Former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has called Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme, claiming it has far less value than gold and even Pokémon cards, which he said are more widely recognized.

 

 

 

In a recent Daily Mail article, former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson called Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme with no real value, saying it relied on a “supply of new and credulous investors.” He also shared the story of a friend who lost about $26,000 in a crypto investment scam.

 

Johnson shared a story about a retired man from a village in Oxfordshire who initially handed over £500 (about $661) to someone who promised to double the money through Bitcoin investments. Johnson said the man went on to invest £20,000 (around $26,450) over three and a half years but ultimately received nothing in return.

 

The former prime minister also questioned the credibility of Bitcoin, calling it “a string of numbers stored in a series of computers.” “Who can we turn to if someone decrypts the crypto?” Johnson asked. “There’s no one except Nakamoto, who might be nothing more than Pikachu or Charmander.”

 

Since the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, lacked institutional backing, Johnson questioned Bitcoin’s credibility as a tradable asset. According to Johnson, Pokémon cards, which fascinated children thirty years ago and still do today, are a more tradable asset than Bitcoin.

 

“These curious little Japanese cartoon beasties hold the same fascination for five-year-olds as they did 30 years ago. The kids are obsessed with them. They boast and squabble about them,” Boris said.

 

“Even if you remain pretty impervious to the charm of Pikachu, you can just about see why a decades-old Pikachu card is still a tradeable asset,” he added.

 

 

The Crypto Community Responded

While many social media users have ridiculed Boris’ understanding of cryptocurrency, some have offered clearer explanations of why Bitcoin cannot be called a Ponzi scheme.

 

Michael Saylor, founder of MicroStrategy, also sought to clarify the issue.

 

“Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi requires a central operator promising returns and paying early investors with funds from later ones,” Saylor wrote on X.

 

“Bitcoin has no issuer, no promoter, and no guaranteed return—just an open, decentralized monetary network driven by code and market demand,” he added.

 

 

 

A crypto user has lost millions of dollars to slippage and Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) bots while performing a swap involving the decentralized finance protocol Aave.

 

The user whose Binance wallet was funded attempted to swap $50.4 million in USDT for the AAVE token using the decentralized exchange aggregator CoW Protocol and the decentralized exchange SushiSwap.

 

Since DEXs like SushiSwap use automated market makers (AMMs) that set token prices based on trading activity, the user was warned about the potential for high slippage.

 

“Given the unusually large size of the single order, the Aave interface, like most trading interfaces, warned the user about extraordinary slippage and required confirmation via a checkbox,” Stani Kulechov, Aave’s founder, said.

 

The user ignored the warning and proceeded with the swap, receiving only 327 AAVE tokens from the $50.4 million transaction. Due to extreme slippage, the user effectively paid about $154,000 per AAVE, far above the market price of $114.

 

“The user confirmed the warning on their mobile device and proceeded with the swap, accepting the high slippage, which ultimately resulted in receiving only 324 AAVE in return,” Stani added. 

 

Reacting to the incident, CoW Protocol, the DEX aggregator used for the swap, said on its X account, “Despite clear warnings that showed the user they would lose nearly all of the value of their transaction, and despite needing to explicitly opt into the trade after seeing the warning, the user chose to proceed with their swap.”

 

 

The MEV Bot Sandwich Attack

In addition to the massive slippage loss, the user also lost nearly $10 million to MEV bots. Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) bots monitor pending blockchain transactions and exploit them for profit. 

 

These bots typically execute a sandwich attack: they buy a token before a user places a large order, driving up the token’s price. Once the user buys at this inflated price, the bots immediately sell, profiting from the transaction.

 

MEV bots, spotting the pending USDt-to-AAVE swap, borrowed $29 million in wrapped ether (WETH) from Morph, used the funds to buy AAVE on Bancor, and then sold the AAVE tokens at an inflated price on Sushiswap before the swap was executed, netting $9.9 million in profit.

 

 

Compensation Plans

To compensate the user for the huge loss, Stani Kulechov, Aave’s founder, said Aave would return $600,000 in transaction fees collected from the transaction. CoW Protocol also said it would refund any fees collected from the transaction back to the user.

 

 

Wells Fargo has filed a trademark application for "WFUSD" with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, covering a broad slate of cryptocurrency services.

 

The 'USD" within the filling leads to huge speculation about stablecoins as it follows the same naming convention used by Tether's USDT and Circle's USDC, the two more notable stablecoins account for the vast majority of the roughly $200 billion stablecoin market. Whether Wells Fargo is building toward a consumer-facing stablecoin product, an institutional settlement layer, or something else entirely, is not clear, and all just speculation.

 

The trademark was filed just months after President Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law in July 2025, the first comprehensive federal framework for payment stablecoins in U.S. history. The law opened a clear path for bank subsidiaries to issue dollar-pegged digital tokens under regulatory oversight, and Wells Fargo's trademark application reads like a bank that intends to walk through that door.

 

 

A Long History, A New Gear
Wells Fargo is not a newcomer to blockchain experimentation. Back in 2019, the bank unveiled Wells Fargo Digital Cash, a dollar-linked stablecoin built on R3's Corda blockchain designed to handle internal book transfers and cross-border settlements within its global network. The pilot worked. The bank successfully ran test transactions between its U.S. and Canadian accounts. But it stayed internal, never touching retail customers or external counterparties.

 

That earlier project had a narrow scope to try to reduce friction in the bank's own back-office transfers. The WFUSD trademark filing feels different. The scope covers cryptocurrency exchange services, digital asset transfers, payment processing, tokenization, blockchain transaction verification, and digital wallet services. That is not a description of an internal settlement tool. It is a description of a full-spectrum digital asset platform.

 

Wells Fargo's own research analysts had been tracking the stablecoin market closely well before the trademark filing surfaced. In a note published in May 2025, analysts led by Andrew Bauch wrote that stablecoin momentum had reached what they called "must-monitor levels," pointing to a 16% jump in total stablecoin market capitalization that year and a 43% rise over the prior twelve months. The report flagged payments companies including Mastercard, Visa, and PayPal as stocks with the most strategic exposure to the stablecoin wave. Whether those analysts knew about internal trademark discussions is unclear, but the research and the filing tell a consistent story about where the bank's thinking may have landed.

