The U.S. spot exchange-traded fund market experienced a dramatic "risk-off" event on January 22, 2026, with total outflows from Bitcoin and Ethereum products nearing the one billion dollar milestone in a single session. This massive wave of redemptions marks the sharpest institutional exit since the early January rally and reflects a sudden cooling of the "New Year" bullish sentiment that had briefly pushed Bitcoin back toward the 95,000 dollar level. According to data from Farside Investors and SoSoValue, spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a staggering net outflow of 708.7 million dollars, lead primarily by significant withdrawals from BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) and Fidelity’s Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC). This sudden reversal in capital flow is being attributed to a "macroeconomic shock" stemming from renewed trade tensions between the United States and the European Union, alongside heightened volatility in the Japanese government bond market, which has prompted a broad-based reduction in exposure to high-beta digital assets. Institutional Distribution and the Technical Breakdown of Ethereum Demand The bearish sentiment was equally visible in the Ethereum sector, where spot ETFs posted a combined daily net outflow of 286.9 million dollars. BlackRock’s ETHA bore the brunt of this distribution, with 250.3 million dollars exiting the fund in one of its largest single-day contractions to date. Analysts at Capriole Investments noted that "apparent demand" for Ethereum has dropped to its lowest level since March 2025, suggesting that institutional investors are aggressively rebalancing their portfolios in anticipation of a potential "bear flag" breakdown toward the 2,000 dollar level. While the underlying price of Ether briefly reclaimed the 3,000 dollar psychological mark earlier in the week, the persistent negative ETF flows indicate a lack of conviction among professional allocators. The only notable outlier in this sea of red was the Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust, which managed to attract a modest 10 million dollars in net inflows, highlighting a fragmented market where low-fee products continue to cannibalize assets from their more expensive counterparts. Altcoin Resilience and the Strategic Shift Toward Focused Asset Exposure In a surprising divergence from the "Majors," the fledgling market for spot XRP and Solana ETFs showed signs of resilience despite the broader market drawdown. On January 22, spot XRP ETFs reported a daily net inflow of 7.16 million dollars, while Solana products managed to stay in the green with a modest 2.92 million dollar gain. This rotation suggests that a segment of the institutional market is beginning to decouple these high-utility "App Chains" from the broader Bitcoin-led trend, seeking out specific thematic exposure even as they reduce their overall crypto weighting. Market participants are now closely watching the 90,000 dollar level for Bitcoin and the 2,800 dollar level for Ethereum as the "battleground" for the remainder of the week. While total ETF assets under management remain historically high at approximately 134 billion dollars, the current "stop-start" pattern of inflows suggests that 2026 will be defined by tactical, headline-driven positioning rather than the uninterrupted "up-only" accumulation seen in previous cycles. As the market digests the latest tariff news and Federal Reserve commentary, the focus remains on whether these outflows represent a temporary correction or the beginning of a deeper structural retreat.

The tokenized equity sector achieved a monumental breakthrough on January 22, 2026, as xStocks—the industry-leading platform for tokenized U.S. equities developed by Kraken and Backed—officially recorded over 3 billion dollars in cumulative on-chain transfer volume. This milestone, which highlights the rapid maturation of real-world asset (RWA) tokenization, includes more than 500 million dollars in activity executed across decentralized exchanges such as Uniswap and Raydium. Since its public launch in mid-2025, xStocks has fundamentally altered the accessibility of the American capital markets, allowing global investors in over 160 countries to gain exposure to blue-chip stocks like Nvidia, Apple, and Tesla without the traditional friction of currency conversion or settlement delays. By maintaining a total trading volume exceeding 17 billion dollars across both centralized and decentralized venues, xStocks has solidified its position as the premier "gold standard" for borderless, internet-native investing. Bridging the Gap Between Traditional Finance and Decentralized Liquidity The primary driver of the recent volume surge has been the successful expansion of xStocks to the Ethereum and BNB Chain networks, alongside its initial foundation on Solana. This multi-chain strategy has allowed the platform to tap into diverse liquidity pools and provide users with a wide range of DeFi opportunities, such as using tokenized shares as collateral for decentralized loans. Mark Greenberg, Kraken’s Global Head of Consumer, noted that the 3 billion dollar transfer milestone proves that investors are no longer satisfied with closed, siloed brokerage systems and instead demand assets that can move freely across the open internet. Each xStock token is fully backed 1:1 by the underlying equity or ETF held by a licensed custodian in a bankruptcy-remote structure, ensuring that the efficiency of blockchain technology is paired with the rigorous oversight of traditional finance. This combination of regulatory rigor and crypto-native interoperability has attracted over 57,000 unique on-chain holders, signaling a permanent shift in how capital markets will operate in the late 2020s. European Expansion and the Future of Permissionless Stock Ownership As xStocks moves into its next phase of growth, the platform has officially opened its services to European customers, further expanding its total addressable market in a year defined by significant regulatory shifts. By removing the barriers for European investors seeking exposure to U.S. markets, xStocks is effectively dismantling the legacy monopolies of traditional stockbrokers and providing a more transparent, self-custodial alternative. The platform’s ability to offer 24/7 trading and instant on-chain settlement has made it particularly attractive to the "always-on" generation of investors who view stocks as just another programmable asset on their digital balance sheets. With upcoming integrations for additional high-impact blockchains like Ink and Tron, xStocks is well-positioned to lead the transition toward a truly global, decentralized financial system. As the total value of tokenized assets is projected to surpass 11 trillion dollars by 2030, the 3 billion dollar transfer milestone achieved today stands as a clear indicator that the era of borderless, permissionless equity ownership has officially arrived.

The Indonesian digital asset market reached a historic peak in 2025, with annual transaction volumes officially touching 31 billion dollars (approximately 486 trillion Indonesian rupiah) according to the latest year-end reports released on January 22, 2026. This significant growth, representing a nearly 15% increase over 2024 levels, confirms Indonesia's status as the leading crypto economy in Southeast Asia and one of the top three fastest-growing markets globally. The surge in activity was particularly pronounced during the final quarter of the year, as investors reacted to the formal transfer of regulatory oversight from the commodity futures regulator, Bappebti, to the Financial Services Authority (OJK). This transition has provided the legal certainty necessary for broader institutional participation, allowing commercial banks and major securities firms to begin offering digital asset services to a user base that now exceeds 22 million registered individuals. The Impact of Tax Alignment and the New Digital Financial Asset Classification A critical catalyst for the record-breaking volume in 2025 was the implementation of Ministry of Finance Regulation Number 50 (PMK-50), which officially reclassified cryptocurrencies as "digital financial assets." This move effectively aligned crypto tax treatment with existing financial legislation, providing a more favorable environment for high-frequency traders and institutional desks. By clarifying the income tax and VAT treatment of transactions, the Indonesian government has successfully brought billions of dollars in "gray market" activity into the formal, taxable economy. In fact, crypto-related tax revenue for the year 2025 surpassed 1.7 trillion rupiah, providing a significant boost to the national treasury and justifying the government's proactive, "pro-innovation" stance. This fiscal success has encouraged the OJK to expand the list of legally tradable tokens to over 1,400 assets, ensuring that Indonesian investors have access to a diverse range of global opportunities while remaining within a protected and transparent regulatory framework. Institutionalization and the Rise of the National Crypto Infrastructure The maturation of the Indonesian market in 2025 was further bolstered by the full operationalization of the national crypto exchange (CFX), the clearing institution (KBI), and the custodian storage manager (ICC). This three-pillared infrastructure ensures that every trade made on a licensed platform is backed by a secure, regulated backend that prioritizes investor protection over speculative hype. As the speculative "memecoin" frenzy of previous years began to subside in late 2025, capital increasingly clustered around large-cap "majors" and sophisticated yield-bearing products. This shift toward a more deliberate and systematic trading style is evidenced by the 100% year-over-year increase in crypto options and derivatives volume, which reached over 5 billion dollars in 2025. As the OJK prepares to review the potential for the first spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs in the first half of 2026, the current volume milestone serves as a powerful testament to the resilience and sophistication of the Indonesian crypto ecosystem. With a population that is increasingly viewing digital assets as a primary tool for wealth diversification and inflation protection, the nation is poised to remain a dominant force in the global digital economy for years to come.

