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%.

Most traders blame bad luck when their transaction gets sandwiched or their trade executes at a worse price than expected. The uncomfortable truth is that many of these losses come from choices made before the transaction was even signed. Hidden inside your wallet are configuration options that decide how visible, predictable and exploitable your activity is to MEV bots and professional searchers. Learning how to configure wallet settings correctly is one of the most underrated forms of protection in Web3 today. This article explains how users can reduce MEV and front running risk by configuring their wallets with intention rather than accepting default options. Key takeaways • MEV and front running exploit transaction visibility and predictable behavior, so managing how your trades appear is important. • The choice of RPC provider and how your transaction reaches the network directly affects exposure to bots. • Manual gas settings and transaction timing reduce the profitability of automated bots. • Simulation and preview tools allow you to spot risks, such as sandwich attacks, before signing. • Proper Wallet settings act as a first line of defense, offering protection without relying on external platforms. The Role of Wallet Configuration in Transaction Safety Maximal extractable value exists because blockchains reward whoever can reorder transactions most profitably. On EVM networks, most transactions first enter a public mempool where anyone can see them, creating direct risks to your trades. How your transaction interacts with this mempool is influenced by your wallet configuration, making it a critical factor in overall transaction safety. Many users assume that protecting themselves from MEV requires only specialized tools or platforms but in reality, wallet configuration determines how visible, predictable, and vulnerable your transactions are. Even small differences in wallet setup can influence whether your trade becomes an easy target for bots or executes as intended. Understanding and prioritizing proper wallet configuration is therefore essential for maintaining security, minimizing front running risk, and protecting the integrity of transactions. Best Wallet Settings for Safe Trades and MEV Protection 1. Choose a high quality RPC provider Your RPC endpoint determines how your transaction enters the network. Free public RPCs broadcast transactions widely and immediately, which gives MEV bots maximum visibility. Users should prioritize reputable RPC providers that support private transaction routing. Some RPCs delay public propagation or send transactions directly to validators that respect order flow privacy. This does not eliminate MEV entirely but it reduces the time window bots have to react. Selecting the right endpoint inside your wallet settings is one of the simplest upgrades you can make. 2. Enable private transactions where available Several wallets now support private transaction modes through integrated relays. When enabled, your transaction bypasses the public mempool and is sent directly to validators. This dramatically reduces sandwich attacks on swaps and liquidations. Private transactions work best for large trades where visibility is the main risk factor. Enabling this option inside your wallet settings should be the default for any high value DeFi activity, especially on Ethereum mainnet. 3. Use manual gas controls Automatic gas estimation often makes your transaction predictable. Bots love predictability because it helps them calculate profitable insertion strategies. Users are encouraged to use manual gas controls to avoid signaling urgency or value. Avoid extreme overpayment which attracts attention and avoid consistently using the same gas strategy. Small variations reduce pattern recognition. Strategic gas configuration in wallet settings can subtly protect your transaction from automated front runners. 4. Turn on transaction simulation and previews Transaction simulation tools show the expected outcome before you sign. This includes price impact, token approvals and in some wallets even sandwich risk warnings. Skipping simulation is like signing a contract without reading it. Simulation does not prevent MEV directly but it helps you spot conditions that invite it. High slippage tolerance and thin liquidity pools are red flags. Keeping simulation enabled in your wallet settings protects you from self inflicted exposure. 5. Adjust slippage tolerance High slippage tolerance is an open invitation to front runners. Bots scan mempools for trades that allow large price movement and exploit them aggressively. Users should calculate slippage based on liquidity depth. Some wallets provide per-transaction slippage controls, giving valuable flexibility. Maintaining low slippage limits lowers potential profit for front runners and is an important part of secure wallet settings. 6. Time and batch transactions Submitting transactions during peak congestion increases competition and MEV intensity. When possible, execute trades during lower activity periods. Some wallets support transaction batching which combines actions into a single execution. Batching reduces the number of opportunities bots have to intervene. Strategic timing and batching options inside wallet settings improve execution quality without changing your trading strategy. 7. Limit unnecessary approvals and signatures Unlimited token approvals pose long-term risks that go beyond a single transaction. Although they are not a direct MEV vector, excessive approvals expand the attack surface and can lead to downstream exploits. Advanced wallets offer options for setting approval limits and receiving revocation alerts. Maintaining strict approvals within your wallet settings helps minimize the impact of any compromised transaction. Bottom line Proper wallet settings are a vital defense in Web3. They determine how your transactions appear on the network and how visible and predictable they are to bots and front runners. Even subtle adjustments can lower the risk of MEV attacks, protect trade integrity, and give you more control over execution. Wallets no longer function as just signing tools. Now, they play an active role in how transactions are processed on the blockchain. While these measures significantly lower exposure, they do not completely eliminate MEV or front running. Proper wallet settings keep your trades secure and give you an advantage in high-stakes situations.