Wells Fargo is not acting alone. In May 2025, the Wall Street Journal reported that JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo were in early discussions about building a jointly operated U.S. dollar stablecoin, with payment infrastructure providers including Zelle and The Clearing House also at the table. Sources familiar with the matter described the conversations as exploratory, but the ambition was clear: create a bank-backed digital dollar that would compete with the success of crypot-native products.

 

JPMorgan has the most developed track record in this space, having operated JPM Coin since 2019 as an internal settlement instrument for institutional clients. The bank has reportedly settled more than $200 billion in transactions through the system. 

 

The GENIUS Act, which passed the Senate with a bipartisan vote of 68 to 30 and the House 308 to 122 before Trump signed it on July 18, 2025, created the regulatory framework that banks had been waiting for. Under the law, bank subsidiaries can issue payment stablecoins under the supervision of their primary federal banking regulator.

 

Issuers must maintain one-to-one reserves in highly liquid assets like Treasury bills, submit to regular audits, and comply with anti-money laundering and Bank Secrecy Act requirements. The law also gave stablecoin holders priority claims over other creditors in any insolvency proceeding, a significant consumer protection provision.

 

For a bank like Wells Fargo, that framework essentially legalizes and licenses what its trademark filing envisions. The FDIC has already approved a proposed rulemaking to implement the GENIUS Act's application procedures for supervised institutions seeking to issue stablecoins, moving the machinery toward full implementation by January 2027 as the law prescribes.

 

 

Competition or Collaboration with Crypto?

While the big four banks have been circling the stablecoin market, crypto-native firms have been circling the banking sector. Circle, the issuer of USDC, has been in discussions about obtaining a bank charter. Coinbase, BitGo, and Paxos are all reportedly pursuing various forms of banking licensure that would let them compete more directly with traditional institutions for deposits and payment volumes. And, most notably, Kraken just recentlly received a Federal Reserve master account, gaining direct access to the Federal Reserve's payment infrastructure.

 

That competitive dynamic is partly what has given the joint stablecoin exploration among the major banks its urgency. A dollar-denominated stablecoin backed by federally chartered banks would carry a different kind of institutional weight than products issued by crypto firms, regardless of how well those firms have managed their reserves. 

 

Still, the incumbents face real headwinds. The GENIUS Act, while giving banks a clear path to issue stablecoins, also permits nonbank firms like fintechs and crypto companies to issue them under OCC oversight. Grant Thornton's national blockchain and digital assets practice leader, Markus Veith, noted after the law passed that banks could face serious competition from nonbank entities that don't carry the same regulatory burden or capital requirements. Stablecoins from USDT and USDC already saw their combined market share dip from 89% to under 84% over the past year as newer entrants gained traction.

 

 

What WFUSD Could Become
The trademark itself, of course, is not a product. Banks and large corporations file trademarks for concepts that never reach the market all the time, and a filing covering cryptocurrency services does not obligate Wells Fargo to ship a stablecoin by any particular date. The application does, however, reserve the commercial rights to the WFUSD brand across a spectrum of digital asset services, which is a form of strategic positioning that serious companies do when they intend to eventually use what they are protecting.

 

If Wells Fargo does build out WFUSD into a live product, the most likely initial form would be an institutional-grade settlement and payment layer, mirroring what Wells Fargo Digital Cash did internally but opening it to corporate clients and potentially other financial institutions. Cross-border payments represent the most obvious near-term use case. The market for global cross-border transactions was roughly $44 trillion in 2023 according to McKinsey estimates cited by the bank's own research team, and stablecoins offer demonstrably faster settlement, lower funding costs, and programmability through smart contracts compared to the correspondent banking infrastructure that currently handles most of that volume.

 

A consumer-facing version would require more work and more time. Wells Fargo analysts themselves noted in their May research note that everyday consumer adoption of stablecoins is likely still a decade away. But the infrastructure being built now, the trademarks being registered, the regulatory licenses being sought, the interoperability frameworks being designed, will determine who is positioned to serve that market when it arrives.

 

 

What Comes Next?

For Wells Fargo specifically, WFUSD represents the most concrete public signal of the bank's digital asset intentions to date. 

 

Whether the bank ultimately issues WFUSD as a standalone product, folds it into a larger bank consortium stablecoin, or uses the trademark as a branding vehicle for a custody and trading platform remains to be seen. The competitive pressure from both crypto-native firms building toward bank charters and fellow Wall Street institutions building their own digital dollar products means the bank can't afford to stay in patent-pending limbo for too long.

 

The name was chosen carefully. When the fourth-largest bank in the United States puts its initials on a dollar-pegged ticker and files it with the federal government, it is placing a bet on where finance is going. The question now is how fast it gets there.

 

Kast, a stablecoin payments company, has raised $80 million in a Series A funding round co-led by QED Investors and Left Lane Capital, bringing its valuation to $600 million.

 

According to the team, the funding will be used to accelerate Kast’s global expansion across North America, Latin America, and the Middle East, as well as to expand the company’s workforce, licensing, and product development efforts.

 

 

What Kast is Building

Kast is a stablecoin-powered neobank founded in 2024 by Daniel Bertoli, an ex-partner at Quona Capital, and Raagulan Pathy, a former executive at Circle Internet Financial, the company behind the USD Coin (USDC) stablecoin.

 

To reduce the delays and high costs often associated with international remittances through traditional banking systems, Kast is building a blockchain-based platform that uses stablecoins as its settlement layer. 

 

According to the team, “Our end game is clear: to become the leading neobank for the stablecoin economy, serving both users and businesses.” 

 

To ensure that users and businesses of all sizes are catered to, Kast has built a platform that allows users to create digital dollar accounts. These accounts enable users to store dollars digitally, send money globally, and receive international payments. As a result, users do not need a U.S. bank account to hold dollars digitally. 

 

Since its launch in 2024, Kast has achieved a number of impressive milestones, including:

- Reaching over 1 million users on its platform.

- Processing about $5 billion in transaction volume to date.

- Enabling users to send money to more than 190 countries. 