In a definitive move to bridge the gap between decentralized finance and national economic planning, Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, commonly known as CZ, confirmed on January 22, 2026, that he is currently engaged in high-level discussions with approximately twelve sovereign governments regarding the large-scale tokenization of state-owned assets. Speaking exclusively from the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Zhao described a future where blockchain technology is utilized to fractionalize and digitize financing for massive infrastructure projects, national real estate portfolios, and essential commodities. By converting rights to physical or financial assets into digital tokens, Zhao argues that governments can democratize investment, allowing a global pool of both retail and institutional participants to fund national development with unprecedented transparency and efficiency. This sovereign-scale application represents a monumental leap for the real-world asset (RWA) sector, moving digital assets from the periphery of speculative trading to the very center of global public finance and industrial reinvestment. Empowering Developing Nations Through Liquidity and Fractional Infrastructure Financing The primary motivation behind these high-level dialogues is to provide nations with alternative avenues for capital formation that do not rely solely on traditional multilateral agencies or high-interest debt markets. Zhao noted that countries such as Pakistan, Malaysia, and Kyrgyzstan are among the nations exploring these digital infrastructure solutions, seeking to leverage their natural resources and state-owned enterprises as collateral for on-chain funding. Through a tokenized model, a government could theoretically tokenize the future revenue streams from a new railway or a renewable energy plant, providing investors with real-time, verifiable data on project performance via an immutable public ledger. This level of transparency not only builds greater trust with international investors but also potentially lowers the cost of capital for the state by reducing the perceived risk of corruption or mismanagement. By focusing on revenue-generating assets, these nations can realize financial gains early in the development cycle, using the proceeds to accelerate industrial growth and provide immediate economic benefits to their citizens. The Strategic Shift Toward a Multipolar Financial Future Driven by Asset Tokenization As the conversations between the blockchain pioneer and national policymakers intensify, the broader financial world is beginning to recognize the strategic value of the "Digital Asset Treasury" model. Zhao’s vision aligns with a growing consensus that tokenization is the ultimate "killer app" for institutional blockchain adoption, as evidenced by BlackRock’s recent 2026 outlook which named Ethereum a key player in the race for on-chain asset management. By advocating for a standard legal framework that includes robust anti-money laundering protocols and interoperability with existing financial systems, Zhao is positioning tokenization as a tool for national sovereignty in an increasingly contested global economy. He predicted that as more nations adopt these strategies, the shift will fundamentally reshape global capital flows, directing investment toward projects with clear digital accountability rather than opaque legacy structures. As these pilots prepare to launch later this year, the dialogue in Davos signals that the integration of the internet with the global financial system is no longer a theoretical concept but a prerequisite for national economic resilience in the digital age.

On January 22, 2026, the Binance Wallet ecosystem underwent a significant technological evolution with the official launch of "Social Hype," a suite of AI-powered market analysis tools designed to help users navigate the rapidly shifting landscape of on-chain opportunities. Available exclusively on the Binance Wallet web platform, this new feature leverages advanced narrative detection and sentiment analysis to rank tokens across the BNB Smart Chain, Solana, and Base networks based on real-time community engagement. By scanning thousands of social media posts, high-profile tweets, and community discussions, the "Social Hype" dashboard provides a structured, data-informed overview of which assets are gaining genuine momentum versus those experiencing temporary price fluctuations. This launch marks a strategic move by Binance to integrate "SocialFi" elements directly into the user’s primary trading interface, ensuring that retail participants have access to the same high-fidelity sentiment data traditionally reserved for professional institutional desks and high-frequency trading firms. Utilizing the Hype Leaderboard and Mindshare for Enhanced Narrative Discovery The "Social Hype" suite is built around several key modules that provide a visual and quantitative breakdown of the current market "vibe," starting with the Hype Leaderboard. This tool ranks tokens by a proprietary Hype Score, which reflects social visibility, post views, and engagement levels over various time periods ranging from the last hour to the previous thirty days. Complementing this is the "Mindshare" visualization, a color-coded map that shows how social attention is distributed across the top ten trending tokens, where the size of each block represents the volume of discussion and the color indicates the prevailing sentiment. For traders seeking immediate opportunities, the "Hype Rising" module highlights tokens experiencing the strongest short-term increases in social activity, providing a timely "smart insight" into emerging narratives before they reach a broader audience. These tools are designed to work in tandem with the "Topic Rush" feature, which groups associated tokens into AI-generated cards based on emerging themes, allowing users to quickly grasp the broader context of a market move. Empowering Users with AI Assistant Widgets and Integrated Trading Tools To further streamline the decision-making process, Binance has introduced a modular AI Assistant widget that can be added to the wallet’s dashboard for continuous visibility into any token’s narrative health. This widget provides a compact summary of essential information, including a timeline of key events, a narrative score, and a sentiment summary derived from the X platform and other mainstream media outlets. Users can engage in trading directly from these hype-driven rankings using integrated tools such as "Quick Buy" and a new "Batch Trading" strategy, which allows for the simultaneous purchase of up to three tokens within a specific trending topic. By creating a seamless closed-loop experience that integrates social networking, market analysis, and execution, Binance is attempting to solve the problem of information overload in the decentralized finance space. As the platform continues to refine its AI-native trading tools, the "Social Hype" launch stands as a clear signal that the future of the crypto wallet lies in its ability to serve as an intelligent, social-aware hub for the global digital economy.

The altcoin market is sending clearer signals now. Activity picked up briefly, but follow-through was weak, showing that traders were moving fast rather than building conviction. As liquidity thinned and momentum cooled, the focus shifted away from short-term hype. That shift became even more meaningful when a Satoshi-era Bitcoin whale moved nearly $85 million in BTC after it had been dormant for over 13 years. Moves like this tend to surface when experienced holders begin repositioning early, often ahead of broader narrative changes, signaling that timing and patience are back in focus. Against that backdrop, the conversation around the best crypto to buy now is growing toward early-stage positioning rather than late entries. APEMARS is drawing attention at a moment when investors are looking beyond exhausted runs and toward structured upside. With its presale now live and traction steadily building, APEMARS offers exposure at a phase where value is defined by timing and growth potential, not crowded charts. As capital quietly rotates and long-term players resurface, APEMARS stands positioned for those aiming to act before the next market expansion takes shape. APEMARS ($APRZ) Explosive Presale Momentum Ahead APEMARS ($APRZ) is pulling attention at a time when investors are actively hunting the best crypto to buy now before the next market expansion. Stage 4 Lunar Drift is officially live, and the numbers behind this phase are driving urgency across the community. Over $106k has already been raised, more than 520 holders are onboard, and over 4.8 billion tokens have been sold with only one day left before the next stage begins. The current Stage 4 price sits at 0.00003003, while the confirmed listing price is 0.0055. That gap creates a projected upside of over 22,300% from this stage alone, with an 18,200 percent gain already delivered from Stage 3. The timer is active, and if tokens sell out early, the system automatically advances to the next stage with a higher price. There are no extensions, no second chances, and no waiting. If Numbers Could Change Your Life, These APEMARS Scenarios Matter Imagine turning small, manageable investments into meaningful financial momentum by entering before the crowd. Based on the current stage and confirmed listing price, even conservative participation can map to powerful outcomes when momentum aligns. Starting with $1000 in the APEMARS presale during Lunar Drift at $0.00003003 secures roughly 33,300 tokens. If the listing reaches $0.0055, the projected value is about $182,000, and the presale benefit is exposure early while the project is still building momentum. That early window becomes far more powerful with $1,500 at the same Lunar Drift presale price, creating roughly 49,950,050 tokens. At a $0.0055 listing, the projected value ties to about $274,725.27, showing how presale timing supports both small and serious commitments. How to Buy APEMARS ($APRZ) Buying APEMARS is simple. Visit the official website, connect a supported wallet, select your preferred payment method, and confirm your purchase. Tokens are allocated instantly under the current stage pricing. XRP Under $2 Headlines in 2026: $1.96 Now, $2.00 to $8.60 Year-End Scenarios XRP is trading around $1.95 to $1.96 USD as of January 22, 2026, posting a 2 to 3 percent daily lift on steady volume, yet it remains below the $2 mark as recent market nerves linger. The latest angle in the news is that the Ripple-linked token has struggled to reclaim levels above $2 while tariff jitters weigh on broader crypto sentiment, which helps explain the choppy, headline-driven price action.  For the rest of 2026, forecasts still lean balanced to bullish, with base expectations commonly placed in the $2.50 to $3.90 zone, stronger institutional and ETF driven scenarios extending toward $4 through $8.60, and more cautious outcomes keeping XRP closer to roughly $2.00 to $2.70 if catalysts arrive slowly or macro conditions stay tense, according to the best crypto to buy now. Solana’s Network Buzz in 2026: $130 Now, $130 to $350 Year-End Outlook Solana is currently trading around $129 to $130 USD as of January 22, 2026, showing a modest 1 to 2 percent daily increase as buyers step in during moderate market activity. The latest news adds extra energy to the narrative, with Solana reportedly outpacing the broader crypto market as a Claude Code-linked token frenzy boosts on-chain engagement and lifts network activity.  Looking ahead through 2026, price expectations remain cautiously optimistic to bullish, supported by Firedancer progress, expanding DeFi and NFT usage, rising stablecoin adoption, and ETF momentum, with base projections pointing to $130 to $160, broader scenarios stretching toward $150 to $200 or higher, and stronger upside cases reaching roughly $229 to $350 if ecosystem strength keeps accelerating. Final Words: Find the Best Crypto to Buy Now Today The market today offers a clear split between established narratives and emerging opportunities. XRP price prediction continues to draw attention from traders focused on long term structure, while Solana appeals to those tracking ecosystem-driven growth. At the same time, early-stage opportunities are where the most aggressive upside still lives for those willing to act early. For investors searching for the best crypto to buy now, timing matters as much as conviction. APEMARS delivers both urgency and structure, with Stage 4 Lunar Drift offering one of the last low price entries before automatic progression reduces upside. Missing this stage means accepting less potential later. As markets evolve, early positioning defines outcomes. XRP price prediction may guide market sentiment, but presale participation defines wealth creation. The clock is active, the stage is live, and the next move belongs to those who act now. Visit APEMARS today and secure your position before the next stage begins. For More Information: Website: Visit the Official APEMARS Website Telegram: Join the APEMARS Telegram Channel Twitter: Follow APEMARS ON X (Formerly Twitter) FAQs about Best Crypto to Buy Now What makes a project the best crypto to buy now? The best crypto to buy now usually combines early entry pricing, active demand, clear token mechanics, and a growing community. These elements together create favorable risk to reward conditions for investors. How does XRP price prediction influence market sentiment? XRP price prediction often reflects broader regulatory clarity and liquidity trends. Positive sentiment around XRP can lift market confidence, while uncertainty may lead investors to diversify into earlier stage opportunities. Is presale investing riskier than buying established coins? Presales carry higher risk but also higher reward potential. Early pricing, staged growth, and limited supply can significantly outperform established coins when demand and execution align properly. Why do early stages matter so much in crypto investing? Early stages offer maximum upside because prices are lowest. Once stages progress, new buyers receive fewer tokens, reducing potential returns compared to early participants. Can beginners participate in presales safely? Beginners can participate safely by researching token structure, understanding staging mechanics, and investing amounts aligned with their comfort level rather than chasing hype or unrealistic expectations. Article Summary This article examined prevailing crypto narratives of APEMARS, XRP and SOL by weighing mature digital assets against newer, high growth opportunities. It highlighted how shifting market sentiment influences capital flows across cycles, rewarding patience in some phases and speed in others. A strong focus was placed on early entry dynamics, showing how positioning before broader attention can amplify upside while increasing risk. The discussion also emphasized timing as a decisive factor, where macro trends, liquidity, and community momentum converge. Overall, the piece framed crypto investing as a balance between conviction and adaptability within fast-growing, narrative-driven markets during uncertain but opportunity-rich financial transitions

