Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has criticised centralised exchanges and the expanding reliance on crypto exchange-traded funds, arguing that the growing institutionalisation of digital assets risks undermining the foundational principles of decentralisation. His comments come as the crypto industry continues to lean heavily on custodial platforms and traditional financial wrappers to attract mainstream investors, a trend Buterin believes replicates the same vulnerabilities blockchain technology was designed to eliminate. Buterin referenced collapses such as FTX as evidence that custodial intermediaries introduce unacceptable systemic risks. He emphasised that the lesson from these failures is clear: centralisation magnifies opacity, custody risk and mismanagement, ultimately harming users who rely on third-party gatekeepers rather than trust-minimised protocols. His remarks reflect broader concerns that crypto adoption is increasingly shaped by convenience and institutional familiarity rather than decentralised architecture. Examining the institutional wave and the centralisation trap Buterin has repeatedly warned that crypto’s rapid institutional growth could shift focus away from the core ideals of self-sovereignty, open-source transparency and minimal trust. He argues that the widespread push toward spot ETFs and exchange-based trading mimics traditional finance structures, centralising asset custody and reintroducing single points of failure. He points out that many of these products depend on off-chain custodians whose operational risks can mirror those of legacy financial institutions. Referencing the fallout from FTX, Buterin suggested that such failures highlight why fully centralised systems are fundamentally misaligned with crypto’s design philosophy. He advocates for frameworks that incorporate verifiable cryptographic proofs, such as zero-knowledge systems, which could allow platforms to comply with regulatory requirements without compromising decentralisation. In his view, exchanges and ETF providers should not become the primary pillars of crypto infrastructure, especially if they reduce transparency and user control. Implications for developers, investors and regulators For developers, Buterin’s critique signals the need to prioritise decentralised architecture rather than relying heavily on custodial onboarding funnels. While centralised platforms may simplify user experience, they introduce trust assumptions that weaken the resilience of the entire ecosystem. Projects that depend on custodial intermediaries for liquidity or adoption may face greater exposure to operational failures or regulatory constraints. For investors, the reliance on ETFs and exchange-based products presents a similar trade-off. While such instruments offer convenience, they distance users from the underlying assets and reintroduce dependence on institutional custodians. Buterin’s remarks highlight the importance of understanding the difference between exposure and ownership, particularly for long-term participants who may benefit from direct interaction with on-chain protocols and self-custody solutions. Regulators face the challenge of balancing consumer protection with innovation. According to Buterin, regulatory frameworks that emphasise verifiable on-chain transparency rather than reliance on centralised intermediaries could reduce systemic risk. His suggestions point toward a future where compliance measures can be satisfied by cryptographic methods rather than institutional trust. In summary, Vitalik Buterin’s critique of centralised exchanges and ETFs serves as a reminder that crypto’s long-term success depends on preserving decentralisation even as the industry matures. He cautions that convenience-driven adoption risks recreating the very systems crypto sought to replace. As the sector grows, his message is clear: trust the technology, not the intermediaries.

The White House has begun reviewing a proposed rule submitted by the U.S. Treasury that would allow the Internal Revenue Service to obtain information on offshore digital asset holdings maintained by American taxpayers. The measure would bring the United States closer to participating in the global Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework, an initiative developed by the OECD to combat tax evasion and enhance transparency surrounding cross-border crypto transactions. Dozens of countries have already committed to implementing the framework, making this one of the most consequential developments for U.S. crypto oversight in recent years. The proposal follows growing pressure on U.S. regulators to strengthen digital asset tax compliance and reduce incentives for investors to shift assets to foreign jurisdictions. Under CARF, participating countries automatically exchange information on crypto accounts and transactions, enabling tax authorities to identify offshore holdings with far greater accuracy. If implemented, the new rule would represent a major upgrade to the Treasury’s oversight capabilities and significantly narrow the visibility gap historically associated with foreign crypto platforms. Practical implications and compliance challenges If approved, the proposed rule would require digital asset service providers that serve U.S. persons to report account-level and transactional data related to offshore activity. These requirements would apply to exchanges, custodians and certain wallet providers operating internationally. Although most CARF jurisdictions plan to begin exchanging information in 2027, affected entities would need to prepare well in advance, upgrading internal systems for data collection, identity verification and jurisdictional reporting. For U.S. taxpayers, the change would make it increasingly difficult to conceal digital asset positions held abroad. The availability of automatic information-sharing would align crypto holdings with traditional foreign financial accounts, which are already subject to extensive reporting requirements. While the Treasury has clarified that decentralised finance transactions will not fall under CARF's reporting scope, centralised platforms and custodial service providers will face significantly heightened compliance responsibilities. Strategic and market-impact considerations From a strategic standpoint, joining CARF would further integrate digital asset markets into the global tax compliance architecture. The move could enhance trust and reduce perceived regulatory risk, encouraging participation from institutions that have hesitated to enter the sector due to concerns over opaque tax reporting standards. Greater transparency may also support the long-term development of regulated digital asset markets in the United States. However, the shift may also reshape capital flows. Increased transparency could prompt some investors to migrate toward privacy-focused jurisdictions or decentralised protocols that fall outside traditional reporting structures. This may create a divergence between regulated and unregulated segments of the market, with implications for liquidity, market depth and cross-border trading behaviours. For regulators, aligning with CARF represents a chance to level the playing field between domestic and offshore platforms. As new reporting forms—such as the forthcoming 1099-DA for digital asset transactions—enter circulation, authorities aim to prevent foreign exchanges from gaining a competitive advantage through reduced oversight. Ultimately, the White House’s review marks a significant step toward a globalised, standardised approach to crypto taxation, with far-reaching implications for investors, service providers and policymakers as the regulatory landscape continues to evolve.

Why KuCoin Is Doubling Down on Australia KuCoin, one of the world’s largest crypto platforms, is making a decisive move into the Australian market. The company has appointed James Pinch as Managing Director for Australia and opened a new headquarters in Sydney’s CBD — a clear signal that the exchange is committing long-term resources to a region where digital asset adoption continues to grow faster than traditional investment categories. The announcement, made under embargo ahead of the Australian Crypto Convention (ACC), marks one of KuCoin’s most significant regional expansions to date. Beyond adding office space, the company plans to hire across compliance, cybersecurity, operations, and product development over the next year. It’s a practical step toward building a full-scale local operation rather than running the Australian market remotely. Pinch’s appointment is central to the strategy. With a background that spans corporate advisory, traditional financial services, and a series of fintech and trading-sector ventures, he brings a mix of industry experience and hands-on disruption that KuCoin believes is well-matched to Australia’s increasingly sophisticated crypto audience. Investor Takeaway KuCoin’s expansion comes as Australia becomes one of the world’s most active crypto markets, with retail adoption outpacing ETFs and international equities. How the New Leadership Fits Into KuCoin’s Broader Strategy Pinch describes the company’s move as a two-way investment: KuCoin commits to Australia, and Australia — already home to more than 360,000 KuCoin users — rewards platforms that can deliver both innovation and trust. “Investors here are serious about digital assets,” he said. “They want transparency, stability, and strong security standards. Our goal is to build that capability directly on the ground.” His comments reflect a broader shift in Australia’s investing habits. Roughly 12% of adults now hold digital assets, placing crypto ahead of exchange-traded funds and international equities in terms of adoption. That’s unusual for a developed market — and highlights why global exchanges have been racing to deepen their presence in the region. KuCoin’s local investment also arrives at a time when digital assets are transitioning from speculative trades into a recognized asset class. Australia sits at the center of that transition: the national market is projected to grow nearly 20% in 2026 toward US$1.2 billion in revenue, according to recent industry estimates. For KuCoin, this makes leadership experience particularly important. Pinch has built and scaled companies across trading, brokerage, and fintech, with a track record rooted in efficiency and transparency. Those qualities line up neatly with KuCoin’s message that it wants to bring institutional-grade security and regulatory alignment to one of its most active user bases. A Marketing Push That Extends Beyond the Office KuCoin’s timing is not accidental. The company is sponsoring the Australian Crypto Convention for the first time, with global CEO BC Wong visiting Sydney to open the new office and meet with partners at the event. The launch also coincides with KuCoin’s first major Australian marketing campaign — fronted by professional golfer and national icon Adam Scott. Scott will use a KuCoin-branded golf bag throughout the Australian tournament season, including the Australian Open at Royal Melbourne and the Australian PGA Championship. The campaign, branded “Integrity First. Trading on KuCoin Next,” leans heavily into themes of trust and long-term discipline, qualities the golf star says align naturally with his own career. “I’ve been watching the crypto sector for years,” Scott noted. “KuCoin’s focus on security and transparency is what won me over.” It may seem unusual for a crypto company to partner with a sports champion, but the move fits a wider industry pattern: exchanges are increasingly using national icons to connect with investors who want a recognizable, stable signal in a sector known for volatility. In Australia, where crypto adoption already runs deep across middle-income users, the strategy could prove especially effective. Investor Takeaway KuCoin is investing simultaneously in regulation, talent, branding, and community — a combination that often signals a long-term market commitment rather than short-cycle expansion. What KuCoin’s Investment Means for the Australian Market KuCoin’s broader message centers around trust. With regulators tightening expectations and users demanding more transparent protections, exchanges can no longer rely on global infrastructure alone. BC Wong described the leadership expansion as “a clear signal of how serious we are about this market,” emphasizing world-class security, deeper liquidity, and a transparent relationship with regulators. For the Australian crypto community, the expansion may bring more than local jobs. It represents another major global player planting roots onshore — at a time when the country’s digital-assets sector is evolving quickly. By combining a physical presence with sponsorships, industry engagement, and a recognizable public ambassador, KuCoin appears positioned to compete aggressively in a market that is maturing faster than many expected. Whether the strategy leads to faster user growth or deeper institutional acceptance remains to be seen, but the intent is unmistakable: KuCoin is no longer treating Australia as a satellite region. It is treating it as a strategic one.

