The past few years have forced markets to operate without a stable baseline. The post-pandemic surge in liquidity gave way to the steepest tightening cycle in decades, and then to a stop-start recalibration as inflation cooled unevenly and growth refused to break cleanly in either direction. Investors and traders have been navigating a world where geopolitics, supply chains, fiscal expansion, and technology shocks have all competed with central banks for control of the narrative. By 2025, the easy phase of the cycle had largely ended. Equities stayed resilient, but leadership became more conditional on earnings delivery and balance sheet durability. At the same time, debt burdens and policy uncertainty helped re-legitimise real assets as strategic hedges, while the AI boom created both genuine productivity potential and a constant valuation stress test with each reporting season. Looking toward 2026, the expectations are shifting from “what will the Fed do?” to “what will actually work?” Markets are likely to remain constructive, but less forgiving: returns may still be there, yet they could come with more dispersion across sectors, more sensitivity to policy repricing, and more volatility around crowded themes such as AI, mega-cap concentration, and safe-haven demand. To explore what that means in practice, this feature brings together perspectives from market analysts, trading technology executives, and industry veterans. Central to the outlook are insights from: Joshua Mahony, Chief Market Analyst of Rostro Group's retail brokerage brand Scope Markets, on macro drivers, currencies, and commodities; Elina Pedersen, CEO of Your Bourse, on global markets and the evolving realities of the trading industry; and Drew Niv, CEO of TraderTools, on how broker and prop firm models are adapting to tighter conditions. Their views are complemented by voices from crypto, regulation, and institutional finance, including Coinbase UK CEO Keith Grose, ThetaRay COO Moshe Siman-Tov, Uplinq co-founder Pat Reily, and veteran FX trader Vince Stanzione. Rates, The Dollar, And Precious Metals Back In Focus [caption id="attachment_178889" align="alignleft" width="150"] Joshua Mahony, Chief Market Analyst at Scope Markets[/caption] Scope Markets' Joshua Mahony believes monetary policy will once again dominate market behaviour in 2026, particularly through its impact on the dollar and bond markets. “2026 will see traders refocus on the dollar once again, with the new Fed Chair likely to push for a fresh bout of easing in a bid to lift economic growth under Donald Trump. One of the core drivers of price action within the FX space involves the respective moves within bond markets, and thus the dollar could get hit if we see a shift in pricing for additional cuts beyond the three currently priced by markets. Talk of the Fed’s ‘terminal rate’ will undoubtedly become increasingly prominent as we weigh up exactly where the FOMC opt to halt their easing process. Given the repeated votes for a 50bp cut from Trump’s appointee Stephen Miran, it is more than likely that his pick for the Chair will similarly push for a fresh bout of monetary easing in H2 2026.” He also sees precious metals remaining structurally supported after an exceptional 2025. “2025 has been an incredibly profitable one for holders of precious metals, with gold and silver ending up as two of the best-performing assets after a particularly strong second half of the year. The decision on when to take your profits and run will always remain one of the more difficult elements of investing, but some of the core drivers behind this strength look unlikely to shift anytime soon. AI valuation concerns continue to drive haven demand. The ever-rising wall of debt faced across the globe will continue to rise, with currency devaluation and fiscal stability concerns likely to drive demand for non-fiat assets.” Mahony argues that geopolitics has further reinforced gold’s appeal. “Meanwhile, the European decision to freeze Russian assets will undoubtedly ensure we see plenty of demand for untraceable non-fiat investments such as gold. JP Morgan predicts a $5,000 year-end target for 2026, and while it is difficult to pin an exact number on any market, another 20% gain next year seems very plausible given the 60% and 27% rise over the past two years. Just expect volatility, and be aware that any sharp selloff in equities will invariably see precious metals suffer a similar fate as has been the case for any previous market selloffs.” Takeaway: Mahony’s outlook frames 2026 as a year where easing expectations, bond repricing and geopolitical risk reinforce demand for real assets, even as higher volatility becomes part of the cost of holding them. Equities, AI Discipline, And A Less Forgiving Market [caption id="attachment_133363" align="alignleft" width="150"] Elina Pedersen, Chief Executive Officer of Your Bourse[/caption] Elina Pedersen, Chief Executive Officer of Your Bourse, expects equities to extend gains in 2026, but only for companies that can deliver measurable results. “Markets enter 2026 with momentum, but the tone has changed. This is no longer a broad rally driven by valuation expansion. Equities should still move higher, likely delivering low to mid-teen returns globally. Results will depend much more on earnings delivery than sentiment.” She argues that artificial intelligence remains central to market leadership, but the tolerance for unfocused spending is fading. “AI remains the main force shaping market leadership. The investment cycle continues, but it is becoming more selective. Investors are rewarding companies that turn AI investment into real productivity and revenue, while penalising those that simply spend. This is helping leadership broaden beyond pure technology into sectors such as utilities, health care, and financials, particularly where demand is linked to power usage, infrastructure and efficiency gains.” Pedersen also points to a more balanced global opportunity set. “The US remains the core market, supported by strong corporate profitability and deep capital markets. That said, opportunities outside the US are improving. Europe is emerging from several years of weak growth, helped by rate cuts and fiscal investment. China, especially its technology sector, offers asymmetric potential. Valuations remain low, liquidity is improving, and earnings are recovering, despite ongoing geopolitical risk.” Takeaway: Pedersen sees 2026 as a stock picker’s market, where AI remains a powerful theme but success depends on execution, profitability, and discipline rather than spending alone. Trading Models, Crypto Infrastructure, And Regulation Catch Up [caption id="attachment_178890" align="alignleft" width="150"] Drew Niv, Chief Executive Officer of TraderTools[/caption] TraderTools CEO Drew Niv believes the contraction in the prop trading sector is setting the stage for a more sustainable phase. "Prop firms will evolve and mature as the sector has shrunk from the 2024 peak due to unsustainable business models.  This will mean more sustainable payout rules, and continued migration to prop as a lead source for brokers, not a standalone business." He also sees brokers increasingly following prop firms by offering multiple platforms, while artificial intelligence lowers the barrier to strategy creation.  "AI will come in strong into the CFD sector, enabling more people to easily create EAs, easily port them from platform to platform, helping [more brokers do what prop firms have done successfully], but most importantly, create more complex multimedia layered systems that aren't one-dimensional like EAs and now don't require a dedicated coding team." Beyond brokerage, structural shifts are accelerating across financial markets. Coinbase UK CEO Keith Grose argues that market infrastructure itself is changing. “The clearest signal about where we’re heading in 2026 is that the next generation of the internet is being built on-chain. Markets are becoming programmable, exchanges are being redesigned around fairness and liquidity, and DeFi is evolving into real financial infrastructure. And at the frontier, AI systems are beginning to rely on blockchains for identity, trust, and settlement - a shift that will define the next decade of the cryptoeconomy.” In Europe, regulation is becoming a forcing function for AI adoption. ThetaRay COO Moshe Siman-Tov expects 2026 to be decisive. “Europe in 2026 will resemble the period leading up to Y2K, with institutions racing to modernize foundational AML systems ahead of a hard regulatory deadline. While the unified AML rulebook is already in place, its most demanding requirements come into force in 2027, and traditional rules-based approaches will not scale to meet them.” On the macro-financial side, Uplinq co-founder Pat Reily expects lower rates to reshape credit markets and expose weaker AI narratives. “The Fed Reserve will reduce interest rates by 1.75% by the end of 2026… Slapping a little AI on something may fool some of the venture capital and broader community, but only for a little while.” Finally, veteran FX trader Vince Stanzione remains constructive on metals amid all the change. “The gold and silver bull market, even with pullbacks, remains intact.” Takeaway: Across trading, crypto, and regulation, 2026 appears set to reward firms and investors who invest early in robust infrastructure, credible AI, and compliance-ready systems—while exposing weak models built for a very different market regime.