What Went Missing and How It Was Discovered South Korea’s Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office is investigating the disappearance of a large quantity of bitcoin that had been seized in a criminal case, after an internal review flagged a possible loss while the assets were under state custody. Local media reported that prosecutors believe the incident likely occurred around the middle of 2025 and may be linked to a phishing attack during the storage or management process. Officials have not disclosed the size or value of the missing holdings, citing the ongoing investigation. The lack of detail has drawn attention because the Gwangju office has previously handled some of the country’s largest crypto seizure cases, including an attempt in 2024 to confiscate more than 24,600 BTC tied to illegal gambling. According to the report, investigators are examining whether internal security controls failed during custody, rather than focusing on an external breach of a private exchange. If confirmed, the incident would raise uncomfortable questions about how seized digital assets are stored and safeguarded by law enforcement agencies. Investor Takeaway The case highlights operational risk around state-held crypto assets, reminding market participants that custody risk does not disappear simply because assets are seized by authorities. Why This Case Draws Unusual Attention The Gwangju prosecutors’ office is not new to crypto-related enforcement. In March 2024, it sought to recover roughly 170 billion won, or about $127 million at the time, in bitcoin linked to an illegal gambling operation. That history makes the reported loss harder to dismiss as a minor administrative error. While prosecutors have avoided confirming whether the missing assets are connected to that case, the scale of prior seizures handled by the office has intensified scrutiny. Even a partial loss could represent a material value gap, particularly given bitcoin’s price levels over the past year. The reported phishing angle also points to a different risk profile from traditional asset seizures. Unlike cash or physical property, bitcoin custody depends on private key security and internal access controls. A single compromised credential can result in irreversible loss, with no recovery mechanism comparable to freezing a bank account. How South Korea Built Its Crypto Seizure Framework South Korea’s legal framework for confiscating digital assets has been developing for several years. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that cryptocurrencies qualify as intangible assets with property value and can therefore be seized under the Criminal Procedure Act. That decision laid the groundwork for treating bitcoin as property subject to confiscation when linked to criminal activity. The ruling was first applied in a case involving a child pornography website operator, where the state seized 191 BTC, valued at around $2.3 million at the time. The court held that digital tokens could be treated as evidence or confiscated items if they were connected to a crime. More recently, the scope of seizure authority expanded further. In December of last year, the Supreme Court confirmed that bitcoin held on centralized exchanges is also subject to seizure. The case involved a police action from January 2020, when more than 55 BTC were taken from an exchange account during a money laundering investigation. After several appeals, the seizure was upheld. In that ruling, the court classified bitcoin as electronic information with independent economic value, placing it firmly within the reach of investigative authorities. Investor Takeaway Legal clarity around confiscation does not automatically translate into robust custody practices, especially as the value of seized assets rises. What the Incident Says About State-Level Crypto Custody If prosecutors confirm that phishing led to the loss, the case would expose a weak point in how seized crypto is handled after confiscation. While exchanges and custodians have invested heavily in layered security, state agencies may lack comparable infrastructure or specialized staff. The episode also blurs the line between enforcement success and operational liability. Seizing large crypto holdings can protect victims and support prosecutions, but it also transfers custody risk to the state. Any failure during that period can undermine public trust and complicate future enforcement efforts. For policymakers, the case may prompt a review of whether seized digital assets should remain under direct control of prosecutors or be transferred to specialized custodial services with stricter access controls and audit trails. What Comes Next The Gwangju prosecutors’ office has said it will not release further details until the investigation is complete. Key questions include when the loss occurred, how access was compromised, and whether internal controls were bypassed or misunderstood. Beyond the immediate inquiry, the case adds to a growing body of evidence that crypto enforcement does not end at seizure. As governments accumulate larger digital asset holdings through criminal cases, the challenge shifts from legal authority to operational resilience.

Why Has AUSTRAC Stepped In Now? Australia’s financial intelligence regulator has ordered Airwallex to appoint an external auditor to examine whether its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing controls are fit for the scale and complexity of its operations. The notice, issued by AUSTRAC, requires the payments firm to fund the review and submit the auditor’s findings within 180 days. The regulator said the audit will assess whether Airwallex is identifying customers correctly, monitoring transactions on a risk-based basis, and meeting its suspicious matter reporting obligations. While AUSTRAC has not alleged criminal wrongdoing, the decision to impose a compulsory external audit places Airwallex among a small group of firms subject to deeper, independent scrutiny. AUSTRAC has used similar powers in the past against payments and remittance providers, including Afterpay, PayPal Australia, Western Union’s local unit, and more recently Binance Australia. In several of those cases, audits were followed by remediation programs or tighter supervisory oversight. Investor Takeaway A compulsory AML audit does not imply misconduct, but it often raises follow-on risks for partnerships, licensing, and expansion timelines. What Is AUSTRAC Concerned About? At the core of AUSTRAC’s action is a familiar tension between rapid fintech growth and compliance infrastructure. Airwallex has expanded quickly over the past two years, adding products, customers, and cross-border corridors that have materially changed its risk exposure. From the regulator’s perspective, the issue is not whether monitoring systems exist, but whether they are aligned with the business Airwallex now runs. That includes whether transaction scenarios reflect current typologies, whether alerts are reviewed and escalated properly, and whether customer risk segmentation keeps pace with a broader mix of industries, jurisdictions, and use cases. Controls that were acceptable for a smaller platform can fall short once volumes rise and transaction flows span more markets. AUSTRAC has repeatedly warned that compliance frameworks must keep up with business change rather than lag behind it. Why Airwallex Sits in a High-Scrutiny Category Airwallex operates squarely within AUSTRAC’s highest-risk supervision cohort. The company provides business clients with global accounts, cross-border payments, foreign exchange services, and cards, moving funds across multiple jurisdictions at scale. Such infrastructure is commercially attractive but also carries elevated financial crime exposure if controls are misaligned. Payment flows that cross borders and currencies can be used to obscure source of funds, particularly where onboarding, monitoring, or escalation processes are uneven across regions. The regulator’s action also comes against the backdrop of Airwallex’s recent growth milestones. The company closed a large funding round late last year at a multibillion-dollar valuation and has expanded across Asia, Europe, and North America. Earlier this year, it announced the acquisition of a South Korean payments firm, adding another regulatory regime to its footprint. Investor Takeaway As payments firms scale across borders, regulators tend to reassess whether earlier compliance reviews still provide comfort under a new risk profile. How the Audit Fits Into Australia’s Regulatory Direction Airwallex has pointed to prior compliance work, including an AUSTRAC review in 2024 and an independent audit in 2025. The latest notice suggests the regulator views those assessments as outdated given the company’s current operating footprint. The timing is also linked to broader regulatory change. Australia is preparing for AML and counter-terrorism financing reforms due to take effect from March 2026, which are expected to widen obligations and sharpen expectations around risk assessments and governance. What Comes Next for Airwallex The immediate focus will be on the scope of the audit, the choice of auditor, and how AUSTRAC responds once the report is delivered. While an audit does not automatically lead to enforcement action, it places the firm under closer observation at a sensitive point in its expansion. Beyond regulatory outcomes, external audits can affect banking relationships and correspondent access, as partners often reassess exposure once a regulator raises concerns. For Airwallex, the review will therefore shape both its supervisory standing and the confidence of counterparties watching closely.  