Crypto investment products saw renewed selling pressure yesterday as institutional outflows accelerated across major U.S. exchange-traded funds. Spot Bitcoin ETFs led the decline, recording nearly half a billion dollars in net redemptions as market sentiment remained fragile following continued price weakness. The move extends a multi-day reversal in ETF flows, reversing the strong inflow momentum seen earlier in the quarter and signalling a cautious stance from professional investors. Preliminary data shows that U.S. Bitcoin ETFs collectively saw about $492 million in net outflows for the day. The withdrawals were driven largely by sizable redemptions from several major issuers, erasing gains from the prior week and contributing to renewed downside pressure in the broader crypto market. The trend follows a larger global pattern: over the past week, crypto ETPs worldwide have shed more than $1.2 billion in capital, with Bitcoin and Ethereum products seeing the sharpest declines. The abrupt shift in investor behaviour suggests a recalibration of risk appetite amid persistent macro uncertainty. Drivers behind renewed outflows Market analysts attribute the sudden reversal in ETF flows to a combination of macroeconomic caution and crypto-specific sentiment erosion. With investors awaiting key economic data and central bank signals, risk assets have faced heightened volatility, pushing institutions to reduce exposure across higher-beta segments such as digital assets. Bitcoin’s continued price softness has also played a role, as ETFs tend to experience pro-cyclical flows that amplify market direction. As long as prices trend lower, ETF redemptions tend to accelerate, creating a feedback loop between spot markets and ETF liquidity. Another factor influencing flows is the rotation into cash-equivalent products as institutional desks adopt defensive strategies ahead of year-end. Traders note that some of the recent redemptions stem from profit-taking after months of strong inflows earlier in the year. Several ETFs had seen significant asset growth, and the recent sell-off presents an opportunity for investors to lock in gains or rebalance into more stable instruments. At the same time, Ethereum ETFs have faced their own challenges, with outflows increasing during the week as uncertainty grows around the asset’s short-term trajectory and regulatory developments surrounding staking products. Implications for market structure and investor sentiment The uptick in outflows has raised questions about whether ETF demand—a crucial driver of institutional Bitcoin adoption—may be losing momentum temporarily. While structural interest in crypto exposure remains strong, especially from long-term allocators, short-term sentiment has clearly weakened. Large-scale ETF redemptions place additional pressure on market liquidity, especially in periods when trading volumes across spot exchanges are already subdued. This dynamic can contribute to more pronounced price swings and reinforce cautious investor behaviour. However, some analysts argue that the pullback reflects normal market cycles rather than a broader shift in institutional positioning. Crypto ETFs have historically experienced flow volatility that corresponds closely with macroeconomic data releases, liquidity conditions and broader risk sentiment. Given the depth of inflows seen earlier in the year, a period of consolidation and withdrawal is not unexpected. Many institutional investors remain fundamentally bullish on long-term crypto adoption, and analysts expect ETF demand to stabilise once macro uncertainties ease. In the near term, ETF flows will remain a key indicator of institutional appetite and broader market direction. Yesterday’s acceleration in outflows highlights the sensitivity of crypto investment vehicles to shifting risk conditions, underscoring their growing integration with mainstream financial markets. As volatility persists, market participants will closely monitor whether redemptions continue or whether stabilisation emerges in the days ahead.

South Korea is actively drafting a sweeping new regulatory framework that would reshape how digital assets, particularly stablecoins and cross-border crypto transactions, are governed in the country. The proposed legislation, including the Digital Asset Basic Act introduced in June 2025, signals a shift from Singapore-style piecemeal rules toward a unified regime for digital assets. The bill addresses key issues such as issuer licensing, reserve requirements, bankruptcy remoteness for stablecoins and controls on foreign-issued crypto networks. At the same time, the government is preparing tighter rules for cross-border crypto flows, including mandatory registration and monthly reporting of foreign transactions by virtual asset service providers (VASPs), in response to large-scale forex-related crimes tied to crypto. The regulatory push reflects South Korea’s ambition to integrate crypto into its financial-system architecture more rigorously while guarding against capital-flight, regulatory arbitrage and risks to monetary sovereignty. Key components of the draft regulation and policy direction Under the Digital Asset Basic Act and related bills, stablecoins would be classified as "asset-linked digital assets" requiring licensing by the Financial Services Commission (FSC). Issuers would face capital and reserve-management obligations—for example, a minimum equity threshold has been proposed. Foreign-issued stablecoins are also likely to be required to establish local branches or meet rigorous eligibility standards before the assets can be listed domestically. The cross-border rules, set to start in the second half of 2025, will require VASPs engaged in offshore crypto activity to register with authorities and report their transactions to the central bank. Together, these measures aim to increase supervisory clarity, raise accountability for issuers and platforms, and ensure consumers and the financial-system are better protected from emerging crypto risks. Implications for industry, investors and the broader financial system For crypto-firms, the planned regulations present both opportunity and challenge. On one hand, a clearer licensing and legal framework may boost confidence, attract foreign investment and support product innovation—particularly in regulated stablecoin issuance and token-services. Local fintechs are already eyeing the issuance of won-pegged stablecoins once rules allow. On the other hand, the cost and complexity of compliance will increase: firms must build stronger governance systems, meet capital requirements, maintain segregated reserves and manage cross-border registration burdens. From an investor perspective, the framework may increase institutional-grade access and reduce regulatory risk, but it also signals a tighter environment for speculative token practices. Platforms and issuers will face closer scrutiny, and tokens previously listed under lighter regimes may require relisting or de-listing processes. At the policy level, South Korea is signalling that crypto is no longer a peripheral market segment but a regulated pillar in its digital-finance strategy, emphasizing financial stability and innovation concurrently. As one of Asia’s largest retail-crypto markets, the effectiveness of the draft laws will be closely watched by market participants globally. In sum, South Korea’s drafting of comprehensive crypto regulation marks a meaningful inflection point for how Asia’s digital-asset markets will evolve. The upcoming legislation on stablecoins, VASP regulation and cross-border oversight could form a template for other jurisdictions balancing innovation with prudential guardrails.

BitMine Immersion Technologies has announced a substantial Ethereum-treasury position, reporting ownership of 3,559,879 ETH as of its latest disclosure, valued at approximately $3,120 per token at the time of reporting. According to the company, this holding represents roughly 2.9 percent of the entire circulating ETH supply, making it the largest publicly known Ethereum treasury position held by a listed company. BitMine also reported holding 192 BTC and more than $600 million in unencumbered cash, bringing its total crypto and cash reserves to approximately $11.8 billion. Chairman Thomas Lee emphasised that the company’s accumulation reflects a multi-year strategic view on Ethereum rather than a short-term market trade. Lee stated that Ethereum’s ongoing network upgrades, tokenisation trends and decentralised finance adoption form the foundation of BitMine’s long-term thesis. Although crypto markets continue to experience periods of volatility, he noted that the firm sees these drawdowns as opportunities to expand its holdings. BitMine’s acquisition of more than 54,000 ETH in a single week further reinforces its conviction and positions the company as one of the most significant institutional participants backing the Ethereum ecosystem. Strategic rationale and concentration risks BitMine’s aggressive accumulation of ETH highlights its intention to treat Ethereum as a core reserve asset, similar to how certain corporates have approached Bitcoin. By holding nearly 3.6 million ETH, the company has taken strong directional exposure on the network’s evolution and economic activity. Lee pointed to tokenisation, institutional settlement infrastructure and the forthcoming “Fusaka” upgrade as structural trends expected to enhance Ethereum’s value proposition. As decentralised applications grow and smart-contract adoption deepens, BitMine believes Ethereum will play an increasingly central role in the future of financial markets. However, the scale of BitMine’s holding also amplifies concentration risk. A downturn in Ethereum’s price impacts the company’s net asset value significantly due to the large proportion of treasury assets tied to the token. Investors may scrutinise the transparency of BitMine’s wallet management, security practices and the methods used to accumulate such a vast treasury. Questions around liquidity management, price impact and risk controls will remain central as the company continues to build its position. Market and investor impact BitMine’s disclosure provides insight into growing institutional participation in Ethereum and its evolving market structure. Large-scale corporate accumulation can influence circulating supply dynamics and market depth, especially during periods of reduced liquidity. While this demonstrates institutional confidence, it may also contribute to heightened price sensitivity if market conditions deteriorate. For BitMine shareholders, the company’s performance is becoming increasingly correlated with Ethereum’s price trajectory rather than traditional business fundamentals. This shift introduces both upside potential and volatility, depending on broader market conditions. Institutional investors evaluating BitMine will closely examine how the company manages governance, treasury risk and operational transparency. Overall, BitMine’s reported ETH holdings represent a significant development in the landscape of corporate digital-asset treasuries. By committing to a long-term Ethereum strategy, the company has positioned itself as a notable institutional actor within the ecosystem. The coming years will test how effectively BitMine balances its conviction with the risks associated with such a concentrated crypto reserve.