 

This funding marks Kast’s second fundraising round, months after the company raised $10 million in December 2024 in a round led by HongShan Capital Group and Peak XV Partners.

 

 

The Surge of Stablecoins in Institutional Remittances

With a market cap of over $300 billion, stablecoins have seen a remarkable increase in institutional use for cross-border payments. 

 

According to a stablecoin report, enterprise cross-border stablecoin transaction volume grew threefold year over year in 2025, with 25% of corporates now using stablecoins for supply-chain payments, particularly for trade settlement, treasury transfers, and gig-economy payouts. 

 

This increased adoption is due to the very fast settlement times of stablecoins, usually less than 24 hours, a sharp contrast from traditional banking systems, which often take days.

 

Based on current adoption trends, stablecoins are projected to capture 10 to 15% of global cross-border payments by 2030, with their annual settlements reaching approximately $5 trillion by the end of this year.

 

 

An X user with the username "Sillytuna" has reportedly lost $24 million in Aave Ethereum USDC (aEthUSDC) in an attack that involved a combination of violence, sexual assault, weapons, and threats to life.

 

 

"Bruised, held off while I could, but can't do that much with axes over your hands and feet," Sillytuna wrote. The user further stated that he was, at this point, done with crypto. In his words, "And now... definitely out of crypto ****ers."

 

While the matter has already been reported to law enforcement, no official statement has been issued by the authorities. However, the X user has announced a 10% bounty for whoever helps recover the stolen funds.

 

 

 

How the Crypto Community Reacted

Shortly after the news went viral, the crypto community reacted with mixed feelings, with many commiserating with the user over their loss. Some also raised awareness about the deplorable state of security in the United Kingdom. Apparently, the victim is a UK resident.

 

 

Amid the sympathy from the global crypto community, some, however, doubted the authenticity of the victim's story.

 

According to YokaiCapital, an X user, the victim had not posted anything about crypto before. He also alleges that the victim's account appears to have been bought recently.

 

"He will probably shill the coin at some point or say that he will take donations from the coin," YokaiCapital went on to write. 

 

However, the victim has denied allegations that he intentionally wanted to trend and claims the stolen funds were long-term holdings.

 

 

How the Attackers Moved the Stolen Funds

Tracking the stolen funds, blockchain analytics firm Arkham Intelligence said that the attackers moved the funds across Layer 2 networks, Bitcoin, and Monero, obviously to evade trail.

 

 

 

Roughly $20 million of the stolen funds were stored in two Ethereum addresses as DAI, a stablecoin on the Ethereum network, while $2.48 million was bridged to USDC on Arbitrum.

 

Arkham reported that the attackers sent $2.47 million to Hyperliquid through 19 separate Wagyu accounts, which were used to convert the funds to Monero (XMR).

 

The attackers also bridged $1.1 million to the Bitcoin blockchain using LiFi, noting that 0.5 BTC was deposited into a mixing service, Arkham added.

 

 

 

Wall Street and crypto have been circling each other for years. On Monday, they shook hands.

 

Nasdaq and Kraken's parent company Payward announced a partnership to develop what they're calling an equities transformation gateway, a piece of infrastructure designed to let tokenized versions of publicly listed stocks move between the traditional, regulated financial system and the open, permissionless world of decentralized finance. The deal is one of the most significant convergences between a legacy exchange operator and a major crypto platform the industry has seen, and it arrives at a moment when several of the world's biggest exchanges appear to be racing to plant flags in the tokenized securities space.

 

Nasdaq President Tal Cohen said the exchange believes tokenization "has the potential to unlock the benefits of an always-on financial ecosystem" and to improve how investors access markets and how issuers engage with shareholders. The equity token design, which Nasdaq expects to become operational in the first half of 2027, is designed to preserve issuer control, existing regulatory frameworks, and the underlying rights associated with company shares.

 

 

What's Actually Being Built

Nasdaq's equity token design is not just about putting a blockchain wrapper around a stock. The initiative is structured so that blockchain records are integrated directly into the issuer's official share register, meaning a transfer of the token represents an actual transfer of the underlying security itself. Full legal and regulatory equivalence is the goal, not a synthetic approximation of it.

 

Kraken's xStocks framework powers the permissionless side of that equation. Since launching less than a year ago, xStocks has processed more than $25 billion in total transaction volume, with over $4 billion of that settled directly on-chain. More than 85,000 unique holders across supported networks have used the product, which currently covers more than 70 tokenized equities and ETFs, each backed 1:1 by the underlying asset. Fractional shares are available from $1. Trading runs around the clock on-chain, and dividends flow back automatically as additional tokens.

 

Under the partnership, the equities transformation gateway will allow clients in eligible jurisdictions to swap tokenized equities between the regulated, permissioned Nasdaq environment and the permissionless DeFi ecosystem. Payward Services will handle KYC and AML onboarding for participants accessing the gateway. Kraken will serve as the primary settlement layer for Nasdaq equity token transactions for an initial period, in the markets where xStocks are available.

 

It's worth being precise about geography. xStocks are not registered under the U.S. Securities Act and are not available to U.S. persons or in the United Kingdom. The initial rollout targets Europe and other international markets where Payward holds the relevant registrations and licenses.

 

 

The Regulatory Foundation Is Already Laid

None of this is happening in a vacuum. Nasdaq filed a proposal with the SEC in September 2025 that sought to allow tokenized versions of its listed stocks and ETFs to trade alongside traditional shares and settle through the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation. That proposal argued for working within existing rules rather than around them, a notable contrast to tokenization projects that have tried to carve out space outside traditional regulatory structures.

 

The regulatory environment has also shifted meaningfully. The SEC's 2026 Staff Statement on Tokenized Securities classifies tokenized equities the same as regular equity securities under federal law, giving the Nasdaq initiative a cleaner legal runway than it might have had even a year ago. SEC Chairman Paul Atkins has been publicly supportive of American leadership in digital financial technology, and the commission has asked staff to work with firms on tokenized securities distribution.

 

Nasdaq's equity token design is set up as an issuer-sponsored, voluntary program. Public companies listed on Nasdaq would be able to opt in as the framework develops. The exchange plans to engage issuers, transfer agents, regulators, and market infrastructure providers as the project evolves.

