisations, which warned that the reform could reduce community funding by more than $150 million.

In response, the government incorporated specific funding guarantees into the bill to address these concerns. The 4% gross gaming revenue requirement forms part of that approach.

Harm Prevention and Player Protection Measures

The legislation also includes provisions aimed at reducing gambling-related harm. According to data from the New Zealand Gambling Survey 2023/24, offshore online gambling participation is more common among younger men and certain ethnic groups, particularly in areas experiencing social deprivation.

To address these risks, the bill introduces mandatory age verification requirements and restrictions on advertising that targets children. These measures form part of the broader regulatory criteria that operators must meet during the application and ongoing compliance process.

Consumer protection standards will be a core component of the full application assessment, alongside financial and operational checks.

What the Timeline Means for Operators and Players

The licensing window beginning in July 2026 marks the start of a formal transition from an offshore-dominated market to a regulated domestic system. With licences capped at 15 and allocated via auction, market access will be limited and competitive.

Operators currently serving New Zealand customers must decide whether to enter the licensing process or exit the market before the December 1, 2026 deadline. The combination of a capped licence structure, auction mechanism, and defined tax obligations introduces clear entry conditions.

For players, the shift means that online casino services will increasingly be offered by domestically licensed providers subject to local oversight, tax contributions, and harm prevention requirements.

Our Assessment

New Zealand is moving to regulate an online casino market currently estimated at more than NZ$750 million annually in offshore spending. The Online Casino Gambling Bill establishes a capped licensing system, a structured auction process, defined tax obligations, and mandatory harm prevention measures. With applications opening in July 2026 and a compliance deadline of December 1, 2026, the government has set a clear timetable for transitioning to a domestically supervised online casino framework.

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.

Bitcoin Rises Above $72,000 – ETF Inflows and Short Covering Support Price Amid Middle East Tensions

Key Takeaways

Bitcoin Breaks Above $72,000 After Prolonged Downtrend

Bitcoin traded above $72,000 during Asian trading hours on March 4, marking its highest level in one month. The move followed a period of sustained weakness, with six straight weekly losses and five consecutive months of price declines.

The previous day, the asset had approached $70,000 but failed to move decisively above that level. The breakout occurred as market participants adjusted positions after weeks of defensive trading.

According to reporting by Bitcoin Magazine, the rebound reflected a shift in positioning rather than a wave of new bullish demand. Many traders had built significant short positions amid concerns that tensions involving Iran could escalate into a wider regional conflict. When the situation did not broaden as feared, those bearish bets were unwound, contributing to upward price pressure.

At the time of writing, Bitcoin was trading near $71,700, slightly below the session high but still above the $71,000 threshold highlighted by market analysts.

ETF Inflows Provide Institutional Support

Institutional flows through U.S.-listed spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds contributed to market support. Over the past five trading days, these products recorded approximately $1.45 billion in net inflows.

Daily figures remained elevated. On March 3, net inflows reached $225 million, following $458 million the day before. These inflows coincided with the price rebound and suggest sustained institutional participation during a period of broader market uncertainty.

For users of crypto platforms and betting services that rely on Bitcoin liquidity, ETF-driven demand can affect short-term price stability and trading volumes. Increased inflows typically correspond with higher spot market activity, which may influence transaction timing and hedging strategies for operators managing crypto exposure.

Derivatives and On-Chain Data Signal Cautious Stabilization

On-chain and derivatives data indicate that market conditions have stabilized, though traders remain cautious.

Glassnode reported that Bitcoin’s relative strength index rose to 41, up from 36 the previous week. This change points to improving momentum after an extended period of weakness. Spot trading volume increased to $9.6 billion from $6.6 billion, reflecting renewed activity in the underlying market.

However, derivatives markets continue to show defensive positioning. Perpetual futures funding rates remain negative, indicating that short positions still dominate in certain segments. Open interest in major contracts has grown, suggesting that traders are adjusting or rolling positions rather than aggressively entering new long trades.

Nicolai Sondergaard, Research Analyst at Nansen, told Bitcoin Magazine that holding above $71,000 through the upcoming U.S. nonfarm payrolls release could materially shift the current trading range. He noted that a softer payrolls number might reinforce expectations of rate cuts ahead of the March 18 Federal Open Market Committee decision. Conversely, if the $71,000 level fails to hold, the previously established $60,000 to $71,000 range would remain intact.

Stablecoin Legislation Debate Adds Regulatory Context

Alongside market movements, regulatory developments in the United States remain in focus. President Trump recently criticized the banking industry, stating that the stablecoin legislation signed last year, known as the GENIUS Act, is being threatened and undermined by banks.

The dispute centers on a provision that bars stablecoin issuers from paying interest directly to holders. Banks argue that this creates a loophole for third-party reward programs. Crypto advocates maintain that such rewards are necessary for stablecoins to compete effectively in payment markets.