Given the overriding daily and the weekly charts, Gold can be expected to rise to the next strong round resistance level 5000.00 (forecast price calculated for the completion of the active impulse waves 5 and (5)) – from where the price is likely to correct down on profit taking.   Gold broke resistance zone Likely to rise to major resistance level 5000.00 Gold recently broke the resistance zone between the key resistance level 4800.00 and the resistance trendline of the daily up channel from November. The breakout of this resistance zone accelerated the active short-term impulse wave 5, which belongs to the intermediate impulse wave (5) from October. The impulse wave (5) belongs to the weekly upward impulse sequence (1) from 2020.  The breakout of the resistance level 4800.00 added to the bullish pressure on this instrument. Given the overriding daily and the weekly charts, Gold can be expected to rise to the next strong round resistance level 5000.00 (forecast price calculated for the completion of the active impulse waves 5 and (5)) – from where the price is likely to correct down on profit taking. The subject matter and the content of this article are solely the views of the author. FinanceFeeds does not bear any legal responsibility for the content of this article and they do not reflect the viewpoint of FinanceFeeds or its editorial staff. The information does not constitute advice or a recommendation on any course of action and does not take into account your personal circumstances, financial situation, or individual needs. We strongly recommend you seek independent professional advice or conduct your own independent research before acting upon any information contained in this article.

What Is USD.AI Financing and Who Is the Borrower? USD.AI, an onchain lending and stablecoin protocol focused on artificial intelligence infrastructure, has approved a $500 million debt facility for Sharon AI, an Australian provider of AI compute infrastructure. The facility is designed to support the expansion of Sharon AI’s GPU deployments, with the company planning to begin drawing on the credit line this quarter. The structure reflects USD.AI’s core operating model: lending against tokenized representations of physical GPU assets. Rather than relying on corporate balance sheets or cash-flow history, the protocol accepts verified GPUs as collateral, allowing borrowers to unlock liquidity directly tied to deployed compute infrastructure. Sharon AI disclosed that it expects to fund $65 million in initial GPU deployments using the facility, targeting expanded capacity to serve hyperscale, research, enterprise, and government customers across Australia and the Asia-Pacific region. Investor Takeaway The deal highlights how tokenized infrastructure is being used to bridge funding gaps for capital-heavy AI operators that face limits in traditional credit markets. Why GPU-Backed Lending Is Gaining Traction AI infrastructure remains one of the most capital-intensive segments of the technology sector. High-end GPUs require large upfront investment, while demand cycles are driven by cloud providers, research institutions, and government contracts that often scale faster than conventional financing can support. USD.AI positions itself as an onchain alternative to bank lending for this segment. By lending only against verified GPU assets and tokenizing those assets onchain, the protocol links physical infrastructure to programmable liquidity. Borrowers pledge GPUs as collateral, and lenders gain exposure backed by identifiable, revenue-generating hardware rather than abstract credit risk. According to a Thursday press release, USD.AI has already approved more than $1.2 billion in guidance and non-recourse facilities for AI infrastructure operators, including QumulusAI and Quantum Solutions. The protocol describes its approach as isolating risk at the infrastructure level, limiting exposure to the specific assets being financed rather than broader corporate liabilities. This model has attracted attention as AI buildouts accelerate globally and competition for compute capacity intensifies. For operators, it offers access to funding without waiting for slower-moving banking processes. For lenders, it offers collateral that can be monitored and verified onchain. How the USD.AI Structure Works At the protocol level, USD.AI operates with a dual-token system built around its USDai stablecoin and a yield-bearing counterpart, sUSDai. Borrowers draw loans denominated in USDai, while liquidity providers can stake into the system to earn yield via sUSDai. The collateral mechanism is central to the design. GPUs pledged by borrowers are verified and tokenized, creating an onchain representation that ties loan exposure directly to physical hardware. This linkage is intended to reduce ambiguity around asset backing, a recurring concern in both decentralized lending and real-world asset tokenization. Conor Moore, co-founder of Permian Labs, the firm behind the USD.AI protocol, framed the Sharon AI deal as aligned with the platform’s target user base. “Sharon AI is precisely the type of partner USD.AI was built for – well capitalized with operational expertise and public market discipline, but unwilling to let growth be constrained by slower-moving, legacy financial rails,” Moore said in a statement. The emphasis on non-recourse structures also limits borrower liability beyond the pledged assets, a feature that may appeal to infrastructure operators managing volatile demand cycles. Investor Takeaway Tokenized GPU collateral ties lending risk to tangible assets, offering an alternative credit model for AI buildouts as compute demand outpaces bank financing. What Sharon AI Gains From the Facility For Sharon AI, the facility offers a way to accelerate deployment without relying solely on equity funding or traditional debt channels. The company confirmed it plans to begin drawing on the loan this quarter, starting with $65 million in GPU deployments. Sharon AI co-founder James Manning said the partnership fits the firm’s expansion strategy. “We are excited to have partnered with such an innovative financier in USD.AI,” Manning said. “Their approach to GPU financing is market leading, and we look forward to further deployments with them as we accelerate our compute infrastructure to service hyperscale, research, enterprise and government customers in Australia and Asia-Pacific.” The deal also reflects a broader trend in which AI infrastructure providers seek funding models tailored to hardware-heavy operations rather than software-style growth assumptions. As GPU supply remains tight and deployment timelines shorten, access to flexible financing has become a competitive factor. What This Means for Onchain Credit Markets The USD.AI–Sharon AI facility adds to a growing set of experiments linking decentralized finance tools with real-world infrastructure. Unlike consumer lending or speculative leverage, GPU-backed credit sits closer to project finance, with assets that can be audited, tracked, and valued outside crypto-native markets. If similar facilities continue to scale, onchain lending protocols may play a larger role in financing sectors where traditional banks move slowly or impose restrictive terms. AI infrastructure, with its clear asset base and strong demand signals, is emerging as one of the first testing grounds for that shift.