 

 

Kraken's Vertical Integration Play

For Kraken, the Nasdaq partnership is the latest move in what looks increasingly like a deliberate strategy to own the entire tokenized equity stack. In December 2025 the company acquired Backed Finance, the Swiss issuer that sits behind the xStocks product, deepening its vertical integration along the tokenization value chain. In February of this year it expanded xStocks to the 360X platform operated by Deutsche Boerse Group. And in late 2025 Kraken launched what it described as the world's first regulated tokenized equity perpetual futures, offering up to 20x leverage for non-U.S. clients across more than 110 countries.

 

Kraken also became the first crypto company to secure approval for a Federal Reserve master account, a regulatory win that drew criticism from several U.S. banking groups but also marked a genuine shift in how regulators are thinking about the boundary between crypto platforms and the traditional banking system. The company is separately targeting a public listing in 2026.

 

Arjun Sethi, Kraken's Co-CEO, framed the Nasdaq deal in terms of capital efficiency as much as access. His argument is that equities today sit largely frozen inside brokerage systems where their utility is limited to directional exposure and, in some cases, venue-specific margin. Tokenized equities on programmable infrastructure, he suggested, can function as collateral across a much broader set of trading, lending, and hedging environments simultaneously, without the capital fragmentation that comes when each venue requires isolated collateral deposits.

 

"When collateral can move programmatically between systems," Sethi said, "settlement friction decreases and capital can move more dynamically between strategies and markets."

 

 

The Race Is On

The Nasdaq-Kraken announcement does not exist in isolation. It arrived in a week that saw the Intercontinental Exchange, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, make a strategic investment in OKX at a reported $25 billion valuation, signing a deal to bring tokenized NYSE-listed stocks and crypto futures to OKX's platform. ICE separately announced development of a new digital trading platform combining the NYSE's Pillar matching engine with blockchain-based post-trade systems. That platform would support 24/7 trading of U.S.-listed equities and ETFs, instant settlement via tokenized capital, and stablecoin-based funding. ICE said it would seek regulatory approvals for the venue, with NYSE-linked tokenized shares targeting availability in the second quarter of 2026.

 

Nasdaq also separately announced a partnership with Seturion, the tokenized settlement platform operated by Boerse Stuttgart Group, to connect its European trading venues to infrastructure supporting trading and settlement of tokenized securities.

 

What's emerging is something that looked improbable even two years ago: a genuine competition among the world's largest exchange operators over who gets to own the infrastructure layer for tokenized securities. The race is less about whether tokenized equities will happen and more about which institutions get to control the plumbing.

 

If the Nasdaq-Kraken infrastructure reaches full operation, the implications for how capital markets function could be substantial. Tokenized equities with 24/7 on-chain settlement would, in theory, compress the settlement cycle that still takes two business days in conventional U.S. equity markets. Shareholders would retain full governance rights, including proxy voting and dividend entitlements, automated through smart contract logic rather than managed through layers of intermediaries.

 

For international retail investors in markets where traditional brokerage distribution is limited or expensive, access to tokenized U.S. equities through a crypto exchange represents a potentially meaningful expansion of the investable universe. Fractional share availability starting at $1 removes one of the practical barriers that has kept some investors out of high-priced stocks.

 

The more speculative scenario, and the one Sethi seems most interested in, is what happens when tokenized equities can be used as collateral across DeFi lending protocols, perpetual futures markets, and other on-chain financial applications. The argument is that programmable collateral is more efficient than static collateral, and that the firms which build the infrastructure to move it across venues will capture a meaningful slice of the value created.

 

There's obviously a long way to go. The Nasdaq equity token design isn't expected to be operational until mid-2027. Regulatory approvals still need to be worked through. Issuer adoption is voluntary and therefore uncertain. The U.S. market itself remains off-limits for xStocks. And building genuine liquidity in tokenized equity markets, as Sethi himself acknowledged, requires more than technology alone.

 

Still, the direction of travel is increasingly clear. The question is no longer whether traditional exchange operators will engage with blockchain-based infrastructure. It's who gets there first, and whose plumbing ends up underneath everyone else's trades.

• Hayden Adams, CEO, Uniswap Labs
• Brian Armstrong, CEO, Coinbase
• Shayne Coplan, CEO, Polymarket
• Brad Garlinghouse, CEO, Ripple
• Luke Hoersten, CEO, Bitnomial
• Tarek Mansour, CEO, Kalshi
• Kris Marszalek, CEO, Crypto.com
• Nathan McCauley, CEO, Anchorage Digital
• Peter Mintzberg, CEO, Grayscale
• Sergey Nazarov, CEO, Chainlink Labs
• Arjun Sethi, Co CEO, Kraken
• Peter Smith, CEO, Blockchain.com
• Tyler Winklevoss, CEO, Gemini
• Anatoly Yakovenko, CEO, Solana Labs
• Andrej Bolkovic, CEO, Options Clearing Corporation
• Thomas Chippas, CEO, Rothera Markets
• Professor Harry Crane, Representative
• Chris Dixon, General Partner, a16z Crypto
• Craig Donohue, CEO, Cboe Global Markets
• Terry Duffy, Chair and CEO, CME Group
• Tom Farley, CEO, Bullish
• Adena Friedman, Chair and CEO, Nasdaq
• Christian Genetski, President, FanDuel
• Frank LaSalla, President and CEO, Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation
• Walt Lukken, CEO, FIA
• Scott D. O’Malia, CEO, ISDA
• Alana Palmedo, Managing Partner, Paradigm
• Vivek Raman, CEO, Etherealize
• Professor Carla Reyes, Representative
• Jason Robins, CEO, DraftKings
• David Schwimmer, CEO, LSEG
• Vance Spencer, Co founder, Framework Ventures
• Jeff Sprecher, CEO, Intercontinental Exchange
• Vlad Tenev, CEO, Robinhood
• Don Wilson, CEO, DRW

 

 

Aster has taken its biggest step yet toward becoming a standalone blockchain.