Duco has entered into a strategic collaboration with Phoenix Group to modernise data reconciliation across the group’s asset management operations. Phoenix Group, one of the UK’s largest long-term savings and retirement businesses, is deploying Duco’s AI-powered SaaS platform to streamline reconciliation processes, strengthen controls, and support efficient growth across a complex operating environment. The initiative will establish a unified, cloud-based reconciliation framework covering investment and accounting records across 20 administrators and multiple asset classes. By consolidating previously fragmented workflows into a single environment, Phoenix aims to reduce operational complexity while improving transparency and oversight across its asset management division. The move reflects a broader industry shift among large asset owners and managers toward cloud-native operational infrastructure, as firms seek to balance scale with tighter governance and lower dependency on manual processes and legacy systems. Operational Ownership and Faster Change Management A key objective of the project is to empower Phoenix’s operational teams with greater ownership of reconciliation processes. By moving reconciliation workflows to the cloud, Phoenix expects to reduce reliance on IT teams for routine changes and enable faster adaptation as data sources, asset classes, and regulatory requirements evolve. Philip Shaw, Asset Management COO at Phoenix Group, said: “Bringing our reconciliation infrastructure to the cloud is a key part of our operational strategy. With Duco, we can manage change more quickly, reduce reliance on IT support, and establish a consistent model for how data is reconciled across the business.” Shaw added that the collaborative nature of the engagement was central to the decision: “The relationship with Duco has been open and collaborative from the start. We value the team’s understanding of our environment and their commitment to helping us build a system that supports future growth.” Takeaway: Phoenix Group is using Duco’s cloud-based reconciliation platform to replace fragmented, manual workflows with a scalable model that strengthens controls while giving operational teams greater autonomy. Initial Focus on IBOR–ABOR Alignment and Regulatory Compliance The first phase of the rollout will focus on automating reconciliation between Investment Book of Record (IBOR) and Accounting Book of Record (ABOR) data. This alignment is designed to improve consistency, auditability, and control across investment and accounting records, which are often maintained in separate systems across large asset management organisations. Ensuring robust reconciliation between IBOR and ABOR is also critical for meeting regulatory obligations. Phoenix said the new framework will support alignment with European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) standards, helping ensure that reconciled data can be relied upon for reporting, risk management, and regulatory scrutiny. Michael Chin, Chief Executive Officer of Duco, said: “Phoenix Group represents the kind of institution Duco was made for: complex operations, multiple data sources, and a clear drive for efficiency and control. We’re delighted to support them in building a reconciliation platform that’s fit for the next decade.” As the project progresses, the platform is expected to provide a foundation for broader automation and data control initiatives across Phoenix’s asset management operations.  