Why Doesn’t JPMorgan See a $1 Trillion Stablecoin Market? JPMorgan analysts say the stablecoin market is unlikely to reach trillion-dollar levels over the next few years, arguing that growth remains closely tied to crypto trading activity rather than mainstream payments. In a report published Wednesday, the bank projected total stablecoin market capitalization at roughly $500 billion to $600 billion by 2028—well below more bullish forecasts circulating in the market. The stablecoin universe has expanded rapidly this year, growing by about $100 billion to exceed $300 billion in total supply. But JPMorgan says that expansion reinforces, rather than challenges, its existing view. Growth remains concentrated in the two largest coins. Tether’s USDT increased supply by about $48 billion this year, while Circle’s USDC added roughly $34 billion, accounting for most of the market’s net growth. According to the analysts, led by managing director Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou, this pattern shows that stablecoins continue to scale alongside crypto market cycles instead of breaking out into an independent growth path driven by payments adoption. Investor Takeaway JPMorgan’s base case ties stablecoin growth to crypto trading demand, not global payments. That caps long-term market size far below trillion-dollar projections. What Is Actually Driving Stablecoin Demand Today? The report reiterates JPMorgan’s long-held view that stablecoin demand is still anchored inside the crypto ecosystem. Most usage comes from stablecoins acting as cash or collateral for derivatives trading, decentralized lending and borrowing, and balance-sheet liquidity for crypto-native firms such as venture funds and market makers. Derivatives activity remains a key factor. This year alone, derivatives exchanges increased their stablecoin balances by about $20 billion, fueled by a surge in perpetual futures trading. The analysts describe this activity as the primary engine behind stablecoin issuance, outweighing growth from retail payments or remittances. As a result, JPMorgan expects stablecoin supply to continue rising in line with overall crypto market capitalization rather than outpacing it. “The stablecoin universe is likely to continue to grow over the coming years broadly in line with the overall crypto market cap,” the analysts wrote, projecting a ceiling of $500 billion–$600 billion by 2028. That estimate contrasts sharply with other forecasts. Citi analysts have suggested stablecoins could reach $1.9 trillion by 2030 under a base scenario, or up to $4 trillion in a more aggressive case. Standard Chartered has projected a $2 trillion market by 2028. JPMorgan has previously described those figures as overly optimistic. Does Payments Adoption Actually Require More Stablecoins? While stablecoins are increasingly used in payments, the analysts caution against assuming that broader usage automatically demands a much larger supply. Instead, they focus on velocity—the rate at which stablecoins circulate—as the more relevant metric. “As payment adoption increases, on-chain activity and velocity will likely rise, reducing the need for a large stock of stablecoin holdings,” the analysts wrote. They pointed to USDT’s annual velocity on Ethereum, which sits around 50. At that rate, even if stablecoins handled about 5% of global cross-border payments—roughly $10 trillion annually—the required outstanding supply would be only about $200 billion. This dynamic, JPMorgan argues, weakens the case for exponential supply growth driven by payments alone. Faster turnover means the same pool of stablecoins can support much higher transaction volumes without requiring massive issuance. Investor Takeaway Payments growth boosts transaction volume, not necessarily supply. High velocity limits how large the stablecoin stock needs to be. How Do Tokenized Deposits and CBDCs Change the Equation? The analysts also highlighted growing competition from tokenized bank deposits and central bank digital currency projects. Unlike stablecoins, tokenized deposits remain inside the regulated banking system and are backed by traditional deposits, often with deposit insurance. JPMorgan itself launched a U.S. dollar deposit token last month through its blockchain unit Kinexys. The product, JPM Coin (ticker JPMD), runs on Base, Coinbase’s Ethereum layer-2 network, and targets institutional clients seeking onchain settlement without stepping outside bank balance sheets. “JPM Coin provides JPMorgan’s institutional clients with the option to make onchain native digital payments, which serve as a digital representation of a bank deposit on public blockchain,” the bank said at the time. The analysts noted that regulators generally favor non-transferable designs for such tokens to limit run risk and preserve what they call the “singleness of money.” They also pointed to initiatives such as SWIFT’s blockchain payment trials and central bank projects like the digital euro and digital yuan as additional pressure points. These alternatives could absorb institutional demand for digital settlement while keeping it within regulated frameworks, reducing reliance on privately issued stablecoins. What’s the Bottom Line for Stablecoins? JPMorgan’s conclusion is straightforward: stablecoins will keep growing, but mostly as a function of crypto market expansion rather than a payments-driven revolution. Even wider use in settlement and commerce does not, in the bank’s view, require a dramatic increase in outstanding supply. “In all, we continue to anticipate stablecoin growth broadly in line with the overall crypto market universe,” the analysts wrote. As banks roll out tokenized deposits and central banks advance digital currency projects, stablecoins may face more competition precisely where many expect them to grow fastest.

Binance is exploring a strategic return to the United States market through recapitalization of its American subsidiary and partnerships with major financial institutions, Bloomberg reported. The crypto exchange is considering plans to reduce founder Changpeng "CZ" Zhao's controlling stake in Binance.US, according to people familiar with the matter. State regulators have long viewed Zhao's majority ownership as a primary barrier to the company's expansion in key American markets. The discussions remain preliminary, but such a restructuring would fundamentally change Binance's approach to U.S. operations. The Path from Crisis to Comeback Binance's troubles began with a November 2023 settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice that included $4.3 billion in penalties. Zhao pleaded guilty to violating anti-money laundering laws, stepped down as CEO, and served four months in prison in 2024. The consequences were severe. Binance.US market share dropped from about 22% in early 2023 to under 1% by mid-year. Several states revoked operating licenses and banking partners cut ties, leaving the platform with limited functionality. The situation shifted in October 2025 when President Trump pardoned Zhao, removing a legal barrier to his involvement. Since then, Zhao has spoken publicly about helping establish the United States as a cryptocurrency hub. The company is also pursuing relationships with established American institutions. Binance has been in talks with BlackRock about expanded collaboration and potential new products. The exchange has also strengthened ties with World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency venture associated with the Trump family. These partnerships are part of a broader effort to rebuild credibility and navigate the regulatory landscape. Challenges Ahead Still, Binance faces significant obstacles. The exchange lacks regulatory approvals in major states, including New York. Competitors like Coinbase have strengthened their market positions during Binance's absence and built stronger regulatory relationships. Any comeback would require navigating state-by-state licensing while facing scrutiny from regulators concerned about the company's past compliance issues. Company insiders feel pressure to act quickly, viewing potential Democratic gains in future elections as a threat to current favorable conditions, according to sources. The recapitalization's success depends on convincing regulators that Binance has made genuine structural changes. That remains the key challenge as talks continue. Binance has so far made genuine structural changes. Under new CEO Richard Teng, a former financial regulator from Singapore and the United Arab Emirates, the company has worked to rebuild its reputation. Despite its U.S. struggles, Binance remains the world's largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, maintaining around 50% of global spot market share and reaching $1.17 trillion in trading volume in 2025. The platform has to approximately 300 million users in the past year. Whether that global dominance can translate into a successful U.S. return remains the central question as discussions continue.

Deriv has appointed Prakash Bhudia as Chief Growth Officer, strengthening its senior leadership team as the company accelerates global expansion and execution of its AI-first strategy. The appointment comes at the end of a landmark year for the online trading platform, marked by new regulatory licences and a refreshed leadership structure. Deriv, which serves more than three million clients worldwide, has undergone significant change in 2025, including the appointment of Rakshit Choudhary as sole Chief Executive Officer and the securing of strategic licences in the UAE, Mauritius and the Cayman Islands. The company has also committed to an AI-first roadmap aimed at improving efficiency, resilience and user experience across its platforms. The promotion signals Deriv’s intent to align growth, technology and regulation under a unified strategic direction as it enters the next phase of its expansion. From Trading Operations to Global Growth Leadership Bhudia was promoted from his role as Head of Trading and Growth, having joined Deriv in 2022 as Head of Dealing. Since then, he has held several senior leadership roles, contributing to growth across trading operations, product development and market expansion. He brings nearly two decades of experience in trading and risk management, having worked across major global financial centres including Tokyo, New York and London. In his new role, Bhudia will oversee a unified global growth structure, with responsibility for scaling Deriv’s presence in high-growth markets and expanding its product and partnership ecosystem. Looking ahead to 2026, his priorities include advancing Deriv’s AI-driven capabilities, strengthening regional market penetration and ensuring disciplined, sustainable expansion. Takeaway: Deriv’s appointment of Prakash Bhudia as Chief Growth Officer reflects a strategic push to combine AI-driven innovation with disciplined global expansion under strengthened regulatory foundations. Positioning Deriv for Its Next Growth Phase Commenting on his appointment, Bhudia said that expanding access to trading must go hand in hand with robust infrastructure and partnerships, particularly in emerging markets where access remains limited. He emphasised the importance of ensuring that each new market benefits fully from Deriv’s technology, compliance standards and client experience. Rakshit Choudhary, Chief Executive Officer of Deriv, highlighted the timing of the appointment, noting that advances in AI and regulatory progress have created an inflection point for the business. He said Bhudia’s track record and client-focused approach would be critical as the company scales its AI-first strategy while maintaining quality and trust. With over 26 years of operating history, Deriv is positioning itself to leverage technology, regulation and leadership depth to support its ambition of making online trading accessible to anyone, anywhere and at any time.

U.S. lawmakers have scheduled a January markup session for the Clarity Act, a landmark crypto regulatory bill aimed at defining federal authority over digital assets and clarifying how cryptocurrencies should be treated under securities, commodities, and banking laws. The bipartisan decision to move the bill into committee markup marks a step forward in what has been a slow, politically intense journey toward comprehensive federal crypto reform. For the crypto industry, the scheduled markup holds promise and peril. If the Clarity Act emerges from committee intact and progresses to a full Senate vote, it could finally establish a uniform legal framework that simplifies compliance, fosters innovation, and reduces the patchwork of state and agency enforcement that has limited digital asset firms for years. Legislative Momentum Builds Around the Clarity Act First introduced as a response to mounting calls for federal regulatory clarity, the Clarity Act bill aims to delineate the roles of key U.S. regulators, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and banking regulators, in governing various segments of the crypto industry. For years, industry participants have faced litigation, enforcement actions, and uncertainty over which laws apply to digital assets. High-profile disputes, including lawsuits targeting major exchanges and enforcement sweeps against token issuers, have highlighted the risk of regulatory ambiguity. The Clarity Act aims to fix many of these issues by establishing clear definitions, jurisdictional boundaries, and operational standards. The confirmation of a January markup by Senate committees signals the idea that crypto regulation can no longer be deferred. This means that January’s session will likely be one of the most consequential moments in digital asset policy. What the Clarity Act Could Change in Crypto Regulation If the Clarity Act passes the committee and eventually becomes law, its effects could be positive. One of the bill’s core objectives is to define what constitutes a security, commodity, or digital asset. This is a question that has been the source of countless disputes between the SEC and industry players.  The bill also seeks to strike a balance between consumer and investor protection. It proposes laws intended to protect consumers from crypto fraud, market manipulation, and systemic risk while still enabling firms to build products that harness blockchain technology. Additionally, the Clarity Act getting a confirmation could pave the way for regulated spot Bitcoin ETFs, tokenized securities, digital payment instruments, and derivatives markets with less legal risk. This would be a green light for firms that have held back on launching innovative products due to regulatory ambiguity. Yet, this moment is also fragile. Markup sessions are where bills are forged, and sometimes, fractured. Beyond being a single policy proposal, clarity, certainty, and competitive positioning for the U.S. in global digital finance could hinge on what happens with the Clarity Act in January.