 

The decentralized trading platform announced that its Layer-1 testnet is now live and open to all users, moving the project out of private testing and into a broader public phase. The launch puts Aster on track for a planned mainnet debut later this quarter and signals a clear shift in strategy, from operating across multiple chains to running its own purpose-built network.

 

For a project that started as a perpetual futures DEX, the move reflects how competitive onchain trading has become. Speed, execution quality, and control over infrastructure are now as important as liquidity.

 

 

From Perp Dex To Full Blockchain

Aster originally gained traction by offering perpetual futures trading across major networks like Ethereum, BNB Chain, Arbitrum, and Solana. Its pitch was simple but effective: capital-efficient trading, deep liquidity aggregation, and tools designed to limit front-running and MEV.

 

That model worked, but it also came with constraints. Relying on shared blockspace means competing with unrelated activity, dealing with variable fees, and making tradeoffs on latency. As onchain derivatives volumes surged over the past year, those limitations became harder to ignore.

 

The Layer-1 effort is Aster’s answer. Instead of adapting to general-purpose blockchains, the team is building a network optimized from the ground up for trading.

 

 

What Makes Aster Chain Different

Aster Chain is designed specifically for high-frequency, high-volume trading. The focus is on fast finality, high throughput, and predictable execution, features that traders typically associate with centralized venues.

 

Privacy is another core element. The chain integrates zero-knowledge proofs to allow trades to be verified onchain without broadcasting sensitive order details. That matters in derivatives markets, where exposed positions can attract front-running and liquidation pressure.

 

Rather than positioning itself as a broad smart contract platform, Aster is leaning into specialization. The goal is to make the chain feel like trading infrastructure first, DeFi playground second.

 

 

Testnet Goes Public

Until recently, access to the Aster testnet was limited. An early cohort of about 1,000 users, selected from hundreds of thousands of applicants, was invited to test core features like perpetual trading, spot markets, and order execution. Those users received test tokens through a faucet and were encouraged to stress the system and report bugs.

 

Opening the testnet to everyone marks a shift from controlled experimentation to real-world simulation. More users mean more edge cases, more feedback, and a better sense of how the chain performs under load.

 

For Aster, it is also a signaling moment. Public testnets are where projects start to be judged less on vision and more on execution.

 

 

The Road Ahead

The testnet launch feeds directly into Aster’s broader 2026 roadmap. The next major milestone is the Layer-1 mainnet launch, currently targeted for the first quarter of the year.

 

Beyond that, the team plans to roll out developer tooling, staking and governance features tied to the ASTER token, and deeper integrations for fiat on-ramps and off-ramps. There are also plans for advanced order types, expanded real-world asset markets, and additional privacy features aimed at professional traders.

 

If it works, Aster could end up occupying a middle ground that many projects talk about but few achieve: the speed and sophistication of centralized exchanges, delivered through decentralized infrastructure.

 

 

Competitive Pressure And Open Questions

Aster is not alone in betting on custom blockchains for trading. Several derivatives platforms are exploring similar paths, all chasing the same prize: better execution without sacrificing self-custody.

 

The challenge will be adoption. Traders are pragmatic, and loyalty is thin. Aster’s Layer-1 will need to prove not just that it works, but that it works better, consistently, and at scale.

 

There are also the usual caveats. Testnet tokens have no value, timelines can slip, and regulatory uncertainty still hangs over derivatives trading in many regions.

 

Still, the public testnet launch is a meaningful milestone. It shows that Aster is serious about owning its infrastructure and confident enough to put it in front of the wider market.

 

For now, the real test begins.

 

CME Group, the world’s largest derivatives exchange, is exploring the idea of issuing its own digital token, a move that signals how far traditional market infrastructure has come in its engagement with blockchain technology.

 

The idea, casually referred to as a “CME Coin,” was raised by CME Group CEO Terry Duffy during a recent earnings call. While still early and undefined, the concept centers on using a proprietary digital asset within CME’s own ecosystem, potentially for collateral, margin, or settlement purposes.

 

This is not about launching a new retail cryptocurrency or competing with bitcoin or ether. Instead, it is about modernizing the technology that supports global derivatives markets, a space where CME plays a critical role.

 

 

What CME Is Actually Exploring

Duffy described the initiative as part of an ongoing review into tokenization and digital asset infrastructure. He suggested that CME is evaluating whether issuing a token that operates on a decentralized network could improve how collateral moves between participants in cleared markets.

 

Details remain scarce. CME has not confirmed whether such a token would be structured as a stablecoin, a settlement asset, or a more limited utility token designed solely for institutional use. The company has also declined to share any timeline or technical framework.

 

Still, the fact that CME is openly discussing the idea is notable. As a systemically important market operator, CME tends to move cautiously, especially when it comes to new financial instruments that intersect with regulation.

 

 

Why Collateral Is the Real Story

The potential importance of a CME-issued token lies in collateral and margin, not payments or speculation.

 

Every day, CME clears massive volumes of derivatives tied to interest rates, foreign exchange, commodities, equities, and cryptocurrencies. These markets rely on collateral to manage risk, and moving that collateral efficiently is a constant operational challenge.

 

Today, most collateral still moves through traditional banking rails, with settlement delays, cut-off times, and operational friction baked in. Tokenized collateral could allow assets to move almost instantly, potentially on a 24-hour basis, while remaining within a regulated framework.

 

That makes a CME Coin fundamentally different from most stablecoins. Its value would not come from being widely traded or used for payments, but from being embedded directly into the risk management systems of institutional markets.

 

Some industry observers argue that a token used in this way could ultimately matter more to financial infrastructure than consumer-facing digital currencies, simply because of the scale and importance of the markets involved.

 

 

Tokenization Without Giving Up Control

Importantly, CME is not signaling any desire to decentralize its role as a central counterparty. The exchange’s interest in tokenization appears focused on efficiency, not ideology.

 

Any CME-issued token would almost certainly operate within a tightly controlled environment, designed to meet regulatory expectations and preserve CME’s oversight of clearing and settlement. In that sense, it reflects a broader trend among traditional financial institutions that are adopting blockchain technology while maintaining centralized governance.

 

The token discussion fits neatly into CME Group’s expanding crypto footprint.

