Menu
MCAP $2.91T ▼-2.81%
BTC $85,918 ▲+0.78%
ETH $2,713 ▲+0.40%
BNB $787.88 ▼-0.10%
XRP $1.510 ▲+0.63%
SOL $120.53 ▼-0.83%
DOGE $0.0958 ▲+2.36%
ADA $0.272 ▲+11.10%
TRX $0.3362 ▼-0.05%
LINK $14.16 ▲+0.58%
AVAX $10.94 ▼-0.40%
HYPE $92.99 ▲+2.98%
DOT $1.210 ▲+1.37%

Bitcoin news, analysis and interviews

Bitcoin is the original digital asset and, for institutions, the one that now trades through spot ETFs, CME futures and corporate treasuries as much as through exchanges. This desk follows the flows that move it: ETF creations and redemptions, treasury company purchases, miner economics, derivatives positioning and the policy decisions that set the rules for all of it.

Guide: How spot Bitcoin ETFs work: custody,Guide: Bitcoin treasury companies explained: mNAV, convertiblesBTC price and chartBTC to USD converterIBIT stockMSTR stockMARA stockNewsletter
Bitcoin (BTC)$85,917.62+0.78% 24hReference rate via CoinGecko · All prices
From the interview archive
Related: ETFEquitiesInstitutional
Metaplanet permits 15% of assets outside Bitcoin for first time since April 2024
Bitcoin

Metaplanet permits 15% of assets outside Bitcoin for first time since April 2024

, , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 5, 2026·3 min read

Metaplanet, the Tokyo-listed company holding 44,000 Bitcoin, rewrote its own asset rules on Monday to let up to 15% of assets flow outside Bitcoin for the first time since it began buying in April 2024. The move matters because Metaplanet’s stock trades at just 74 cents for every dollar of Bitcoin it holds, a discount that bars the firm from raising fresh equity under its own bylaws.

  • Metaplanet’s 44,000 BTC is worth roughly $3.8 billion, while its shares are valued at about $2.1 billion.
  • The new 15% ceiling funds acquisitions, income-paying securities and a planned Net Interest Income Strategy lending business.
  • In the third quarter, Metaplanet sold more Bitcoin than its entire debt load, then bought back enough to add a net 1,000 BTC.
  • 44,000 Bitcoin held by Metaplanet, worth about $3.8 billion
  • 15% share of assets now allowed outside Bitcoin, up from near zero
  • 74¢ market value per dollar of Bitcoin held, per Bitcoin Treasuries

Metaplanet amended its asset allocation policy on Monday, capping Bitcoin holdings at 85% to 90% of total assets, according to BeInCrypto’s report. The remaining slice can now fund acquisitions, yield-bearing securities and a new investment unit, a departure from the pure buy-and-hold program the company has run since April 2024. The policy change comes as Metaplanet’s stock trades below the value of its own Bitcoin stockpile, a gap the company’s own rules make difficult to close through new share sales.

Gerovich Directs the New 15% Toward Takeovers and Yield

Chief Executive Simon Gerovich said in a post on X that accumulating Bitcoin was never the company’s entire strategy. According to the firm’s filing, the new 15% allocation has three jobs: funding acquisitions, buying income-paying securities, and seeding the Net Interest Income Strategy, which borrows money and invests it in assets paying more than that money costs.

In August, Metaplanet agreed to transfer 2,100 BTC and $2.5 million to Super League Enterprise, a Nasdaq-listed media company, pending regulatory approval. Metaplanet expects to control the firm and rename it Superplanet.

Metaplanet’s mNAV Falls to 74 Cents on the Dollar

At Bitcoin’s current price of about $86,070, Metaplanet’s 44,000 BTC is worth roughly $3.8 billion, yet its shares carry a market value of about $2.1 billion. That gap shows up in Metaplanet’s mNAV, a ratio comparing market capitalization to Bitcoin holdings tracked by Bitcoin Treasuries, which put the figure at 74 cents per dollar of Bitcoin on Monday.

Metaplanet’s own rules ban most new share issuance while the company trades below its Bitcoin’s value, cutting off the equity raises that funded its buying since 2024. Growth capital now depends on loans, bonds and preferred shares carrying fixed dividends instead. Borrowing against Bitcoin on its credit facility stays below about 10% of the coins’ value, a conservative approach.

Metaplanet Nets 1,000 BTC After Selling More Than Its Total Debt

In the third quarter, Metaplanet sold more Bitcoin than its entire outstanding debt and held the proceeds in cash rather than spending them immediately. It then repurchased more Bitcoin than it had sold, ending the quarter with a net gain of 1,000 BTC. Gerovich framed the maneuver as a proof point for creditors weighing whether to rate the company.

Rating agencies and credit investors ask one question of a Bitcoin company: can that Bitcoin be turned into cash to meet obligations, and will it be? We answered by doing it.

Simon Gerovich, Chief Executive of Metaplanet

Metaplanet is now pursuing a formal credit rating on the strength of that track record. The Tokyo Stock Exchange has not yet ruled on the company’s separate plan to list preferred shares, a decision that could reshape how it funds growth under the new 15% rule.

The CCS read. A 74 cent mNAV tells creditors Metaplanet’s equity cannot absorb another dilution round, which is why the firm is redirecting new capital toward debt-like instruments instead. The 15% carve-out looks less like diversification and more like a hedge against a stock that the market refuses to price at par with its Bitcoin.