Identity underpins nearly every digital interaction we make: logging into an account, opening a bank account, boarding a flight, or even proving our age online. Yet the systems we rely on today are ageing and fragmented. Governments, banks, and technology platforms store and verify identity data in siloed databases, making them vulnerable to breaches, misuse, and overcollection. The rise of decentralized identity, powered by cryptography and distributed systems, aims to rethink this model. But can decentralized identity truly replace the IDs we use today, or will it remain a promising idea that struggles to scale beyond niche use cases? What Is Decentralized Identity? At its core, decentralized identity allows individuals to control their identity credentials rather than handing them over to centralized institutions. These credentials are typically stored in secure digital wallets and can be verified cryptographically without requiring repeated checks with the issuing authority. Two foundational components make this possible. The first is decentralized identifiers, which are unique cryptographic identifiers controlled by users rather than governments or platforms. The second is verifiable credentials, which are digitally signed attestations, such as proof of age, nationality, or professional qualification, that can be verified without exposing the underlying personal data. Aaron Painter, CEO of Nametag, says, “From my perspective, one of the biggest failures of today’s identity systems is that we often don’t know whether the person on the other side of a digital interaction is actually the person they claim to be, or even a real human at all. This becomes especially dangerous in remote work environments, customer support calls, help desks, and hiring processes”.  Supporters argue that this model enables self-sovereign identity, in which individuals decide when, how, and with whom they share specific information. Instead of uploading full identity documents every time, users can disclose only what is necessary for a given interaction. The Trust Problem Traditional identity systems work because institutions are trusted. A passport is valid because governments supervise enrollment and issuance. A driver’s license is trusted because law enforcement recognizes it. Bank identity checks work because regulators enforce standards. Decentralized identity challenges this structure by shifting custody to individuals. But as Painter emphasizes, trust does not disappear in decentralized systems; it is redistributed. Even in user-controlled identity models, trusted institutions must still issue credentials and retain authority over revocation and enforcement. Boris Bohrer-Bilowitzky, an infrastructure specialist working on regulated blockchain systems and currently involved with Concordium, explains that the core problem with today’s identity systems is that users are forced to repeatedly hand over far more personal information than is necessary.  Every new platform requires full onboarding, and every one of those platforms stores sensitive data, which massively increases the risk of breaches. In this sense, decentralized identity does not remove authority. It removes centralized data custody. Verification becomes cryptographic, but legitimacy still depends on recognized issuers and shared standards. Regulation, Governance, and Global Interoperability Any identity system that aims to replace or meaningfully supplement government-issued IDs must operate within legal and regulatory frameworks. Today, most decentralized credentials are not legally recognized as official identification, which limits their use in areas such as banking, immigration, and public services. Evin McMullen, CEO of Billions Network, argues that decentralized identity does not require governments to relinquish regulatory control. Decentralized identity does not require governments to give up regulation. They can still set rules and standards and obtain all the necessary information from decentralized identity sources. The only difference is that in that system, they don’t have to keep data in their custody.  For instance, a citizen who needs to prove they are of age could do so by sending a signature from their data wallets, providing that exact info. Notably, the information wouldn’t even have to contain their real age, just that they are above a certain age. Cryptographic hashing and zero-knowledge proofs (which verify that something is true without revealing the underlying information) ensure the data they need is valid, without requiring users’ full IDs.  In practice, this system can even strengthen regulatory outcomes. When people trust that the regulation of digital spaces won’t result in arbitrary data collection or long-term surveillance, they are more likely to opt in rather than seek workarounds. This approach may even strengthen regulatory outcomes. When people trust that compliance does not automatically lead to permanent data collection or surveillance, they are more likely to participate honestly rather than seek workarounds. However, adoption remains uneven. While many countries are experimenting with digital identity initiatives, global interoperability is still limited. Different regions are building systems that do not easily communicate with one another. Without shared standards, decentralized identity risks becoming fragmented, recreating many of the inefficiencies it aims to solve. Painter also points out that identity systems fail when they are optional. If decentralized credentials exist alongside weaker alternatives, attackers will simply choose the easiest path. For decentralized identity to improve security, it must become a default standard rather than a niche option. Infrastructure, Security, and User Experience Even with sound cryptographic design and regulatory support, decentralized identity must overcome practical challenges before it can scale. One of the most significant issues is user responsibility. Managing cryptographic keys and digital wallets introduces new risks. Losing access to a wallet cannot mean losing access to one’s identity. At the national or global scale, such failures are unacceptable. McMullen acknowledges these risks and emphasizes that modern decentralized identity systems are not about pure self-custody without support. Recovery mechanisms such as trusted contacts, multi-device verification, and institutional reissuance must be built in from the start. The goal is to keep users in control without turning them into single points of failure. Security dynamics also change. Centralized databases concentrate risk, making them attractive targets for large-scale breaches. Decentralized identity reduces this systemic risk by limiting data aggregation. However, it may increase targeted attacks against individuals, including phishing or coercion. The objective is not to eliminate risk entirely, but to reduce the scale and impact of failures. On usability, Boris Bohrer-Bilowitzky says, “The biggest hurdle isn’t regulation, it’s usability. If identity systems are too complex for everyday users, adoption will never happen. People don’t want to manage private keys, recovery phrases, or complicated workflows. We already live in a digital world where payments and access are seamless. Decentralized credentials must feel the same way. Once the tooling becomes intuitive and abstracted, legal acceptance and global recognition naturally follow because the system fits how people already live and transact”. Usability remains one of the most underestimated barriers. Bohrer-Bilowitzky notes that adoption will depend on simplicity. If identity wallets feel complicated or fragile, users will avoid them. For decentralized identity to succeed, it must feel as seamless as today’s login and onboarding experiences, even if the underlying technology is far more complex. So, Can Decentralized Identity Replace Today’s IDs? The honest answer is cautious optimism. Decentralized identity is unlikely to ли fully replace passports, national IDs, or regulated bank KYC systems in the near term. But it is already reshaping how identity can function in digital environments. Rather than a full replacement, the most realistic future is a hybrid one. Governments and trusted institutions issue verifiable credentials. Users hold and control those credentials. Verification is performed using privacy-preserving cryptography rather than repeated database checks. Centralized identity stores shrink, and identity becomes more modular and context-specific. In this model, decentralized identity does not overthrow existing systems; it modernizes them. The deeper shift is conceptual. Identity becomes less about handing over documents and more about proving just enough truth to participate. That change may be subtle, but its implications for privacy, security, and digital trust are profound. Decentralized identity may not replace the IDs we use today outright, but it is steadily redefining what identity means in a digital world.

When Bitcoin’s market capitalization passed $1 trillion, U.S. apartment buildings continued to operate much as they always had: collecting rent, responding gradually to interest-rate changes, and generating steady, single-digit returns. Yet in recent years, a growing number of platforms have begun promising to bridge these two worlds through tokenized real estate, fractional ownership of apartment buildings recorded and traded on blockchain networks.  The implication is hard to miss: if crypto unlocked exponential gains for early adopters, could putting real estate on-chain do the same? That question sits at the intersection of finance, technology, and investor psychology. Tokenized real estate is no longer theoretical. Billions of dollars in real-world assets are now on public blockchains, and residential property has emerged as a favored asset class.  At the same time, macro forces are reshaping real estate markets, from higher interest rates to renewed attention on U.S. housing finance institutions such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. What remains unclear is whether tokenization fundamentally changes the return profile of apartment buildings,  or whether it simply changes how those returns are accessed and traded. The more durable impact of tokenization is infrastructural. Just as electronic trading reshaped equities without changing corporate earnings, on-chain real estate may reshape participation without rewriting fundamentals. The question, then, is not whether tokenized apartments can replicate Bitcoin’s past returns. It is whether a more liquid, accessible, and transparent real estate market produces a different kind of efficiency,  one measured less in multiples and more in how capital flows into the buildings people actually live in. When Real Estate Meets Crypto Market Logic Real estate and crypto evolved under very different conditions. Residential property is local, regulated, and income-driven. Bitcoin emerged as a global, permissionless asset whose value was shaped by scarcity narratives, network effects, and speculative adoption. Tokenization attempts to bridge that divide by applying crypto-market mechanics,  fractional ownership, continuous trading, and automated settlement to physical assets. Apartment buildings have become a focal point because they produce steady cash flow and are widely understood, even as ownership has historically been restricted to institutions and high-net-worth investors. Proponents argue that tokenization lowers minimum investment sizes, improves liquidity, and opens property markets to global capital. Critics counter that none of those features change the fact that apartments remain yield-based assets constrained by rents, operating costs, and financing conditions. Mitch DiRaimondo, founder and lead project manager at SteelWave Digital, and a real estate and digital-asset investor who previously ran a crypto volatility trading fund, sees this tension as unavoidable. He argues that much of the confusion stems from applying crypto-style return expectations to an asset class designed to be stable rather than explosive. “Real estate is fundamentally designed to be boring, stable, and durable,” he notes. “That’s its strength.” Expecting it to behave like Bitcoin, in his view, misunderstands both markets. What Tokenized Apartment Buildings Actually Represent Tokenized real estate typically involves issuing blockchain-based tokens that represent economic interests in a property-owning entity. In most cases, an SPV holds the apartment building, while token holders receive exposure to income, appreciation, or both. Unlike REITs, which bundle hundreds or thousands of properties, tokenized offerings often focus on single assets. That structure offers clarity: investors can see exactly which building they are exposed to, but it also concentrates risk. Julian Kwan, CEO of real-world asset infrastructure platform IXS, emphasizes that tokenization today is primarily about modernizing access, not transforming asset fundamentals. Early tokenized real estate projects often assumed that digitization alone would create liquidity or value, an assumption that proved incorrect. Tokenization can expand the investor base, enable new financial use cases, and improve settlement efficiency. It, however, does not alter rents, occupancy rates, or local housing demand. DiRaimondo reinforces that distinction, arguing that many offerings still serve as synthetic wrappers rather than accurate representations of ownership. The difference matters. Exposure alone does not guarantee enforceable rights. Single-Asset Tokens vs. REITs: A Structural Divide One of the clearest insights DiRaimondo brings to the debate is the need to distinguish single-asset real estate tokens from diversified REITs, both economically and regulatorily. A single-asset token, he argues, behaves more like a private placement or joint venture tied to one specific property. Investors are exposed directly to sponsorship quality, leverage, asset performance, and liquidity risk. REITs, by contrast, derive stability from diversification and scale. Because of that difference, applying REIT-style regulatory frameworks to single-asset tokens would be misguided. The appropriate approach, DiRaimondo suggests, is risk-scaled regulation: clearer disclosures and greater transparency of ownership rather than one-size-fits-all oversight. This distinction also affects return expectations. REITs deliver predictable, income-oriented performance. Single-asset tokens can offer more targeted exposure, but that comes with higher variance and operational dependency. Liquidity: Pricing Efficiency, Not Unlimited Upside Liquidity is often cited as the primary mechanism through which tokenization could boost returns. Assets that are easier to trade typically command higher valuations, as investors demand less compensation for illiquidity. Julian Kwan acknowledges that liquidity can meaningfully affect pricing, particularly by reducing private-market discounts that can reach 20–40 percent. But he also stresses that real estate remains anchored to yield. DiRaimondo takes the argument further, cautioning against extrapolating liquidity into exponential growth. Continuous trading may introduce short-term volatility or speculative layers, but it does not eliminate cash-flow constraints. “Where upside appears is through leverage and capital structuring,” he explains,  refinancing, unlocking trapped equity, or improving capital efficiency. Those mechanisms can enhance returns, but they operate within real-world limits. Liquidity improves how real estate trades, not what it earns. Legal Rights and the Limits of Token Ownership Another area where DiRaimondo’s perspective is critical is investor protection. In many tokenized offerings, holders do not own property directly. Their rights depend on smart contracts, operating agreements, and legal structuring. “The smart contract effectively becomes the engine of the investment,” he notes. If that engine is weak, so are governance, cash flow enforcement, and remedies. Thomas Gaffney, an attorney specializing in crypto, Web3, and real-world asset (RWA) infrastructure and the head of Hearth Labs, a subsidiary of OFA, reinforces this concern from a legal perspective, noting that token holders often lack the explicit rights traditional property investors enjoy unless those protections are deliberately built in.  Ownership claims, bankruptcy treatment, and creditor priority must be clearly defined. As the market matures, DiRaimondo expects investors to increasingly differentiate between tokens that merely reference real estate and those that confer enforceable economic claims. Can Bitcoin-Style Returns Exist in Real Estate at All? Across many experts and market opinions, there is broad agreement on one point: the “Bitcoin-style returns” narrative does not hold up under scrutiny. Bitcoin’s growth was driven by a repricing from zero to global monetary relevance. Apartment buildings do not follow that trajectory. They generate income, appreciate gradually, and perform best when underwritten conservatively. DiRaimondo is blunt on this point. Expecting real estate tokens to deliver crypto-style price explosions, he argues, confuses speculative narratives with asset design. At best, tokenized real estate occupies a middle ground: more volatile than stable-yield instruments, but less volatile than unbacked crypto assets. That positioning reflects structure, not marketing. Institutional Capital in a Stress Scenario If concerns about real estate stress,  including those raised by Michael Burry,  prove directionally correct, institutional behavior is unlikely to change as retail narratives suggest. Rather than exiting the asset class, DiRaimondo argues institutions will concentrate on lower leverage, stronger governance, and durable cash flows.  Poorly structured or hype-driven projects will struggle, while disciplined operators benefit. In that environment, tokenization is not a differentiator by itself. It becomes relevant only if it supports institutional standards around custody, disclosure, and capital discipline. Stress, in this sense, does not invalidate real estate. It tests structure. What Tokenization Actually Changes Tokenization does not turn apartment buildings into cryptocurrencies. It changes access, transferability, and integration with digital financial systems. Ownership can be fractional, programmable, and globally distributed. Those changes may create temporary pricing effects in early markets. Over time, however, returns remain anchored to rent, leverage, and operations. The more lasting impact of tokenization is infrastructural rather than speculative. It reshapes how capital enters real estate, not why it earns returns. The question, then, is whether blockchain can make apartment buildings behave like Bitcoin. It is whether a more liquid, transparent, and accessible ownership layer improves how real estate functions,  without asking it to become something it is not.