Who Was Sentenced and What Role Did He Play? A senior promoter tied to the collapsed crypto scheme IcomTech has been sentenced to nearly six years in prison, adding to a growing list of convictions linked to one of the most prominent crypto fraud cases prosecuted in the United States. Magdaleno Mendoza, 56, received a 71-month prison sentence after pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and illegal reentry into the U.S., according to a statement released Thursday by the Department of Justice. Mendoza was described by prosecutors as a central figure in recruiting victims and expanding the scheme’s reach across multiple states. U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York said Mendoza played a key role in targeting Spanish-speaking and working-class communities with little prior investment experience. “As a senior promoter of IcomTech, Mendoza helped prey on Spanish-speaking victims who lacked investment experience, including our fellow New Yorkers,” Clayton said. “By exploiting trust and the promise of ‘crypto,’ he and his co-conspirators stole millions from working-class people.” Investor Takeaway US prosecutors are continuing to pursue individual promoters, not just founders, in crypto fraud cases—raising personal liability risks for anyone involved in recruitment or marketing. How Does Mendoza’s Sentence Fit Into the Broader IcomTech Case? Mendoza’s sentencing follows earlier prison terms handed down to other senior figures behind IcomTech. Founder David Carmona received a 121-month sentence—nearly 10 years—in October 2024 after prosecutors described him as the architect of the scheme. Former chief executive Marco Ruiz Ochoa was sentenced to five years in prison in January 2024. Together, the cases outline a coordinated operation that prosecutors say operated for years while presenting itself as a legitimate crypto mining and trading business. IcomTech launched in mid-2018 and promised investors guaranteed returns tied to crypto activities that never actually occurred. Instead, authorities said, the operation functioned as a classic Ponzi scheme, using funds from new investors to pay earlier participants and finance the personal spending of promoters. Lavish lifestyles and frequent promotional events were funded directly from investor deposits, according to court filings. An earlier release from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission said IcomTech operators fraudulently solicited at least $1 million from roughly 190 victims across the U.S. and other countries, though prosecutors have indicated actual losses may be higher. How Did IcomTech Recruit Victims? Court documents describe Mendoza as one of IcomTech’s most senior promoters, regularly coordinating with Carmona and traveling across the country to host recruitment events. These gatherings were often aimed at immigrant and working-class communities, where promoters relied on personal trust networks rather than formal financial disclosures. The scheme leaned heavily on crypto-themed marketing, promising passive income through mining and trading strategies that were never implemented. Prosecutors said the complexity of digital assets made it easier to disguise the absence of real operations, especially for first-time investors. The Department of Justice has increasingly highlighted this pattern in crypto fraud prosecutions: localized promoters serving as the primary interface between centralized organizers and retail victims. Mendoza’s conviction underscores how enforcement agencies are treating these roles as integral to fraud, not peripheral. Investor Takeaway Recruitment-focused crypto schemes face heightened scrutiny. Promoters who market unverified returns can face prison time even if they are not founders. What Penalties Were Imposed Beyond Prison? In addition to his prison sentence, Mendoza was ordered to pay nearly $790,000 in restitution and to forfeit $1.5 million tied to the scheme. Authorities also seized his interest in a home in Downey, California, which prosecutors said was purchased using proceeds from the fraud. The combination of prison terms, financial penalties, and asset forfeitures reflects a broader enforcement trend. US agencies are not only pursuing incarceration but also seeking to strip defendants of assets connected to crypto fraud, even when funds have been moved through digital wallets. With multiple senior figures now behind bars, the IcomTech prosecutions appear to be nearing completion. But the Department of Justice has signaled that similar cases remain under active investigation as authorities continue tracking crypto-linked fraud targeting retail investors.

Ripple has expanded its long-standing partnership with TJM Investments and TJM Institutional Services, strengthening institutional trade execution and clearing capabilities across traditional and digital markets. As part of the agreement, Ripple has invested in TJM while continuing to provide infrastructure support for the broker’s execution and clearing services. TJM operates through a FINRA-registered broker-dealer and an NFA-registered introducing broker, enabling institutional clients to access global markets. The deeper collaboration is designed to improve capital and collateral efficiency, enhance clearing stability, and provide stronger balance-sheet support for TJM’s growing institutional client base. The move underscores Ripple’s strategy of embedding its technology and capital within regulated market infrastructure, positioning the firm as a provider of institutional-grade services rather than a standalone digital asset platform. Ripple Prime and TJM Extend a Long-Standing Relationship At the center of the partnership is Ripple Prime, Ripple’s multi-asset prime brokerage platform, which has worked with TJM for years to support high-quality trade execution, clearing, and financing for institutional clients. The expanded agreement builds on this relationship by aligning Ripple more closely with TJM’s operational and growth ambitions. The enhanced partnership is expected to allow TJM to deliver improved efficiency for hedge funds, family offices, asset managers, and global investors. Leveraging Ripple Prime’s capabilities, TJM also plans to expand into digital asset coverage in the coming months, reflecting rising institutional demand for regulated access to crypto markets. Noel Kimmel, President of Ripple Prime, said: “We are pleased to deepen our partnership with TJM, which reflects the shared vision and trust the principals of our businesses have cultivated for over a quarter-century. TJM’s strong execution experience across asset classes, combined with the scale and reach of Ripple Prime, is a powerful value proposition for institutions globally. We look forward to supporting the continued growth of TJM’s business, including through its expansion into digital assets, and to participating in that growth as a strategic investor.” Takeaway: Ripple’s investment in TJM highlights a broader industry shift toward tightly integrated, regulated partnerships that combine traditional market expertise with digital asset infrastructure to meet rising institutional demand. Institutional Demand Drives Convergence of TradFi and Digital Assets The partnership reflects a broader convergence between traditional financial markets and digital assets, as institutions seek reliable execution, clearing, and financing across asset classes. By leveraging Ripple Prime’s digital market infrastructure, TJM aims to meet this demand while maintaining the regulatory standards expected by sophisticated counterparties. Steve Beitler, Co-Manager at TJM, said: “Ripple Prime has long been an important partner to TJM and our joint clients, delivering the operational standards expected by the most sophisticated financial market participants worldwide. We are thrilled to build on our relationship through this investment, which provides TJM with the resources and infrastructure required to support the order flow we execute on behalf of counterparties, particularly as institutions increasingly seek exposure to digital assets.” For Ripple, the deal reinforces its positioning as a financial technology provider focused on enterprise and institutional use cases. With offerings spanning payments, custody, prime brokerage, and stablecoins, the company continues to align itself with regulated intermediaries as it seeks to integrate digital assets more deeply into global financial markets.