The Tokyo Stock Exchange’s decision on Metaplanet’s preferred share listing remains pending, and its outcome will determine whether the company can tap a new funding channel beyond the Bitcoin-backed credit facility it currently limits to roughly 10% of coin value.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

IMF releases $138 million to El Salvador after freezing Bitcoin purchases
Bitcoin

IMF releases $138 million to El Salvador after freezing Bitcoin purchases

, , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 5, 2026·3 min read

El Salvador secured a $138 million disbursement from the International Monetary Fund after agreeing to keep its Bitcoin reserve frozen to donations only, with no further state-funded purchases allowed under its $1.4 billion loan program. The decision shows the IMF is willing to overlook past breaches of its Bitcoin accumulation limits as long as President Nayib Bukele’s government documents where new coins come from.

  • The IMF released $138 million, equal to SDR 101.96 million, against a $1.4 billion Extended Fund Facility approved in February 2025.
  • El Salvador’s reserve stands at roughly 7,794.37 Bitcoin worth about $666.1 million, a figure the IMF says should not grow from new public purchases.
  • The government still owes the IMF a full unwind of state exposure to the Chivo wallet and tighter disclosure rules for public-sector crypto holdings.
  • $138M IMF tranche released, about 10% of the $1.4B total program
  • 7,794 BTC state reserve size, valued near $666.1 million today
  • Feb 2025 approval of the 40-month Extended Fund Facility

The IMF completed the second and third reviews of El Salvador’s loan program on Thursday (October 1), clearing the way for the $138 million disbursement and granting waivers for performance criteria the country had already missed on Bitcoin accumulation. The waivers came after Salvadoran authorities took corrective steps and renewed their commitment to the program’s terms, according to CryptoSlate’s report on the decision. The Fund’s board attached the condition that no further accumulation is envisaged beyond documented donations, a distinction that lets the reserve’s dollar value rise with the market price without implying new state purchases.

IMF Grants Waiver Instead of Cutting Off Financing

El Salvador’s Bitcoin reserve has grown in ways that appeared inconsistent with its IMF commitments, a pattern CryptoSlate has tracked in prior coverage of additions to government-linked wallets, including a reported 1,540-coin increase the IMF said Bukele’s government did not pay for.

Rather than halting disbursements over that gap, the Fund chose waivers, a mechanism that keeps the $1.4 billion facility intact while preserving the no-new-purchases rule going forward.

The IMF’s broader review found fiscal consolidation on track and reserve and liquidity targets comfortably met.

That assessment, laid out in the IMF’s completed review, gave the board cover to treat the Bitcoin breach as a procedural issue rather than grounds to stall the program. The arrangement mirrors how other institutional holders disclose and justify reserve changes, a transparency standard not unlike what Strategy outlined in its 8-K filing on its own corporate Bitcoin position.

Chivo Wallet Still Carries Unresolved Public Exposure

El Salvador has transferred majority ownership and control of the state-backed Chivo wallet, the app the government built to let citizens hold and spend Bitcoin alongside the dollar, to a private operator.

The IMF said that shift reduces the state’s direct role in crypto but stopped short of calling the job finished, telling El Salvador that remaining public-sector exposure to Chivo should still be fully unwound.

That leaves one of the program’s original crypto-related conditions open even as a fresh tranche of financing clears.

Disclosure Rules and Digital Asset Law Face Amendment

The IMF is asking El Salvador to improve disclosure of public-sector crypto holdings, strengthen regulation and governance for digital-asset providers, and amend its Digital Asset Issuance Law where necessary. Those demands sit alongside the no-new-accumulation pledge as conditions tied to future disbursements under the facility.

Future IMF reviews will hinge on whether El Salvador can document any change in its Bitcoin balance while completing the Chivo unwind and the governance reforms. Unexplained increases in the reserve could again force Bukele’s government to seek waivers before unlocking additional tranches of the $1.4 billion facility.

The CCS read. The waiver matters less for Bitcoin policy than for what it tells institutional lenders about El Salvador’s credibility as a borrower. By trading disclosure commitments for continued financing instead of forcing a reserve sell-down, the IMF has effectively let Bukele keep the $666 million position intact while absorbing the compliance cost through paperwork rather than coins.

The next test comes with the program’s fourth review, when the IMF will check whether El Salvador has finished unwinding public exposure to Chivo and tightened disclosure of any change in its 7,794 BTC holdings.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Leveraged funds narrow Bitcoin futures net shorts to 35,720 BTC-equivalent
Bitcoin

Leveraged funds narrow Bitcoin futures net shorts to 35,720 BTC-equivalent

, , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 3, 2026·3 min read

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s latest Bitcoin futures positioning data shows leveraged funds cutting their reported short exposure by 5,300 BTC-equivalent in the week to September 29, even as their overall long positions contracted. For institutional traders and fund managers, the reduction in shorts occurred alongside a contraction in overall futures market exposure, though a futures short may be part of a hedge and does not necessarily establish fresh spot-market demand or reflect a sustained conviction reversal.

  • Leveraged funds’ reported Bitcoin futures shorts fell 5,299.69 BTC-equivalent between September 22 and September 29, according to CFTC data released October 2.
  • Their net short position narrowed by 4,390.70 BTC-equivalent to 35,720.13 BTC-equivalent, even as longs fell 908.99 BTC-equivalent in the same period.
  • Combined open interest across CME standard and micro Bitcoin futures plus Coinbase Derivatives nano products fell 13.31% to 103,343.14 BTC-equivalent, signaling overall market contraction.
  • 5,300 BTC-equivalent reduction in leveraged funds’ reported short positions week-over-week
  • 13.31% decline in total open interest across all four tracked Bitcoin futures products
  • 35,720 BTC-equivalent net short position for leveraged funds after the week’s repositioning

The CFTC’s latest futures-only positioning data covers four Bitcoin derivatives markets: CME standard Bitcoin futures (5 Bitcoin contracts), CME micro Bitcoin futures (Bitcoin X $0.10 contracts), Coinbase Derivatives nano Bitcoin futures, and nano perpetual-style futures. The data, released in the October 2 reporting cycle, converts different contract sizes into BTC-equivalent exposure to allow institutional traders and analysts to compare positioning across all four venues on a standardized basis.