The disagreement has slowed progress in the Senate on related market structure legislation, including the Clarity Act. Meetings led by the White House between banking and crypto representatives have not yet resolved the standoff.

For users of crypto betting platforms and online gambling services that rely on stablecoin transactions, regulatory clarity in the United States can influence product design, payment features, and cross-border usability.

Our Assessment

Bitcoin’s move above $72,000 follows months of sustained declines and coincides with significant inflows into U.S.-listed spot ETFs. The rebound was driven in part by short covering linked to geopolitical concerns that did not escalate further. On-chain indicators show improving momentum, while derivatives markets remain defensively positioned. At the same time, unresolved U.S. stablecoin legislation highlights ongoing regulatory discussions that may affect broader crypto market structure. Together, these factors frame the current environment for market participants and crypto platform users.

MARA Rejects Claims of Bitcoin Treasury Sell-Off – Filing Clarifies Flexibility Without Mandated Liquidation

Key Takeaways

Executive Response to Sell-Off Claims

MARA Holdings, one of the world’s largest Bitcoin mining companies, has publicly rejected assertions that it is preparing to offload most of its Bitcoin reserves. The clarification was issued by Robert Samuels, MARA’s vice president for investor relations, in response to claims circulating on social media.

The claims originated from SwanDesk adviser Jacob King, who stated that MARA had shifted toward a sell-down strategy. King cited filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission as the basis for his interpretation. His post drew more than 325,000 views at the time of reporting, amplifying the narrative that the company was preparing a significant reduction of its Bitcoin holdings.

Samuels responded by pointing to the company’s 2026 10-K filing. According to him, the document states that MARA expanded its treasury strategy to allow for potential sales of Bitcoin held on its balance sheet. He emphasized that this change does not represent a commitment to sell the majority of the company’s reserves.

What the 2026 10-K Filing States

The 2026 10-K filing authorizes discretionary transactions involving Bitcoin based on market conditions and capital allocation priorities. The language provides the company with flexibility to sell Bitcoin when management deems it appropriate.

However, the filing does not require or mandate a reduction of the company’s treasury holdings. The distinction, as outlined by Samuels, lies between maintaining optionality and committing to a material drawdown of reserves. In other words, the policy change broadens the company’s operational flexibility without signaling an immediate or large-scale liquidation plan.

For market participants, this difference is significant. A mandated sell-off would imply structural changes to the company’s treasury management. A discretionary framework, by contrast, allows management to respond to evolving financial conditions without predefining the scale or timing of any transactions.

MARA’s Bitcoin Treasury Position

Bitcoin remains central to MARA’s balance sheet. The company currently holds 53,822 BTC, valued at approximately $3.7 billion. This makes MARA the largest publicly traded Bitcoin miner by treasury size.

Data from BitcoinTreasuries.net shows a one-year history of MARA’s Bitcoin holdings, underscoring the scale and continuity of its reserve strategy. Among public companies overall, only Michael Saylor’s Strategy holds more Bitcoin, with over 720,000 BTC accumulated to date.

MARA has historically positioned itself as a long-term Bitcoin holder. Because of this positioning, any perceived adjustment to its treasury approach attracts attention from investors and market observers. Publicly listed mining companies with substantial Bitcoin reserves often see their treasury policies scrutinized, particularly when filings introduce new language around asset sales.

Diversification Efforts Alongside Core Bitcoin Exposure

While Bitcoin remains central to MARA’s financial structure, the company has broadened its operational footprint in recent years. In February, MARA acquired a 64 percent stake in Exaion, a France-based computing infrastructure company focused on high-performance computing and blockchain services.

This move reflects diversification beyond pure Bitcoin mining operations. Even so, the company’s balance sheet remains heavily tied to Bitcoin exposure. The scale of its holdings means that treasury decisions can influence how investors assess its financial flexibility and risk profile.

The combination of diversification initiatives and continued large-scale Bitcoin reserves indicates that MARA is expanding operationally while maintaining a substantial digital asset position.

Why Treasury Policy Matters for Market Participants

For investors and industry observers, the management of corporate Bitcoin treasuries carries broader implications. Large miners with significant reserves can affect market sentiment when they signal potential changes in holding or selling strategies.

In this case, the public discussion was triggered by interpretations of regulatory filings. MARA’s response clarifies that expanding authorization to sell Bitcoin does not equate to a declared sell-off strategy. Instead, it formalizes the company’s ability to execute sales if management considers them appropriate under prevailing market conditions.

Given MARA’s position as the largest publicly traded Bitcoin miner by treasury size, statements regarding its reserve management are closely monitored. The clarification aims to distinguish between regulatory language that enables flexibility and narratives suggesting a fundamental shift in strategy.

