Payoneer Files for US National Trust Bank Charter – Stablecoin Plans Expand in Growing Fintech Push

Key Takeaways

Payoneer Submits Application to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

Global financial services firm Payoneer has applied for a national trust banking charter in the United States. The company confirmed that it filed with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, or OCC, to establish an entity named PAYO Digital Bank.

The application places Payoneer among a growing number of fintech and crypto focused companies seeking entry into the US federal banking system. A national trust charter would allow the company to operate under federal oversight and expand its range of regulated financial services.

The move follows a recent partnership between Payoneer and stablecoin infrastructure firm Bridge. That agreement was announced one week before the OCC filing and is intended to add stablecoin capabilities to Payoneer’s platform, which primarily serves cross border transactions.

Planned Stablecoin PAYO-USD and Intended Use Cases

As part of its charter application, Payoneer said it intends to issue a stablecoin named PAYO-USD. According to the company, the token would be compliant with the GENIUS Act and designed to function as the holding currency in Payoneer wallets.

The proposed stablecoin would also allow customers to send and receive stablecoins directly through the platform. If approved by the OCC, Payoneer would be authorized to manage the reserves backing PAYO-USD, provide custodial services, and enable customers to convert stablecoins into their local currencies.

Payoneer’s customer base includes nearly two million users, most of whom are small and medium sized businesses. The company stated that a regulated stablecoin could simplify cross border trade by providing a digital dollar based settlement option within its ecosystem.

According to Payoneer, stablecoins could play a meaningful role in global trade. The company also said that its offering could help advance the use of the US dollar in international transactions, reduce barriers for American companies operating abroad, and expand the dollar’s presence in non dollar payment corridors.

Part of a Broader Wave of Crypto and Fintech Charter Applications

Payoneer’s filing comes amid a broader wave of applications from crypto and fintech companies seeking US bank charters.

Earlier this week, the OCC granted conditional approval to Crypto.com for a banking charter. In December, several crypto firms secured charters, including Circle, Ripple, Fidelity Digital Assets, BitGo and Paxos.

Other applicants are still awaiting decisions. World Liberty Financial, associated with the Trump family, applied in January to expand the use of its USD1 stablecoin. Crypto trading platform Laser Platform also submitted an application in January. Coinbase has been waiting for a decision on its application since October.

These developments indicate increased interest from digital asset firms in obtaining federal banking status. A national trust charter can provide a regulated framework for activities such as custody, reserve management and digital asset related financial services.

In December, Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould stated that new entrants into the federal banking sector are positive for consumers, the banking industry and the broader economy. He said that additional participants can provide access to new products and services, new sources of credit and contribute to a competitive and diverse banking system.

Relevance for Cross Border Payments and Digital Asset Users

Payoneer’s core business focuses on cross border payments. The company positions stablecoins as a tool that could streamline international settlements, particularly for small and medium sized enterprises engaged in global trade.

If PAYO-USD is approved and launched, customers would be able to hold balances in a stablecoin within their Payoneer wallets. They could also convert those holdings into local currencies, subject to regulatory approval and operational implementation under the OCC framework.

For digital asset users and businesses that rely on cross border transfers, a federally regulated stablecoin issuer could provide an alternative settlement mechanism within a supervised US banking structure. At the same time, the outcome of the OCC review process will determine whether Payoneer can proceed with its plans.

Our Assessment

Payoneer has formally entered the group of fintech and crypto companies seeking US national trust bank charters. The company’s application to establish PAYO Digital Bank is directly linked to its plan to issue the PAYO-USD stablecoin and expand regulated crypto related services. With Crypto.com having received conditional approval and several other firms awaiting decisions, the OCC is currently reviewing multiple applications that could shape how stablecoins and digital asset services operate within the US federal banking system.

SBC Digital to Host 2026 FIFA World Cup Event as Sportsbooks Prepare for Operational Pressure

Key Takeaways

SBC Digital Announces World Cup 2026 Focused Event

SBC Digital is preparing a dedicated event titled SBC Digital – World Cup 2026 to address the operational and commercial challenges sportsbooks are expected to face during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. According to the announcement, the event will convene senior leaders from global operators and suppliers.