Leveraged funds cut shorts faster than they reduced longs as markets contracted

On CME standard Bitcoin futures, leveraged fund shorts declined and accounted for 4,310 BTC-equivalent of the total 5,300 BTC-equivalent short decline. This single product bore most of the repositioning, while their long exposure on the same venue actually grew by 1,175 BTC-equivalent, between the two dates.

The picture diverged sharply on CME micro futures and both Coinbase products. Leveraged fund longs fell across all three, with the micro venue seeing significant declines that offset the gains in standard CME longs. Total leveraged fund exposure across all four products consequently narrowed, with short reduction outpacing the long contraction by 4,391 BTC-equivalent in net terms.

Asset managers, a separate category tracked by the CFTC, moved in the opposite direction, increasing their net long position by 2,137.90 BTC-equivalent to 18,069.10 BTC-equivalent, driven mostly by falling shorts (down 1,564.80 BTC-equivalent) rather than expanding longs.

September micro contract expiry and classification shifts muddy causation behind the repositioning

The CFTC data does not distinguish between active liquidation and automatic roll-overs. CME’s monthly micro Bitcoin contract expired on September 25, falling between the two observation dates, and traders typically shift positions forward to the next month’s contract. This mechanical factor could explain part of the open interest contraction without implying any change in underlying conviction.

Category reclassification compounds the interpretation challenge. The CFTC groups traders by their predominant business activity, and entities that shift their primary focus move to a new category in the next reporting cycle.

A fund might move from leveraged-funds to asset-manager classification if its trading profile changes, which would reduce reported leveraged-fund shorts even if no actual position was closed. The data release does not flag individual reclassifications, making it impossible to isolate how much of the week’s move came from genuine position reduction versus administrative recategorization.

Smaller short positions do not confirm spot buying or conviction change

A reduction in futures shorts does not automatically signal reduced bearish conviction or increased spot-market demand. Leveraged funds often use futures shorts as a hedge against physical bitcoin holdings or to manage risk on long spot positions they hold elsewhere. Closing a short leg could reflect profit-taking on an existing hedge rather than a turn toward bullish positioning.

The CFTC reports do not capture paired spot and ETF positions, so a complete picture of leveraged fund conviction remains obscured by this data window alone.

The CCS read. We note the source did not address whether this short reduction reflects genuine capitulation by leveraged traders or mechanical expiry and roll effects. If the next report, due October 9, shows leveraged funds maintaining smaller short exposure and rebuilding longs, the shift gains institutional weight. If shorts rebound, this week’s move becomes noise in the normal churn of futures markets.

The next CFTC Commitments of Traders release is scheduled for October 9 (Friday) and will cover positions as of October 6. That report will clarify whether leveraged funds have sustained their short reduction, reversed it, or simply moved positions forward into new contract months without changing exposure.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

South Korea’s licensed exchanges lose 35% of won deposits as traders shift to offshore leverage platforms
Bitcoin

South Korea’s licensed exchanges lose 35% of won deposits as traders shift to offshore leverage platforms

, , , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 2, 2026·4 min read

South Korea’s licensed crypto exchanges shed 35% of won deposits in the first half of 2026 as traders migrated to offshore platforms offering leverage products banned domestically. The collapse signals a structural crisis in local market share, driven not by price alone but by regulatory arbitrage that favors unregulated foreign venues.

  • Won-denominated deposits fell 2.9 trillion won (35%) to 5.2 trillion won by June 30, 2026, while market capitalization dropped 28.3 trillion won (33%).
  • Average daily trading volume collapsed 44% to 3.1 trillion won; operating income fell 78% to 81.6 billion won in the first half versus 374.8 billion won a year prior.
  • Offshore platforms including Binance, Bybit, OKX and KuCoin launched leveraged products on Korean assets and indices that domestic law prohibits, attracting traders via Tether transfers.
  • 35% decline in won-denominated deposits on licensed Korean exchanges in H1 2026
  • 78% drop in operating income for domestic exchanges compared with same period one year prior
  • $530B cumulative outflows traced to Korea-linked wallets from 2021 to mid-2026

The Korea Financial Intelligence Unit and Financial Supervisory Service, in a survey of 26 registered virtual asset service providers, documented a domestic market in sharp retreat. Won-denominated customer deposits fell to 5.2 trillion won from 8.1 trillion at year-end 2025, while combined exchange market capitalization shrank to 58.9 trillion won (roughly $42 billion) from 87.2 trillion. The decline accelerated through the period as Bitcoin fell 33% to $58,559 by June 30, but regulators and market analysts attribute the outflow to a more structural problem: South Korea’s regulatory framework permits only spot trading on domestic exchanges, while offshore venues offer perpetual futures, leveraged products and around-the-clock trading on Korean equities and indices.

Binance launched 150x-leverage KORU contracts on Korean retail traders with no domestic safeguards

Beginning in June 2026, offshore exchanges began marketing exotic leverage products tied to Korean assets. Binance launched a perpetual futures contract on KORU, a U.S.-listed exchange-traded fund that tracks three times the daily move of South Korea’s KOSPI index, with 20x leverage on June 22, then raised the maximum to 50x four days later.

Because KORU itself compounds daily moves at a 3x multiplier, traders could end up exposed to as much as 150 times the underlying index’s daily loss or gain. The product bore no resemblance to offerings available on licensed Korean exchanges.