What Did the Supreme Court Decide? JPMorgan, UBS, Citigroup and three other major banks have blocked a £2.7 billion ($3.6 billion) mass lawsuit in the UK over alleged foreign-exchange rigging, after the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the case lacked merit. The ruling ends a multi-year effort to bring a large opt-out action on behalf of thousands of asset managers, pension funds and financial institutions. The case was led by Phillip Evans, a former inquiry chair at the UK Competition and Markets Authority, and was based on findings from the European Commission, which fined several banks more than €1 billion in 2019 for FX cartel activity. Regulators in the U.S., UK and Europe have imposed more than $11 billion in penalties over currency-manipulation violations dating back years. But in its judgment, the Supreme Court agreed with earlier reasoning from the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), finding the underlying claim "weak" and unlikely to justify a collective opt-out lawsuit. Investor Takeaway FX-rigging investigations cost banks billions in fines, but securing large-scale payouts for alleged victims remains difficult without strong, certifiable claims. Why Was the Case Rejected? Evans’ lawsuit was first blocked by the CAT in 2022, which refused to certify it on an opt-out basis. The tribunal said the case could proceed as opt-in litigation, but acknowledged that doing so would likely end the effort because most claimants were unlikely to participate. The Court of Appeal later revived the claim in 2023. The banks appealed, and the Supreme Court reinstated the tribunal’s original conclusion. Judge Vivien Rose wrote that the CAT “was right to assess the merits of the claim as weak,” noting that some members of the proposed claimant group may have viable claims but had shown no interest in pursuing them. These claimants represented “a tiny fraction” of the value Evans sought to litigate on their behalf. The ruling gives the banks a definitive win in a long-running case tied to one of the largest market-manipulation scandals in currency-trading history. What Does the Decision Mean for Collective Actions in the UK? The CAT’s original refusal to certify the case centered on whether the lawsuit was suitable for an opt-out structure, where eligible claimants are automatically included unless they choose otherwise. The tribunal found the evidence too weak to justify sweeping thousands of parties into a collective damages claim. The Supreme Court’s endorsement of that assessment reinforces the high bar for financial-market class actions under the UK’s competition framework. Even when regulators have previously issued major fines, claimants must still demonstrate clear and measurable harm tied to the misconduct. While several competition-related class actions have succeeded in recent years, the FX case shows that financial-market claims remain difficult to certify when the alleged damage varies widely across participants. Investor Takeaway UK competition class actions face strict certification standards. Regulatory penalties do not guarantee that collective-damages cases will clear the same threshold. How Did the Banks and Claimants Respond? UBS and MUFG welcomed the ruling. JPMorgan and Barclays declined to comment, while Citi and NatWest did not immediately respond to requests. For the banks, the decision removes the threat of a multibillion-pound damages case tied to misconduct for which they have already paid heavy regulatory fines. Evans said he would now consider “what options remain available to pursue justice for those affected.” In his view, an opt-in route would not work: “The practical reality is that opt-in proceedings are unlikely to deliver meaningful redress for the tens of thousands of ordinary individuals and businesses affected by the banks' unlawful conduct.” With the opt-out path closed, the lawsuit is effectively finished unless a new claimant group emerges willing to pursue individual or opt-in claims—an outcome the tribunal previously said was improbable.

Coinbase has launched a new custom stablecoin service aimed at institutional clients and platform partners, allowing qualified users to create and issue their own dollar-linked digital currencies using Coinbase’s infrastructure. The product, described as a “white-label stablecoin solution,” reflects the exchange’s growing emphasis on regulated financial products and bespoke digital asset solutions for institutional clients. By offering these custom stablecoins, Coinbase is positioning itself as a 360-degree platform. The global exchange is set to accommodate cryptocurrency traders and provide financial infrastructure to help banks, fintech firms, and platforms launch compliant dollar tokens backed by audited reserves and integrated with the exchange's liquidity and settlement rails. Coinbase Shows that Exchanges Need Strong Stablecoin Positioning The latest move by Coinbase to launch a custom stablecoin service that allows partners to leverage its existing compliance, custody, and reserve-management systems instead of building token issuance frameworks from scratch transforms the exchange into a stablecoin infrastructure provider.  With its white-label solutions that handle issuance, redemption, audit reporting, reserve backing, and integration into major trading venues, institutional clients and platforms seeking brand-specific stablecoins can reduce both technical barriers and regulatory friction.  By doing so, Coinbase is tapping into a growing stablecoin market, which seems to be driving the next phase of digital asset growth. More trading platforms continue to align with the global stablecoin advancement, and Coinbase’s latest move is a reminder that crypto exchanges with a long-term vision should consider having a solid stablecoin strategy.  Impact on Institutions, Platforms, and the Digital Dollar Economy The implications of a custom stablecoin service from Coinbase cut across liquidity, stablecoin competition, and the future of digital dollar issuance. By enabling institutions to issue their own stablecoins under a compliant umbrella, Coinbase lowers the onboarding barrier for banks, asset managers, and fintechs wary of reputational and regulatory risk.  This could accelerate institutional participation in stablecoin markets and expand use cases beyond trading or decentralized finance (DeFi) into everyday financial operations. Also, we may see a rise in brand-aligned digital currencies since custom stablecoins will carry the brand identity of the issuing partner. This offers institutions the ability to deepen customer relationships through proprietary digital money rather than relying solely on generic tokens. Brand alignment may also foster loyalty and reduce reliance on third-party stablecoins. As Coinbase enables tailored tokens, competitors, including banks, payment networks, and tokenization platforms, may accelerate their own issuance and integration strategies. This could lead to a fragmentation of stablecoin supply that reflects differentiated use cases, compliance postures, and settlement preferences. However, issuers must still ensure that their custom stablecoins meet local regulatory definitions of e-money, payment instruments, or securities. Market participants will also need to navigate varying global stances on reserve backing, redemption rights, and audit transparency despite Coinbase’s robust compliance support. Ultimately, as the digital dollar economy matures, bespoke stablecoin issuance may become a central enterprise capability, and Coinbase is keying into that future early. 