The stated objective is to provide a practical view of profitability in the context of a tournament that is expected to test infrastructure, trading models, compliance frameworks, and customer acquisition strategies. By concentrating specifically on the World Cup, SBC Digital positions the event as a forum for decision makers to evaluate readiness ahead of what is described as an ultimate industry challenge.

World Cup 2026 Described as an Unprecedented Stress Test

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is characterized as placing unprecedented pressure on sportsbooks. The scale of the event, combined with evolving market dynamics, is expected to intensify both operational and financial demands.

For operators, major international tournaments typically concentrate betting activity into a defined period. In this case, the language used by SBC Digital underscores that the 2026 edition will go beyond routine peak traffic and represent a structural stress test. The focus is not only on handling increased betting volume but also on maintaining profitability under changing market conditions.

The description of the tournament as the industry’s ultimate challenge reflects a convergence of multiple pressures rather than a single operational hurdle.

Rising Acquisition Costs and Compliance Demands

One of the core issues identified is rising acquisition costs. As competition intensifies around major sporting events, operators often compete aggressively for new customers. Higher acquisition expenses can directly affect margins, particularly if promotional spending increases while retention rates remain uncertain.

At the same time, tighter compliance rules are cited as an additional burden. For international operators and suppliers, regulatory expectations can shape everything from onboarding processes to marketing practices and risk controls. Stricter compliance requirements typically require investment in monitoring systems, reporting structures, and internal controls.

The combination of higher customer acquisition spending and stricter compliance obligations creates a dual cost structure. For sportsbooks, this means that scaling up for a global event like the World Cup is not only a question of demand but also of regulatory alignment and cost efficiency.

AI Assisted Bettors and In Play Volatility

SBC Digital also points to AI assisted bettors as a significant factor. The increasing use of automated tools and data driven strategies by customers can affect trading models and risk management frameworks. For operators, this development requires constant monitoring of betting patterns and pricing strategies.

In parallel, extreme in play volatility is highlighted as a specific challenge. In play betting involves continuously updated odds during live matches. Rapid shifts in game dynamics can trigger large swings in liability exposure within short time frames. When combined with higher traffic during a global tournament, volatility can test the resilience of trading teams and automated systems.

The reference to both AI assisted bettors and in play volatility signals that the pressure extends beyond infrastructure capacity. It also touches on analytical capabilities, algorithmic pricing, and real time risk controls.

Senior Industry Leaders to Discuss Profitability and Risk

The event will bring together senior leaders from global operators and suppliers. This suggests participation from executives responsible for trading, compliance, technology, and commercial strategy.

The emphasis on providing a practical view of profitability indicates that discussions are expected to focus on measurable business outcomes rather than general industry trends. Topics are likely to include cost management, regulatory alignment, and strategies to handle increased betting activity without eroding margins.

For suppliers, the World Cup represents a test of platform stability, data feeds, and service reliability. For operators, it is a moment to evaluate whether technology partners can support peak demand while maintaining performance standards.

Why This Matters for International Betting Users

For users of crypto betting platforms, sportsbooks, and other iGaming services, operational pressure on operators can translate into tangible effects. High traffic events may influence platform stability, odds responsiveness, and the availability of certain markets.

Compliance adjustments can also affect onboarding requirements, identity verification processes, and geographic availability. As operators adapt to tighter rules and increased scrutiny, user experiences may change accordingly.

The focus on AI assisted bettors and in play volatility is relevant for customers who rely on live betting markets. Pricing speed, limit adjustments, and risk controls may become more dynamic during peak tournament phases.

By addressing these issues in advance of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, SBC Digital frames the event as part of the industry’s broader preparation cycle.

Our Assessment

SBC Digital – World Cup 2026 is positioned as a targeted industry forum ahead of the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The event focuses on rising acquisition costs, tighter compliance rules, AI assisted betting activity, and extreme in play volatility as key pressure points for sportsbooks. By convening senior leaders from global operators and suppliers, the initiative centers on practical approaches to profitability and operational resilience during a high intensity global sporting event.

Wynn Resorts Faces Proposed Class Action Over Alleged ShinyHunters Data Exposure – Legal and Cybersecurity Risks Intensify for Casino Operators

Key Takeaways

Class Action Targets Alleged Data Exposure at Wynn Resorts

Wynn Resorts is confronting a proposed class action lawsuit following allegations that customer information was exposed during a cyber incident linked to the hacking group known as ShinyHunters. The legal action centers on claims that personally identifiable information was accessed due to weaknesses in the company’s cybersecurity measures.