The blockchain industry often uses overlapping technical terms that can confuse newcomers and professionals alike. Proof of Authority (PoA) and Proof of Concept (PoC) fall into that category. They sound similar but serve completely different purposes within the broader ecosystem. One is a consensus mechanism that governs how a blockchain reaches agreement. The other is an early-stage framework used to validate ideas before they move into production. Distinguishing these concepts is essential for developers, enterprises, and analysts assessing the viability and design of blockchain systems. Key Takeaways Proof of Authority is a consensus model optimized for speed, efficiency, and governance-driven validation. Proof of Concept is a development approach used to test feasibility before building a full blockchain system. PoA prioritizes identity and accountability among validators, making it suitable for permissioned or enterprise networks. PoC reduces risk by allowing developers and enterprises to confirm that a proposed blockchain solution can solve the intended problem. Understanding the difference between PoA and PoC helps analysts, developers, and businesses correctly evaluate the maturity and purpose of blockchain projects. What Proof of Authority Means Proof of Authority is a consensus mechanism that prioritizes identity, reputation, and verified authority rather than computational work or token holdings. It is used in permissioned or semi-permissioned networks where a group of pre-approved validators maintain the chain. These validators are selected based on their credibility, organizational standing, or regulatory alignment. Their real-world identities are known, which introduces accountability into the validation process. PoA is designed for efficiency. Blocks are produced quickly, throughput increases significantly, and energy consumption remains minimal. This structure makes it a suitable choice for enterprise blockchains, private consortiums, and applications where trust is established at the governance level rather than the network level. However, the mechanism naturally trades decentralization for performance. Users must trust that the validators operate honestly and do not collude or censor transactions. Where Proof of Authority Is Used The applications of PoA typically sit within environments that require predictable performance and clear governance. Supply chain networks, enterprise settlement layers, consortium-led digital identity systems, and internal financial infrastructure are common examples. Ethereum’s former testnet (Kovan) and chains like vechain have implemented PoA to support scalability and regulated participation. Its real advantage is operational stability in contexts where decentralization is not the primary requirement. What Proof of Concept Means Proof of Concept is not a consensus algorithm. It is a development process adopted to demonstrate whether a blockchain idea, technical design, or business case actually works. Teams use PoCs to test a core concept without building the full system. A PoC evaluates feasibility, uncovers flaws, validates assumptions, and determines if the proposed solution can progress into a pilot, MVP, or production network. In blockchain development cycles, a PoC typically includes a narrowly scoped prototype that focuses on the hardest or most innovative part of the system. If the PoC succeeds, developers gain confidence to expand the architecture. If it fails, teams avoid costly full-scale implementation. The goal is clarity, not perfection. Where Proof of Concept Fits in Blockchain Development Enterprises rely heavily on PoCs before committing to blockchain adoption. Financial institutions test tokenization workflows. Logistics companies validate traceability systems. Government agencies assess digital identity frameworks. Startups also build PoCs to attract investors, refine token models, or validate technical assumptions. The PoC process reduces risk. It helps stakeholders determine whether blockchain is necessary, whether the technology can function as expected, and whether the implementation can scale. Without this step, many blockchain projects would fail at the deployment phase due to misunderstood requirements or unrealistic expectations. Core Difference Between PoA and PoC A Proof of Concept comes before any implementation and helps determine whether a blockchain solution is necessary, feasible, and aligned with the intended use case. It gives teams clarity on technical requirements and exposes limitations early. Once a PoC confirms that the idea can work, Proof of Authority becomes one of the potential consensus mechanisms for the production system. PoA is chosen when the final network needs identifiable validators, predictable performance, and a controlled governance model. The PoC validates the idea, while PoA—if selected—defines how the network will operate once deployed. They serve different purposes in the development process but complement each other when moving from concept to a functional blockchain system. Why the Distinction Matters Understanding both concepts is important for evaluating blockchain projects. A project claiming to use PoA is referring to its trust structure, validator network, and governance model. A project presenting a PoC is showing early evidence that its idea can work. Mixing the two leads to misinterpretation. Analysts, investors, and users need clarity to determine maturity, risk, and viability. Misunderstanding these terms can distort expectations about performance, decentralization, or market readiness. Choosing the Right Approach The choice is never between PoA and PoC. They serve different phases of the blockchain lifecycle. An enterprise may begin with a PoC to determine whether a blockchain solution addresses its needs. If the PoC succeeds and the system requires structured governance and high throughput, the final product may use PoA as its consensus model. Developers assess feasibility first, then select a mechanism that fits the performance and trust requirements of the production environment. Conclusion Proof of Authority and Proof of Concept occupy separate but equally important roles in blockchain development. PoA provides a governance-driven consensus mechanism suitable for enterprise-grade systems that prioritize speed and accountability. PoC validates ideas before they mature into scalable applications. A clear understanding of both terms helps stakeholders interpret technical documents accurately, assess project maturity, and make informed decisions about blockchain adoption. Frequently Asked Question (FAQs) 1. Is Proof of Authority the same as Proof of Concept?No. Proof of Authority is a blockchain consensus mechanism, while Proof of Concept is an early-stage model used to test whether an idea or system is feasible. 2. Where is Proof of Authority commonly used?PoA is typically used in enterprise blockchains, consortium networks, supply chain platforms, and other permissioned environments that require high throughput and clear governance. 3. Why do developers use Proof of Concept in blockchain projects?Developers use PoCs to validate technical assumptions, identify potential flaws, and determine whether a blockchain-based solution is viable before investing in full development. 4. Can a blockchain project use both PoA and PoC?Yes. A project may first create a PoC to validate its concept and later choose PoA as its consensus mechanism for the final production network. 5. Which is better between PoA and PoC?Neither replaces the other. PoA is used to secure live networks, while PoC is used to test ideas before development. Their roles are distinct and not comparable as alternatives.

Strategy Inc. has added 8,178 BTC to its corporate treasury, a purchase valued at roughly $835.6 million according to the company’s latest disclosure. The acquisition brings Strategy’s total Bitcoin holdings to 649,870 BTC, solidifying its position as one of the world’s largest corporate holders of the digital asset. The firm reported an average purchase price of around $102,171 per token for this latest tranche, underscoring its willingness to buy aggressively despite ongoing volatility in the crypto markets. The acquisition was funded through preferred stock issuances, a continuation of Strategy’s capital-raising model that has supported its multi-year Bitcoin accumulation strategy. Strategy’s leadership reiterated that the company views Bitcoin as a long-term reserve asset rather than a speculative holding. Despite market turbulence and recent price pullbacks, the firm believes current conditions offer opportunities to strengthen its balance sheet. With Bitcoin trading below previous highs, Strategy’s purchase signals conviction in the asset’s long-term appreciation potential and a desire to further entrench its role as a Bitcoin-centric treasury institution. The company’s aggressive accumulation strategy has become a defining feature of its identity, making its financial performance highly correlated with Bitcoin’s price movements. Strategic rationale and external conditions Strategy’s decision to purchase more than 8,000 BTC reflects its ongoing commitment to a Bitcoin-first treasury model. Management highlighted several factors behind the move, including expectations of long-term network growth, increased institutional adoption and macroeconomic uncertainty that continues to support Bitcoin’s appeal as a hedge against inflation and currency debasement. The firm has consistently framed Bitcoin as its primary strategic asset, with acquisitions timed to take advantage of market weakness. However, the scale of this latest purchase also amplifies the firm’s exposure to market volatility. As one of the largest Bitcoin-holding corporations, Strategy faces significant concentration risk, with a substantial portion of its balance sheet tied directly to the performance of a single asset. The use of preferred stock issuances to fund the acquisition raises additional questions about dilution risk, capital structure sustainability and ongoing dividend obligations. These factors will remain important considerations for investors evaluating Strategy’s long-term positioning. Implications for investors and the broader crypto landscape For shareholders, the acquisition reinforces Strategy’s status as a leveraged proxy for Bitcoin exposure. Investors seeking direct correlation to Bitcoin’s price may find the company’s expanding treasury position appealing, while others may express concern about the increasing risk profile associated with such concentrated exposure. Strategy’s financial health, equity valuation and earnings outlook will continue to be heavily influenced by Bitcoin’s price trends, making the company highly sensitive to both crypto-specific developments and macroeconomic conditions. In the wider crypto market, Strategy’s purchase contributes to broader supply dynamics and institutional sentiment. Large-scale acquisitions at times of market weakness can act as a signal of confidence, particularly when institutional inflows into crypto investment products remain uneven. At the same time, substantial corporate accumulation reduces the available float of Bitcoin in circulation, potentially impacting liquidity conditions and market depth during periods of heightened volatility. Overall, Strategy’s purchase of 8,178 BTC strengthens its position as a leading corporate Bitcoin holder and underscores the firm’s unwavering belief in the asset’s long-term value. While the move reinforces its strategic alignment with Bitcoin, it also heightens the company’s dependency on the token’s price performance. The coming months will reveal how effectively Strategy balances its conviction with the inherent risks tied to its expanding Bitcoin treasury.