The risk crystallized immediately. On June 23, KORU fell 35.7% in a single session to $700.01 when the KOSPI dropped 9.99%. Bybit, OKX and KuCoin quickly launched their own KORU contracts, while all three platforms also began offering 20x leverage on individual Korean blue-chip stocks, Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix and Hyundai Motor, that Korean retail traders could not access with leverage domestically. These platforms operate outside the reach of South Korea’s investor protections, with traders moving money offshore by purchasing Tether on licensed local exchanges and then transferring the stablecoin to unregulated venues.

Tiger Research traced $530 billion in cumulative outflows over five years, with $120 billion leaving in 2025 alone

Tiger Research, working with blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis, tracked approximately 120,000 Korea-linked wallets and estimated that 700 trillion won ($530 billion) left domestic exchanges between 2021 and mid-2026. Outflows accelerated sharply: around $120 billion left in 2025, and the firm projected roughly $52 billion would depart in 2026.

The scale exceeds the total value of assets remaining on licensed domestic exchanges.

In July alone, approximately 1,200 Korea-linked wallets traded $4.97 billion in notional volume on Hyperliquid, a decentralized derivatives platform. Between January 2024 and July 2026, Korean wallets deposited $1.64 billion across three decentralized derivatives platforms, Hyperliquid, Lighter and Variational, with no regulatory oversight or custody safeguards.

Shinhan Securities analyst Park Sung-jae attributed the exodus to policy rather than market conditions.

In July, when domestic crypto trading had fallen to 1.6% of KOSPI turnover, he noted that South Korea’s “only de facto trading option” is spot trading, whereas foreign exchanges offer perpetual futures and leverage products across dozens of asset classes including crude oil and non-trading-hours access. The regulatory gap has become the mechanism of market exit.

Proposed 22% tax starting January 2027 threatens to accelerate outflows further

The Financial Supervisory Service has signaled plans to impose a 22% levy on annual crypto gains above a 2.5 million won ($1,900) deduction, with the first returns due in May 2028. The rule drew immediate resistance from traders, who gathered more than the 50,000 signatures needed to force a National Assembly review, warning that it would push more investors offshore.

Finance Minister Lee Hyoung-il has publicly backed the tax, arguing that 85% of domestic holders own crypto worth less than 5 million won and would not be materially affected after the deduction.

Lawmakers from both ruling and opposition parties have proposed delays ranging to 2030, but no consensus exists on postponement. The tax’s implementation coincides with the platform exodus, not preceding it, leaving open whether rate-setting or product prohibition is the primary driver of capital flight.

The CCS read. We see a regulatory framework collapsing not from price volatility but from arbitrage. South Korea licensed spot-only exchanges while offshore venues competed directly on leverage and trading hours, making domestic platforms a liquidity desert by design. The tax debate misses the structural point: traders are leaving because they can access products that do not exist at home, not because they fear taxation. Postponing the levy treats a symptom.

The Financial Supervisory Service must decide by year-end whether to proceed with the 22% tax on January 1, 2027. That date will clarify whether Seoul intends to compete for offshore capital or accept further market concentration on unregulated platforms.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Treasury yield hits 22-year high, ending crypto’s cheap-money financing era
Bitcoin

Treasury yield hits 22-year high, ending crypto’s cheap-money financing era

, , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 2, 2026·4 min read

The 10-year US Treasury yield hit 5.29% on October 1, marking the highest level since 2002 and ending crypto’s era of near-zero borrowing costs that fueled leverage and financing innovation. Institutional investors now face a structural reset: Bitcoin and Ethereum rallied through the shock, but the financing models underwriting crypto treasury companies, DeFi lending, and basis trades have repriced sharply upward.

  • 10-year Treasury yield reached 5.29% on October 1, up 90 basis points in Q3 alone, the largest quarterly rise this century.
  • Bitcoin ETFs drew $6.3 billion in Q3 and Ethereum ETFs $3 billion despite the yield headwind, signaling institutional demand survived the shock.
  • Crypto treasury companies now trade at or below net asset value, losing the premium valuations that previously made equity and convertible financing viable.
  • 5.29% 10-year Treasury yield on October 1, highest since 2002
  • 43% Bitcoin gain in Q3 2026 despite Treasury shock and liquidations
  • $6.3B Spot Bitcoin ETF inflows in third quarter alone

The Federal Reserve H.15 release for October 1 put the 10-year Treasury at 5.29%, the 30-year at 5.64%, and the 10-year real yield at 2.93%, a level at which inflation-adjusted government debt now competes directly with a coupon-free asset. That shift marks the operational end of the cheap-money era that enabled crypto lending to thrive.

Even as Bitcoin climbed roughly 43% in the third quarter and Ethereum gained about 71%, the financing infrastructure built around accumulation strategies fractured under the weight of higher funding costs.

Citi raised its 12-month Bitcoin forecast to $113,000 from $82,000, citing stronger institutional activity and ETF inflows alongside adviser and brokerage allocations, but the bank acknowledged that higher yields remain a structural headwind. The story of Q3 2026 is not that Bitcoin won; it is that the machinery financing Bitcoin changed shape.

Treasury rates force repricing of crypto treasury company capital structures

Bitcoin treasury companies, public firms that hold cryptocurrency as balance-sheet reserves, have historically funded purchases through common equity, preferred stock, and convertible debt, according to Skadden. The model worked when shares traded at a premium to net asset value, because issuing stock priced above the underlying crypto value per share allowed management to buy more crypto with fewer shares diluted. At a 5% risk-free rate, the return investors demand on preferred shares and convertible debt rises, the risk premium on common equity widens, and the cost of hybrid capital climbs. Goodwin describes the sector’s compression from premium valuations to NAV or below, with many treasury companies now trading at or below NAV. That gap destroys the financing arbitrage that made the model work.

Higher benchmark rates raise the cost of capital for explicit borrowing and implicit leverage such as perpetual futures, basis trades, options structures, and collateralized loans.