According to court filings referenced in the complaint, the plaintiffs argue that the safeguards designed to protect sensitive customer data were not strong enough to prevent intrusion. They allege that gaps in security controls enabled outside actors to gain access to internal records. The lawsuit states that individuals affected by the incident may now face increased risks of identity theft and fraud.

Wynn Resorts has not conceded wrongdoing. The scope of the alleged exposure is still under review, and the case is at a preliminary stage.

Type of Data Reportedly Involved

The information believed to have been accessed includes customer names, email addresses, contact data, and certain account related details. While the full extent of the exposure has not been publicly detailed, the complaint emphasizes that even partial access to such records can create risks for affected individuals.

Casino and resort operators typically manage large volumes of customer information. Their systems often include loyalty program databases, hotel reservation platforms, online wagering accounts, and payment processing channels. In such environments, personally identifiable information is closely integrated with hospitality and gaming operations. As a result, any alleged intrusion into these interconnected systems can trigger regulatory disclosures, forensic investigations, and civil litigation.

In the current case, plaintiffs also question the company’s notification practices. The complaint describes the disclosure process as delayed or insufficient, although specific timelines have not been outlined in the available information.

ShinyHunters and Targeting of Large Consumer Databases

ShinyHunters has been associated with data breaches affecting companies in retail, technology, and entertainment sectors. The group has been linked to incidents involving organizations that maintain extensive consumer databases.

Such databases can be attractive targets because stolen information may later be sold or used in extortion schemes. Companies that collect large volumes of identity and contact data are therefore exposed to both operational and reputational risks when cybersecurity incidents occur.

The alleged connection to ShinyHunters places Wynn Resorts within a broader pattern of cyber activity targeting data rich enterprises. However, the current proceedings focus specifically on whether Wynn Resorts implemented adequate safeguards and responded appropriately once the incident became known.

Digital Transformation Expands Cyber Risk in Gaming and Hospitality

Casino and integrated resort operators rely on complex digital infrastructures. These systems support hotel bookings, gaming activity, customer loyalty programs, and financial transactions. The integration of these services allows for operational efficiency and customer personalization, but it also increases the number of potential entry points for cyber threats.

Large scale data collection has become central to modern gaming and hospitality operations. Resorts process high volumes of transactions while storing detailed identity and behavioral data. This combination makes cybersecurity a core component of operational resilience.

Recent incidents involving major operators in the sector have led to service interruptions, compliance reviews, remediation costs, and legal claims. In this context, lawsuits tied to alleged data protection failures reflect growing legal and regulatory pressure. Consumers and regulators increasingly expect timely disclosure and robust data protection frameworks when incidents occur.

Legal Claims Focus on Security Controls and Disclosure Practices

The complaint against Wynn Resorts outlines several core allegations. These include claims of inadequate cybersecurity controls, exposure of sensitive information, and notification practices that plaintiffs describe as insufficient.

Class action proceedings of this nature typically seek to represent a broader group of individuals who may have been affected by the same incident. At this stage, the lawsuit remains proposed, meaning that court approval is required before it can proceed as a certified class action.

The outcome will depend on the court’s assessment of the evidence presented, including the adequacy of the company’s security measures and the timeliness and clarity of its communications with customers.

Our Assessment

The proposed class action against Wynn Resorts highlights the legal and operational consequences that can follow alleged cybersecurity incidents in the casino and hospitality sector. The case centers on claims that customer data including names, email addresses, and account related details was accessed due to insufficient safeguards. Wynn Resorts has not admitted wrongdoing, and the proceedings are ongoing. The development underscores the central role of cybersecurity controls and disclosure practices for operators managing large volumes of customer information.

Crypto.com Receives Conditional US National Trust Bank Approval – Federal Oversight Would Expand Digital Asset Custody and Staking Services

Key Takeaways

Conditional Approval From the OCC

Crypto.com has announced that it has received conditional approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to establish a national trust bank in the United States. The decision marks a regulatory step that would place part of the company’s digital asset operations under direct federal supervision once all requirements are met.