Searching for the most promising cryptos usually depends on entry timing, fair pricing, and whether the plans ahead are clearly explained. Presale phases allow early participation before public trading begins, but not every project offers the same potential. Some focus more on technical build quality, while others highlight firm schedules and fixed prices before exchange trading. The real challenge is finding projects that mix strong ideas with rising interest before the presale window closes. This article reviews four presale names drawing strong attention at the moment. Each project targets a different area, including fast networks, AI-based tools, creator platforms, and liquidity-focused chains. BlockDAG leads these most promising cryptos due to its structured pricing and presale end date, followed by Vortex FX, SUBBD, and LiquidChain, which each bring a different use case to the crypto market. 1. BlockDAG (BDAG): Fixed Presale Price and Final Countdown Right now, BlockDAG (BDAG) is often mentioned among the most promising cryptos because its presale details are clearly defined and easy to follow. The presale is ending on January 26, with the current Batch 36 offering a special presale price of $0.001 per coin. More than $445 million has already been raised, and only about 2.3 billion coins remain, which adds urgency as the deadline gets closer. This structure has drawn steady attention from people watching presales closely. A major point driving interest is the fixed price gap. The confirmed public listing price is set at $0.05, creating a clear difference between the current presale rate and the expected market value. That wide gap is why BlockDAG continues to stand out among the most promising cryptos as the presale enters its final 5 day countdown. From a technical side, the network uses a combined Proof of Work and DAG model to support faster block handling while keeping the system secure. It also supports EVM compatibility, allowing developers to move Ethereum-based applications without changing their existing code. This makes it easier for projects to build and expand once the network becomes fully active. What adds even more momentum is the defined timeline. Since the presale is officially ending on January 26, there is little uncertainty around when this phase closes. That level of clarity is uncommon and is a big reason many market watchers list BlockDAG among the most promising cryptos heading into early 2026. With limited supply left and time running out, attention continues to build around the final presale window. 2. Vortex FX: AI-Driven Tools for Active Users Vortex FX takes a different route by focusing on artificial intelligence tools designed for trading and content workflows. The platform aims to help users analyze data, manage risk, and improve decision-making speed through AI-based systems. This approach has remained popular as more users look for functional tools instead of simple coins, placing Vortex FX among the most promising cryptos in the AI category. Recent updates suggest the presale price has been around $0.05, which is higher than some early-stage entries but reflects its focus on ready-to-use tools. For those tracking the most promising cryptos connected to AI trends, Vortex FX offers a direct link to that demand without overly complex structures. Future growth depends largely on whether users actively adopt the platform after release. If the tools see real usage and steady engagement, demand could grow gradually over time. Rather than aiming for sharp price jumps, the project appears positioned for more stable progress built on usage. 3. SUBBD: Supporting Digital Creators SUBBD is designed with digital creators and subscription content in mind. The platform aims to allow creators to earn directly from supporters, while fans gain access without relying on large centralized services. This setup fits the ongoing interest in creator-led platforms and direct payment systems. At present, SUBBD remains in its presale stage, with entry pricing kept low to attract early participation before exchange trading begins. While prices may adjust as stages move forward, the early level is structured to stay accessible. This has helped SUBBD earn a place among the most promising cryptos for those focused on creator-driven platforms. Longer-term progress will rely on bringing creators and users onto the platform. Even modest user growth could support steady demand over time. The focus here is less on speed and more on regular activity and everyday use. 4. LiquidChain: Built Around Liquidity Efficiency LiquidChain centers its design on improving on-chain liquidity and fast settlement processes. The goal is to support smoother swaps and reduce friction for both users and applications. This type of infrastructure plays an important role during periods of high trading volume. The presale currently offers early-stage pricing meant to reward those joining before public listings. While not positioned at ultra-low levels, it still sits below expected market pricing. When comparing the most promising cryptos, LiquidChain appeals to those interested in DeFi-focused infrastructure rather than end-user apps. Its future will depend on real integrations and partnerships. If decentralized platforms choose to route liquidity through LiquidChain, steady network use could support ongoing demand. Final Thoughts Presale opportunities always involve uncertainty, but they can also offer strong early positioning. Among the names discussed, BlockDAG continues to stand apart with its $0.001 Batch 36 price, confirmed $0.05 listing value, and a presale ending on January 26, in 5 days. These clear details are why many consider it one of the most promising cryptos as the deadline approaches. Vortex FX, SUBBD, and LiquidChain each address different needs, from AI tools to creator platforms and liquidity systems. Together, they highlight how varied the most promising cryptos can be in the current market. Making smart choices means focusing on pricing clarity, presale timelines, and how each project plans to attract real usage after the presale ends.

GoHenry has expanded its role beyond youth banking by launching more than 80 free financial education lessons on YouTube for families across the UK, aiming to close the gap left by delayed curriculum reform. The move comes as mandatory financial education in primary schools is not due to begin until September 2028, leaving millions of children without structured money lessons during critical formative years. By making its curriculum-mapped content publicly available, GoHenry is positioning itself not just as a fintech provider, but as an emerging EdTech force addressing a national skills shortfall. Filling the Gap Ahead of the 2028 Curriculum The UK government committed last year to making financial education compulsory within Citizenship lessons at primary school level, following years of industry campaigning and advocacy. However, with more than two years until implementation, GoHenry argues that waiting risks leaving an entire cohort of children without essential money skills during early development. The YouTube launch provides immediate, free access to structured lessons, offering families and teachers a stopgap solution while formal education frameworks remain pending. Curriculum-Mapped, Age-Appropriate Learning The lessons form part of GoHenry’s award-winning in-app “Money Missions” programme, developed in collaboration with teachers and financial experts. Content is mapped to UK education guidelines and adjusted by age, confidence and skill level, covering topics from saving and budgeting through to compounding and investing. The bite-sized, video-based format is designed to make complex financial concepts accessible, reflecting how younger audiences increasingly engage with educational content. Digital Education and Measurable Behaviour Change Independent academic analysis has shown tangible behavioural impact from GoHenry’s approach, with children saving over 30% more on average after completing their first lesson. This evidence supports the argument that digital-first financial education can influence real-world habits, particularly when delivered alongside tools that children already use to manage money. By placing its proprietary content in the public domain, GoHenry is also setting a precedent that may influence both government policy and the wider fintech sector’s approach to social impact. Takeaway: GoHenry’s decision to release free, curriculum-mapped money lessons on YouTube highlights how fintech firms are stepping in as de facto education providers, shaping financial literacy delivery well ahead of formal school reform.