XRP is positioned for a pivotal phase in its market trajectory as several asset managers prepare to launch multiple spot ETFs tracking the token. Up to seven new products are reportedly in development, expanding institutional access beyond the already-listed XRP ETF that debuted earlier this month. Issuers including Franklin Templeton, Bitwise Asset Management and 21Shares are among those exploring regulated investment vehicles that would allow investors to gain exposure to XRP without holding the underlying asset directly. These developments signal accelerating institutional interest at a time when XRP’s regulatory backdrop has improved and demand for altcoin ETFs is broadening across U.S. markets. As regulatory clarity has increased, the pathway for crypto ETFs has become considerably smoother. SEC rule changes introduced earlier this year simplified listing standards and shortened approval timelines for digital asset funds, allowing issuers to bring products to market more efficiently. This shift has opened the door for altcoin ETFs beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum, positioning XRP as one of the first movers in the next wave of institutional-grade crypto investment vehicles. However, while anticipation for the upcoming ETFs grows, on-chain data indicates a concurrent upswing in whale activity, hinting that major XRP holders may be repositioning ahead of the launches. Whale dynamics and market-structure implications On-chain analytics firms report unusually large transfers of XRP from major wallets to exchange addresses, with hundreds of millions of tokens moved over the last several weeks. These movements have triggered a significant rise in the Whale-to-Exchange Flow metric, reaching levels not seen since early 2024. Historically, such behaviour signals preparation for distribution, with large holders potentially seeking liquidity during periods of heightened demand—such as ETF launches. While new fund inflows can help absorb some of this supply, their ability to counterbalance whale-driven sell pressure remains uncertain in the early days of trading. The interplay between ETF-driven demand and whale-led supply will likely determine XRP’s short-term price direction. Should institutional investors allocate aggressively into the new ETFs, this absorption could tighten market float and drive appreciation. Yet if whale outflows continue to accelerate, the resulting excess supply may cap upside momentum despite strong investor interest. Liquidity conditions, market depth and order book stability will therefore be essential factors to monitor as the ETFs begin trading. Outlook and strategic considerations The upcoming ETF launches represent a crucial moment for XRP as it transitions further into regulated financial markets. Analysts note that a successful rollout could solidify XRP’s status as a leading institutional-grade digital asset, particularly if strong subscription flows reduce circulating supply and bolster price support. Conversely, subdued ETF inflows combined with increased whale selling could lead to heightened volatility and reinforce a more cautious investor stance. For market participants, these developments highlight the need to assess not only XRP’s fundamentals but also broader market-structure indicators such as exchange balances, institutional demand patterns and large holder behaviour. The emerging convergence of traditional finance and crypto-native actors underscores XRP’s evolving role within the global digital asset ecosystem. As the ETF landscape expands, XRP’s performance will increasingly reflect the balance of supply and demand pressures shaped by both institutional allocators and long-term whale holders.

What Is Eightcap’s New Day Trader Challenges Product? Eightcap has re-entered the prop-style trading sector with a fixed-odds challenge product called Day Trader Challenges, marking its return less than two years after the company withdrew from the funded-trader ecosystem. The broker announced the launch on 17 November, positioning the format as a fast, low-commitment alternative to traditional multi-stage evaluations. The product allows traders to select one-hour to eight-hour sessions, choose a stake starting at five dollars, and pick a reward multiplier of two times, five times, or ten times. If a trader hits the required target within the session, Eightcap pays the defined payout. If not, the stake is forfeited. The challenges run on MT4, MT5, and TradeLocker—platforms already familiar to Eightcap’s client base. The firm framed the offering as a response to demand for “shorter commitments” and a desire to distance itself from the overhyped, high-pressure evaluation culture that dominated prop trading in 2023 and 2024. Investor Takeaway Short-session, fixed-odds formats create predictable revenue for brokers without exposure to allocation risk. For traders, the low entry price is appealing, but outcomes resemble rapid speculative bursts rather than long-form assessments. Why Eightcap’s Return Matters After Its 2024 Exit Eightcap’s re-entry is notable because the broker publicly exited the prop sector in early 2024. At the time, MetaQuotes—developer of MT4 and MT5—tightened enforcement around how prop firms used its platforms, warning that certain brokers risked license complications if they continued servicing large challenge providers. Regulators across multiple jurisdictions were simultaneously scrutinizing prop models that resembled unlicensed investment schemes. Eightcap had previously worked with high-profile entities—including The Funded Trader—before stepping away under pressure. Day Trader Challenges avoid the structures that drew scrutiny. There is no funded account, no staged evaluation process, and no simulated allocation. Instead, the format functions as a fixed-odds contract with predefined risk and payout. For Eightcap, the product simplifies operational demands: Revenue comes from challenge fees rather than allocation activity. The model is less dependent on long evaluation cycles or ongoing volume. No funded-account management is required. There is no need to run simulated capital or monitor trader drawdowns. Successful challenge participants may convert into brokerage clients. This creates an acquisition funnel without the complexity of a traditional prop structure. For users, the key appeal is speed. A trader can enter, trade, and complete a session in less than a workday—something not possible in multi-stage evaluations that stretch across weeks. Is the Model Regulatory-Safe or a New Flashpoint? Whether the format remains compliant will depend on how regulators classify it. The structure resembles: - a trading challenge, - a derivative with fixed payouts, or - a digital contest tied to market outcomes. Countries where Eightcap holds licenses—including Australia (ASIC), the United Kingdom (FCA), Cyprus (CySEC), and the Bahamas (SCB)—have increased oversight of high-velocity retail products. Short-term, fixed-odds structures can attract attention from both financial regulators and consumer-protection agencies, depending on how the product is marketed. The sector’s sensitivity stems from two issues: Rapid-fire formats can resemble wagering. This may trigger gaming or contest rules, not just financial regulations. Short timeframes often encourage riskier behaviour. Some regulators may argue that such mechanics push speculation over skill-based trading. MetaQuotes also remains part of the backdrop. Although the challenges run through MT4 and MT5, the structure avoids funded-account issues that caused friction in 2024. Still, other brokers will monitor whether MetaQuotes comments on the model if adoption grows. Investor Takeaway Low-duration, fixed-payout trading products could gain traction, but they may also face questions about consumer risk and responsible marketing. Regulatory interpretation will determine the model’s durability. What Comes Next for Prop-Style Trading Products? The prop-trading landscape has shifted dramatically over the past two years. Some large firms collapsed under operational strain, others faced regulatory scrutiny, and several struggled with liquidity-provider disputes. The sector remains crowded but fragile, and traders have become more cautious about lengthy evaluation and payout structures. Eightcap’s new format aligns with a broader move toward smaller, quicker, and more controlled challenges. The low commitment may attract retail traders who want defined outcomes without long waiting periods. At the same time, the game-like structure may revive debates about speculative behaviour and responsible product design. What happens next will depend on user traction, published success ratios, regulatory feedback, and whether other brokers adopt similar micro-challenge formats. For now, Eightcap has reopened a sector it once exited—this time with a streamlined, time-boxed model designed to sidestep prior pitfalls.