The planned entity will be formed as Foris Dax National Trust Bank and will operate as Crypto.com National Trust Bank after full authorization. The OCC approval is conditional, meaning Crypto.com must satisfy specific pre opening requirements before it can begin operations under the federal charter. These requirements relate to capital levels, governance structures, risk management controls, and internal policies.

Until final approval is granted, the bank cannot commence operations as a federally supervised national trust bank.

Scope of Services: Custody, Staking, and Trade Settlement

The proposed national trust bank will function as a limited purpose institution. It will not accept customer deposits and will not issue loans. Instead, it will focus exclusively on digital asset services.

According to the announcement, these services include institutional grade custody, staking, and trade settlement. Custody refers to the safeguarding of digital assets on behalf of clients. Staking involves participating in blockchain validation processes where applicable, while trade settlement covers the processing and finalization of digital asset transactions.

For users of crypto platforms, especially institutional clients, federally supervised custody can affect how assets are held and managed. Oversight by the OCC introduces a single federal regulatory framework for the trust bank’s activities, as opposed to oversight solely at the state level.

Relationship to Existing State Regulated Entity

Crypto.com already operates Crypto.com Custody Trust Company, a non depository trust firm regulated by the New Hampshire Banking Department. The new federal charter would exist alongside this state level entity.

With the addition of a national trust bank, Crypto.com aims to offer what it describes as a one stop qualified custodian under federal oversight. In practical terms, this would allow certain institutional clients to work within a unified federal regulatory structure rather than relying solely on state supervision.

CEO Kris Marszalek stated that the conditional approval reflects the company’s focus on compliance and on providing regulated services. He described the development as a step toward meeting institutional demand for custody solutions under what he called a gold standard of federal oversight.

Political Context and Corporate Activity

According to Bloomberg, Marszalek was among the first crypto executives to meet with Donald Trump at Mar a Lago following his 2024 election victory. The company later contributed 1 million dollars to Trump’s inauguration committee and made eight figure donations to MAGA Inc., a conservative political action committee. In January, Crypto.com added another 5 million dollars to MAGA Inc., according to a recent filing.

Separately, earlier this month Marszalek acquired the AI.com domain for approximately 70 million dollars in cryptocurrency. The purchase was brokered by Larry Fischer and is described as the largest domain name transaction to date. The domain had previously been listed at 100 million dollars. Marszalek plans to launch a consumer AI platform under that brand.

These developments are separate from the national trust bank application but form part of the broader corporate activity surrounding the company.

Part of a Broader Trend Among Digital Asset Firms

Crypto.com is not alone in pursuing a national trust charter. The announcement places the exchange among a group of digital asset firms that have sought similar federal approvals. Companies mentioned include Circle Internet Group, Paxos, BitGo, and Fidelity Digital Assets.

For institutional investors, federal oversight by the OCC can provide regulatory clarity and a standardized supervisory framework. In the context of digital asset custody, this may simplify compliance processes for entities that require federally regulated counterparties.

The national trust bank structure differs from a traditional commercial bank model because it does not involve deposit taking or lending. Instead, it is tailored to specific fiduciary or custodial functions.

What the Conditional Status Means

Conditional approval does not equate to immediate operational status. Crypto.com must meet the OCC’s pre opening conditions before the charter becomes fully effective. These conditions typically relate to demonstrating sufficient capital, establishing governance and board structures, implementing risk management systems, and finalizing internal compliance policies.

Only after the OCC confirms that these requirements have been satisfied can the institution open as a national trust bank. Until then, Crypto.com’s existing regulated activities continue under its current structure, including its New Hampshire regulated custody trust company.

Our Assessment

The conditional approval from the OCC allows Crypto.com to move forward with plans to establish a federally supervised national trust bank focused on digital asset custody, staking, and trade settlement. The institution will operate as a limited purpose trust bank and will not engage in deposit taking or lending. Final authorization depends on meeting capital, governance, and risk control requirements set by the regulator. The development places Crypto.com among several digital asset firms seeking national trust charters and expands the company’s regulatory footprint beyond its existing state regulated custody entity.

OCC Grants Crypto.com Conditional Bank Trust Charter – Federal Oversight Would Expand Custody Role in the US

Key Takeaways

OCC Issues Conditional Approval for Crypto.com

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has granted Crypto.com conditional approval for a national bank trust charter. The exchange announced the development on Monday, stating that it had applied for the charter in October.