Choosing the best reputable online broker is more important than ever for investors today. With ongoing technological progress, a growing range of asset classes, and new German regulations, investors are looking for platforms that combine trustworthiness, low fees, and strong compliance. This comparison brings together reputable online brokers side by side in terms of costs, features, awards, and overall reputation. Our evaluation considers company size, headquarters location, founding year, services, notable clients, leadership structure, and key features—giving investors a concise view of a busy market. All companies were reviewed based on solid financial data, existing user ratings, independent awards, regulatory records, and company publications. Sources include German and EU public media, corporate websites, and existing industry directories to ensure credibility and transparency. Comparison Table Agency Name Key Features Pros Cons Rating XTB Wide offering, professional tools, robust risk management Strict regulation, low fees No direct crypto trading 4.7 Scalable Capital Automated investing, flat fee, strong technology Automated options, €1 plans Limited direct advisory services 4.5 Trade Republic Commission-free, mobile-first, EU coverage User-friendly, fixed costs Some minor transaction fees 4.3 flatex Fixed pricing, strong presence in the EU Reliable, easy integration Costs can add up 4.2 Company Overviews XTB XTB is Germany’s leading reliable online broker in 2026 and ranks among the best reputable online brokers in Europe. The company combines high-quality trading technology with a prudent regulatory framework to offer investors security and flexibility. It supports a wide range of instruments, from stocks and ETFs to indices and currencies, and also offers fractional shares and savings plans. XTB additionally provides various educational materials, professional market analyses, and risk management tools suitable for both new and experienced investors. Its Europe-oriented approach ensures regulatory compliance and continuous system updates to meet today’s trading demands. Location: Warsaw, Poland (Headquarters) Founded: 2004 Founder: Jakub Zabłocki LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/xtb/ Scalable Capital Scalable Capital combines technology-driven wealth management with flexible brokerage services. Investors have access to instruments such as stocks, ETFs, cryptocurrencies, and savings plans. The subscription model enables straightforward cost optimization while providing access to new exchanges across Europe. Its clients include both retail and B2B customers, including major companies such as Siemens and ING. Location: Munich, Germany (Headquarters) Founded: 2014 Founder: Erik Podzuweit LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/scalable-capital/ Trade Republic Trade Republic targets mass-market investors who primarily want to trade on mobile. The company offers trading in stocks, ETFs, bonds, derivatives, and cryptocurrencies, as well as savings plans and card products. It has a strong presence across the EU and millions of customers. It places particular emphasis on convenient features, educational offerings, and affordability. Location: Berlin, Germany (Headquarters) Founded: 2015 Founders: Christian Hecker, Thomas Pischke, and Marco Cancellieri LinkedIn: https://de.linkedin.com/company/trade-republic flatex flatex combines traditional brokerage expertise with modern electronic trading features. Its multi-platform solution gives users access to European markets for stocks, ETFs, bonds, funds, CFDs, and crypto markets. With fixed brokerage fees, EU banking compliance, and a partnership with DeGiro, flatex suits investors who want transparent pricing and broad market coverage. Location: Frankfurt, Germany (Headquarters) Founded: 2006 Founder: Bernd Förtsch LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/flatex-onlinebroker/ Summary Choosing the best German online broker in 2026 requires making regulatory compliance the top priority, keeping fees to a minimum, ensuring broad market coverage, using cutting-edge technology, and offering high-quality services. For us, XTB is the clear number one because the broker provides strict regulation in Europe, convenient trading options, professional features, and transparency. It is a strong choice for both new and experienced investors who value trustworthiness and continuous improvements to the platform, and it ranks among the best reputable online brokers in Europe. Frequently Asked Questions 1. Which online broker offers a strong combination of low fees and reliable trading in Germany? XTB is a top choice for investors seeking low to zero order commissions for stocks and ETFs (0% commission at XTB up to €100,000 per month), along with a highly reliable system and strict regulatory compliance. While other brokers offer similar features, XTB consistently stands out through customer trust and security. 