On September 23, a stronger PMI pushed the 10-year above 5.2%, and Bitcoin slipped below $85,000 with $135.8 million of long liquidations in a single hour and $510 million over 24 hours. On September 25, open interest on selected exchanges fell 14.3% as Bitcoin held near $84,000. Leveraged traders bore the damage, not buy-and-hold holders. The fact that equity issuers could not absorb the shock at previous valuations signals that the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve model faces a financing ceiling at current yields unless spreads widen or the cost of capital falls.

DeFi borrowing and stablecoin yields must now clear a 5% hurdle

A 2026 Finance Research Letters study using Aave data found stablecoin borrowing and deposit rates linked directly to US Treasury yields, with the 10-year showing the most consistent explanatory power.

An ECB working paper on Aave examined how restrictive monetary shocks reduce both stablecoin borrowing demand and liquidity supply, with transmission depending on the balance between arbitrage and leverage channels. In the zero-rate era, a 4% or 5% DeFi yield looked attractive against cash paying near zero.

At a 5% Treasury, DeFi products must now cover smart contract, liquidity, counterparty, stablecoin, oracle, and governance risk on top of a 5% risk-free alternative. RWA.xyz lists 108 tokenized US Treasury products, including USYC, USDY, BUIDL and iBENJI, all offering rates close to Treasuries with minimal credit risk.

The San Francisco Fed estimates stablecoin issuers’ Treasury holdings could roughly double to about $400 billion by 2030 if recent growth continues, meaning institutions now have a regulated, on-chain alternative to traditional DeFi borrowing.

That structural shift favors tokenized collateral adoption and reduces the appeal of leveraged DeFi strategies that competed on yield alone.

The CCS read. We see the 5% Treasury yield as the inflection point between two eras: one where leverage and premium valuations funded growth, and one where institutional crypto must compete on fundamentals and custody efficiency rather than favorable financing spreads. Bitcoin proved it survives higher rates, but the companies and protocols that relied on cheap capital to drive activity do not.

If the 10-year falls back below 5% as oil and inflation cool, Citi’s $113,000 forecast becomes the institutional reference, treasury-company premiums could reopen, and tokenized collateral adoption would broaden. If yields hold near 5% and real yields stay close to 3%, Bitcoin can rally in bursts on each data shock, but preferred and debt financing will remain expensive and leveraged trading will face persistent forced deleveraging, the question now is whether institutions will shift capital away from high-yield DeFi entirely toward regulated Treasury products or whether basis trades and spot markets will find new equilibrium partners at higher cost.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

SEC proposes crypto custody framework as ninth federal action since August
Bitcoin

SEC proposes crypto custody framework as ninth federal action since August

, , , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 2, 2026·2 min read

The US Securities and Exchange Commission proposed a custody framework on Thursday (October 1) that would let registered investment advisers and regulated funds hold crypto assets, including through self-custody and state-chartered trust companies, for the first time under rules built specifically for the asset class. The proposal is the ninth US regulatory action on crypto since mid-August, a run that has moved from how tokens are sold to how they are held, even as Congress remains stalled on the market-structure bill that would settle jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC.

  • The SEC’s Oct. 1 proposal would permit crypto self-custody “under certain circumstances” and recognize state trust companies as custodians for client and fund assets.
  • It is the ninth federal crypto action since Aug. 18, following the Senate’s 49-50 failed cloture vote on the CLARITY Act on Sept. 15, ten votes short of the 60 needed.
  • The CFTC’s broader market-structure framework, covering secondary trading, has sat at the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs since Sept. 17 with its text still unpublished.
  • 60 days comment window on the SEC’s custody proposal once published in the Federal Register
  • 49-50 Senate cloture vote on CLARITY Act, ten votes short of the 60-vote threshold
  • 1.2% digital-asset allocation share in CoinShares’ August survey, first rise since the October 2025 selloff

The Securities and Exchange Commission said in its proposal that it wants to “modernize custody rules and expand investor choice” by removing barriers that currently keep advisers from offering crypto-related advice. The rules, proposed under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, would also update financial-statement audit requirements for advisers and broker-dealer custodial arrangements for regulated funds. Crypto Coin Show covered the earlier stage of this custody rule as the agency signaled the change was coming.

SEC Chairman Atkins Calls Rule a ‘Compliant Pathway Where None Existed Before’

SEC Chairman Paul Atkins framed the proposal as closing a gap that has existed since crypto moved from fringe asset to institutional holding. He said regulators had not kept pace with an asset class that has grown “from a niche curiosity into a multi-trillion-dollar asset class to which investors actively seek exposure.”

Today’s proposal would provide a clear regulatory framework for the custody of crypto assets, giving investment advisers and funds a compliant pathway where none existed before, and replacing the grey of uncertainty created by custody rules crafted for a bygone era.

Paul S. Atkins, SEC Chairman

The proposal is not final. Comments run 60 days from the proposing release’s publication in the Federal Register, a window roughly double the 30 days the agency gave on some earlier crypto proposals this cycle.

Self-Custody Provision Breaks From Decades-Old Qualified Custodian Rule

For registered investment advisers, custody of client assets has historically required a “qualified custodian,” typically a bank or registered broker-dealer, a standard written before crypto existed and widely seen as incompatible with how digital assets are actually held and transferred. The new framework would let advisers rely on self-custody “under certain circumstances” and would add state trust companies as an eligible custodian category, broad

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Bitcoin wallet Electrum patches Lightning backup flaw affecting fund recovery
Bitcoin

Bitcoin wallet Electrum patches Lightning backup flaw affecting fund recovery

, , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 2, 2026·4 min read

Electrum developers closed a Lightning Network backup flaw that left some Bitcoin wallet users unable to reclaim funds after a channel closed remotely, but the fix does not retroactively repair backups already saved to disk. For institutional holders running self-custodied Lightning infrastructure, the episode is a reminder that off-chain key management carries recovery risks that standard custody audits rarely test.