According to Crypto.com, full approval would allow the company to establish itself as a federally regulated institution operating under OCC oversight. In that capacity, it would act as a custodian across the United States.

The company previously said that its trust bank would provide custody services for digital asset treasuries, exchange-traded funds, and other institutional participants. Custody services typically involve safeguarding digital assets on behalf of clients, a function that carries regulatory and compliance obligations when conducted within the US banking framework.

The OCC is the federal agency responsible for chartering, regulating, and supervising national banks and federal savings associations. A national bank trust charter places an institution under direct federal supervision rather than a patchwork of state-level licensing regimes.

Part of a Broader Wave of Conditional Approvals

Crypto.com is not the only digital asset company to receive a conditional green light from the OCC in recent months. In December, the regulator conditionally approved five national bank charter applications submitted by Circle, Ripple, BitGo, Fidelity Digital Assets, and Paxos.

These approvals marked a significant policy step for the federal banking regulator in relation to crypto-focused firms seeking integration into the traditional banking system. While conditional approval does not equate to full authorization, it signals that the OCC is willing to consider crypto-native companies within the national banking framework, subject to meeting supervisory and compliance requirements.

Coinbase also applied for a national bank trust charter in October. However, the company stated that it had no intention of becoming a bank if its application were approved.

Industry Pushback and Regulatory Timing Concerns

The wave of applications has drawn scrutiny from parts of the traditional banking sector. This month, the American Bankers Association sent a comment letter to the OCC urging the regulator to delay granting new national trust bank charters to companies associated with digital assets.

The association argued that the framework for the payment stablecoin legislation known as the GENIUS Act, which was signed into law in July, should be fully implemented before additional charters are approved. The group stated that each application review requires robust and broadly applicable safety and soundness standards. It also cautioned the OCC against measuring its decision timelines against traditional benchmarks.

These comments reflect ongoing debates about how digital asset companies should be supervised and how new federal standards intersect with existing banking regulations.

Implications of a National Trust Charter

A national bank trust charter can materially change how a crypto company operates in the United States. According to BairdHolm attorney Eli Rosenberg, most state money transmission regulations exclude chartered trust companies. As a result, a nationally chartered trust company would likely be exempt from most state licensing requirements.

For companies operating across multiple US jurisdictions, state-level licensing can involve separate applications, reporting obligations, and compliance procedures in each state. A national charter centralizes supervision under the OCC, potentially streamlining regulatory oversight.

In Crypto.com’s case, the company has stated that the charter would support its custody business. Custody of digital assets for treasuries and exchange-traded funds involves safeguarding client holdings and maintaining operational controls consistent with federal banking standards.

Political Scrutiny Around Other Applications

The broader charter process has also intersected with political developments. World Liberty Financial, the crypto company behind the USD1 stablecoin and backed by US President Donald Trump and his sons, applied for a national bank trust charter in January.

The company said that, if approved, the charter would allow it to issue and custody USD1 directly rather than relying on third-party providers. The application has drawn scrutiny from Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who questioned whether the review process would be handled impartially. OCC head Jonathan Gould has stated that the review would be conducted as an apolitical and nonpartisan process.

These developments underscore that applications for national trust charters by crypto firms are being evaluated in a politically sensitive environment, particularly when they involve high-profile backers.

Our Assessment

The OCC’s conditional approval of Crypto.com’s national bank trust charter application places the exchange among several major digital asset firms seeking federal banking status. If finalized, the charter would allow Crypto.com to operate as a federally supervised custodian in the United States and could reduce reliance on state-level money transmission licenses. The decision forms part of a broader series of conditional approvals by the OCC and is unfolding amid industry feedback and political scrutiny over how crypto-related banking activities should be regulated.

France Introduces Framework for Monetizable Digital Object Games – New Rules Define Limits for Web3 Titles Without Cash Payouts

Key Takeaways

France Establishes a Legal Category for Monetizable Digital Object Games

France has introduced a dedicated regulatory framework for games that include what the national gambling authority defines as monetizable digital objects. The Autorité Nationale des Jeux, or ANJ, announced the new mechanism as part of a three-year pilot programme.