Our Assessment

MARA Holdings has stated that its updated 2026 10-K filing expands its ability to sell Bitcoin but does not mandate a majority liquidation of its reserves. The company continues to hold 53,822 BTC, valued at about $3.7 billion, and remains the largest publicly traded Bitcoin miner by treasury size. The clarification addresses social media claims and underscores that the revised policy provides discretionary flexibility rather than signaling a structural change in its Bitcoin treasury approach.

Bitcoin Treasury Companies Face Shareholder Revolt While Stablecoin Firms Report Strong Earnings – Market Tensions Reshape Corporate Crypto Strategies

Key Takeaways

Empery Digital Faces Shareholder Pressure Over Bitcoin Treasury Strategy

Empery Digital is facing a public challenge from one of its largest shareholders over its Bitcoin focused treasury model. A nearly 10% shareholder, Tice P. Brown, has called for sweeping changes, including the sale of the company’s roughly 4,000 Bitcoin holdings and the resignation of its chief executive officer and board.

In a letter to management, Brown argued that the company’s strategy of holding Bitcoin on its balance sheet has failed to maximize shareholder value. He demanded that capital be returned to investors instead of being tied up in digital assets.

Empery rejected these claims and defended its approach. The company transitioned its legacy business into a Bitcoin treasury model last year and has since accumulated 4,081 BTC. According to BitcoinTreasuries.NET data cited in the report, this places Empery among the top 25 largest public holders of Bitcoin.

The dispute highlights growing tension between activist investors and publicly listed firms that have adopted Bitcoin as a core balance sheet asset. After months of declining digital asset prices, companies with significant crypto exposure are facing renewed scrutiny from shareholders focused on capital allocation and volatility risks.

For investors evaluating companies with crypto treasury exposure, this case underscores how balance sheet strategies tied to digital assets can become central governance issues during market downturns.

Circle Reports Revenue Growth and Expanding USDC Supply

While Bitcoin treasury firms face pressure, stablecoin issuer Circle reported stronger than expected financial results for the fourth quarter. The company generated $770 million in revenue, marking a 77% increase compared to the same period a year earlier. Net income reached $133.4 million, or 43 cents per share, exceeding analyst expectations.

A key driver was the continued growth of USDC. By year end, the dollar backed stablecoin’s supply had risen 72% to $75.3 billion. The expansion reflects sustained demand for onchain dollar liquidity, even as broader crypto market conditions weakened.

For the full year, Circle reported $2.7 billion in revenue and a net loss of $70 million. The annual loss was largely attributed to stock based compensation tied to its initial public offering.

Following the earnings release, Circle’s shares rose more than 20%. The stock reaction reflected investor focus on revenue growth and the expanding stablecoin base.

The figures indicate that stablecoins continue to play a central role in digital asset markets. For users of crypto platforms, including those involved in trading or online betting, stablecoin liquidity remains a core component of transaction flows and onchain settlement.

PayPal Draws Takeover Interest Amid Ongoing Restructuring

Legacy payments company PayPal is reportedly attracting early stage takeover interest after a prolonged decline in its share price. According to Bloomberg, some potential buyers are evaluating a full acquisition, while others may seek specific business segments.

Discussions remain preliminary, and no formal offer has been announced. Stripe, described as a Bitcoin friendly payments company, later emerged as one of the interested parties.

PayPal’s stock rallied following the takeover reports, yet it remains down 37% over the past 12 months. The development comes as PayPal continues restructuring efforts and expands further into digital assets, including its proprietary stablecoin, PayPal USD.

For market participants, the situation reflects the competitive pressure facing established payment providers as they integrate digital asset services. Strategic interest in PayPal suggests that crypto related initiatives are increasingly intertwined with broader consolidation trends in digital payments.

$500 Million Stablecoin Initiative Connects DeFi Liquidity With Mortgage Lending

In a separate development, mortgage lender Better and Framework Ventures are launching a $500 million initiative designed to channel stablecoin liquidity into US mortgage lending.

Under the structure outlined in the report, Better will continue underwriting and issuing home loans, while funding is sourced through a stablecoin ecosystem. The arrangement aims to connect blockchain based liquidity with traditional real estate finance.

Tokenized real world assets have long been discussed within crypto markets. This initiative represents a large scale attempt to deploy stablecoin capital into housing finance, even as broader digital asset prices remain volatile.

For crypto users, the structure illustrates how stablecoins are being positioned not only as trading instruments but also as funding tools for conventional financial products.