Retail trading platforms were built to connect users to markets. For a long time, that was enough. But things have changed. Algorithmic systems now handle most of the order flow across crypto, FX, and equities, and retail traders are competing against machines without any of the tools that might level the playing field. Bryan Benson has watched this gap widen from both sides. During his time as Managing Director at Binance, he saw millions of users trade on platforms that gave them market access but no real edge. The infrastructure that institutions relied on simply didn't exist for retail. Now, as CEO of Aurum, he's focused on building the AI infrastructure layer he believes retail platforms have been missing all along. 1. Bryan, drawing on your experience as Managing Director at Binance, where did you see the most significant technology gaps in retail trading infrastructure?  The biggest gap was always the quality of execution itself. Retail platforms gave users access to markets, but the infrastructure behind the scenes looked nothing like what institutions had. Smart order routing didn't exist for retail. Neither did real-time risk engines nor any systematic way to process data at scale. At Binance, I watched millions of users trade on platforms that were essentially order forms connected to an exchange. They could buy and sell, but they had no edge. Meanwhile, institutional desks ran algorithms that scanned multiple venues, optimized entry points, and managed risk automatically. Retail never had access to any of that. Data was the other problem, and in some ways an even bigger one. Institutions aggregate feeds from dozens of sources and run models on top of them. Retail traders get a price chart and maybe some basic indicators. That asymmetry explains a lot of why most retail traders lose money. 2. From a market-structure perspective, what lessons from running operations at one of the world's largest exchanges now shape your belief that AI must become a core infrastructure layer for retail platforms?  What really shaped my thinking was watching the order flow and realizing who was on the other side. Most of the order flow on major exchanges already comes from automated systems — in crypto, in FX, in equities. Manual traders are competing against machines that react in milliseconds and never get tired. That's not a fair fight, and the numbers reflect it. Retail loss rates are high because the infrastructure gap keeps getting bigger. Institutions keep building faster, smarter infrastructure, while most retail platforms focus on adding new coins and hope that's enough. If retail platforms want their users to have a real chance, they need to embed the same systematic advantages that professional desks rely on: execution logic, risk management, and data processing — all of it running in the background so that the users don't have to think about it. 3. For years, advanced execution engines were available only to institutions. Can AI-driven infrastructure now give retail crypto platforms access to the same level of trading sophistication? From a technical standpoint, everything you need to build institutional-grade systems is already available. Cloud infrastructure, exchange APIs, and open-source ML tools have made it possible to build high-end systems without institutional budgets. Ten years ago, this required a small army of quants and serious hardware. That's no longer the case. The real question is whether retail platforms actually choose to build this way. Most don't, because it's easier to ship a simple trading interface and collect fees. The ones that invest in proper AI infrastructure can offer users something genuinely different. At Aurum, we built around this idea from the start. Our team came from Binance, Morgan Stanley, IBM, and OKX, and they brought the same standards they applied at those institutions. Retail platforms can absolutely close the gap now, as long as they build AI into the foundation and don't just tack it on for marketing. 4. Aurum positions AI as a 24/7 backbone that uncovers mid-term and real-time opportunities that manual systems miss. What types of patterns or signals does your system detect?  Our approach is to look at multiple layers of data simultaneously, because no single source gives you the full picture: price and volume behavior across exchanges, order book depth, liquidity shifts on DEXs, and whale wallet movements on-chain.  The mid-term signals come from pattern recognition across market cycles. The models learn which setups tend to precede sustained moves and which ones fade. That takes years of historical data and constant validation against live conditions. Real-time signals are more about speed: arbitrage windows between exchanges, sudden liquidity imbalances, and sentiment spikes around news events. These opportunities last seconds or minutes at most, and while a human trader might catch one occasionally, the AI picks them up systematically. 5. How are these patterns translated into practical, AI-driven trading strategies?  AAVE's flash loan protocol is what makes the execution possible. When the AI spots a price gap between DEXs, it borrows capital, buys on the cheaper venue, sells on the pricier one, repays the loan, and pockets the spread—all in a single transaction. The loan only goes through if the math clears after fees. No directional bets, no overnight exposure. If any step fails, the transaction reverts and we're out nothing but gas. From the user's perspective, none of this complexity is visible. They see results in their dashboard and don't need to understand flash loans or DEX routing to benefit from them. 6. Retail performance is often hurt by emotional decision-making. How does an AI execution layer help remove behavioral bias and maintain discipline during volatility?  The key is that users never face the decision in the first place. Traditional platforms put every choice in front of the trader. Hold or sell? Add to the position or cut it? Those decision points are where emotion creeps in. When AI handles execution at the infrastructure level, those moments don't exist for the user. The system already knows entry conditions, position sizing, and exit rules. Volatility hits, the parameters execute, and the user sees results after the fact. Our flash loan model takes this even further. Trades open and close within a single transaction, so there's never a position sitting there while someone second-guesses whether to hold. The emotional window simply doesn't exist. 7. Looking ahead, how do you expect the AI infrastructure layer for retail traders to develop over the next few years?  Platforms that don't build AI into their infrastructure will lose users to those that do. It's that simple. When users get used to a platform that handles execution, risk, and opportunity detection on its own, they won't want to go back to doing it manually. I expect the infrastructure layer to become standardized over time. Right now, each platform builds its own stack. In a few years, you'll likely see modular AI components that any exchange or broker can plug in. That will raise the floor for everyone, which is good for retail traders overall. The interesting battle will be at the edges. The base layer gets commoditized, so platforms compete on what they build on top: better data sources, smarter signal filtering, and tighter DeFi integrations. That's where Aurum is focused. We already have the flash loan infrastructure working. Now we need to make every piece around it sharper and faster than what anyone else offers.

Why Did the Yen Fall After Japan’s Biggest Rate Move in Decades? The Bank of Japan raised its short-term policy rate by 25 basis points to 0.75%, the highest level in nearly 30 years, extending its slow retreat from decades of ultra-loose policy. The move, however, failed to support the Japanese yen, which weakened against the U.S. dollar shortly after the announcement. The yen slipped to 156.03 per dollar from 155.67 as markets digested the decision. The reaction reflected heavy positioning ahead of the meeting rather than surprise. The hike had been widely priced in, and speculative accounts had accumulated long yen exposure for weeks, limiting scope for fresh buying once the decision landed. In its policy statement, the BOJ acknowledged inflation has stayed above its 2% target, driven by higher import costs and firmer domestic pricing. Still, the central bank noted that inflation-adjusted rates remain negative, leaving financial conditions accommodative even after the increase. Investor Takeaway The BOJ’s move did little to tighten real conditions. With the hike priced in and yen longs already crowded, the currency reaction faded quickly. Why Didn’t the Rate Hike Trigger a Carry Trade Unwind? For years, Japan’s near-zero and negative rates turned the yen into a preferred funding currency. Investors borrowed cheaply in yen to buy higher-yielding assets such as U.S. equities, Treasuries, and emerging market debt, amplifying global risk appetite. Concerns had grown that higher Japanese rates could disrupt this structure, forcing traders to unwind leveraged positions. Those fears did not materialize. Even after the hike, Japan’s policy rate remains far below U.S. rates, preserving the yield gap that underpins carry strategies. The muted market response suggests that the current level of Japanese tightening does not alter the broader funding landscape. Without a sharper repricing in rates or guidance pointing to faster hikes, the yen’s role as a low-cost funding currency remains intact. How Did Bitcoin React to the BOJ Decision? Bitcoin strengthened as the yen weakened, rising from around $86,000 to near $87,500 before settling close to $87,000. The move fit a broader pattern in which global liquidity conditions, rather than local rate adjustments, continue to dominate crypto price action. The reaction was reinforced by U.S. inflation data earlier in the session. November CPI came in at 2.7% year-over-year, below forecasts of 3.1%, easing pressure on real yields and lifting risk appetite. Bitcoin’s rebound followed the data release, with open interest rising alongside price, pointing to fresh positioning rather than short covering. Derivatives data showed options exposure broadly balanced around spot levels, suggesting fewer mechanical constraints on price movement if liquidity conditions improve. Still, the advance remained liquidity-driven, with traders cautious about chasing momentum ahead of year-end. Investor Takeaway Bitcoin’s gains tracked softer U.S. inflation and steady global liquidity, not Japan’s rate move. The yen’s weakness removed one potential risk-off trigger. What Do Onchain Metrics Say About Bitcoin’s Current Phase? Onchain data points to stabilization rather than distribution. Metrics such as net-unrealized profit and loss indicate losses have stopped deepening, while spent-output profit ratios hover near breakeven, showing coins changing hands close to cost rather than in distress. Exchange inflows spike mainly during brief dips and fade as price steadies, suggesting selling pressure remains reactive. Meanwhile, highly active address inflows remain elevated, but valuation ratios have flattened, consistent with range trading rather than renewed speculative excess. From a technical standpoint, Bitcoin needs to clear $90,000 and hold above monthly volume-weighted levels to confirm buyer conviction. A failure to do so could reopen downside tests toward recent swing lows near $83,800. What’s the Macro Signal Going Into Year-End? With the BOJ decision behind markets and U.S. inflation showing signs of cooling, two major sources of near-term uncertainty have eased. Japanese rates remain low in global terms, while softer CPI narrows the gap toward the Federal Reserve’s inflation target. If dollar strength fades and real yields drift lower, Bitcoin’s current consolidation could tilt higher. For now, price action reflects balance rather than breakout, with global liquidity trends still doing most of the work.

CoinJar has officially entered the United States, extending its footprint beyond its established markets in Australia, the U.K., and Ireland. The move represents a significant milestone for one of the longest-running cryptocurrency exchanges, as it brings its regulated trading infrastructure into the world’s largest capital market. The company said its U.S. launch has been structured to operate within applicable federal and state regulatory frameworks, reflecting CoinJar’s long-standing emphasis on compliance. This approach mirrors its operations in other jurisdictions, where regulatory alignment has been central to its growth strategy and brand positioning. By expanding into the U.S. at this stage of the market’s evolution, CoinJar is signaling confidence in a compliance environment that is becoming clearer for digital asset platforms. The company views the U.S. as a market where regulatory oversight and innovation are increasingly able to coexist. CoinJar AI Debuts as Part of the U.S. Rollout A key feature of CoinJar’s U.S. expansion is the introduction of CoinJar AI, an assistant embedded directly into the exchange platform. The tool allows users to query portfolio data and market activity from within the trading environment, rather than relying on external analytics or standalone applications. The launch reflects a broader trend across the digital asset sector, where exchanges are beginning to integrate AI-driven functionality into regulated trading platforms. CoinJar said it is among a small group of exchanges entering the U.S. market with AI-enabled portfolio and market tools already built into their core offering. Asher Tan, Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder of CoinJar, said: “The U.S. market has reached a point where we can plan and build with greater confidence. That applies not only to market access, but to the kinds of tools we can responsibly deploy for users. CoinJar AI shows what becomes possible when regulation and technology move forward together.” Takeaway: CoinJar’s U.S. launch combines a compliance-first market entry with AI-driven portfolio tools, highlighting how exchanges are beginning to differentiate beyond basic trading functionality. Compliance and Product Design Shape the U.S. Strategy CoinJar said CoinJar AI has been integrated directly into its platform rather than released as an experimental or standalone feature. The assistant operates within a controlled environment, with privacy protections and data security embedded into its design to align with regulatory expectations. Founded in 2013, CoinJar serves more than 800,000 customers across Australia and the U.K., where it is registered with AUSTRAC and the Financial Conduct Authority respectively. The company has built its reputation around transparency and regulatory engagement, positioning compliance as a competitive advantage rather than a constraint. With its U.S. expansion, CoinJar is bringing that regulated infrastructure and user-focused design philosophy to American crypto investors navigating a rapidly maturing digital asset market. The company said the launch lays the groundwork for further product development as both regulation and institutional participation in the U.S. continue to evolve.  