The framework targets games that operate between traditional video gaming and regulated gambling. These titles allow players to obtain digital assets such as NFTs or blockchain-based items that can be traded on secondary markets. However, they do not provide payouts in legal tender in the way licensed gambling products do.

The legal basis for the framework is the Security and Digital Space Regulation Act, known as the SREN Act, which was passed in May 2024. Under this legislation, France created a distinct legal category for online games that involve chance, financial stakes and resellable digital assets without cash payouts. This distinction separates such products from both conventional video games and fully licensed gambling offerings.

Scope: Blockchain Mechanics and Secondary Market Trading

The new rules directly affect blockchain-based gaming mechanics. Any game that enables players to acquire digital objects with monetary value through resale falls within the scope of the framework, provided that no legal tender payouts are offered.

This is particularly relevant for Web3-based gaming models in which in-game items are tokenized and transferable. The ability to trade these assets externally has been a defining feature of many blockchain projects. Under the French framework, this monetization element triggers regulatory oversight even if the operator does not distribute cash prizes.

For users of crypto-based gaming platforms, this means that certain titles previously operating in a regulatory grey area will now be subject to formal supervision in France. The classification hinges on the presence of chance, financial participation and the resale value of digital objects.

Operational Requirements: KYC, Limits and Reporting

Operators offering games under this new category must comply with several obligations. First, minors are not permitted to participate. Companies must therefore implement strict know your customer procedures with a focus on age verification.

Second, the framework introduces limits on the maximum value of digital rewards that a single player can receive during a defined period. Although these rewards can be monetized through secondary markets, they cannot be exchanged for cash directly through the game in the manner of licensed gambling products.

Third, responsible gambling measures are mandatory. Operators must provide tools such as play-time limits, spending limits and self-exclusion features. These requirements align the oversight of monetizable digital object games more closely with established gambling compliance standards.

In addition, companies must file a formal declaration with the ANJ before launching games that fall under the new regime in France. They are also required to maintain detailed activity logs and grant the regulator access provisions to track fund flows. This reporting structure enables ongoing supervision and potential scrutiny of how digital assets are distributed and traded.

Three-Year Pilot Programme Under the SREN Act

The framework has been introduced as a pilot programme lasting three years. During this period, the ANJ will oversee how the category functions in practice and how operators comply with the obligations.

By embedding the regime in the SREN Act, France has provided a statutory foundation rather than relying on informal guidance. The creation of a clearly defined legal category signals that the authorities view monetizable digital object games as distinct from both unregulated gaming and traditional gambling.

For international operators, the pilot structure indicates that the rules are operational but may be subject to evaluation over time. Any company targeting the French market with blockchain-based mechanics must assess whether its product falls within this new classification.

European Context: Belgium, the UK and Poland

France is described as the first jurisdiction to introduce a dedicated framework specifically overseeing monetizable digital object games. However, other European countries have also addressed similar products.

Belgium and the United Kingdom have enacted their own regulatory measures concerning such games. While the specific approaches differ, the existence of national rules in multiple jurisdictions shows that regulators are increasingly examining titles that combine elements of chance, financial participation and digital asset trading.

Poland is currently working on an amendment to its Gambling Act aimed at making the legislation more inclusive and comprehensive. This indicates that legislative developments in this area are ongoing within the European Union.

For operators and users of crypto-integrated gaming platforms, this broader European movement suggests a shift toward clearer legal definitions and supervisory mechanisms for Web3-related gaming models.

Our Assessment

France has formally defined and regulated a category of games that involve chance, financial stakes and resellable digital assets without cash payouts. The framework, introduced as a three-year pilot under the SREN Act, imposes KYC requirements, responsible gambling tools, reward limits and reporting obligations, while excluding minors. In a European environment where Belgium, the UK and Poland are also addressing similar products, the French model establishes a structured approach to supervising blockchain-based games that monetize digital objects through secondary markets.

Binance Reports 97% Drop in Sanctions Exposure Since 2024 – Exchange Responds to Allegations With Compliance Data

Key Takeaways

Binance Publishes Compliance Update After Media Allegations

Binance has stated that it has significantly reduced its exposure to sanctioned entities and high risk jurisdictions since the beginning of 2024. In a blog post titled “Setting the record straight,” published on February 23, the crypto exchange said that sanctions-related exposure as a percentage of total exchange volume has fallen by roughly 97 percent since January 2024.