Our Assessment

The developments show diverging dynamics within the crypto related corporate landscape. Empery Digital’s shareholder dispute highlights governance risks for companies that rely heavily on Bitcoin as a treasury asset during periods of price weakness. At the same time, Circle’s revenue growth and expanding USDC supply point to sustained demand for stablecoin based liquidity. PayPal’s reported takeover interest and the $500 million mortgage initiative further demonstrate how digital asset strategies are influencing both traditional payment firms and real world finance structures. Together, these events reflect how corporate crypto exposure is increasingly scrutinized by investors while stablecoin infrastructure continues to expand into new use cases.

Cambodia Gambling Revenue Rises 14% in 2025 – Licensed Sector Expands Despite Enforcement Crackdowns and Border Disruptions

Key Takeaways

Revenue Growth Recorded by the Cambodian Commercial Gaming Commission

Cambodia’s regulated gambling sector generated 290.7 billion riels in mandatory revenue in 2025, equivalent to approximately $72 million. According to data released by the Cambodian Commercial Gaming Commission, this represents a 14% increase compared with 2024.

In absolute terms, the year on year rise amounted to around 35.8 billion riels, or roughly $8.9 million. The figures reflect revenue collected from licensed operators under Cambodia’s commercial gambling framework.

By the end of 2025, the country counted 195 licensed casinos. Of these, 160 were located in Preah Sihanouk province, which remains the central hub of Cambodia’s casino industry. The concentration of licences in one province highlights the geographic focus of land based gambling operations within the country.

Licence Suspensions and Revocations During 2025

While revenue increased, regulators also stepped up enforcement. In February 2025, authorities announced the suspension and revocation of five casino licences. The regulator stated that violations of the Law on Commercial Gambling Management could result in financial penalties or permanent closure.

Throughout the year, several casinos in Sihanoukville and in Svay Rieng province faced suspension or revocation following police investigations. These actions formed part of a broader effort to address alleged regulatory breaches and criminal activity linked to gambling properties.

The Cambodian authorities made clear that compliance with the legal framework is a condition for continued operation. The combination of higher revenue collection and targeted licence actions indicates closer monitoring of licensed entities.

Crackdowns on Cybercrime and Illegal Online Betting

Enforcement in 2025 extended beyond licence reviews. Authorities conducted raids aimed at dismantling cyber scam operations, illegal online betting networks, and suspected money laundering activities connected to casino premises.

One large scale operation resulted in dozens of arrests. Law enforcement officials seized computers and mobile devices that were allegedly used in cyber fraud networks. The Cambodian Commission for Combating Cybercrime coordinated these actions with provincial courts and the national police.

Joint operations focused in particular on border regions. In certain locations, telecommunications restrictions were reportedly introduced to disrupt suspected fraud networks. These measures reflect an effort to address cross border elements of online crime linked to gambling infrastructure.

International scrutiny also intensified. The United States and the United Kingdom imposed sanctions on Cambodian operators and individuals accused of involvement in cross border scams and money laundering. These measures added an external dimension to domestic enforcement efforts.

Border Tensions With Thailand Affect Casino Hubs

The gambling sector also faced geopolitical pressure in 2025. Armed clashes occurred near Poipet, a key casino hub that relies heavily on visitors from Thailand. Checkpoint closures and tighter security measures disrupted cross border travel.

Thai authorities issued an arrest warrant for a Cambodian casino figure over alleged links to cross border scams. The combination of security incidents and legal action added uncertainty to operations in border dependent casino areas.

For land based casinos that depend on cross border traffic, travel disruptions can directly affect visitor flows. Despite these tensions, official revenue figures show that the licensed sector as a whole recorded growth during the year.

Revenue Increase Linked to Compliance and Collection Measures

Although revenue rose by 14%, analysts cited in the source material attribute the increase primarily to stricter compliance among remaining operators and improved revenue collection mechanisms. The data does not indicate that the growth resulted from a surge in gambling demand.

This distinction is relevant for understanding the structure of the market. With multiple licences suspended or revoked and enforcement activity intensifying, the overall number of compliant operators may have narrowed even as reported revenue increased.

Improved oversight and more effective collection processes can raise recorded revenue without necessarily expanding the underlying customer base. In this context, the 2025 figures reflect both regulatory tightening and continued operation of licensed casinos.

Our Assessment

The 2025 data show that Cambodia’s regulated gambling sector generated higher mandatory revenue despite intensified enforcement, licence suspensions, cybercrime crackdowns, and border tensions with Thailand. The industry ended the year with 195 licensed casinos, heavily concentrated in Preah Sihanouk province.

Authorities combined revenue collection with expanded oversight, including raids, telecommunications restrictions in targeted areas, and cooperation with courts and police. International sanctions and cross border legal disputes added further pressure. According to the available information, the revenue increase is linked to stricter compliance and improved collection mechanisms rather than rising gambling demand. For observers of regional gambling markets, the figures indicate a shift toward tighter regulation alongside continued operation of the licensed sector.