 

CME already offers regulated futures and options on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. It has also announced plans to introduce futures tied to Cardano, Chainlink, and Stellar, pending regulatory approval.

 

These products have positioned CME as one of the main gateways for institutional crypto exposure in the U.S. market. Unlike offshore exchanges or crypto-native platforms, CME’s offerings are deeply embedded in traditional financial workflows, making them attractive to banks, hedge funds, and asset managers.

 

CME is also planning to expand trading hours for its bitcoin and ether futures to a 24/7 model, reflecting the always-on nature of crypto markets and growing demand from global participants.

 

Separate from the CME Coin idea, CME is working with Google Cloud on a tokenized cash initiative expected to roll out later this year. That project involves a depository bank and is focused on settlement and payments between institutional counterparties.

 

Taken together, these efforts suggest CME is methodically experimenting with how tokenized money and assets can fit into regulated financial infrastructure, rather than making a single, headline-grabbing bet.

 

 

A Familiar Pattern for CME

This is not CME’s first cautious step into crypto.

 

When the exchange launched bitcoin futures in 2017, it marked one of the first major points of contact between regulated derivatives markets and digital assets. That move helped legitimize bitcoin as a tradable asset class for institutions, even as skepticism remained high.

 

Today’s exploration of tokenization follows a similar pattern. CME is not chasing hype. It is watching where market structure could benefit from new technology and testing whether blockchain-based tools can solve real operational problems.

 

 

Regulatory Questions Still Loom

Any move toward issuing a proprietary token would inevitably draw scrutiny from regulators, including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and potentially banking authorities depending on how the asset is structured.

 

Questions around custody, settlement finality, and classification would all need to be addressed before anything goes live. CME’s history suggests it will not move forward without regulatory clarity, even if that slows progress.

 

 

The Bottom Line

For now, the CME Coin remains an idea rather than a product. But the fact that it is being discussed at the CEO level underscores how seriously traditional market operators are taking tokenization.

 

If CME ultimately moves forward, it could reshape how collateral works in cleared markets and accelerate the adoption of blockchain technology at the core of global finance.

 

For an industry that once viewed crypto as a fringe experiment, this type of move is very telling. 

 

Bitcoin was back on the biggest screens in global sports as the 24 Hours of Daytona marked the unofficial start of the year’s major sponsorship season. From that point forward, weekend after weekend, major sporting events once again became prime real estate for high profile brand exposure.

 

With the Super Bowl, Pro Bowl, Daytona 500, and the Formula 1 season opener approaching in the following weeks, Bitcoin, crypto, exchanges, and NFT companies were once again looking to maximize their advertising dollars by attaching their brands to the world’s most watched events.

 

This cycle had become familiar. It started years earlier with Matt Damon, Tom Brady, a crypto exchange, and a Super Bowl commercial. Since then, at least one crypto project had aimed to make a major splash during big game advertising season every year.

 

Crypto and Racing, A Proven Match

Racing and crypto sponsorships had proven to be a natural fit. It was fast, loud, bright, and made for the big screen, exactly where crypto wanted to be.

 

Three years earlier, PolkaDot took a shot at the IndyCar Championship with Conor Daly driving for Dreyer Rheinbold Racing. Kraken and Pudgy Penguins appeared on the wings of the Williams Formula 1 cars. Ed Carpenter Racing ran a Bitcoin-branded car in the Indy 500.

 

In Formula 1, Red Bull secured season-long sponsorships with SUI and Bybit. McLaren landed a season-long deal with OKX and later minted NFTs on Tezos. The overlap between motorsport audiences and crypto culture continued to deepen.

 

BitcoinMAX and Meyer Shank Racing at Daytona

That weekend, Meyer Shank Racing set out to potentially make history by bringing Bitcoin to victory lane at the birthplace of speed. The team ran the Bitcoin MAX sponsored Acura LMDh Prototype in one of the most demanding races in the world.

 

Bitcoin Max was a community-driven, decentralized digital currency project. The partnership centered on the global launch of OnlyBulls, a finance super app, and the establishment of BitcoinMAX, a Swiss-based Bitcoin trust launching in January 2026. BitcoinMAX was designed to democratize the digital economy and allow people to participate in the Bitcoin economy through a secure, regulated trust.

 

The task was never going to be easy. The Daytona 24 Hours was notoriously one of the toughest tests of man and machine. It was twice around the clock on one of the world’s fastest tracks, against the best drivers on the planet.

 

Long Odds and a Stacked Field

Bitcoin supporters entered the weekend as long odds contenders, despite Meyer Shank Racing having taken victory in the race in 2022 and 2023 with Acura. The team was also looking to rebound after finishing second the previous year behind Porsche.

 

Porsche, however, had pulled factory support from endurance racing that season, leaving Penske and JDC Miller Motorsports to compete as privateers using modified versions of the previous year’s car. Acura’s continued factory backing of Meyer Shank Racing offered a potential advantage, though not against a strong Cadillac effort that entered the season with momentum as they prepared to run a Formula 1 team.

 

The field was stacked. Cadillac arrived hungry to start fast. Aston Martin debuted the highly anticipated Valkyrie prototype. BMW remained a factory threat. Victory was never guaranteed.

 

An Elite Driver Lineup

Meyer Shank Racing assembled one of the strongest driver lineups in the field. Tom Blomqvist, a veteran endurance champion. Colin Braun, a young endurance ace who had consistently delivered results since arriving on the scene. Scott Dixon, a former IndyCar champion. A.J. Allmendinger, the “Dinger,” a road course specialist with major wins across NASCAR, IndyCar, and prototype racing.

 

If that group could cross the line first after 24 hours, they would become the first team to bring a Bitcoin-sponsored car to victory lane, a surprising milestone that had not happened since Bitcoin’s creation.

 

Chaos, Fog, and a Fight to the Finish

Qualifying went the way of Porsche and Cadillac, leaving the Bitcoin MAX Acura starting fifth for the 24-hour race.

 

Midway through the night, heavy fog rolled over Daytona, forcing a yellow flag period that lasted a record six and a half hours. When the sun rose and the fog finally lifted, the Bitcoin Acura was still firmly in contention for the overall win.