  • Electrum 4.8.2, dated Sept. 11, remains the newest build listed on Electrum’s official site as of Oct. 1.
  • Wallets using BIP39 seeds or imported extended private keys always generate non-deterministic Lightning keys and stay at risk.
  • Electrum-seed wallets are only safe if the wallet file was created in version 4.1 or later, not merely upgraded to it.
  • 4.8.2 patched Electrum release, still current three weeks after shipping
  • Sept.11 release date of the fix, versus Oct.1 confirmation it is current
  • v4.1 wallet-file version threshold separating safe from vulnerable seeds

Electrum’s development team merged a fix for a backup defect in its Lightning Network integration, according to the pull request on the wallet’s GitHub repository. Lightning is Bitcoin’s off-chain payment layer that lets users transact without posting every payment to the base blockchain, and anchor channels are a Lightning channel type designed to let either party adjust fees when closing a channel. The defect meant that if a peer force-closed an anchor channel remotely, certain saved backups lacked the private-key material needed to sweep the user’s share of the balance back onto the Bitcoin chain.

The fix shipped in Electrum 4.8.2, released Sept. 11, still the newest build on Electrum’s official website as of Thursday, Oct. 1. It does not rewrite old backups automatically.

The gap was first detailed by CryptoSlate, which traced the fix to two linked pull requests and Electrum’s own warning language for affected wallets.

PR 10851 Adds Missing Payment-Key Data to Channel Backups

The pull request extends Electrum’s channel backup format to include the payment_basepoint, the key material needed to claim an anchor channel’s to_remote output after the peer force-closes it. Without that field, an exported backup could record that funds existed in a channel but lacked the specific key required to sweep them.

The fix also hides the option to request a remote force-close whenever the backup on hand cannot sweep the resulting output, preventing a user from triggering a close their own backup cannot settle.

A companion change, PR 10851, repairs full wallet-file exports. Maintainer SomberNight noted in the pull request discussion that earlier exports deleted a randomly generated Lightning private key, so re-enabling Lightning from that backup would generate different keys entirely, leaving the old channel records useless for spending anchor-channel funds.

BIP39 and Imported-Key Wallets Carry the Permanent Risk

Electrum’s release notes set two conditions that must both apply for a backup to be affected: the wallet uses non-deterministic Lightning keys, and the backup involves an anchor channel. Wallets built from BIP39 seeds or imported extended private keys always fall into the non-deterministic category, because those keys cannot be regenerated from the seed the way Electrum’s native format allows.

Electrum-seed wallets are the exception, but only partially. Their Lightning keys are deterministic solely if the wallet file was created in version 4.1 or later; a file originally generated under 4.0.x stays non-deterministic no matter how many times the software itself is upgraded.

On desktop, Electrum’s wallet information panel now flags channels as non-recoverable from the seed, while the Android app warns in its channel-opening dialog before a user even funds a channel.

The distinction did not exist in earlier releases, where the seed was broadly assumed to regenerate all wallet keys, including Lightning ones. It leaves one question Electrum’s documentation does not resolve: users who have already discarded the original wallet file that produced an at-risk backup have no stated path back to a safe export.

Startup Warnings Push Users Toward Manual Re-Export

Electrum 4.8.2 fixes the backup logic for future exports, but it cannot repair files generated before the update. The documented remedy is a fresh export from the running wallet, and Electrum now displays a startup warning to any wallet it detects as affected under the two conditions above.

That remedy depends on still holding the original wallet data needed to generate a new export. Installing 4.8.2 changes the software, but it does not recover key material already lost along with deleted wallet files.

The CCS read. The bug matters less for its scale than for what it says about Lightning tooling broadly: recovery assumptions baked into seed phrases do not automatically extend to off-chain layers, a gap custodians building institutional Lightning rails, and projects pursuing related upgrades like post-quantum Lightning changes, will need to account for in their own backup audits.

Electrum has not said whether a future release will attempt to identify which specific users still hold funds in anchor channels opened before the Sept. 11 patch, leaving the re-export step entirely manual and voluntary, much as node operators faced after unrelated client updates like Geth’s v1.17.7 release required opt-in configuration changes rather than automatic fixes.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Bitcoin ETF outflows halt nine-day $3.08 billion inflow streak
Bitcoin

Bitcoin ETF outflows halt nine-day $3.08 billion inflow streak

, , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 1, 2026·3 min read

US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds broke a nine-day inflow streak on Wednesday (September 30), posting $148.7 million in net outflows even as the group sits just $5 billion from its all-time cumulative inflow record. The reversal does little to settle whether an 11-month recovery from last October’s peak has run its course, since it was concentrated almost entirely in one fund.

  • Fidelity’s FBTC lost $125.6 million on Sept. 30, accounting for most of the day’s $148.7 million in net withdrawals.
  • September brought in roughly $2.65 billion, the second-strongest month of 2026 behind August’s $3.52 billion.
  • Cumulative lifetime inflows have climbed back to about $57.7 billion, leaving the funds roughly $5 billion below their Oct. 10, 2025 peak of $62.8 billion.
  • $148.7M Sept. 30 outflow that ended a nine-session, $3.08 billion inflow run
  • $62.8B prior cumulative inflow record set one year ago, Oct. 10, 2025
  • $5B gap remaining before ETFs reclaim that all-time high-water mark

Spot Bitcoin ETFs are regulated funds, run by issuers including BlackRock, Fidelity and Bitwise, that hold bitcoin directly and trade on US exchanges, giving institutional and retail investors exposure without self-custody. On Wednesday (September 30) those funds posted $148.7 million in net withdrawals, according to Farside Investors, snapping a nine-day run that had pulled in about $3.08 billion. The outflow was narrow rather than broad, a detail that matters more than the headline number, as CryptoSlate first reported.