At first glance, the connection feels unusual. Misfits Boxing, Andrew Tate, crypto investing, and IPO Genie don’t look like they belong in the same conversation. One is a viral fight promotion. One is the most polarizing figure in modern internet culture. One is a fast-moving financial space. But once you slow the picture down, the overlap becomes hard to ignore. This isn’t about boxing versus investing. It’s about how winners think, how access is created, and why IPO Genie ($IPO) as a Misfits Boxing sponsor actually fits far better than it appears on the surface. The Connection Feels Random?  To most fans, Misfits Boxing 2025 is pure spectacle. Big personalities. Loud press conferences. Viral moments engineered for social media. The upcoming Misfits fight Dubai card, headlined by the Top G himself, feels like the peak of that energy. Crypto investing, on the other hand, is often framed as charts, numbers, and risk warnings. So why would a platform like IPO Genie ($IPO)  step into the middle of a Misfits Boxing event? The answer sits in something deeper than promotion: early positioning, access, and control. IPO Genie Isn’t Chasing Attention, It’s Placing It IPO Genie wasn’t built as a platform for people who want to chase trends after they explode. Its core idea is simple: give everyday investors access to early-stage opportunities normally reserved for insiders. That philosophy mirrors how attention itself works. Misfits Boxing doesn’t create interest from nothing. It concentrates attention where culture already lives. Right now, that place is Dubai. The upcoming Misfits boxing Dubai card is pulling global eyes because it blends controversy, celebrity, and competition into one high-impact moment. By aligning with Misfits Boxing, IPO Genie isn’t chasing hype. It’s placing itself where early attention is already forming, the same way smart investors position before markets fully wake up. That’s the first real connection. Andrew Tate Is a Case Study in Early Positioning Strip away the headlines, and Andrew Tate’s rise follows a clear pattern. He rarely enters conversations late. He moves before narratives peak, not after. Whether people agree with him or not, Tate understands three things extremely well: Timing matters more than approval Attention is leverage Control beats chaos Those principles explain why his presence has turned the upcoming Misfits fight Top G matchup into one of the most talked-about events of the year. Tate didn’t wait for universal support. He entered early, controlled the narrative, and let attention compound. That mindset isn’t unique to culture;  it’s fundamental to smart investing. What Smart Investing Really Means Through the IPO Genie Lens Smart investing doesn’t mean guessing the next viral coin or reacting to every market move. Through the IPO Genie lens, it means: Access before availability Research before excitement Risk awareness before upside Most investors enter when something already feels “safe” because everyone is talking about it. By that point, the advantage is often gone. IPO Genie’s model is built around the opposite behavior: early exposure to emerging opportunities, paired with structure and transparency. It’s not about reckless betting. It’s about understanding where value forms before it becomes obvious. That same logic applies to attention, culture, and even boxing. Where Andrew Tate and Smart Investing Overlap This is where the connection becomes clear; not symbolically, but practically. They Both Move Before the Crowd Andrew Tate doesn’t wait for consensus. He steps in early, knowing that public opinion usually lags momentum. Smart investors do the same. They don’t buy narratives at their loudest. They position before the crowd notices. IPO Genie exists entirely in that early window. That’s why many analysts and communities already refer to it as a top crypto presale of 2025, long before it reaches broader public awareness. They Understand Attention Without Being Controlled by It Attention can amplify success or destroy it. Tate uses attention as a tool, not a compass. He doesn’t let viral reactions dictate his next move. That restraint is rare in modern culture. In investing, emotional decisions are often the most expensive ones. IPO Genie emphasizes structure, data, and controlled access precisely to avoid impulse-driven behavior. Whether in a boxing promotion or a financial market, discipline separates leverage from loss. They Focus on Control, Not Validation Tate doesn’t wait for approval. Smart investors don’t either. The market rewards people who can act without external validation, especially early. IPO Genie’s entire mission is built around empowering users with access and information, not promises or hype. That’s why its presence alongside Misfits Boxing feels aligned rather than forced. Both reward decisiveness over consensus. Why This Philosophy Fits Misfits Boxing Perfectly Misfits Boxing thrives on bold positioning. Fighters step in knowing they’ll be judged instantly. There’s no slow build, no hiding. That environment mirrors early-stage investing. You either understand the risk and enter prepared or you stay on the sidelines. IPO Genie’s sponsorship isn’t just about visibility. It’s about aligning with a platform that celebrates early conviction, which is why its integration during this Misfits Boxing event resonates with both fight fans and investors. What This Means for Fans and Everyday Investors This isn’t about copying Andrew Tate. It’s not about boxing. And it’s not about reckless speculation. The real takeaway is mental: Think earlier Stay calmer Focus on access, not noise Manage downside before chasing upside As markets head toward year-end, many eyes are turning to projects being discussed as top crypto of December 2025, not because they’re loud, but because they’re positioned early. IPO Genie’s presence in fight culture reflects that same shift: finance and culture are merging around access, not exclusivity. The Current Scenario: Few Hours Left  With only hours left before Misfits Boxing Dubai ignites, the spotlight is shared between Andrew Tate and a stacked fight card that has pulled global attention to the city. Tate’s presence alone has amplified the moment, with fans tracking his movements, arrivals, and final preparations as anticipation reaches its peak. Around him, other fighters are locking in, completing last-minute routines and stepping into fight-night focus as the arena comes alive. Inside this charged atmosphere, IPO Genie is woven into the event environment as an official Misfits Boxing sponsor. While fighters prepare and crowds gather, $IPO branding remains visible across official event spaces, sitting alongside the same stages, screens, and setups that frame the night’s biggest moments. The connection is not about a single fighter, but about being present where attention is at its highest. Misfits Boxing is built on moments like this, when personalities, pressure, and performance collide. As Tate and the rest of the fighters prepare to step forward, IPO Genie stands inside the scene, aligned with the energy, scale, and global focus surrounding fight night in Dubai. The countdown is nearly over. The noise is real. And everything is set for impact. Final Thought: Different Arenas, Same Mentality A boxing ring in Dubai and a financial platform might seem worlds apart. But the rules that decide outcomes don’t change. Early positioning beats late reaction. Control beats chaos. Access beats waiting. That’s the real reason IPO Genie fits alongside Misfits Boxing and why the connection between Andrew Tate and smart investing isn’t random at all. Different arenas. Same mentality. Join the IPO Genie presale today:   Official website Telegram Twitter (X)  Disclaimer: Investing in digital assets involves risk, including the potential loss of capital. Past performance or market trends mentioned in this article do not guarantee future results.

What Did Bybit Launch in the UK, and Under What Setup? Bybit says it has restarted services in the United Kingdom after a 2-year pause, rolling out a UK platform with spot trading across 100 pairs and a peer-to-peer venue. The Dubai-based exchange had stopped serving UK customers in late 2023 when the Financial Conduct Authority’s tougher financial promotion rules took effect. The relaunch is not tied to Bybit securing its own FCA registration or authorization. Instead, Bybit says the rollout is being delivered under a promotions arrangement approved by Archax, a London-based crypto exchange that is FCA-authorized to approve financial promotions. In practice, this route acts as a gateway for firms that are not FCA-authorized to market crypto services to UK consumers within the promotions regime. Bybit describes the setup as a framework designed to meet FCA financial promotion standards and to increase transparency for UK users. The exchange will operate and market its services under Archax’s approval, rather than under its own FCA license. Investor Takeaway This is a UK return through the FCA promotions regime, not an FCA license. The key diligence point is who the customer contracts with, and what protections apply if something goes wrong. Why Did Bybit Leave in 2023, and What Changed in the Rulebook? The FCA tightened its financial promotion rules in October 2023, adding stricter standards for how crypto firms advertise to British residents and how onboarding and risk warnings are handled. The crackdown prompted several crypto firms to stop UK operations or change their marketing structures. Bybit exited the market around that shift and is now returning using a promotions-approval pathway rather than direct authorization. The company’s UK offering excludes derivatives and other higher-risk leveraged products at launch. It also highlights prominent risk warnings around the possibility of losing all invested funds and the lack of protection under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme or the Financial Ombudsman Service for most crypto activity. In its messaging, Bybit links the reboot to the UK’s regulatory direction and a tightening environment around promotion compliance. “The UK is home to one of the most sophisticated financial ecosystems in the world, and its clear regulatory direction makes it an ideal environment for responsible innovation,” said Mykolas Majauskas, senior director of policy at Bybit. “In the months ahead, we aim to embody this innovative spirit by introducing new products tailored to the needs of UK users, always within a framework that prioritises transparency, and compliance.” UK policy direction has also moved. The government has said it intends to establish a broader crypto rulebook by 2027, which would extend beyond promotion constraints into a more complete framework for supervision and conduct requirements. Does UK Crypto Adoption Support a Re-entry Narrative? Bybit’s announcement points to 8% engagement in UK crypto activity. That number intersects with a different angle from the regulator: the FCA’s most recent consumer research suggests crypto ownership has fallen to 8% from 12% previously, with weaker appetite among newer users for speculative tokens. The same figure can be read in two ways: either a stable base that still exists under tighter marketing rules, or a cooling market after the 2021–2022 cycle and the 2023 promotions crackdown. For exchanges, the UK remains commercially attractive because of a large retail market, a deep financial services ecosystem, and a global payments footprint. The trade-off is heavier compliance friction: stricter promotion controls, tighter onboarding standards, and limited room for higher-risk product distribution to mass-market users. What Questions Follow When a Platform Returns Without Its Own FCA License? The Archax arrangement is central to Bybit’s UK re-entry. Archax holds a regulatory permission that allows it to approve financial promotions. That creates a route for unauthorized firms to market in the UK, but it also concentrates accountability around how promotions are reviewed, how customers are onboarded, and how risks are communicated. Archax says it has provided similar support to other large exchanges. “Archax is supporting Bybit’s compliant access to the UK market, building on our experience where we have previously helped other leading crypto exchanges, such as Coinbase and OKX, access the UK market without the need for their own authorisation,” said Ben Brown, chief compliance officer at Archax, via email. Bybit’s UK restart is a test case for how far the promotions framework can stretch as a market-access route. The product set begins with spot trading and P2P, with messaging focused on KYC/AML and promotion compliance. The next scrutiny point is product expansion: what can be added under this structure, and how the customer relationship is defined when the exchange itself is not FCA-authorized.