 

At the restart, the car ran fourth and even held the lead with more than three hours remaining. In the end, the pace of Felipe Nasr in the Penske Porsche proved just too strong. Meyer Shank Racing eventually slipped back to a sixth-place finish after pitting early in hopes that a late caution might shuffle the order. That caution never came.

 

Once again, a Bitcoin-sponsored car narrowly missed victory lane.

 

Beyond The Checkered Flag

The good news was that Bitcoin MAX secured a full-season sponsorship with Meyer Shank Racing. The goal remained clear, to finally bring Bitcoin to victory on the biggest stage in motorsports.

 

The opportunity would come again. And when it did, Bitcoin would once more be right where it wanted to be, fast, loud, and on the world’s biggest screens.

 

 

World Mobile kicked off Network Builder Auction 2 at full speed, officially going live on January 15, 2026. Within the first 12 hours, more than half of the 50 available hexes were claimed, signaling strong demand and growing confidence in the Network Builder franchise model. The auction immediately delivered a mix of major metropolitan markets, rural regions, and high-traffic vacation destinations.

 

Notable early markets included Fairbanks, Alaska, Seattle, Washington, St. Louis, Missouri, Topeka, Kansas, and Salt Lake City, Utah. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania emerged as a particularly strong contender, with eight additional hexes purchased and a total of twelve hexes sold across the greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area. The Steel City appears poised to represent World Mobile prominently, complete with its iconic black and yellow.

 

Florida also saw continued expansion. Coral Bay joined its Gulf Coast neighbor Tampa from the previous auction, while North Key Largo extended World Mobile’s footprint from the southern tip of the Sunshine State. Two hexes along the southern New Jersey coast also entered the auction mix, further expanding coastal coverage.

 

Rural expansion remained a central theme throughout Auction 2. Continued growth was seen across Iowa, New Mexico, Texas, and the North Carolina coast. Notable additions included Bald Head Island and Sunset Beach in North Carolina, Carlsbad, New Mexico, and San Antonio’s greater south side. These markets highlight World Mobile’s continued focus on areas historically underserved by traditional telecom providers.

 

Auction 2 also introduced a new dynamic not previously seen on auction day. The Roanoke and Salem, Virginia area made a strong debut, with two hexes purchased instantly using the “buy now” feature at $900 each. In total, six connected hexes were secured in the area, putting the region firmly on the World Mobile map.

 

Vacation destinations played a major role in this round as well. Nantucket Island, Massachusetts, often considered the summer playground of East Coast elites, appeared on the board and brought much-needed connectivity attention to the island. Located roughly 30 miles south of Cape Cod, Nantucket is a seasonal hotspot that large telecom companies have long treated as expendable due to fluctuating demand. This has often resulted in outdated infrastructure being deployed for some of their wealthiest customers. The hope is that a local Network Builder identified this gap, aiming to both improve service and capitalize on the opportunity.

 

Additional underserved vacation areas joined the network, including one hex claimed in the Hawaiian Islands on Kauai. Texas vacation country continued to expand with Breckinridge, a lake market nestled in the Texas Hill Country. This region is frequently overlooked by major telecom providers due to geographic challenges. Rugged terrain, extreme elevation changes, dense mesquite growth, briar patches, creeks, lakes, boulders, and rock slides make infrastructure deployment and maintenance difficult. Combined with a roughly two-hour drive from the Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex, Breckinridge has remained unattractive to big telecom operators, creating an ideal opening for World Mobile Network Builders.

 

Several notable bids stood out during Auction 2. Salt Lake City’s Sandy suburb closed at $3,898.46. Pittsburgh’s Emworth neighborhood followed closely at $3,449.26. San Antonio’s south side Elmendorf neighborhood sold for $811.17. Seattle’s Keyport neighborhood closed at $698.82, while St. Louis’ East Carondelet neighborhood sold for $669.03. Carlsbad, New Mexico came in at $525.32, making it one of the more expensive low-population markets on the map. By comparison, Nantucket Island listed at $229.86.

 

Investors in larger metropolitan areas will be looking to capitalize on higher customer density and bandwidth demand. World Mobile coverage in these markets is expected to provide relief to users who frequently experience throttling from major telecom providers during peak hours and large events. Population density combined with bandwidth limitations remains a key revenue driver in urban markets.

 

Rural markets, however, offer a different value proposition. In these areas, users are likely to roam onto World Mobile’s network simply because traditional carriers often fail to provide reliable service at all. By delivering infrastructure that large telecom companies have neglected for decades, Network Builders are expected to bring meaningful connectivity improvements to rural communities. This approach aligns closely with World Mobile’s mission to deliver a cheaper, better, and more private cellular experience, while earning strong local support.

 

This continued expansion reflects World Mobile’s community fully embracing the mission to “connect the unconnected,” as outlined by founder and CEO Micky Watkins. In just over a week, 100 franchises have been sold across 18 states, spanning coast to coast and extending to the islands. With this level of momentum, World Mobile storefront openings appear imminent.

 

If Auction 3 launches next week as expected, another 50 franchises will enter the market. Questions remain around whether every state will eventually adopt World Mobile, or if some regions will resist, similar to patterns seen in fast food franchise adoption. There are also open questions about long-term profitability across states with varying tax laws. Despite these uncertainties, early Network Builders are not hesitating.

 

Some investors have committed heavily to large markets, betting on demand and scale. Others are building networks in rural communities, aiming to improve local infrastructure while earning returns for their efforts. Auction 2 closed faster than Auction 1, wrapping up in just 20 hours compared to 22 hours during the first week. This occurred during the same week a Verizon outage impacted large portions of the country, further fueling investor confidence as weaknesses in traditional telecoms became more visible.

 

Within 36 hours, all sales will finalize, further reshaping the U.S. telecommunications landscape into something more decentralized and user-friendly. Announcements are expected in many of these markets, including half-off discounts for the first month of service and potential storefront openings. Given the level of early investment and anticipation surrounding the World Mobile User Network, it is increasingly clear that at least one Network Builder is ready to open shop.