Fidelity’s FBTC Absorbs 84% of the Day’s Outflow

FBTC drove the reversal with $125.6 million in redemptions, more than four times the next largest mover. Bitwise’s BITB lost $13.6 million and BlackRock’s IBIT shed $9.5 million, while the remaining nine listed funds recorded no net flows at all.

That concentration is the detail worth tracking. A single-fund outflow after nine straight positive sessions reads differently than a broad retreat across BlackRock, Fidelity and smaller issuers simultaneously. BlackRock’s IBIT recorded only $9.5 million in outflows on Sept. 30, a fraction of FBTC’s reversal.

September Closes at $2.65 Billion, Trailing Only August’s $3.52 Billion

Despite Tuesday’s pullback, September remained the second-strongest month of the year for the product category, with roughly $2.65 billion in net inflows versus August’s $3.52 billion. That monthly haul helped push 2026 net inflows to about $930 million, a notable turnaround after much of the year was spent in net outflow territory.

Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas called the rebound notable given the pressure the funds had absorbed over the prior 11 months, noting that flows had returned to levels reminiscent of the ETFs’ earlier strength even with bitcoin contending with higher yields and lingering negative sentiment, he said.

Balchunas added that the recovery had made the bearish case harder to sustain as price kept grinding higher. Bitcoin traded around $83,800 early Thursday (October 1), a level that keeps ETF demand as one of the clearest signals of whether institutional buyers are still adding exposure rather than rotating out.

Funds Need $5 Billion More to Beat the Oct. 10, 2025 Record

Bloomberg Intelligence data put the products’ cumulative inflow peak at about $62.8 billion on Oct. 10, 2025, before months of redemptions erased much of that progress. By July 13, the drawdown from that peak had reached roughly $12 billion, leaving lifetime flows near $50.9 billion, before fresh demand narrowed the deficit to about $57.7 billion by late September.

That leaves the funds roughly $5 billion short of their all-time high. Whether advisers and wealth platforms keep routing allocations through these vehicles will help determine how fast that gap closes.

The CCS read. A single-fund outflow after nine days of broad-based buying is a weak signal on its own, and the real test is whether BlackRock’s IBIT, which barely moved on Tuesday, starts bleeding alongside FBTC. For allocators sizing bitcoin exposure through ETFs rather than spot holdings, the September print matters more than the one bad day, since it confirms demand survived higher yields without BlackRock’s flagship fund doing all the work.

The next several sessions will show whether Tuesday’s withdrawal was a pause or the start of a broader reversal, since a run of redemptions spreading to BlackRock and Fidelity together would undercut the recovery narrative Balchunas described. Until then, the funds remain about $5 billion from erasing a drawdown that took nine months to build, with the pace of fresh inflows in early October serving as the clearest test of whether buyers are still committed near current prices.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Crypto Coin Show
Bitcoin

MEXC doubles Guardian Fund Bitcoin holdings to 2,000 BTC

, , , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 1, 2026·3 min read

MEXC has added another 1,000 BTC to its Guardian Fund, the exchange’s publicly disclosed user-protection reserve, bringing total holdings to 2,000 BTC alongside 100 million USDT. The move matters to institutional investors because it signals exchanges are now competing on balance-sheet depth and on-chain verifiability of reserves, not just on fee structures or listings.

  • MEXC added 1,000 BTC to its Guardian Fund on Thursday, October 1, 2026, its second Bitcoin allocation to the fund this year.
  • The fund now holds 2,000 BTC plus 100 million USDT, up from an all-stablecoin launch of $100 million in June 2025.
  • MEXC is targeting $500 million in total fund size within two years of a May 2026 commitment to expand the reserve.
  • 2,000 BTC Guardian Fund’s current Bitcoin holdings, double May’s 1,000 BTC total
  • $500M two-year fund target, five times its $100M June 2025 launch size
  • 100M USDT stablecoin reserve held alongside the fund’s Bitcoin

MEXC disclosed the new allocation through publicly disclosed wallet addresses that allow independent verification of the fund’s holdings. The second Bitcoin allocation sits at a distinct address, separate from the wallet that received the first 1,000 BTC in May. The USDT portion of the reserve remains trackable on Etherscan.

MEXC Doubles Bitcoin Reserves to 2,000 BTC

MEXC’s Guardian Fund began as a $100 million reserve held entirely in USDT. In May 2026 the exchange committed to grow the fund fivefold, to $500 million over two years, and added its first 1,000 BTC alongside the existing stablecoin base.

Thursday’s addition doubles that Bitcoin position to 2,000 BTC. MEXC’s chief executive framed the move as part of an ongoing process rather than a one-time milestone.

Security and user protection is not a one-time investment. It is a continuous commitment. The risks facing digital asset platforms continue to evolve, and the resources behind user protection need to evolve with them. Adding another 1,000 BTC to the Guardian Fund reflects our long-term approach to building stronger protection for users and ensuring that the infrastructure behind that protection continues to grow with MEXC.

Vugar Usi, CEO of MEXC

Guardian Fund’s Model Breaks From Third-Party Insurance

The structural difference from conventional exchange insurance is the publicly traceable wallet model. Every MEXC-held BTC and USDT address tied to the fund is disclosed, letting users independently verify balances and transaction history on-chain rather than relying on an auditor’s attestation after the fact.

That transparency matters against a backdrop of recent exchange failures. MEXC’s publicly disclosed addresses are meant to let users check reserve adequacy before an incident occurs, rather than after.

What the disclosures do not specify is how compensation is triggered or capped per incident, or whether the Bitcoin component can be liquidated quickly enough to match the fund’s own “instant coverage” claim during a market stress event. MEXC has not published a claims policy alongside the wallet addresses.