According to the company, this figure now stands at approximately 0.009 percent of overall trading volume. Binance said that exchange volume connected to sanctions-related entities has declined over the same period.

The statement was released after a February 13 report by Fortune, which cited anonymous sources and alleged that Binance had dismissed at least five investigators. These individuals were reportedly said to have uncovered evidence of potential Iranian sanctions violations. Binance rejected those claims on February 15, calling the report “categorically false.” The company stated that no investigator was dismissed for raising compliance concerns or for reporting potential sanctions issues.

In its latest post, Binance said that some compliance employees did leave the company following an internal review. According to the exchange, that review identified breaches of company data protection and confidentiality guidelines.

Reduction in Exposure to Iranian Exchanges

Binance provided specific figures related to its exposure to Iranian trading platforms. The company said that between January 2024 and January 2026, it reduced direct exposure to four top Iranian exchanges by more than 97 percent. In monetary terms, this exposure declined from 4.19 million dollars to 110,000 dollars over the two year period.

The exchange did not name the four Iranian platforms in the statement but characterized them as the leading exchanges in the country. Binance framed the reduction as part of broader efforts to limit interaction with sanctioned entities and jurisdictions.

In the same post, Binance argued that recent reporting on its sanctions compliance relied on incomplete and mischaracterized accounts. The company said such reporting did not reflect all of the facts or the full investigative record.

Sanctions compliance has been a recurring issue for crypto exchanges operating globally, particularly when dealing with jurisdictions subject to international restrictions. In 2022, Binance faced scrutiny after a Reuters report alleged that Iranian users continued to trade on the platform even after the country had been blacklisted. The latest statement positions the company as having tightened its controls since then.

Compliance Investment and Workforce Allocation

Beyond the numerical data on sanctions exposure, Binance used the blog post to emphasize its compliance structure. The company stated that approximately 25 percent of its global headcount is dedicated to compliance related functions.

Binance also said it has invested hundreds of millions of US dollars in its compliance programs. While the post did not break down specific spending categories, the reference to substantial financial resources indicates that the company is highlighting internal controls, monitoring systems, and regulatory engagement as core operational priorities.

For users of crypto trading platforms, including those who rely on digital assets for betting or gaming transactions, compliance measures can affect account access, withdrawal processes, and jurisdictional availability. Exchanges that tighten sanctions controls may implement stricter verification procedures or restrict services in certain regions. Binance did not announce new user facing restrictions in the post, but the data suggests ongoing monitoring and adjustments to exposure levels.

Ongoing Scrutiny of Sanctions Compliance in Crypto Markets

The broader crypto industry continues to face scrutiny over sanctions enforcement, particularly in relation to countries such as Iran and Russia. In the same news cycle, separate reporting highlighted concerns about crypto exchange networks allegedly helping Russia skirt sanctions, according to blockchain analytics firm Elliptic.

Although Binance’s latest statement focused on its own internal metrics, the timing reflects a wider regulatory environment in which authorities and media outlets closely examine transaction flows linked to sanctioned jurisdictions.

By publishing detailed percentage reductions and specific dollar amounts, Binance appears to be responding directly to questions about how it monitors and limits exposure to restricted entities. The company maintains that the allegations cited in the Fortune report are inaccurate and that internal departures were linked to confidentiality breaches rather than retaliation for raising compliance concerns.

Our Assessment

Based on the information provided by Binance, the exchange reports a 97 percent reduction in sanctions-related exposure since January 2024, with current exposure representing approximately 0.009 percent of total trading volume. It also states that direct exposure to four major Iranian exchanges declined from 4.19 million dollars to 110,000 dollars over two years. The company denies allegations of dismissing investigators over sanctions concerns and highlights that one quarter of its workforce is dedicated to compliance. These disclosures indicate that sanctions compliance remains a central operational and reputational issue for the exchange as it responds to external scrutiny.

Crypto Capital Shifts From Token Launches to Listed Stocks – New Data Shows Most 2025 Tokens Trade Below TGE Price

Key Takeaways

Majority of 2025 Token Launches Trade Below Listing Price

Research referenced by market maker DWF Labs indicates that most token launches in 2025 have struggled to maintain their initial valuations. Drawing on data from Memento Research that covers hundreds of token launches across major centralized and decentralized exchanges, DWF reports that more than 80% of projects now trade below their token generation event price.