The Circle Foundation has given the United Nations funding to update how it delivers humanitarian aid through digital financial infrastructure, such as regulated stablecoins like USDC. The World Economic Forum in Davos announced the plan on Wednesday. Its goals are to make cross-border payments easier, cheaper, and more open to refugees and others who have had to leave their homes. The grant supports the UN's Digital Hub of Treasury Solutions (DHoTS), launched by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in 2021 to bring together new banking and risk management technologies across all UN systems. It builds on a partnership between Circle, UNHCR, and DHoTS in 2022 that was the first to use USDC to send money to Ukrainians who had to leave their homes because of the war. Circle didn't specify the donation amount, but they said that digital technologies, like stablecoins, can reduce the cost of delivering humanitarian aid by up to 20%. This would make the most of the $38 billion in annual humanitarian contributions that are currently stuck in slow, outdated systems. Using Stablecoins to Make Aid Easier The main goals of the project are to enable cross-border transfers to occur almost instantly, allow banks and fintech partners to convert local currencies, and provide programmable disbursements. Stablecoins will enable faster payments and easier tracking, reducing the delays and middlemen that come with traditional correspondent banking. UNHCR pilots have been underway since 2022 and have shown promising results: Blockchain-based systems provide faster, more human-centered aid with full transparency, improved accountability, and initial cost reductions of up to 20%. Important Things Officials Said Alexander De Croo, the head of the UN Development Programme, talked on how much more efficient things have become: "Stablecoin payments would let the UN 'make every dollar work harder' with 'tight budgets.'" He went on to say that adopting regulated stablecoins for program payments and cross-border transfers can "lower costs, make things clearer, and create more open and trustworthy financial systems that protect people's data, respect monetary sovereignty, and support long-term resilience." Barham Salih, the UNHCR High Commissioner, underlined the human impact: "This is about using technology to protect the dignity and choice of people who have to flee, while getting the most out of every dollar we are given." Elizabeth Carpenter, Chief Strategic Engagement Officer at Circle and Founding Chair of the Circle Foundation, said that combining regulated stablecoins with AI-enabled compliance and risk management will accelerate aid, make it more accountable, and save money, thereby building trust in global aid. Wider Effects on Humanitarian Finance The project shows how stablecoins are becoming more important for global payments. Bloomberg Intelligence predicts that stablecoin flows will reach $56.6 trillion by 2030, with an annual growth rate of 81%. The grant's goal is to modernize the UN's financial gateway to better protect recipient data, make aid more accessible to those in need, and support those who are being displaced around the world. This alliance might set a new benchmark for efficient and open humanitarian finance as the UN's digital infrastructure grows.

Why Did CySEC Withdraw the Licence? The Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission has formally withdrawn the Cyprus Investment Firm authorisation of HTFX (EU) Ltd, bringing to an end a regulatory relationship that lasted almost a decade. The decision was taken on Jan. 12, 2026, and made public on Jan. 22, with CySEC confirming that the firm had “expressly renounced” its licence. According to the regulator, the withdrawal was carried out under Section 8(1)(a) of the Investment Services and Activities and Regulated Markets Law of 2017, together with Section 4(7) of Directive DI87-05, which governs the suspension and withdrawal of CIF licences. CySEC did not reference breaches, sanctions, or enforcement findings in its notice. Instead, the regulator treated the case as a voluntary exit, a procedure that allows firms to surrender authorisation once they have completed a supervised wind-down of operations and client obligations. This distinction matters, as it places the withdrawal firmly in the category of an orderly departure rather than regulatory intervention. Investor Takeaway CySEC’s handling of the HTFX (EU) case shows how licensed firms can exit the market through process rather than penalty, provided client and regulatory obligations are settled. A Single Licence, Multiple Brand Names HTFX (EU) Ltd was not a newly formed broker exiting shortly after launch. The company represents the latest name attached to a single legal entity that has operated under several brands while holding the same CySEC licence. Before adopting the HTFX (EU) name, the firm was known as CDG Global (EU) Ltd, and earlier still as Evest Ltd. All three names are tied to the same legal entity, the same CIF authorisation number, 332/17, and the same Legal Entity Identifier. Public regulatory records show continuity across these name changes, with no interruption to the firm’s authorised status during that period. The company was incorporated in Cyprus in October 2015 and received its CIF licence in August 2017. From that point onward, it operated as a CySEC-regulated investment firm, even as its branding evolved. Throughout its licensed life, the firm’s registered address remained in Limassol, reflecting its place within Cyprus’s retail trading and CFD brokerage sector. What “Renunciation” Involves Under Cypriot Rules CySEC’s reference to an “express renunciation” points to a defined exit process rather than a simple administrative step. Under Directive DI87-05, a CIF that chooses to give up its licence must complete a structured wind-down before authorisation is formally withdrawn. That process includes halting the onboarding of new clients, closing or transferring existing client accounts, returning all client funds and financial instruments, addressing outstanding complaints, and settling any regulatory or financial liabilities. Firms are also required to communicate clearly with clients and to provide confirmations, often from external auditors, that the wind-down has been completed. Only after these conditions are met does CySEC proceed with licence withdrawal and update its public register. In the case of HTFX (EU) Ltd, client-facing communications indicated that new client onboarding had stopped and that support channels remained available for existing queries, steps consistent with the DI87-05 framework. Investor Takeaway A voluntary CIF exit requires more than a name change or announcement; regulators expect documented proof that client interests have been addressed before authorisation is withdrawn. No Enforcement Action, but a Familiar Pattern Such exits have become increasingly common in Cyprus in recent years. Higher compliance costs, tighter EU-wide requirements, and group-level restructurings have led some investment firms to surrender licences rather than continue operating as standalone regulated entities. In many cases, firms consolidate activities elsewhere or refocus on non-EU jurisdictions, though CySEC typically does not comment on post-exit plans. What the Withdrawal Means Going Forward With the licence now withdrawn, HTFX (EU) Ltd is no longer authorised to provide investment services under Cypriot regulation. Any future activity linked to the brand would need to operate under a different legal entity or regulatory framework. For former clients and counterparties, the central question is whether all wind-down steps were completed in line with DI87-05. CySEC’s decision indicates that, in the regulator’s view, the conditions for withdrawal were satisfied. The case closes the final chapter of a regulatory identity that began as Evest Ltd, later became CDG Global (EU), and ultimately operated as HTFX (EU).

After a security flaw that stole about $7 million in unauthorised cash, Saga has stopped its SagaEVM chainlet. The event caused the protocol's main stablecoin, Saga Dollar, to lose its peg and led to a significant drop in total value locked (TVL). This shows that cross-chain infrastructure is still vulnerable. The SagaEVM chainlet, an Ethereum-compatible layer, was halted at block height 6,593,800 after hackers used the system to mint Saga Dollar tokens without providing any collateral. According to CoinGecko data, the stablecoin dropped to $0.75 around 10:16 PM UTC on Wednesday after funds were moved and changed into Ether. TVL on the platform dropped by over 55% in just 24 hours, going from approximately $37 million to $16 million.  Exploit Mechanics and Attacker Activity Threat researchers found that the main problem was an assistance contract that misused Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC) capabilities by sending bespoke messages. Vladimir S, a security researcher, said, "The attacker was able to mint Saga Dollar out of 'thin air' with a helper contract that abused IBC mechanisms with custom messages." The contract bypassed validation in the precompile bridge logic by creating its own messages or payloads. This allows it to issue $D tokens without collateral. Spectre, an on-chain investigator, said it seemed like "the result of a private key compromise," but he also said that there wasn't much information accessible at the time. Saga has found the attacker's wallet and is working with exchanges and bridges to block the address. The team stressed that the larger Saga network remains safe, with no consensus failures, validator compromises, or signer key leaks. Saga's Quick Response Saga said in an X post and a follow-up Medium update that the chainlet would be paused and that additional safety measures would be put in place to prevent such events. The team said, "There has been no failure of consensus, compromise of validators, or leakage of signer keys." The bigger Saga network is still fundamentally sound. Engineering and security teams will fully investigate the SagaEVM chainlet before it can restart. When it's done, a full post-mortem will be made public. Wider Effects on Cross-Chain Protocols The vulnerability shows that IBC-enabled bridges and precompile logic are always at risk, as custom payloads can bypass security measures. Even while Saga's fundamental infrastructure stayed strong, the experience shows how hard it is to keep stablecoin pegs stable when faced with advanced attacks. The experience is a reminder that the threat landscape for modular blockchain ecosystems is constantly evolving as the team works to recover and strengthen defences.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of Thailand is working quickly to set up rules for cryptocurrency exchange-traded funds (ETFs), futures trading, and tokenized financial products. The goal of the program is to make the country a top regional centre for institutional crypto adoption, as demand from professional investors continues to grow. The SEC has approved crypto ETFs in principle and is now working on comprehensive rules for investing in and operating them. The SEC said that formal rules will be released "early this year." This comes after Thailand officially recognised digital assets as an asset class under the Derivatives Act. Which means investors can allocate up to 5% of their diversified portfolios to cryptocurrencies. Important Changes in the Law The framework will allow trading of crypto futures on the Thailand Futures Exchange (TFEX), with market makers ensuring sufficient liquidity. The SEC is also working with the Bank of Thailand on a tokenisation sandbox. They want issuers of bond tokens and other tokenised products to participate so they can be tested and approved by the government. Jomkwan Kongsakul, the SEC's deputy secretary-general, talked about how crypto ETFs are good for investors: "One of the best things about crypto ETFs is that they are easy to get to. They get rid of worries about hacking and wallet security, which has been a big problem for many investors." At the same time, the regulator is tightening its control of financial influencers. Kongsakul said, "Any advice about securities or investment returns will need to come from a licensed investment advisor or introducing broker." The SEC will also ask issuers of bond tokens to join the regulatory sandbox. More and More Institutions Are Interested Thailand's drive shows that more institutions are accepting digital assets, even as retail trade remains strong. Bitkub, the country's largest exchange, handles about $60 million in daily trades. This shows that many people are using crypto, even though payments with it have been illegal for a long time. The SEC's plan is aimed at professional investors in particular and seeks to close the gap between retail interest and institutional infrastructure. Thailand wants to attract global capital while maintaining strong protections by treating crypto as an asset class and offering regulated products such as ETFs and futures. Wider Effects on the Region These changes are happening alongside a global trend towards regulated crypto products becoming more popular, driven by the success of spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs in other markets.  Thailand's balanced approach, combining innovation with stricter rules for influencers and anti-money laundering measures, puts it well-positioned to capitalise on expanding institutional demand. The framework could enable Thailand to establish its first crypto ETFs this year, making the market more liquid and helping crypto become more popular in Southeast Asia.