Bitpanda Technology Solutions (BTS) has signed a strategic partnership with Banco BS2, marking its first banking partnership in Latin America and a major milestone following its recent regional expansion announcement. The agreement positions BTS as a digital asset infrastructure provider to one of Brazil’s forward-looking financial institutions, as the country’s regulatory environment for crypto assets continues to take shape. Under the partnership, Banco BS2 will integrate BTS’ institutional-grade digital asset infrastructure, starting with Fusion, Bitpanda’s advanced trading and liquidity platform. The framework also allows for the potential rollout of additional capabilities, including custody technology and tokenisation services, subject to regulatory approvals and Banco BS2’s own governance and customer oversight processes. The deal signals growing momentum among Latin American banks seeking trusted infrastructure partners as digital assets move closer to the financial mainstream. By entering Brazil through an established banking institution, Bitpanda is anchoring its regional strategy around regulated adoption rather than direct-to-consumer expansion. Brazil’s Regulatory Shift Creates Opening for Institutional Crypto Services The collaboration comes at a pivotal moment for Brazil’s financial sector. Earlier this year, the Central Bank of Brazil (Bacen) introduced landmark crypto regulations, providing clearer legal and supervisory foundations for banks and financial institutions to engage with digital assets. This regulatory clarity has accelerated interest from incumbent players looking to responsibly explore crypto-related services. Banco BS2’s integration of BTS infrastructure reflects a broader trend among banks aiming to offer digital asset exposure while maintaining institutional standards for risk management, compliance, and client protection. Rather than building in-house technology, many banks are opting for specialised providers with proven experience operating in regulated markets. For Bitpanda, Brazil represents a strategically important entry point into Latin America’s largest economy. The partnership demonstrates how regulatory progress can translate into concrete institutional adoption, particularly when banks are able to rely on infrastructure that aligns with evolving supervisory expectations. Takeaway: By partnering with Banco BS2, Bitpanda has secured its first Latin American banking client, using Brazil’s new crypto regulations as a launchpad for institutional digital asset infrastructure in the region. Executives Emphasise Alignment on Safety, Regulation, and Growth Nadeem Ladki, Managing Director at Bitpanda Technology Solutions, said: “Brazil is entering a new phase of digital asset adoption, and financial institutions will need partners with deep experience operating in these environments. Banco BS2’s vision for the digital asset economy, aligns perfectly with what our infrastructure enables. We’re proud to support their journey as our first banking partner in Latin America.” Banco BS2 framed the partnership as part of its broader strategy to align local offerings with international standards. Carlos Eduardo T. de Andrade Jr., an executive at Banco BS2, said: “This partnership reinforces BS2’s strategy of offering clients financial solutions aligned with global best practices. Bitpanda’s infrastructure allows us to move forward safely and efficiently in offering services related to the digital asset ecosystem, keeping pace with regulatory evolution and the demands of the Brazilian market.” As financial institutions across Latin America assess how to participate in the digital asset economy, the Bitpanda–BS2 agreement highlights a model based on regulated infrastructure, phased deployment, and institutional controls. For both parties, the partnership sets the foundation for expanding crypto-related services while navigating regulatory change in one of the world’s most closely watched emerging markets.  

Gros-Islet, Saint Lucia, December 19th, 2025, FinanceWire As the year draws to a close, NordFX has introduced a festive social media initiative designed to engage its global trading community through light, interactive daily activities. The NordFX Year-End Countdown Challenge runs from December 16 to December 31 and combines simple daily tasks with a year-end prize draw. The challenge spans 15 days, with one task published each day across NordFX official social media channels. Tasks are intentionally straightforward and accessible, allowing participants to take part with minimal time commitment. Each completed daily task counts as a valid entry into the final draw, giving consistent participants a higher chance of winning. Participation is open to anyone who follows the official NordFX social pages and leaves a comment under each daily challenge post. The initiative is designed to encourage regular interaction while keeping the format inclusive and easy to follow. At the end of the challenge period, winners will be selected randomly from all valid entries. The prize pool includes one cash prize of $200 and three prizes of $100 each. To receive a prize, winners must have an active real trading account with NordFX or open one after being selected. Winner announcements will be published on the same social media pages where the challenge takes place. According to NordFX, the Year-End Countdown Challenge is intended as a relaxed way for the community to stay engaged during the holiday season, without complex rules or demanding requirements. By focusing on simple daily interaction, the campaign aims to make participation enjoyable rather than competitive. Updates and daily challenge posts can be followed via NordFX official Telegram channel: https://t.me/NordFX_ENG/3094 and other company social media channels. The Year-End Countdown Challenge concludes on December 31, with winners announced shortly after the final day. About NordFX NordFX is an international multi-asset broker providing online trading services to clients worldwide since 2008. The company offers access to global financial markets through widely used trading platforms and focuses on transparent trading conditions and client-oriented services. Contact Marketing Manager Vanessa Polson NordFX marketing@nordfx.com

The XAU/USD chart shows that gold climbed close to its October record near 4,380 yesterday, but failed to hold those levels and reversed lower shortly afterwards (see arrow). The sharp increase in volatility was the result of several overlapping drivers: → US interest-rate expectations. Recent data indicated that US inflation cooled further in November, with headline CPI slowing to 2.7% versus expectations of 3.1%, while core inflation eased to 2.6%, the lowest since March 2021. As a result, markets are now assigning around a one-in-four chance to a rate cut in January, with easing by April viewed as highly likely. → Geopolitical uncertainty. Investors remain alert to headlines from Venezuela, where the risk of a military confrontation involving the US has risen. At the same time, comments from UK and European officials ahead of the EU summit added to market nervousness. On 5 December, we: → highlighted that the absence of a clear trend had produced a symmetrical triangle on the XAU/USD chart, centred near $4,205; → suggested that this structure resembled a “coiled spring”, likely to be followed by a burst of volatility. That scenario played out on 11–12 December, when gold broke out of the pattern and surged to around $4,340. Since then, price action has begun to compress again, forming a new triangle with a midpoint near $4,316, signalling a temporary equilibrium between buyers and sellers. Within this framework: → the latest spike higher followed by a swift reversal may be viewed as a false upside break, pointing to strong selling interest near record levels and raising the risk of a pullback towards the lower edge of the developing triangle; → with the holiday season approaching and liquidity typically thinning, sharp and erratic moves become more likely. Under such conditions, gold could still surprise the market with another attempt at fresh all-time highs. FXOpen offers spreads from 0.0 pips and commissions from $1.50 per lot (additional fees may apply). Enjoy trading on MT4, MT5, TickTrader or TradingView trading platforms! The FXOpen App is a dedicated mobile application designed to give traders full control of their accounts anytime, anywhere. This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.  

Coinbase Global Inc. has taken its growing financial strategy to the courtroom by filing lawsuits against the states of Michigan, Illinois and Connecticut over their attempts to regulate prediction markets under state gambling laws. The exchange argues that these event-based contracts are not a form of traditional gambling but fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), a federal agency overseeing derivatives and futures products. This legal offensive comes as Coinbase prepares to launch prediction market services through a partnership with a CFTC-regulated platform ahead of a planned U.S. rollout in early 2026. By seeking declaratory relief from federal courts, Coinbase is attempting to prevent what it sees as inconsistent state regulation that could undermine a unified legal framework for event contracts and similar products. Coinbase Debates Federal Oversight vs. State Gambling Laws At the heart of Coinbase’s lawsuits is a legal question on who gets to regulate prediction markets in the United States. In filings, Coinbase asserts that Congress clearly placed authority over event contracts within the Commodity Exchange Act, making them derivatives subject to CFTC oversight. Under that argument, states have no legal right to treat prediction markets as gambling or apply their own gaming statutes.  Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal has been vocal on social media, stressing that prediction markets operate as neutral matching engines that pair buyers and sellers, which makes it different from casino-style betting, where houses set odds and profit from losses. Grewal’s comments reiterate Coinbase’s stance that state interventions are legally misplaced and harmful to innovation by creating conflicting rules across jurisdictions. However, state regulators have taken the opposite view. Michigan, Illinois and Connecticut have either threatened enforcement or taken action against firms offering event-based contracts, arguing that such products resemble gambling and must comply with local gaming regulations.  What This Means for Crypto and the Prediction Markets Prediction markets, which are platforms where users trade contracts tied to outcomes of future events such as elections, economic data releases, or sporting results, have surged in popularity and volume in recent years. Platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket have particularly attracted billions in trading activity. If Coinbase succeeds in securing judicial affirmation that the CFTC, not individual states, has exclusive regulatory authority, it could establish a national standard for prediction markets. It would simplify compliance for firms operating across state lines and potentially accelerate the development of regulated event contracts as mainstream financial products.  On the other hand, if courts uphold state authority to treat prediction markets as gambling, the industry could face a series of regulations that complicate nationwide offerings. That fragmentation may push some innovation offshore or into decentralized protocols that try to sidestep local enforcement  Ultimately, the outcomes of these cases could determine whether prediction markets develop under a cohesive federal regime or become subject to a range of localized rules. 