The token generation event price is the exchange-listed opening price set before launch. According to DWF Labs managing partner Andrei Grachev, most tokens reach a peak within the first month after listing and then trend downward as selling pressure builds. The data show that typical declines range between 50% and 70% within roughly 90 days of listing.

The analysis focuses on structured launches linked to projects with products or protocols, rather than meme coins. Identified sources of selling pressure include airdrops and early investor token unlocks. These mechanisms increase circulating supply shortly after listing, which can weigh on market prices when demand does not keep pace.

For you as a market participant, the data highlight that initial exchange pricing has not translated into sustained market support for most newly issued tokens in 2025.

IPO Fundraising and M&A Activity Increase in the Same Period

While token performance has weakened, capital formation in traditional financial markets tied to the crypto sector has accelerated. According to figures cited by DWF, fundraising for crypto-related initial public offerings reached about $14.6 billion in 2025. This marks a sharp increase from the prior year.

Merger and acquisition activity in the sector also rose significantly, surpassing $42.5 billion. That represents the highest level in five years, based on the data referenced in the report.

Grachev described the development as a rotation of capital rather than an exit from the sector. He pointed to the simultaneous rise in IPO funding and M&A activity as evidence that investor money remains within the broader crypto ecosystem, but is shifting from token-based exposure to equity stakes in publicly listed companies.

For international users evaluating crypto businesses, these figures indicate that institutional and corporate transactions are taking place at scale, even as many token markets face post-listing declines.

Valuation Gap Between Listed Crypto Companies and Token Projects

DWF compared publicly listed crypto companies including Circle, Gemini, eToro, Bullish and Figure with tokenized projects using trailing 12-month price-to-sales ratios. According to the report, public equities trade at multiples ranging from roughly 7 to 40 times sales. Comparable tokenized projects trade at lower multiples, between about 2 and 16 times sales.

The firm attributes this valuation gap primarily to accessibility. Many institutional investors, such as pension funds and endowments, are restricted to regulated securities markets. Public shares can also be included in indexes and exchange-traded funds, which can create automatic buying through passive investment products.

Tokens, by contrast, often require additional custody approvals and policy adjustments within institutional frameworks. As a result, equity instruments may fit more easily into existing portfolio rules and compliance structures.

Market Participants Distinguish Between Tokens and Businesses

Maksym Sakharov, co-founder and group CEO of WeFi, confirmed that he has observed a capital rotation away from token launches. He stated that when risk appetite tightens, investors seek clearer ownership structures, disclosure standards and enforceable rights.

According to Sakharov, capital is moving toward businesses that function as infrastructure, including custody, payments, settlement, brokerage and compliance services. He noted that the equity structure aligns with licensing, audits, partnerships and distribution channels, which are features of operating companies rather than standalone tokens.

Sakharov also emphasized that the market increasingly treats tokens and businesses as separate entities. A token without sustained user activity, transaction volume and revenue may be priced primarily on expectations. This dynamic can lead to strong initial performance followed by later declines if operational metrics do not meet market assumptions.

Listed crypto equities are not necessarily described as safer, but they offer standardized reporting, governance frameworks and legal claims. These characteristics can make them easier to evaluate within established investment processes.

Structural Shift Rather Than Short-Term Volatility

Grachev characterized the development as structural rather than cyclical. In his view, tokens will continue to play roles in network incentives and governance, but institutional capital is increasingly favoring equity-based exposure.

He described the situation as a bifurcation in which protocols with demonstrable revenue may continue to attract support, while a larger group of speculative launches faces a more challenging environment.

For users of crypto platforms, including those active in adjacent sectors such as digital payments or online services that integrate tokens, this shift underscores a broader differentiation in how capital markets evaluate digital assets compared with regulated corporate entities.

Our Assessment

The data presented by DWF Labs show a clear divergence in 2025 between token market performance and capital flows into publicly listed crypto companies. Most new token launches trade below their initial listing price, often with significant drawdowns within three months. At the same time, IPO fundraising and M&A volumes in the crypto sector have reached multi-year highs. The figures indicate that capital remains active in the sector but is increasingly directed toward equity structures rather than newly issued tokens.