BTCC is heading into its 15th year with a clear message: it wants to be more than a legacy exchange that survived the early cycles. The company said it closed 2025 with record performance, processing $3.7 trillion in total trading volume and growing its global user base to 11 million—a 60% jump year-on-year. But the more important piece is what BTCC is prioritizing next. As it approaches its 15th anniversary in 2026, the exchange is framing its next phase around AI-enabled trading tools and a broader push into tokenized real-world assets (RWAs), two themes that have quickly moved from buzzwords to competitive requirements. What drove BTCC’s record year in 2025? BTCC’s annual performance was powered by both derivatives scale and a sharp acceleration in tokenized product demand. For the year, the exchange reported $3.27 trillion in futures volume and $431 billion in spot trading volume, taking total activity to $3.7 trillion. The standout growth engine, however, was tokenized real-world asset trading. BTCC said quarterly RWA volumes surged from $1.2 billion in Q1 to $22.7 billion in Q4, representing a 1,792% increase. Total tokenized futures volume for 2025 reached $53.1 billion. That scale matters because it signals a structural shift in trader demand. Tokenized exposure to macro and real-world markets is no longer a fringe category. For exchanges, it’s increasingly a way to keep traders engaged when crypto-native narratives slow down or when volatility rotates into commodities, FX, or other asset classes. BTCC also emphasized transparency mechanics as part of its growth narrative, pointing to monthly Proof of Reserves reporting with reserves consistently above 100%. Product upgrades across 2025 included a site-wide UI refresh, a redesigned VIP program, and TradingView integration for futures trading. Investor Takeaway The RWA spike is the key metric here. If traders are moving size into tokenized assets, exchanges that can list and scale non-crypto exposure may capture flow that used to leave the ecosystem entirely. Global expansion, community events, and brand positioning BTCC spent 2025 pushing visibility through both events and partnerships. The exchange participated in TOKEN2049 in Dubai and Singapore, hosted a Summer Festival in Tokyo, and ran an MVP Night during Taipei Blockchain Week. It also sponsored the Red Eagle Foundation’s charity golf events, which raised over $100,000 during the year. On the branding side, BTCC partnered with NBA All-Star Jaren Jackson Jr. as its first global brand ambassador. The exchange is positioning the partnership as a crossover play: linking sports audiences to crypto trading culture through Jackson’s public identity beyond basketball, including music and trading. BTCC’s year was capped with industry recognition, including BeInCrypto’s Best Centralized Exchange (Community Choice) award—a notable win because it leans on user sentiment rather than internal industry scoring. BTCC’s 2026 strategy: AI tools, more RWAs, and a next-gen platform BTCC is pitching 2026 as an execution year built on its operational history. The exchange outlined three priority areas. First: AI-powered trading features. BTCC plans to integrate AI across risk management and execution optimization. The company is positioning these tools as useful for both professionals and mainstream users, which suggests a blend of automated decision support and behind-the-scenes safety controls rather than a pure “AI bot trading” pitch. Second: real-world asset expansion. After what BTCC described as an 18-fold jump in tokenized trading volume during 2025, it plans to expand its RWA suite with new asset classes and more trading pairs. This is likely the most commercially important leg of the roadmap, since it widens the product catalogue without relying on new meme cycles to generate volume. Third: a next-generation trading platform. BTCC said it is preparing a broader system upgrade spanning derivatives, spot markets, and multi-asset matching engines, alongside a new wealth management feature designed to offer diversified strategies for different risk profiles. That last point is a shift in tone. Wealth-style products imply BTCC is looking beyond pure trading and toward longer-duration customer relationships—where users park capital and pick strategies rather than only executing high-frequency positions. Investor Takeaway Exchanges chasing AI and RWAs are converging on the same goal: retain users across market regimes. BTCC’s advantage is longevity, but its 2026 success depends on shipping tools traders actually use. Marcus Chen, BTCC’s Product Manager, framed the strategy bluntly: “the real risk isn’t change but standing still,” adding that BTCC’s 2026 focus is turning operational experience into speed—building what traders need for where markets are going, not where they’ve been. For BTCC, the numbers make a strong case that 2025 was more than a volume year. The bigger question now is whether it can convert that momentum into a platform upgrade cycle that keeps pace with a market increasingly shaped by automation, tokenized real-world access, and cross-asset trading demand.

Why Did the Sale Trigger a Backlash? Space Protocol’s public token sale has become a flashpoint in crypto fundraising after demand surged far beyond the $2.5 million figure cited ahead of the offering. The project, which is developing a leveraged prediction market on Solana, said interest in its SPACE token exceeded $20 million, pushing the sale well beyond initial expectations. The sale priced SPACE at $0.069, implying a fully diluted valuation of about $69 million, with token claims set to open at the token generation event. Early enthusiasm around the oversubscription quickly gave way to criticism, as participants questioned whether the $2.5 million figure functioned as a real cap or simply a reference point. On social media, critics argued that the structure echoed other contentious launches, most notably Trove Markets, whose heavily oversubscribed sale was followed by a sharp post-launch token decline. Comparisons intensified as users debated how much capital Space would ultimately retain and how transparently those decisions were communicated. Investor Takeaway Oversubscribed token sales can boost short-term interest, but unclear caps and allocation mechanics often become a source of post-sale distrust. How Did Space Respond to the Criticism? In a statement posted on X late Wednesday, Space Protocol rejected comparisons to Trove Markets and clarified that the $2.5 million figure was a soft cap rather than a hard ceiling. The team said it ultimately allocated 19.6% of the total token supply to the public sale. According to the statement, more than $7.3 million in excess capital was returned after the team reviewed its funding needs. Larger contributions were reduced, smaller participants received higher fill rates, and ownership was distributed across thousands of wallets. Space said the retained funds would be used to seed leverage pools, provide launch liquidity, support centralized exchange listings, expand the team, and invest in security, audits, and risk controls. “Building leveraged prediction markets at scale requires deep liquidity and enterprise-grade systems from day one,” the team said. The project also stressed that token claiming would only be enabled at the token generation event and that the platform remains under active development. Why Do Critics Remain Unconvinced? Despite those explanations, skepticism has continued across crypto-focused social media. Ethos CEO Serpin Taxt said Space’s decision to keep a large share of the raised funds amounted to acting “in bad faith,” while other commentators raised concerns about aggressive marketing and what they described as limited technical documentation. Some users also pointed to similarities in branding and presentation between Space and Trove Markets, further fueling suspicion online. No evidence has emerged linking the two teams, but the visual and messaging overlap has kept the comparison alive. Additional scrutiny has focused on the backgrounds of Space’s founders, who previously worked on GameFi projects such as UFO Gaming. That token later fell sharply during the broader downturn in the GameFi sector, which critics cite as a reason for caution. Questions have also been raised around partnerships mentioned during the sale, including references to firms such as Kalshi and MoonPay. Critics note that these relationships have yet to translate into visible product usage. Investor Takeaway Past project history and sale messaging now carry more weight with investors after a series of high-profile post-launch failures. How Trove Markets Looms Over New Token Launches The dispute around Space unfolds against the backdrop of renewed attention on prediction markets in 2025, a sector that has posted record volumes while also drawing closer regulatory and reputational scrutiny. Trove Markets has become a reference point in those debates. The project raised more than $11 million before later pivoting chains, after which its token dropped sharply following launch. That episode has heightened sensitivity around sale mechanics, disclosure standards, and how teams handle excess demand. For Space, the challenge now is less about explaining the mechanics of its sale and more about rebuilding trust ahead of its token generation event. While the team has denied any wrongdoing and pledged to address questions in a public X Spaces session, the controversy shows how quickly sentiment can turn when expectations around caps and allocations are not aligned with outcomes.