2. How can I ensure my investments are protected when using an online broker? Leading brokers hold client funds with insured partner banks and comply with strict European regulations. XTB goes a step further with integrated risk management tools, negative balance protection, and professional-grade security—making it a strong option for investors who prioritize safeguarding their funds. 3. What types of assets can I trade with a reputable online broker in Germany? Traders can access assets such as stocks, ETFs, as well as CFDs on indices, forex, commodities, and cryptocurrencies. Strong online brokers like XTB offer this full range, plus fractional shares and advanced trading features that differentiate them from other platforms. Direct cryptocurrency trading is excluded due to FCA regulations. 4. How do I choose an online broker suitable for both beginners and experienced traders? Look for a platform that combines regulatory compliance, an intuitive interface, low fees, and educational resources. XTB meets these criteria well and offers tools for beginners, while also supporting professional traders with fast execution and in-depth market analysis. 5. Are there minimum deposit requirements with leading online brokers in Germany? Minimum deposits vary, but opening a new account with reputable online brokers like XTB is free; stock and ETF investments can start from as little as one euro. This affordability, combined with advanced functionality, makes XTB an attractive choice. 6. What risks should I consider when trading online? All investments carry a degree of risk, including losses in stocks, CFDs, or ETFs. XTB provides additional safeguards through compliance and risk management tools. The system is designed to help investors control risk while gaining protected access to a wide range of markets. However, every trade involves risk—this should always be understood before making any investment. Risk Warning Trading and investing involve risks. CFDs are complex instruments, and 73% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. The value of your investments may rise or fall, and your capital is at risk. Tax treatment depends on your personal circumstances and may change.

MSCI, one of the world’s most influential index providers, is considering changes that could reshape how public companies with large cryptocurrency holdings are treated in global equity benchmarks. The proposal, now under consultation, could ultimately force the sale of up to $15 billion worth of crypto-linked stocks if adopted, according to market estimates. As a key reference point for institutional investors, MSCI indexes guide how trillions of dollars in assets are allocated across global markets. Passive funds, ETFs, and many active managers track or benchmark against MSCI indexes, meaning any change in index eligibility can have direct and immediate consequences for stock demand. The proposal currently affects 39 companies with a combined float-adjusted market capitalization of about $113 billion. Of these, 18 companies are already included in MSCI indexes, while 21 additional firms could be blocked from future index inclusion if the rule is adopted. Why MSCI’s proposal matters for markets At the center of the proposal is how MSCI defines an operating company. The index provider is assessing whether firms whose cryptocurrency holdings make up 50% or more of their total assets should remain eligible for inclusion in equity indexes. MSCI has suggested that such companies may function more like investment vehicles than traditional businesses, raising questions about their suitability for broad market benchmarks. If these companies are excluded, funds that track MSCI indexes would be required to rebalance their portfolios, potentially triggering forced selling. Analysts estimate that the resulting outflows could range between $10 billion and $15 billion, depending on the final scope of exclusions. Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, is widely seen as the most exposed name due to its sizable bitcoin treasury, holding over 671 BTC worth $59 billion at present time. Although several smaller crypto-linked firms could also be affected. MSCI is expected to reach a final decision in January, with any approved changes likely implemented during its February index review. Industry pushback highlights broader crypto-equity tension However, the proposal has sparked resistance from parts of the market. Companies and crypto advocates argue that holding digital assets on the balance sheet does not strip a firm of its operating identity. They warn that forced removals could amplify volatility, particularly for stocks with limited liquidity, and reduce investor access to a growing segment of the public market. More broadly, the debate underscores a structural challenge for index providers as digital assets become more embedded in corporate finance strategies. The outcome of MSCI’s consultation could set a precedent for how traditional equity benchmarks adapt to companies that blur the line between operating businesses and crypto exposure.