MEXC Still Needs $400 Million More to Hit Its Target

At 2,000 BTC plus 100 million USDT, the Guardian Fund sits well below the $500 million target MEXC set for itself in May 2026, roughly 19 months from today’s deadline window. The exchange has not disclosed a pace for further allocations or whether future additions will again be Bitcoin-denominated.

The approach of building reserves through direct asset purchases, rather than pooled insurance, echoes a broader pattern of crypto-native firms holding Bitcoin on their own books, a strategy also visible in corporate treasuries such as Strategy’s bitcoin purchases. For MEXC, the open question is whether exchange-held reserves earmarked for user compensation should be treated differently from a corporate treasury position.

The CCS read. We read this less as a security headline and more as a balance-sheet signal. Exchanges that disclose wallet-level reserves are effectively competing with licensed custodians on verifiability, and MEXC’s bet is that users will choose venues where compensation capacity is checkable in real time rather than promised in a terms-of-service clause.

MEXC has not set a date for its next allocation toward the $500 million target, nor published the claims criteria that would govern how the Bitcoin portion gets deployed during an actual incident. Users and counterparties tracking the fund can watch the disclosed wallet addresses directly for the next move.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Bitcoin developer Liam Gilligan’s BIP461 closes signature loophole that leaks private keys
Bitcoin

Bitcoin developer Liam Gilligan’s BIP461 closes signature loophole that leaks private keys

, , , , , , ,

BitcoinCrypto Coin Show News Team·October 1, 2026·3 min read

A new Bitcoin Improvement Proposal gives wallet makers a way to catch hardware that secretly leaks private keys inside otherwise valid signatures. For custodians and exchanges that rely on hardware signing devices to secure institutional bitcoin holdings, a shared, checkable standard narrows a blind spot that has existed since ECDSA signing began.

  • BIP461, authored by developer Liam Gilligan, was merged into the Bitcoin BIPs repository as a Draft on Sept. 16.
  • The proposal forces two independent signers holding the same secret key to produce byte-identical ECDSA signatures for the same message.
  • A Bitcoin Core reviewer said test vectors and a reference implementation are still required before BIP461 can advance to Complete status.
  • 70 bytes maximum size of a BIP461 signature
  • Sept. 16 date Gilligan’s draft was merged into Bitcoin’s BIPs repository

Bitcoin developer Liam Gilligan’s proposal, filed as BIP461, specifies a fully deterministic version of ECDSA, the signature scheme Bitcoin has used since its launch to authorize transactions. Under existing rules, a signer has latitude over a value called the nonce, a one-time number chosen during signing, and that freedom lets compromised firmware encode fragments of a secret key inside a signature that still passes verification. Gilligan’s draft closes that gap by fixing every choice in the signing process, so any two honest, compliant signers given the same key and message must output the identical result.

The document was merged into the BIPs repository on Sept. 16. It remains marked Draft, the earliest formal stage in the BIP process.

According to its report on the proposal, CryptoSlate noted that BIP461 requires no change to Bitcoin’s consensus rules, since the resulting signatures remain valid under existing validation logic. The fix operates entirely at the signer level, meaning wallet and hardware vendors can adopt it without any network upgrade or soft fork.

Standardization Turns a Signature Into a Checkable Benchmark

The vulnerability BIP461 targets was formalized by the Dark Skippy disclosure, which showed that corrupted wallet firmware could embed seed material inside transaction signatures without failing verification. Dark Skippy’s original demonstration used Schnorr signatures, the scheme behind Taproot, while BIP461 covers ECDSA; Taproot uses the separate BIP340 Schnorr scheme, so the new draft does not directly standardize a remedy for that specific demo.

Detection works by loading the same key into two independent signers, signing the same message on both, and comparing the output. A mismatch proves at least one signer deviates from BIP461, though it does not by itself prove theft or identify which device is malicious.

Another important motivation is that signatures produced according to a standardised approach will be byte-identical. This means signers can be compared to ensure they are not leaking secrets by embedding them in signatures (e.g. Dark Skippy).

Sjors, reviewer on the related Bitcoin Core pull request

The proposal’s mitigation discussion warns the check has a real limit: a malicious device could pass a test signature while leaking only on a selected real transaction, so a single matching comparison confirms nothing beyond that one sample. The document itself states that standardization alone “is what enables leak detection,” since a nonstandard algorithm has no reference to cross-check against. Our Crypto Coin Show coverage of a separate post-quantum signing proposal for Lightning shows developers are tackling signer-security gaps across multiple layers of the Bitcoin stack this year, not just at the base layer.

Test Vectors and Reference Code Remain Unbuilt

BIP461 carries a secondary benefit: its deterministic algorithm also grinds signatures to a maximum of 70 bytes in DER encoding, by enforcing low-r and low-s forms, with the side effect that a non-grinding signer becomes identifiable on-chain by its high-r signatures.

At the September merge, a reviewer said reference implementation code and test vectors were still listed as “TODO” and necessary before BIP461 could progress from Draft to Complete.

The CCS read. For institutional custodians, this draft matters less as a protocol change than as an audit tool for vendor firmware. Firms with large on-chain reserves, like the one disclosed in Strategy’s 8-K filing, could eventually require hardware signers to pass BIP461 comparisons as a procurement condition, shifting signer verification from a trust assumption to a contractual one once compliant implementations exist.

BIP461 cannot advance beyond Draft until someone publishes the missing reference implementation and test vectors, work the jeanpablojp offer on the pull request has proposed but not yet delivered. Until that code lands and hardware vendors adopt the deterministic algorithm, the detection benchmark Gilligan designed exists on paper only.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

Subscribe

Load More