Bitcoin Slides to New Six-Month Low as 2025 Gains Vanish Bitcoin extended its multi-week decline on Monday, hitting a fresh six-month low below 91,300 dollars and erasing all of its 2025 performance. The latest drop pushed BTC roughly 27 percent off its October all-time high, reinforcing a broader deterioration in crypto sentiment. After rebounding from overnight lows, BTC resumed selling pressure during the U.S. session, falling to 92,500 dollars. The weakness carried over to other majors: ether hovered just above 3,000 dollars after a 15 percent weekly slide. Crypto-linked equities were equally red. Coinbase, Circle, Gemini and Galaxy all shed about 7 percent. Treasury-linked digital asset firms moved lower as well, with Strategy (MSTR) dropping 4 percent to its lowest level since October 2024. Ether treasury firms BitMine and ETHZilla fell 8 percent and 14 percent, while Solana-linked Upexi and Solana Company retreated 10 percent and 7 percent. Some HPC and AI-adjacent miners outperformed. Hive Digital jumped 10 percent after its computing subsidiary struck a cloud partnership with Dell Technologies, while IREN and Hut 8 posted moderate gains. Investor Takeaway BTC’s drawdown is being driven by macro pressure and positioning, not structural cracks. Traders should watch futures gaps and realized-loss stabilization for signs of a local floor. Fed Expectations Shift as Economic Data Surprises to the Upside The market narrative around Federal Reserve policy shifted again after the New York Fed’s Empire State Manufacturing Survey unexpectedly jumped to 18.7 — far above expectations for a decline to 6. With official data delayed by the government shutdown, secondary indicators like this have taken on outsized influence. The stronger reading reduced expectations for a December rate cut. Predictive markets now reflect a clearer bias toward holding rates steady: Polymarket assigns a 55 percent chance of a pause, while the CME FedWatch Tool puts the probability closer to 60 percent. That shift has created new headwinds for bitcoin. CoinDesk Senior Analyst James Van Straten noted an additional technical factor: CME bitcoin futures left an unfilled gap at 91,970 dollars from April. BTC has a long history of revisiting such gaps, and the remaining distance is now a magnet for short-term selling pressure. Bitfinex analysts, however, see signs that the downturn may be nearing a local inflection point. Realized losses have begun to stabilize, and the pace of short-term holder capitulation is approaching levels that have historically preceded rebound phases. “Across multiple historical cycles, sustainable bottoms have only formed after short-term holders have capitulated into losses and not before,” the analysts wrote. With this now the third-largest pullback since 2023, they argue a local low could form “relatively soon.” XRP Rejects $2.30 as Profit-Taking and Liquidations Accelerate XRP faced its own sharp reversal on Tuesday after failing to break through the 2.30 dollar ceiling. The rejection triggered heavy selling and a spike in volume, confirming that the resistance band remains structurally strong. XRP fell 4.58 percent to 2.18 dollars during the session, with a 342 percent volume surge at 14:00 UTC marking the peak selling wave. The token swung between 2.27 and 2.18 dollars as sellers defended overhead supply. A brief bounce to 2.27 at 16:50 UTC lost momentum as pressure re-emerged near 2.22. Derivatives data showed 28 million dollars in XRP liquidations over 24 hours, with long positions accounting for nearly 25 million dollars of that total — a sign of aggressive unwinding after the resistance rejection. ETF flows were mixed. Canary Capital’s XRPC — the first U.S. spot XRP ETF — posted 58.6 million dollars in first-day volume on Nov. 13 but failed to drive sustained spot demand. Institutional traders remain selective, rotating toward assets showing stronger breakouts and reducing exposure in overextended zones like XRP’s 2.28–2.30 dollar region. Investor Takeaway XRP’s 2.30 resistance has now become a structural barrier. A hold above 2.20 would reset bullish momentum attempts, while a break below 2.18 risks a deeper slide toward the 2.02–1.98 range. Key Levels for Traders Across BTC and XRP Bitcoin futures gap near 91,970 dollars. This remains a gravitational zone until filled. Short-term holder capitulation is close to threshold. Stabilization in realized losses suggests a potential local bottom forming. XRP must defend the 2.20 dollar region. A breakdown opens the path toward 2.02–1.98 dollars. XRP resistance at 2.30 remains unbroken. Sustained ETF inflows would be required for a breakout attempt. Broader crypto sentiment remains fragile as rate expectations shift, major assets struggle to reclaim key levels and institutional flows stay defensive. Traders should expect elevated volatility as markets digest the Fed outlook, futures positioning and technical inflection zones across majors.  

Why Is IG Japan Closing Crypto-ETF CFDs? IG Securities, the Japanese arm of London-listed IG Group, will shut down contracts for difference linked to crypto-based exchange-traded funds after Japan’s Financial Services Agency ruled that derivatives referencing bitcoin or ether ETFs must be treated the same as any other crypto-asset derivative. The decision affects CFDs based on BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust and its ether equivalent. Although the ETFs are foreign-listed, the FSA confirmed they still qualify as “crypto-linked” products under Japanese rules. Because Japan does not permit crypto-asset ETFs at all, any derivative tied to one sits outside the standard ETF-CFD framework used by retail brokers. IG told clients it will stop taking new orders on December 1, 2025, and force-close any remaining positions on January 31, 2026. Traders may close voluntarily before then, but anything left open will be liquidated at the official closing price on the final day. This is the first major market consequence of Tokyo’s 2024–2025 stance reaffirming that crypto ETFs remain off-limits, regardless of where they are listed. Investor Takeaway Japan’s ruling signals that any product referencing a crypto-holding ETF will be treated the same as a direct crypto derivative. Traders should expect stricter controls and fewer synthetic exposure options until the rules change. How Did Japan’s Crypto Policy Arrive at This Point? Japan began regulating digital assets earlier than most markets. The 2016–2017 amendments to the Payment Services Act established exchange registration requirements, and the 2019 revision of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act brought crypto-asset derivatives under the same regulatory umbrella as traditional financial instruments. This placed CFDs and swaps tied to crypto prices into a formal derivatives regime. Throughout 2024 and 2025, the FSA continued reviewing the framework. An April 2025 discussion paper flagged persistent issues around product classification, disclosure quality, insider-trading risks, and labeling requirements for crypto-linked investment offerings. Meanwhile, local reporting throughout 2025 indicated the agency was exploring a system that could classify roughly one hundred crypto assets as financial products, extend insider-trading rules to the sector, and potentially shift crypto gains to Japan’s 20 percent stock-tax bracket. Those reforms may be debated in the Diet in 2026. But none of them alter the fundamental rule that drives IG’s exit: Japan still does not approve crypto ETFs. And if crypto ETFs are prohibited, any derivative based on a crypto ETF is treated the same as a derivative on bitcoin or ether itself. What Does the Ruling Mean for Brokers? IG Japan originally introduced crypto-ETF CFDs because they allowed clients to gain crypto exposure inside a normal securities account without interacting directly with crypto-asset derivative rules. But once the FSA classified those ETF-based products as crypto derivatives, they became subject to a different regulatory standard. Under the revised interpretation, brokers offering products tied to ETFs that hold bitcoin or ether must comply with rules for crypto-asset derivatives, not standard ETF-linked contracts. These rules involve tighter investor-protection requirements, operational controls, and licensing obligations. For competitors, the message is unambiguous. Any CFD, note, or structured product referencing an ETF that owns crypto assets risks being reclassified as a crypto derivative. Few Japan-regulated brokers offered such products to begin with, but IG Japan’s forced wind-down confirms that the regulator expects full alignment. Investor Takeaway ETF-linked crypto exposure is effectively blocked in Japan until lawmakers formally authorize crypto ETFs. Synthetic access products will remain restricted, and crypto-derivative rules will govern any structure tied to bitcoin or ether. What Happens Next for Traders and Japan’s Crypto Market? For IG’s clients, the immediate task is simple: close positions or allow them to be automatically unwound at the end of January. Tax treatment remains unchanged, falling under Japan’s comprehensive income category for this type of derivative activity. For the broader market, attention now shifts to 2026. If the proposed reforms advance, they could reshape how crypto assets are classified, taxed, and supervised. A future regulatory shift allowing domestic crypto ETFs could reopen the door for ETF-linked derivatives in a more controlled environment. Until then, brokers must treat any structure—even indirectly linked to crypto ETFs—as falling under the crypto-derivative umbrella. The FSA has indicated it will continue updating its guidance as it examines index products, synthetic exposures, and other gray-area structures. For now, IG Japan’s shutdown suggests the regulator’s message has already been absorbed: indirect exposure still counts as crypto exposure, and the compliance bar will remain high until lawmakers rewrite the rules.

Silicon Valley has a seductive narrative about investment bubbles in transformative technologies: yes, there's excess and overvaluation, but the long-run benefits—new products, better infrastructure, technological progress—outweigh the costs. Even investors who lose money, the story goes, leave society better off by funding innovation that wouldn't otherwise occur. Research on the late-1990s Information and Communication Technology boom suggests this narrative needs revision. While society may benefit from bubble-fueled innovation, the workers who create those innovations often pay a steep price. Economists Johan Hombert and Adrien Matray studied what happened to skilled workers who joined ICT companies during the sector's late-90s boom. Their findings challenge conventional wisdom about how financial exuberance affects human capital. Workers who joined the booming ICT sector earned about 7% less 15 years later than otherwise similar workers who started elsewhere—even though they initially commanded premium wages. This wasn't temporary pain from the post-2001 crash; it was permanent erosion of earning power. The mechanism appears to be accelerated skill obsolescence. Periods of intense technological experimentation produce multiple generations of rapidly evolving technologies. Workers who develop expertise in early versions find their knowledge quickly outdated. The ICT boom's legacy wasn't just fiber optic cables and server farms; it was also thousands of professionals whose specialized skills in first-generation web technologies, early networking protocols, or initial e-commerce platforms lost value as newer approaches emerged. But here's the troubling twist: easy money made the problem worse. The researchers found that firms receiving the largest capital inflows during the boom were precisely those whose workers experienced the greatest long-term wage declines. This wasn't random. Capital flowed toward companies doing the most aggressive experimentation—the firms most likely to generate rapid technological turnover and, consequently, the fastest skill obsolescence. “Easier access to financing during innovation booms may speed up technological progress but often reduces the long-term returns to workers’ skills,” says Adrien Matray. This creates a perverse dynamic. During innovation booms, cheap capital doesn't just enable more experimentation; it attracts workers into the specific firms where their skills will depreciate fastest. More funding means more workers exposed to obsolescence risk, and each worker faces amplified risk because well-funded firms can afford more experimental—and hence more quickly obsolescent—technical approaches. The data bears this out. ICT subsectors with the highest share of STEM workers—those doing the most intensive technical experimentation—received disproportionate capital inflows and showed the steepest worker wage declines. The effect was concentrated among engineers and technical specialists, not general managers or financial staff, confirming that technology-specific skills bore the brunt of obsolescence. This pattern should concern anyone watching today's AI boom. The sector exhibits all the same characteristics: massive capital inflows, premium entry wages for technical talent, and extraordinarily rapid technological change. The best-funded AI companies are often those pushing the frontier hardest—exactly where technological generations turn over fastest. Consider an AI engineer today specializing in a specific architecture or framework. In five years, will that expertise retain value, or will it seem as outdated as late-90s expertise in now-defunct web technologies? The pace of AI development suggests the latter is plausible. Skills in particular model architectures, fine-tuning approaches, or deployment frameworks may have shorter half-lives than ever before. The researchers' findings on capital flows are particularly relevant. If, as in the ICT boom, AI investment is flowing disproportionately toward companies with the most aggressive experimentation—and if those companies are attracting a disproportionate share of technical talent—we may be setting up another cohort of skilled workers for long-term wage erosion. This doesn't make AI investment wrong. Society may benefit enormously from rapid AI development, even if financed partly by speculative capital. But we should abandon the assumption that all stakeholders benefit equally. Investors understand they're taking risks. Workers may not realize they are too. The policy implications are significant. If investment booms systematically erode the human capital of workers drawn into booming sectors, standard assumptions about labor market efficiency need revision. Workers making career choices based on entry wages may be systematically underestimating long-term risks, especially when those risks are amplified by the very capital flows that make entry wages attractive. For individuals, the lesson is clear: premium wages in a booming sector may reflect compensation for risk, not just high productivity. The hottest companies with the most funding might actually pose the greatest long-term career risk, especially for technical specialists. More broadly, this research suggests that the relationship between financial markets, innovation, and human capital is more complex than typically assumed. Easy money may accelerate technological progress while simultaneously devaluing the human capital of those creating that progress. It's creative destruction with the destruction falling disproportionately on workers who thought they were riding the wave of the future. As billions flow into AI and technical talent floods the sector, we should remember the ICT boom's lesson: the most exciting technological revolutions can leave their creators behind.