 

Auction 2 has now wrapped, closing out the second auction recap. To stay informed on Auction 3, follow the World Mobile Discord and Telegram channels, and check back with Rare News for the next recap if you are enjoying these updates.

 

The World Economic Forum’s annual gathering in Davos didn’t treat crypto like a fringe experiment or a buzzword for the sidelines. In 2026, digital assets were woven into the fabric of mainstream finance discussions, with dedicated sessions, public clashes, and real institutional debate. What stood out wasn’t hype about price charts but serious questions about how blockchain, stablecoins, and tokenization might actually function inside global financial markets.

 

The forum still had the usual Davos theatrics: world leaders, geopolitical angst, and even some absurd headlines. But under that backdrop, crypto’s presence felt more substantive than symbolic.

 

Dedicated Sessions for Crypto’s Practical Questions

This year’s agenda included two clearly labeled sessions that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. One was titled “Is Tokenization the Future?” and another “Where Are We on Stablecoins?” These weren’t happy-talk panels. They featured heavy hitters from both the crypto world and traditional finance, and the exchanges got frank and occasionally tense.

 

In the tokenization session, the debate wasn’t about whether tokenization mattered, but how to make it work in real markets. Executives from leading exchanges and tokenization platforms shared the stage with regulators and central bank representatives. Banks and custodians talked about technical issues like governance, custody, and interoperability. The message from financial incumbents was cautious but clear: tokenization is interesting, but it has to fit into existing market infrastructure with clear rules and risk controls.

 

Stablecoins got their own moment too. The session on stablecoins drew some of the biggest names in crypto alongside central bankers and global settlement experts. One of the most explosive moments came when industry CEOs pushed back against regulators on whether stablecoins should be allowed to pay yield to holders. That argument went far beyond textbook economics. On stage, executives argued that interest-bearing stablecoins were essential for consumer utility and global competitiveness, while some central bankers warned that yields could undermine banking systems and monetary sovereignty. Those side conversations revealed just how uneasy regulators still are, even when they acknowledge stablecoins’ potential as settlement rails.

 

These discussions reflected a broader shift. The question at Davos was no longer whether digital assets belong in the financial system, but how they should be regulated, engineered, and governed if they are going to be part of the future of payments, markets, and enterprise infrastructure.

 

Tokenization Takes the Spotlight

Out in the corridors and at side events, almost every conversation came back to one theme: tokenization of real-world assets. Whether you were talking to a sovereign wealth fund advisor or a fintech CEO, the framing was similar. Crypto tech is moving past speculation and into something that could materially change liquidity and access in global finance.

 

The story from a range of institutional participants was that tokenization is no longer an academic idea. There are live projects tokenizing government bonds and traditional funds, and institutional settlement firms are piloting systems that blend blockchain principles with existing financial rails. The buzz was not about replacing banks but about layering new capabilities on top of old systems in ways that reduce friction and increase transparency.

 

One telling difference this year was that tokenization was discussed in terms of liquidity and fractional ownership, not volatility. That shows where the conversation has matured: from digital assets as a wild bet to digital assets as potential plumbing for capital markets.

 

Stablecoins, Regulation, and Real Debate

The stablecoin panel was one of the most watched crypto moments in Davos. People crowded into the room not for price predictions but for substance. Here you had exchange CEOs, stablecoin issuers, and veteran regulators hashing out definitions, safeguards, and the practical role stablecoins could play in cross-border settlement.

 

One point that came up repeatedly was that stablecoins could act as a connective layer between traditional finance and digital markets. Advocates painted a picture where businesses run treasury operations using stablecoins, and global money movement gets more efficient as a result. Critics, especially from central banking circles, countered that allowing stablecoins to pay competitive yields could disrupt bank deposits and challenge monetary policy levers.

 

That tension came out in specific debates on policy design. Industry representatives argued for clearer frameworks that enable innovation while protecting holders and financial stability. Regulators struck back with questions about reserve requirements, audit regimes, and who ultimately backs these digital dollars.

 

This was not Davos speak for broader audiences. The conversation was technical, at times dry, and realistic about where the risks and opportunities lie.

 

Crossroads Between Crypto and Geopolitics

Crypto at Davos didn’t exist in a vacuum. It was wrapped into broader threads of geopolitical competition and economic strategy. Several high-profile talks touched on how digital finance intersects with national priorities. Leaders from the United States framed crypto engagement as part of broader global competitiveness. European regulators emphasized monetary sovereignty and financial stability in ways that indirectly questioned unfettered digital asset growth. These differing philosophies underscored how regulatory fragmentation is almost guaranteed for now.

 

You could see it play out in individual exchanges between CEOs and policymakers. Some firms pushed the narrative that restrictive rules in one region would push innovation offshore. Others pushed back, saying that control and trust are prerequisites for large institutional adoption.

 

Institutional Players, Not Just Crypto Natives

What was remarkable at Davos this year was how many traditional institutions turned up with real substance on digital assets, not just lip service. Big banks, settlement providers, and regulators were on panels alongside crypto founders. Conversations about custody solutions, compliance tools, interoperability standards, and governance models were not niche; they were mainstream finance topics with crypto elements built into them.

 

Some of the most detailed sessions focused on technical integration questions, including how blockchain standards could interoperate with legal and compliance frameworks around the world. That kind of discussion would have felt out of place at Davos only a few years ago.

 

What This All Means for Crypto’s Place in Finance Today

Out of Davos 2026 comes a clear message: crypto is no longer an outsider in global finance. There’s still enormous disagreement about details. Regulators worry, technologists dream, and institutions hedge. But the conversation has shifted toward execution and integration, not justification.

 

Crypto is being talked about not for short-term price moves but for what it could mean for settlement, liquidity, cross-border flows, and asset ownership structures going forward. The debates were real, messy, and imperfect, but they were also grounded and practical in a way they hadn’t been before.

 

For the crypto world, that is a much bigger step forward than any headline about price or bull markets. Davos has made clear that digital assets are now a topic global leaders feel they have to wrestle with, seriously and directly. The question now is not whether crypto belongs in the future of finance. It is how that future gets built, who shapes it, and where the regulatory guardrails ultimately land.