The Canton Network has announced World Liberty Financial’s intention to deploy its USD1 stablecoin on Canton, a move positioned as a step toward broader institutional adoption of regulated onchain settlement. The planned rollout is aimed at bringing USD1 into an interoperable environment designed for financial markets where privacy, compliance, and control are central requirements. USD1 is being positioned as an institutional-grade digital dollar stablecoin, described as fully reserved and 1:1 redeemable, with backing that includes short-term U.S. government treasuries, U.S. dollar deposits, and other cash equivalents. The company said USD1 has surpassed a $2 billion market capitalisation, underlining the speed at which demand for tokenized dollars continues to scale. By bringing USD1 onto Canton, WLFI is targeting regulated global market participants that want the programmability of blockchain infrastructure without moving sensitive trading and settlement activity into fully public environments. Canton’s design is intended to support institutional workflows through privacy-enabled settlement rails while maintaining interoperability across participants and asset types. Stablecoin Use Cases Extend Beyond Payments Into Collateral and Capital Markets WLFI and Canton framed the planned deployment around institutional use cases that go beyond retail payments, highlighting how stablecoins are increasingly being positioned as settlement assets inside capital markets. In this model, USD1 could support collateralisation for derivatives and institutional lending, enabling faster movement of margin and collateral between counterparties. The integration is also aimed at enabling instant cross-border payments with 24/7 settlement—an increasingly attractive proposition for global institutions operating across time zones and dealing with legacy cut-off times in correspondent banking and traditional settlement cycles. Other proposed use cases include onchain issuance, funding, and redemption of assets, and interoperable financing across institutions and markets. Zak Folkman, Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer of World Liberty Financial, said: “Institutions around the world, from sovereign entities to global asset managers, are looking for a trusted and purely digital U.S. dollar. Our intention to deploy USD1 on Canton will allow regulated institutions to transact securely and privately while leveraging the programmability and efficiency of blockchain technology. Canton’s institutional-grade infrastructure creates an ideal foundation for real-world digital dollar settlement.” Takeaway: If deployed, USD1 on Canton would position a fast-growing digital dollar stablecoin inside a privacy-enabled, regulated blockchain environment—expanding stablecoin utility from payments into collateral, lending, and tokenized capital markets settlement. Canton Positions Privacy-First Architecture as an Institutional Differentiator The Canton Network is built around a model designed for regulated markets, where institutions often require selective disclosure, permissioned access, and configurable controls over who can see and interact with transactions. Canton’s proponents argue that these privacy and governance features are essential for scaling tokenized finance beyond pilot programs into production-grade market infrastructure. Melvis Langyintuo, Executive Director of the Canton Foundation, said: “WLFI’s move to bring USD1 to Canton highlights the growing demand for compliant, interoperable digital assets within institutional markets. Canton’s privacy-first architecture enables stablecoins like USD1 to power next-generation financial applications, from intraday repo to digital bond settlement, without compromising regulatory requirements.” For institutional players, the significance of the planned deployment lies in the combination of stablecoin settlement with a network architecture designed to support regulated workflows. If executed, the USD1 integration could strengthen Canton’s role as a hub for tokenized assets and stablecoin-based settlement, while giving WLFI a pathway to embed USD1 into higher-value institutional use cases where compliance, privacy, and interoperability are non-negotiable.  