Neel Somani, a technologist and researcher shaped by his multidisciplinary education at the University of California, Berkeley, has turned his attention to the worldwide shortage of graphics processing units and its sweeping influence on the evolution of artificial intelligence. The industry has reached a turning point as leaders and public institutions confront limited access to the hardware required to build and operate state-of-the-art learning systems. This constraint has become a powerful catalyst, encouraging new strategic approaches, unexpected collaborations, and a redefinition of global AI priorities. How a Hardware Bottleneck Became a Strategic Inflection Point The rapid acceleration of artificial intelligence has pushed demand for high-performance GPUs far beyond global supply. These chips support the parallel computation required to train large models and to run inference workloads at scale. As interest in generative systems, multimodal architectures, and simulation platforms surges, organizations face increased competition for access to limited hardware. Lengthening lead times, capacity shortages, and constrained manufacturing pipelines have forced organizations to rethink how they pursue innovation. Procurement is no longer a routine operational task. It has become a strategic pillar with direct influence on research velocity and competitive standing. “The shortage has reshaped the hierarchy of priorities inside many organizations,” says Neel Somani. “Access to hardware now determines how ambitious an AI roadmap can be.” The result is a landscape where planning horizons are extending, budgets are shifting, and teams must be more deliberate in choosing which models to build and which experiments to pursue. Impacts Across the Global AI Ecosystem The hardware constraint affects entities of all sizes. Large technology companies are redistributing computers across projects, prioritizing high-value workloads, and reserving inventory years in advance. Startups face even steeper challenges, often redesigning their product strategies to reduce training needs or to rely on shared cloud resources. Research institutions encounter slower progress as they compete with industry partners for access to GPU clusters. Delayed availability influences academic collaboration, grant planning, and data analysis timelines. Public agencies exploring AI for healthcare, infrastructure, and education also navigate procurement obstacles that complicate long-term program development. Ripple effects illustrate how deeply AI progress depends on the availability of advanced computers. Without consistent access to GPUs, the pace of discovery slows across every domain that depends on computational models. Rethinking Model Size, Efficiency, and Design One of the defining outcomes of the shortage is a renewed focus on efficiency. Large models remain impressive, but their training demands have prompted researchers to explore more compact architectures capable of similar or superior performance with fewer computational resources. Approaches in distillation, sparse training, retrieval augmented generation, and quantization have gained prominence as pathways to maintain performance while lowering GPU requirements. These methods reduce strain on infrastructure and expand the possibilities for smaller organizations to participate in AI development. “The shortage has encouraged a more disciplined approach to model design,” notes Somani. “Efficiency is becoming a first-class objective rather than an afterthought. The shift aligns with a broader movement toward responsible resource use and improved accessibility. The industry is beginning to balance its pursuit of scale with a more pragmatic understanding of energy, hardware, and environmental limits. Somani has examined similar optimization pressures in financial markets, where forecasting accuracy and resource efficiency directly shape system design and decision-making at scale. Expansion of Cloud and Shared Compute Markets As direct GPU procurement becomes more difficult, cloud providers are experiencing increased demand for rental capacity. Flexible consumption models allow organizations to scale compute access in shorter cycles, supporting experimentation even during supply constraints. Cloud companies respond by investing heavily in new regions, new data centers, and new acceleration technologies. Market growth in shared compute options reflects the need for alternatives to large capital expenditures in dedicated hardware. Demand for timed access, reservation systems, and spot markets has grown significantly. These structures allow organizations to compete for compute in more granular cycles and to plan workloads with greater precision. Influence on National AI Policy and Sovereign Compute Initiatives Governments are taking an active role in addressing the shortage. Many countries now treat AI capacity as a national priority due to concerns around competitiveness, scientific leadership, and economic resilience. National computer programs, publicly funded GPU clusters, and sovereign AI infrastructure initiatives are expanding across Europe, Asia, and the Americas. These programs aim to reduce dependency on foreign supply chains while ensuring that domestic organizations have access to the computers needed to support scientific and technological growth. “The shortage has elevated AI infrastructure to the level of strategic national planning. Countries that secure sustainable computers will gain structural advantages for decades,” says Somani. There is a long-term geopolitical significance to the shortage, as AI capability is increasingly tied to the availability and reliability of advanced manufacturing and energy supply. Rise of Custom Accelerators and Alternative Compute The scarcity of GPUs has accelerated interest in custom chips designed for specific machine learning requirements. These accelerators target particular workloads such as transformer operations, inference pipelines, or edge computation. Custom hardware offers performance and efficiency benefits but introduces new engineering and software integration challenges. It also signals a diversification of the compute ecosystem, where organizations rely on a combination of GPUs, TPUs, ASICs, and optimized CPUs to match workload characteristics with the appropriate architecture. A blended environment supports greater resilience. When one type of hardware faces constraints, others can help fill the gaps, allowing development to proceed. Energy Constraints Amplify the Hardware Shortage Even when GPUs are available, power capacity limits often restrict deployment. Large training clusters require significant electrical infrastructure and heat management. Many data centers now operate near maximum power utilization, leaving limited room for expansion. Cooling demands contribute to the challenge. Advanced thermal systems add additional load, raising the total energy footprint of each cluster. Organizations must balance their ambition to scale with the realities of grid capacity, environmental goals, and regulatory requirements. The convergence of hardware scarcity and power scarcity pressures organizations to adopt more sophisticated infrastructure strategies and to distribute workloads across regions with available capacity. Strategic Adaptation Through Collaboration The shortage has encouraged new forms of cooperation across organizations that traditionally operated independently. Shared research models, federated computer networks, and joint investments in data centers represent a shift toward distributed responsibility for maintaining the global AI ecosystem. These collaborations help stabilize access to computing while reducing duplication of resource investment. They also strengthen interoperability and encourage the exchange of best practices across industries. The Future Direction of Global AI Strategy The GPU shortage has reshaped how organizations think about development, deployment, and governance. The era of unbounded model scaling has given way to a more intentional approach centered on efficiency, energy planning, and diversified hardware. AI strategy now depends on three interconnected pillars. The first is access to a reliable computer. The second is the ability to design models that maximize performance within resource limits. The third is the resilience of infrastructure capable of supporting long term national and organizational goals. These factors will influence the pace and direction of innovation in the years ahead. While the shortage presents real challenges, it also encourages new creativity in model architecture, data management, and sustainable engineering. The global AI landscape is entering a stage defined not by unlimited expansion but by thoughtful planning and strategic alignment. Organizations that adapt to these conditions will be positioned to lead the next wave of technological progress.

The Federal Court has ordered Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) to pay $250 million in penalties following four separate proceedings spanning the bank’s Institutional and Retail divisions, in what ASIC described as the largest combined penalties it has ever secured against a single entity. The judgment was delivered on 19 December 2025, after the matters were heard by Justice Jonathan Beach on 2–3 December 2025. The penalties cover misconduct affecting the Australian Government and taxpayers, alongside failures impacting at least 65,000 retail banking customers. The court-ordered total exceeded the $240 million ANZ and ASIC had jointly asked the court to impose in September 2025, after Justice Beach increased one component relating to inaccurate bond market turnover reporting by $10 million. Justice Beach’s increase lifted the penalty tied to secondary bond market turnover misreporting to $50 million, contributing to a broader $135 million allocation for institutional and markets misconduct linked to the management of a $14 billion government bond deal and the inaccurate reporting of secondary market turnover data. Bond Deal Trading, Misreporting, and ASIC’s Warning on Systemic Risk The institutional and markets component of the case centred on ANZ’s handling of a $14 billion government bond issuance and the bank’s reporting of bond turnover data used by the Australian Government to assess market activity. According to ASIC, the misconduct created systemic risk failures with potential implications for public finances, with ASIC estimating the trading conduct cost up to $26 million—money that could have supported essential public services. ASIC Chair Joe Longo said, ‘ANZ is a critical part of Australia’s banking system and, frankly, they must do better.’ He added, ‘The size of the penalties ordered today underscores the seriousness of ANZ’s misconduct and its far-reaching consequences for the Government, taxpayers and tens of thousands of customers.’ He also said the outcome should be a “clear signal” that ANZ must overhaul its non-financial risk management. In comments referenced in the coverage of the decision, Justice Beach emphasised deterrence and lifted the bond-data penalty element by $10 million, taking the institutional and markets penalties to $135 million. Reuters reported that the bank was penalised for unconscionable conduct and inaccurate bond market data reporting, with the court increase reflecting the seriousness of the misreporting. Takeaway: The $250m order—boosted by the court above the parties’ agreed $240m figure—underscores ASIC’s focus on non-financial risk and market integrity, with the bond-deal and bond-data breaches drawing heightened judicial scrutiny. Retail Failures: Hardship Handling, Interest Rates, and Deceased Estates The remaining penalties address a series of retail banking failures, including financial hardship handling, savings interest rate representations, and processes linked to deceased estates. Reuters summarised the breakdown as $40 million for failing to address hundreds of customer hardship notices, $40 million for misleading savings-rate statements and interest underpayments, and $35 million for failures to refund fees charged to deceased customers. ASIC Deputy Chair Sarah Court said, ‘Tens of thousands of customers suffered from systemic failures across ANZ’s retail bank, which extended to fundamental banking basics like paying the correct interest rate on savings accounts.’ She added, ‘ANZ will also pay for misconduct that made an already difficult time far harder for hundreds of its customers who were experiencing hardship or dealing with the loss of a loved one.’ ANZ had admitted the misconduct in September 2025 and, together with ASIC, asked the court to impose penalties of $240 million—before Justice Beach increased the total to $250 million. The outcome caps a multi-matter enforcement action that ASIC framed as a response to widespread misconduct and systemic non-financial risk management failures across the group.