Fed–BoE divergence boosts USD as GBP weakens; AI profit doubts sink Dow, shifting focus to delayed NFP and potential Fed cuts. The Great Monetary Divide: BoE vs. The Hawkish Fed The defining narrative for currency traders is the profound monetary policy divergence between the Federal Reserve (Fed) and the Bank of England (BoE). This is not just a technicality; it's a fundamental split setting the stage for significant weakness in the British Pound. The Fed, grappling with robust US growth and sticky inflation, has signaled a cautious, less-accommodative stance—a subtle hawkishness that provides strong support for the US Dollar. Conversely, the BoE has adopted a decidedly dovish posture to nurse the UK's fragile economy, with markets eagerly anticipating up to three quarter-point rate cuts. This widening differential in interest rates effectively makes the US Dollar the more attractive currency, inevitably pushing the GBP/USD pair toward a sustained decline, potentially testing historical lows like the 1.2037 support level and even dipping towards 1.1000 according to technical analysts. The momentum is clearly favoring the Greenback as the US economy continues to outpace its UK counterpart. The AI Sector's Profitability Reckoning: Market Doubts and the Dow's Decline A crucial element of the current economic climate is the cooling enthusiasm for the high-flying Artificial Intelligence (AI) sector, signaling a necessary market reckoning regarding long-term profitability. The narrative is shifting from pure technological promise to hard questions about endpoint revenues and return on investment (ROI), particularly for companies like Nvidia (NVDA). This skepticism has directly impacted the broader equity market, contributing to a substantial decline in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA). The slump reflects a growing investor concern that the seemingly limitless demand for AI compute power has become "woefully outsized" compared to actual, realized commercial deployment revenues. This reality check is forcing traders to look beyond hyped valuations and instead focus intensely on forthcoming US economic data—specifically the delayed Nonfarm Payrolls (NFP) report—as they anxiously await any signals that could push the Federal Reserve toward a much-needed interest rate cut.   Top upcoming economic events: Monday, 11/17/2025 20:35:00 - Fed's Waller speech (USD) As a governor and permanent voting member of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), comments from Fed's Waller are closely scrutinized for insights into the Federal Reserve's current thinking on monetary policy, inflation, and the future path of interest rates. His remarks can significantly influence market expectations for the US Dollar. Tuesday, 11/18/2025 00:30:00 - RBA Meeting Minutes (AUD) These minutes from the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) meeting are a HIGH impact event because they provide a detailed account of the board's discussions on economic conditions and the rationale behind their most recent interest rate decision. Traders analyze the language and tone to gauge the future monetary policy bias (hawkish or dovish), which is a key driver for the Australian Dollar (AUD). Tuesday, 11/18/2025 14:15:00 - Industrial Production (MoM) (USD) This indicator measures the change in the total output of factories, mines, and utilities in the US. It's an important gauge of the health of the US manufacturing sector and overall economic activity. A reading better or worse than expected can influence the medium-term outlook for the USD. Tuesday, 11/18/2025 23:50:00 - Merchandise Trade Balance Total (JPY) The trade balance for Japan, detailing the net difference between the value of its exports and imports, is a key measure of the demand for Japanese goods and services. Since Japan is a major exporter, this medium-impact release gives insight into international trade flows and can affect the valuation of the Japanese Yen (JPY). Wednesday, 11/19/2025 00:30:00 - Wage Price Index (QoQ) (AUD) This reading measures the change in the cost of labor for employers in Australia. As wage growth is a crucial component of inflation, this medium-impact data point is watched closely by the RBA and markets as a predictor of future monetary policy adjustments, impacting the AUD. Wednesday, 11/19/2025 07:00:00 - Consumer Price Index (YoY) (GBP) This is a HIGH impact event for the Pound Sterling (GBP) as it is the primary measure of inflation for the UK economy. The annual change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) is what the Bank of England (BoE) targets. A deviation from the target can trigger significant market reactions due to altered expectations for interest rate movements. Wednesday, 11/19/2025 07:00:00 - Core Consumer Price Index (YoY) (GBP) Released simultaneously with the headline CPI, the Core Consumer Price Index excludes volatile items (like food and energy). Its HIGH impact status means it offers a clearer picture of underlying, persistent inflationary pressure in the UK, which is arguably even more critical for the BoE's long-term policy decisions and the GBP. Wednesday, 11/19/2025 10:00:00 - Core Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices (MoM) (EUR) This Eurozone inflation gauge, excluding energy, food, alcohol, and tobacco, is a key measure of underlying price pressures that the European Central Bank (ECB) targets to fulfill its mandate. It is a medium-impact event that provides important guidance on the health of the Eurozone economy and the future path of ECB policy. Wednesday, 11/19/2025 13:30:00 - Housing Starts (MoM) (USD) Measuring the change in the number of new residential units that began construction, Housing Starts are an important gauge of the health of the US housing sector and a leading indicator of economic health. The medium-impact release can provide clues about broader economic confidence and future consumption. Wednesday, 11/19/2025 19:00:00 - FOMC Minutes (USD) The FOMC Minutes are a HIGH impact publication that details the deliberations, policy vote breakdown, and economic outlook discussed during the most recent Federal Reserve meeting. They offer crucial context and forward guidance for the market, potentially causing volatility in the US Dollar (USD) as traders refine their expectations for future rate hikes or cuts.   The subject matter and the content of this article are solely the views of the author. FinanceFeeds does not bear any legal responsibility for the content of this article and they do not reflect the viewpoint of FinanceFeeds or its editorial staff. The information does not constitute advice or a recommendation on any course of action and does not take into account your personal circumstances, financial situation, or individual needs. We strongly recommend you seek independent professional advice or conduct your own independent research before acting upon any information contained in this article.