What Did Coinbase Announce—and How Broad Is the Expansion? Coinbase has unveiled one of the largest product rollouts in its history, adding stock trading, prediction markets, Solana DEX integration, custom stablecoins, simplified derivatives, payments infrastructure, and new business services. The company describes the push as its move toward an “everything exchange,” where users can trade crypto, equities, onchain assets, and derivatives within a single app. The rollout formalizes features that had circulated in leaked screenshots in recent weeks. Coinbase says this shift is necessary as competition accelerates across fintech apps, global exchanges, and onchain platforms that already offer a wider mix of financial tools. For the first time, the company outlined the full scope of its expansion and the markets it intends to compete in. Investor Takeaway Coinbase is no longer just a crypto exchange. It is moving into equities, synthetic-free prediction markets, Solana DEX aggregation, stablecoin issuance, and business finance—all inside one app. How Will Stock Trading Work on Coinbase? A central element of the rollout is stock trading for U.S. users through Coinbase Capital Markets Corp. Customers can buy and sell stocks and ETFs using either U.S. dollars or USDC, with trading displayed alongside their crypto portfolios. The feature offers zero commissions and extended hours, covering 24-hour trading on selected equities for five days a week. “Zero-commission stock trading will be a permanent offering on Coinbase,” a spokesperson told The Block, though the company did not disclose its planned revenue model. Coinbase expects to add “thousands” of additional stocks in the coming months. The company is also preparing stock-linked perpetual futures for users outside the U.S. early next year. These instruments would give international traders continuous access to U.S. equity exposure without using traditional brokerage channels. Further down the roadmap is Coinbase Tokenize, an institutional platform that will support the issuance and management of tokenized real-world assets, including equities. More details are expected in 2026. What About Prediction Markets and Solana DEX Trading? Coinbase is rolling out prediction markets through a partnership with Kalshi, a regulated platform offering event-based contracts. Liquidity at launch will come directly from Kalshi, with additional venues expected later. Users can trade contracts for as little as $1, funded with either dollars or USDC, with the results displayed inside their Coinbase balances like any other asset. On the decentralized side, Coinbase has integrated Jupiter—Solana’s largest DEX aggregator—allowing Solana token trading directly inside the Coinbase app. Users can route trades for new Solana assets immediately at launch without visiting external DEX interfaces. Jupiter handles routing and pricing, while Coinbase manages the wallet flow and user experience. The company says millions of assets across Solana and Base will now be visible by default, with plans to extend DEX integrations to more networks over time. How Is Coinbase Expanding Its Stablecoin and Payments Strategy? Stablecoins are a key part of the expansion. Coinbase has introduced Custom Stablecoins, allowing businesses to issue branded tokens backed by mixes of USDC and other USD stablecoins. “Coinbase Custom Stablecoins will be backed 1:1 by a flexible mix of USDC and other USD-stablecoins, not fiat,” a spokesperson said. Partners testing the product include Flipcash, Solflare, and R2. The move places Coinbase in more direct competition with infrastructure firms such as Paxos and Anchorage. The company has also applied for a National Trust Company charter with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; the application remains under review. Coinbase is extending its payments and developer stack as well, offering APIs for custody, trading, stablecoins, and settlement. Companies including Deel, Papaya, Routable, and dLocal already use Coinbase’s payment rails. The firm also highlighted x402, an open payments standard for attaching stablecoin payments to web requests. According to Coinbase, it enables autonomous transactions from AI agents and recently crossed $200 million in annualized volume over a 30-day period. Coinbase said it is working with Cloudflare and others to develop the x402 Foundation. Investor Takeaway Stablecoins and payments infrastructure are becoming a core revenue focus for Coinbase, positioning it against both fintechs and enterprise blockchain providers. What Else Is Changing for Retail and Business Users? Coinbase will now offer futures and perpetual futures trading inside the main app. These products previously lived in Coinbase Advanced, aimed at experienced traders. The redesign introduces a simplified interface for leveraged trading. “This is the same product with a better, more intuitive experience,” a spokesperson said, adding that U.S. traders can access perps directly from the retail interface. The company also introduced Coinbase Advisor, an AI-enabled assistant that helps users build portfolios and ask financial questions. Beta access is being rolled out to early testers. Separately, the Base App—Coinbase’s onchain social and finance app—is now live in more than 140 countries. Assets posted inside the app are tokenized and tradeable by default. On the business side, Coinbase Business is now live in the U.S. and Singapore. It offers global payments, asset management, USDC rewards, and automation tools for startups and small companies. Businesses will gain access to the same expanded trading tools introduced for retail users. “This is a defining moment in Coinbase’s journey,” the company said, calling the rollout the next chapter in its goal to build an all-in-one financial platform.