Fiserv has completed its acquisition of StoneCastle Cash Management, extending its insured deposit and liquidity capabilities across its global payments and banking ecosystem. The integration brings StoneCastle’s institutional deposit network into Fiserv’s core account processing, digital banking, and payments platforms, creating new funding and liquidity options for financial institutions. For banks, the expanded offering provides access to secure, technology-driven deposit funding designed to help optimize liquidity management and strengthen balance sheets. These capabilities include support for managing reserves associated with digital assets and the issuance of FIUSD, Fiserv’s stablecoin solution. The acquisition positions Fiserv to offer differentiated funding solutions at a time when financial institutions are increasingly focused on balance sheet resilience, regulatory certainty, and diversified sources of insured deposits. New FDIC-Insured Liquidity Options Introduced for Merchants The integration also introduces new cash management and liquidity solutions for merchants, including access to FDIC-insured deposit options. These services are designed to help merchants manage operating cash more efficiently while offsetting acquiring costs and improving overall financial flexibility. Fiserv said the offering will be particularly relevant for merchant clients within its Clover ecosystem, providing a safe, yield-oriented alternative for managing excess cash without stepping outside regulated banking infrastructure. Takis Georgakopoulos, Co-President at Fiserv, said: “This acquisition highlights Fiserv’s unique position at the intersection of banking and commerce: for banks, it provides a new, stable deposit source; for Merchant clients, including our Clover merchants, it provides a safe, high-yielding alternative to manage their operating cash.” Takeaway: By combining StoneCastle’s deposit network with its core banking and payments infrastructure, Fiserv is creating a rare bridge between insured bank liquidity, merchant cash management, and regulated digital asset issuance. Digital Assets and Stablecoins Become Part of Core Liquidity Strategy Looking ahead, StoneCastle’s liquidity capabilities are expected to play a key role in Fiserv’s digital asset strategy, particularly around FIUSD stablecoin issuance. The ability to link insured deposits and institutional funding with stablecoin infrastructure reinforces Fiserv’s approach to embedding digital assets within established financial systems. Existing StoneCastle clients, including wealth managers, will also benefit from the expanded distribution and connectivity provided by Fiserv’s extensive network of financial institutions. The transaction closed following receipt of all required regulatory approvals. While financial terms were not disclosed, the deal underscores Fiserv’s broader strategy of expanding beyond payments into balance-sheet, liquidity, and digital asset infrastructure that serves both banks and merchants within a single, regulated ecosystem.+

There was a huge outcry when the price of Silver plummeted by almost 6% in less than two hours last Friday – after previously reaching a new all-time high of US$64.65. As is so often the case, voices were raised accusing the market of manipulation. As a result, we were inundated with emails and inquiries. Reason enough for us to take a closer look at the recurring rumors of market manipulation in this issue. The so-called bullion banks are those institutions that play a central role in the trading, storage, and financing of precious metals at the LBMA in London. These include JP Morgan, UBS, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, and others. There is no question that some of these banks have been convicted of market manipulation on several occasions in the past. The relevant cases are well documented – see here, here, and here. If you have physical precious metals and the owners do not demand physical delivery, there are numerous opportunities to generate additional income from them: through derivatives, swaps, lending transactions, synthetic products, and the like. However, this model only works as long as control over the physical metal is guaranteed. With the exploding demand for physical Silver from China and India, this source of income is increasingly drying up. When people talk about “paper Gold” – or, analogously, paper Silver – they usually mean the COMEX (CME, Chicago Mercantile Exchange) in New York. Options, futures, and other derivative products are traded there. The trading volume of these paper products can be ten times that of physical trading – which makes perfect sense, as transporting and storing physical metal is costly. Of course, the bullion banks from the London trade are also active on the CME. And, just as naturally, good money can be made with derivatives in New York and the underlying metal in London. However, the often-expressed theory that banks sell futures in order to deliberately push down the price makes little sense. Selling pressure – which leads to a lower price – only arises at the moment of sale itself. After that, the seller is obliged to deliver if requested – something that very few market participants strive for. If you sell futures with the intention of buying them back later at a lower price (i.e., as a short position), you expose yourself to the risk of rising prices and potentially massive losses until that time. We at Pretiorates have been or are currently active as traders at various international banks and do not know of any institution that would take such a risk over a longer period of time and on a large scale. Professional traders are generally hedged – either through derivatives or synthetic structures. Looking at the current CME data on open Silver contracts for March 2026, the number of open positions is indeed exceptionally high. However, it would be wrong to conclude that these are predominantly short positions. Mining companies also sell their future production via futures in order to secure their margins and maintain financial planning security. A single contract corresponds to 5,000 ounces of Silver. The current open interest of nearly 114,000 contracts thus represents an impressive 569 million ounces of Silver – around two-thirds of global annual production. At the same time, however, it should be noted that several hundred million ounces of Silver are traded daily on COMEX. Of course, there are investors who speculate on falling prices by selling futures and come under considerable pressure when prices continue to rise. If they cannot deliver the corresponding Silver, they will sooner or later have to cover their positions – which in extreme cases can lead to a so-called short squeeze. At the same time, however, there are also numerous professional investors operating in the market who engage in arbitrage and are hedged accordingly. The high volatility in Silver trading in recent months is a veritable El Dorado for arbitrageurs and intraday traders. Price differences between different exchanges, but also between futures and options, are often exploited simultaneously. For example, there may be a profitable spread between the purchase of call options and the simultaneous sale of a futures contract. Today, these strategies have long been taken over by computers and algorithms. Open positions in both futures and options are increasing, but sooner or later they will be closed out or settled in cash. This has little lasting impact on actual price formation in the spot market. Investing in futures has the advantage of requiring significantly less capital. A Silver future of 5,000 ounces currently represents a value of around US$325,000, but only around US$22,000 needs to be deposited as collateral. If losses exceed this margin, the broker issues the infamous “margin call” – with a request to inject additional capital or close the position. The exchange itself can adjust the level of these margins at any time. If the price or volatility of the underlying asset rises too sharply, the requirements are increased. The investor must then provide additional capital or reduce their position – in extreme cases, liquidate it completely. This is exactly what happened last Friday when the CME announced that it would raise the margin per Silver contract from $20,000 to $22,000. This margin increase was the immediate trigger for last Friday's sharp correction. In addition, numerous traders are likely to have amplified the movement. Within a single trading day, a trader may well sell first and then buy back later, ideally at lower prices. So-called “cross-market trades” are prohibited. These are strategies in which futures are first sold and then targeted sales are made in the spot market in order to push down the price. As the futures price follows this decline, the contracts can be bought back at a profit. Whether the trader makes little or no profit when buying back in the spot market is irrelevant. It was striking that during the price pressure last Friday, the iShares Silver ETF saw unusually high trading volumes both at the start of trading and shortly before the close of trading. This could fuel suspicions of cross-market trades. However, this can only be proven by an in-depth investigation by the stock exchange supervisory authority. If such transactions are carried out across multiple trading venues, however, various supervisory authorities are involved – which pushes monitoring to its limits. It is undisputed, however, that US Silver trading has been subject to a certain degree of price suppression for years. We became aware of an analysis by Goldchartus.com and analyzed it ourselves using the iShares Silver ETF (SLV). The ETF clearly correlates with the price of Silver. Looking at the cumulative daily percentage movements during US trading hours since its launch in April 2006, an investor would have lost around 65%. Outside US trading hours – i.e., from the close of trading to the next opening – the same investor would have achieved a cumulative performance of no less than 1,165% !!! This can be explained in part by the fact that a large proportion of Silver demand comes from Asia and is active during trading hours there. However, the Chinese in particular have not been strong buyers since 2006. As early as 2011, the outperformance was over 400% at times. So does it make sense to focus intensively on short positions in the Silver or Gold market? In our opinion, no. These rumors have been circulating on the markets for over 30 years. They are rarely proven and are energy-intensive. It is striking when large sell orders are placed in an extremely short period of time – often even in illiquid, off-exchange phases – causing the price to plummet abruptly. The motive in such cases is obvious: price pressure. However, it is equally obvious that supervisory authorities will continue to uncover new abuses in the future. In all asset classes. Regardless of this, Silver is becoming increasingly scarce due to massive industrial demand. Whether in the solar industry or solid-state batteries, demand is growing steadily. The mining industry can hardly respond to this: new mines take many years to develop, and around three-quarters of Silver is only produced as a by-product of Gold, Copper, or other mines anyway. Long-term industrial demand will continue to rise, while bullion banks are losing their traditional sources of income due to dwindling access to physical stocks. Large price increases therefore remain entirely possible – perhaps even sooner than many expect. The media will probably call it a “short squeeze” because it's a simple explanation. In fact, long-term upward trends in precious metals almost always end in euphoria and parabolic movements. Western investors remain significantly underinvested in precious metals. In China, on the other hand, a veritable buying frenzy can already be observed: the premium on the purchase price of the only Silver ETF on the Shanghai Stock Exchange recently rose to an irrational 30%.