What Is Cboe Bringing to the U.S. Crypto Derivatives Market? Cboe Global Markets is preparing to launch bitcoin and ether “continuous futures” on December 15, creating the first U.S.-regulated crypto derivatives that function similarly to perpetual futures. The listing is pending final regulatory approval, but Cboe says the products are designed to give institutions a long-term, rollover-free way to trade crypto exposure. The contracts will be listed on the Cboe Futures Exchange under the tickers PBT (Bitcoin Continuous Futures) and PET (Ether Continuous Futures). Each product will feature a 10-year expiration at listing, daily funding adjustments to keep prices aligned with spot markets, and cash settlement instead of physical delivery. Traditional futures expire monthly or quarterly, requiring traders to “roll” their positions forward. By contrast, perpetual futures — overwhelmingly popular on offshore crypto exchanges — do not expire, using daily funding mechanics to anchor prices to the underlying asset. Cboe’s continuous futures replicate that structure but under U.S. regulatory oversight. Rob Hocking, Cboe’s global head of derivatives, said the new structure is intended to offer a compliant alternative to offshore perps. He noted that the long-dated design and funding adjustments aim to deliver streamlined portfolio management while giving traders controlled leveraged exposure to digital assets. Investor Takeaway U.S.-regulated perpetual-style futures could become a core liquidity tool for institutions that avoid offshore platforms. This may reshape where large funding flows originate in crypto derivatives. Why Do These Contracts Matter for Traders? Perpetual futures dominate crypto derivatives markets. Trading volumes on decentralized exchanges surpassed one trillion dollars in September, a record high, while centralized exchange futures volumes neared seven trillion dollars, driven primarily by perpetuals. Despite their popularity, perps remain unavailable on U.S. regulated markets due to structural and risk concerns. This forces U.S.-based institutions to either avoid perps or route exposure offshore, where counterparty and compliance risks are higher. Cboe aims to close that gap. The new continuous futures offer several advantages for institutional and sophisticated traders: Long-term exposure without roll costs. Positions can be held for years without executing roll trades, eliminating slippage and operational friction. Daily funding adjustments. Similar to perpetuals, funding charges or credits keep futures prices aligned with bitcoin and ether spot rates. U.S. regulatory clarity. Clearing through Cboe Clear U.S. provides counterparty protections and margin oversight under CFTC rules. Cross-margining potential. Traders may offset margin with existing Cboe crypto futures positions, such as the financially settled bitcoin (FBT) and ether (FET) contracts. The contracts will trade almost continuously — Sunday to Friday, from 6 p.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Time — creating a 23×5 schedule that mirrors global crypto markets. How Will Cboe’s Products Compete With Offshore Perpetuals? Cboe’s timing is strategic. Perpetuals remain one of the most profitable products in crypto trading, generating significant fees across Binance, OKX, Bybit and decentralized platforms. But their offshore nature has been a dealbreaker for many institutional players. Cboe’s continuous futures may appeal to: - Hedge funds needing audited, compliant instruments - Asset managers with mandates restricting offshore derivatives - Proprietary trading firms seeking regulated funding-rate environments - Advanced retail traders wanting high-liquidity leverage without using overseas entities Anne-Claire Maurice, managing director of derived data at Kaiko, said that bringing perpetual-style futures into regulated markets fills a genuine need for long-term, efficient crypto exposure. She emphasized that institutions have been seeking ways to avoid operational rollovers without forfeiting oversight. The products reference Cboe Kaiko Real-Time Rates, which aggregate deep liquidity data to derive fair pricing benchmarks for bitcoin and ether. The daily funding amount will adjust open positions based on deviations from the spot benchmark. Singapore Exchange also announced plans to offer bitcoin and ether perpetual futures starting November 24, signaling a global shift toward regulated perps. What Comes Next for U.S.-Regulated Crypto Derivatives? If Cboe’s continuous futures gain traction, they could reshape how large market participants hedge exposure and manage directional risk. A few potential market impacts include: Shift of perp demand into regulated markets. Hedge funds and asset managers may increasingly prefer compliant funding-rate products. More stable funding-rate dynamics. U.S. oversight could reduce manipulation and extreme funding swings common on offshore venues. Pressure on competitors. CME, which dominates institutional BTC and ETH futures, may introduce its own perpetual-style instruments. Cboe’s entry comes as institutional interest in crypto derivatives remains high despite recent market volatility. With bitcoin trading below 93,000 dollars and ether near 3,000 dollars, long-dated exposure instruments could see immediate demand from funds positioning around macro and regulatory catalysts.

Zcash cryptocurrency be expected to fall to the next round support level 600.00 (target price for the completion of the active impulse wave i).   Zcash reversed from resistance area Likely to fall to support level 600.00 Zcash cryptocurrency recently reversed from the resistance area between the key resistance level 750.00 (which stopped with the previous sharp impulse wave (3) at the start of November, as can be seen below) and the upper daily Bollinger Band. The downward reversal from the resistance level 750.00 created the daily Japanese candlesticks reversal pattern long-legged Doji – highlighting the strength of the resistance level 750.00 – which started the active short-term impulse wave i. Given the strength of the resistance level 750.00, bearish divergence on the daily Stochastic indicator  and the bearish sentiment seen across the cryptocurrency markets today, Zcash cryptocurrency be expected to fall to the next round support level 600.00 (target price for the completion of the active impulse wave i). [caption id="attachment_170257" align="alignnone" width="800"] Zcash Technical Analysis Report[/caption] The subject matter and the content of this article are solely the views of the author. FinanceFeeds does not bear any legal responsibility for the content of this article and they do not reflect the viewpoint of FinanceFeeds or its editorial staff. The information does not constitute advice or a recommendation on any course of action and does not take into account your personal circumstances, financial situation, or individual needs. We strongly recommend you seek independent professional advice or conduct your own independent research before acting upon any information contained in this article.

Alfa-Bank, one of Russia's largest banks, has launched the pilot phase of a new contactless payment system called "Vzglyad," which translates to "Pay with your eyes." The system utilizes real-time facial recognition to verify transactions, eliminating the need for cards, mobile phones, or physical terminal interaction. The test started with Alfa-Bank staff utilizing Android handsets and the bank's own payment terminals. The objective is to spread it out to more of its network. How Vzglyad Works The Vzglyad technology quickly processes biometric data to keep things safe and prevent fraudulent transactions that could occur due to static photos or pre-recorded videos. Users can employ PIN code verification as an additional layer of security when needed.  Alfa-Bank states that this innovative solution complies with the standards of Russia's current payment systems and was developed in collaboration with Russia's National Payment Card System (NSPK). This makes it the first bioacquiring product in the country for offline retail purchases. The platform is designed to work with various providers' terminals without requiring any specific hardware. Customers who choose to utilize Vzglyad get cashback benefits for qualified bank card purchases, which encourages more people to sign up. Data Privacy and Security Alfa-Bank states that the biometric data collected by the system is safe due to strong internal controls. This reduces the likelihood of theft or duplication that could compromise the integrity of transactions. The bank states that it maintains user information security at every stage of the payment process. Strategic Vision and Working Together in the Market Denis Osin, Director of Small and Micro Businesses at Alfa-Bank, stated that Vzglyad represents a significant step forward in making payments easier, faster, and safer for everyday use. The bank says it is willing to collaborate with other financial institutions to expand the technology and increase its adoption. Digital Ruble Developments in Context Vzglyad's introduction aligns with broader developments in Russia's financial industry, such as the ongoing trials of the country's central bank digital currency (CBDC), the digital ruble. The digital ruble, first proposed in 2021 and enacted into law in 2023, will serve as an alternative for paying salaries.  However, Russian officials say that using it will still be optional. Once inter-account transfers begin in January 2026, workers will be able to choose whether to accept digital ruble payments. This will happen before the payments are available to everyone on September 1, 2026. Sanctions from the EU and the Banking Sector Alfa-Bank's new initiative coincides with the European Union's current round of sanctions against the Russian banking and industrial sectors. The EU's 19th round of sanctions, which took effect on November 12, imposed new restrictions on Alfa-Bank, its foreign branches, and its partner networks in Belarus and Kazakhstan.  The EU will also cease using the Mir payment system in certain parts of Europe, starting on November 25. This will put even more stress on Russia's domestic and cross-border payment systems.  The restrictions also include limits on imports of Russian liquefied natural gas, additional rules for big oil corporations, and the growth of targeted maritime and banking organizations. The goal of the restrictions is to make it harder for Russia to support its military operations in Ukraine. Alfa-Bank's trial of the Vzglyad contactless payment service demonstrates that biometric technology and digital innovation are becoming increasingly important in Russia's evolving financial landscape.  This change comes at a time when sanctions and digital ruble measures are in place. It demonstrates that advanced technology solutions are becoming increasingly crucial for both enhancing economic resilience and improving the consumer experience.

What Led to the Sudden Shutdown of DappRadar? DappRadar, one of the most widely used analytics platforms in the decentralized application ecosystem, is shutting down after seven years. The company announced Monday on X that it will cease tracking blockchains and DApps “in the coming days” as part of a full wind-down. Founders Skirmantas Januškas and Dragos Dunica said that operating the platform had become financially unsustainable. Despite being a core dashboard for developers, investors, and institutions, the founders noted that the platform’s scale and cost structure no longer matched market conditions. The announcement immediately hit its token. DappRadar’s native RADAR token fell around 30%, trading near 0.00072 dollars at the time of writing. The team said it would communicate separately about how the shutdown affects the RADAR token and the DappRadar DAO. Cointelegraph contacted DappRadar for comment but has not yet received a response. Investor Takeaway DappRadar’s collapse signals growing pressure on analytics companies as infrastructure costs rise and user acquisition slows. Data reliability in DeFi and gaming sectors may take a hit as fewer independent trackers remain. Why Does This Closure Matter for the DeFi and DApp Ecosystem? Since launching in 2018, DappRadar became a central hub for tracking decentralized applications, on-chain metrics, new exploits, and emerging trends across multiple ecosystems. Its reports were widely cited by researchers, VCs, projects, and media outlets. The platform helped contextualize major cybersecurity incidents, including: A whale exploiting Hyperliquid in March 2025. The 100 million dollar exploit on Balancer. Drops and surges in total value locked (TVL) across chains. In its most recent Q2 2025 report, the team highlighted rising exploit-related losses even as DeFi TVL climbed to new highs. “Growth without robust security can set the space back,” the report warned — a reflection of the sector’s persistent challenges. DappRadar’s shutdown raises concerns about transparency. Accurate DApp metrics are already fragmented across multiple tools; losing a major aggregator could widen information gaps and reduce the availability of neutral analytics. How Does This Fit Into the Wave of Crypto Closures in 2025? The analytics platform joins a growing list of crypto companies shutting down or restructuring in 2025. Market conditions — tighter funding, reduced user activity, and lower transaction-driven revenue — have pressured both infrastructure providers and consumer-facing platforms. Notable closures this year include: Cryptocurrency exchange eXch. NFT marketplace X2Y2. Decentralized exchange Mango Markets. Together, these shutdowns highlight a common theme: crypto’s infrastructure is maturing faster than its monetization models. Platforms that once relied on peak activity levels from 2021–2022 now face thinner margins as the industry recalibrates. DappRadar’s exit is particularly impactful because analytics firms play a critical role in: Establishing industry benchmarks. Without neutral dashboards, it becomes harder to compare networks, track active wallets, or assess DApp traction. Monitoring exploits and bridging failures. Analytics platforms help detect suspicious wallet movements and early signs of protocol vulnerabilities. Providing trusted data for investors. Institutional desks, DeFi protocols, and exchanges rely on analytics for forecasting and security assessments. Losing a major player increases fragmentation and forces users to rely on smaller, more specialized tools — many of which lack the same breadth, independence, or scale. Investor Takeaway Watch for consolidation in crypto analytics. Remaining platforms may see increased usage but could also face sustainability challenges as data requirements grow and revenue models lag behind. What Happens Next for DappRadar’s Token and Its DAO? The founders said they would issue a separate announcement addressing the future of the RADAR token and the associated DAO. Key questions remain: How will token holders be treated? Will RADAR retain any utility or treasury assets? Will the DAO transition to a new mandate or dissolve? Is a potential acquisition or merger still possible? Token projects rarely shut down cleanly, and uncertainty around RADAR’s future may create more volatility until the team provides direction.

This preview of weekly data examines USOIL and XAUUSD, where economic data expected later this week are the primary market drivers for the near-term outlook.  Highlights of the week: RBA & FOMC meeting minutes, UK inflation, US job report Tuesday RBA meeting minutes at 12:30 AM GMT are anticipated by market participants to provide insight into the Reserve Bank of Australia's short-term action plan. More dovish commentary might be seen as a weakness of the Aussie Dollar, creating some minor push on the price to the downside and vice versa.  Japanese Balance of trade at 11:50 PM GMT, where the expectations are for a decline in the figure from ¥-234.6 billion to ¥-280 billion for the month of October. If the expectations are correct, then the yen could face some pressure against the currencies it is traded against.  Wednesday UK inflation rate at 07:00 AM GMT. The consensus is for a decline from 3.8% to 3.6% in October. If the consensus is correct, it could potentially yield some minor short-term gains for the pound, as it may influence the Bank of England's decisions at its next meeting.  FOMC Minutes at 19:00 GMT, where investors and traders will be paying close attention to any hints from the Federal Reserve in terms of future developments on the monetary policy. Currently, the possibility of a rate cut seems to be shifting, as the majority now believes we will not have another rate cut this year. According to the Fedwatch tool, the probabilities are 56% in favor of a hold and 44% in favor of a rate cut.  Thursday US Job report at 13:30 GMT, where the non-farm payrolls and unemployment rate are going to be published. The expectations for the NFP are for an increase to reach 50,000, up from the previous record of 22,000. If these expectations are correct, we may see the dollar move up in various pairs in the aftermath of the release. On the other hand, the unemployment rate is expected to remain static at 4.3%.  Japanese inflation rate at 23:30 GMT. The expectations for the month of October are that the rate could go up to 3.1% from the previous 2.9%. This may be somewhat bullish news for market participants trading the yen.  USOIL, daily Oil prices also slipped after Russia’s Novorossiysk port quickly resumed operations following a Ukrainian strike, removing a short-lived supply scare. Geopolitical tensions remain elevated, with notable examples including Iran’s seizure of a tanker and the ongoing US sanctions on Russia; however, rising global production remains the dominant force. Outages and disruptions across refining hubs have pushed margins higher; however, the broader trend suggests a well-supplied market heading into next year. In addition, many traders don’t expect OPEC+ to cut production next year, even with a potential surplus on the horizon. The group is sticking to its market-share strategy unless demand collapses and prices drop sharply. Saudi Arabia and its partners have revived output despite weak prices, betting that oversupply remains manageable and that China can continue to absorb excess barrels.  On the technical side, the crude oil price found sufficient support around the $58 mark, which is a combination of the lower band of the Bollinger Bands and the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement level, and has since corrected to the upside. Although the moving averages are confirming an overall bearish trend in the market, the recent bullish correction could persist into the upcoming sessions and potentially retest the latest high around $61, if it manages to break above the psychological resistance of the round number at $60. The Stochastic oscillator is in neutral levels, indicating potential for the price to move either way in the short term. However, the overly contracted Bollinger Bands may limit price action in the short term, likely keeping the price within sideways action between $58 and $62 for now.  Gold-dollar, daily Gold is slipping for a third straight day as traders lose confidence in a December Fed rate cut. With the Fed showing no urgency to ease and the recent government shutdown delaying key economic data, markets are operating in the dark. The fog around labor and inflation numbers is making policymakers hesitant, and traders are now split on the odds of a cut that seemed almost guaranteed a month ago. Physical demand in Asia is soft, with Indian dealers forced to offer heavy discounts after recent price swings scared off buyers. Even so, gold is still up roughly 55 percent this year and on track for its strongest annual gain since 1979. Central-bank buying and persistent global uncertainty continue to anchor the long-term bullish trend despite the short-term pullback.  From a technical perspective, the price of gold has encountered sufficient resistance at $4,200, which is a combination of the psychological resistance of the round number and the upper band of the Bollinger Bands, and is currently correcting to the downside. On the other hand, the moving averages are validating the overall bullish trend in the market with the faster 50-day simple moving average trading well above the slower 100-day SMA. The Stochastic oscillator is in neutral levels, hinting that there is potential for the price to move in either direction in the short-term; however, the contracted Bollinger Bands show a decline in volatility, so any significant moves might need some time to happen unless we get a new catalyst in the market to create large volume.  Disclaimer: The opinions in this article are personal to the writer and do not reflect those of Exness or Finance Feeds.

Melbourne, Australia, November 17th, 2025, FinanceWire Eightcap is back in the prop space with a new product that allows traders to choose their timeframe, stake, and reward multiplier. This is in addition to the relaunch of Phase 1 and Phase 2 challenges. Day Trader Challenges are ideal for traders who want high focus and short trading sessions, without long evaluations or restrictive requirements. Challenges are built for traders who trade the open or close, use pairs, gaps, or other core intraday strategies. Eightcap, a global derivatives provider, is back in the prop space with a new product built specifically with day traders in mind. The broker has launched Day Trader Challenges, a new way for traders to experience fast and customisable prop trading challenges. The launch marks Eightcap’s return to the prop trading industry after a period of industry turbulence associated with overhyped “get rich quick” schemes that distorted trader expectations. In that time, Eightcap spoke directly with experienced traders, from open and close specialists to gap, intraday, breakout, scalpers and pair traders, so that they could create challenges built for traders, by traders. Unlike standard trading challenges that require multiple days or even weeks to complete, Day Trader Challenges are built for instant action. These challenges are ideal for traders who want high focus, short sessions without long evaluations or restrictive requirements. “Day Trader Challenges were born from real conversations with the trading community,” said Adam Bock, Head of Eightcap Tradesim. “We wanted to create something grounded in skill, not hype and something that put traders back in control of their own trading experience. Day Trader Challenges are the answer to that; the challenges are designed to teach, test, and reward all within a few hours." Designed for active and aspiring prop traders seeking fast-paced, skill-based challenges, Day Trader Challenges allow traders to set their own stake and trading duration, from as little as 1 hour. Traders will be able to choose their: Duration: 1, 2, 4, or 8-hour sessions. Stake: From $5 Reward Multiplier: 2x, 5x, or 10x potential payout. Day Trader Challenges are accessible to traders via the MT4 and MT5 platforms, as well as through TradeLocker. Each challenge adapts dynamically to the trader’s choices. For example, shorter timeframes and higher multipliers increase the difficulty, while longer sessions and lower multipliers offer a more balanced experience. Challenges start within 10 minutes of purchase, giving traders immediate access to a fast-paced, skill-based experience. Key Benefits: Customisation & Control: Choose your investment, timeframe, and reward multiplier for a tailored prop challenge experience. Speed: Complete challenges within hours and earn payouts on the same day. Learning Focus: Practice real strategies in a simulated environment that mirrors live market conditions. Accessible Entry: Start from as little as $5. Adam Bock continued, “Our goal with Day Trading Challenges is to make trading education both more engaging and accessible to anyone looking to sharpen their skills,” added Bock. “We’ve taken the traditional trading challenge model and reimagined it for speed and flexibility.” About Eightcap: Founded in 2015, Eightcap is a multi-regulated Australian fintech company providing a full suite of derivative products across traditional and digital asset markets. With regulatory licenses in the UK (FCA), Australia (ASIC), the Bahamas (SCB), Cyprus (CySEC), the UAE (MENA), and Seychelles (FSA). Eightcap serves both B2C and B2B clients through its trading solutions. Recognised as the Best Global CFD Broker by TradingView in 2024 and with a global team of over 300, Eightcap is focused on providing exceptional trading solutions for modern traders. From award-winning derivatives brokerage to customised trading solutions for businesses and enterprises. Contact PR Manager Mishelle Thurai Eightcap mishelle.thurairatnam@eightcap.com