Ripple’s dollar-pegged stablecoin RLUSD has crossed a symbolic and strategic milestone, reaching a $1 billion market capitalization and securing a place among the top five USD stablecoins just one year after launch. The achievement caps a rapid rise for a token that entered an already crowded market dominated by long-established incumbents, yet managed to carve out relevance through institutional alignment and infrastructure-first positioning. The anniversary milestone is being framed by Ripple as a numerical success and also as validation of its long-term stablecoin strategy. RLUSD’s growth reflects a broader shift in the stablecoin landscape, where trust, regulatory positioning, and enterprise integration are increasingly outweighing pure trading dominance. The RLUSD Story From Zero to Top-Tier Stablecoin  Stablecoins are notoriously difficult to scale, but RLUSD seems to be getting it right. In a market dominated by dollar-backed stablecoins like USDT and USDC, RLUSD’s ascent from zero to a $1 billion market cap in just twelve months is an anomaly, but a deliberate one. Rather than chasing retail trading volume, Ripple's stablecoin was positioned from the outset as a regulated, institution-friendly digital dollar, closely aligned with Ripple’s existing payments, settlement, and enterprise blockchain infrastructure. This strategy prioritized trust and usability over rapid speculative adoption, allowing the stablecoin to grow steadily while avoiding the boom-and-bust dynamics that have plagued smaller stablecoin launches. Ripple executives have highlighted that RLUSD’s growth has been driven largely by enterprise demand, payment corridors, and institutional flows, rather than exchange-centric arbitrage. This has given the stablecoin a more stable liquidity profile and reduced reliance on short-term market incentives. Institutions Continue to Fuel RLUSD’s Expansion One of the defining features of RLUSD’s first year has been where its demand comes from. Instead of competing in market trading volume, Ripple’s longstanding relationships with financial institutions have given its stablecoin a distribution advantage.  Banks and payment providers already working with Ripple’s technology have ben quietly adopting Ripple's stablecoin instead of onboarding an unfamiliar issuer or infrastructure. Another factor is timing. As regulators across the U.S., Europe, and Asia sharpen their focus on stablecoin oversight, institutions are reassessing which tokens they are comfortable using long-term. RLUSD’s compliance-first posture positions it as a candidate for environments where regulatory alignment is not optional. Reaching the top five stablecoins for global finance within a year signals that the market is increasingly receptive to alternatives that offer clarity on reserves, governance, and compliance. The next phase of growth appears less about raw issuance and more about integration, governance, and trust. Stablecoins that can demonstrate clear reserve backing, regulatory alignment, and enterprise usability are increasingly favored by institutional capital. As stablecoins continue to evolve from trading assets into core financial infrastructure, RLUSD’s first anniversary offers a glimpse of where the market may be headed in the long term.

While traditional financial systems have kept transaction data locked behind institutional walls, blockchain networks operate with unparalleled transparency and security. However, when organized chronologically, this data reveals patterns invisible to casual observers. Every confirmed action, from a simple cryptocurrency transfer to a complex smart contract interaction, is permanently recorded on a public ledger. Behind each transaction lies a timestamp, creating an unbroken trail of data that tells the story of digital asset movements, network activity, and market behavior. This is on-chain timeseries data, one of the most powerful ways to understand cryptocurrency markets. Key Takeaways On-chain time-series data tracks blockchain activity over time, including transaction volumes, active addresses, and exchange movements. It moves analysis beyond price charts to reveal the fundamentals of a network, including genuine user adoption, investor sentiment, and network health. This data helps to predict market cycles to identify security vulnerabilities, making it essential for informed decision-making in cryptocurrency markets. What Is On-Chain Time-Series Data? On-chain data refers to all the publicly accessible information stored on a blockchain. This includes: Wallet addresses: The pseudonymous identifiers for users. Transaction details: This includes the sender, receiver, amount transferred, and some information about gas/miner fees. Block timestamps: A record of the exact time a transaction was confirmed. Smart contract interactions: Detailed records of decentralized application (dApp) functions. When this data is organized chronologically—tracking changes in a specific metric over time—it becomes time-series data. Platforms such as Glassnode track over 3,500 different metrics across major blockchains, while CryptoQuant focuses primarily on Bitcoin and Ethereum data. Examples of key on-chain time-series metrics include: Active addresses: The number of different unique wallets transacting a given asset daily. Transaction volume: The total amount of an asset transferred on the network in a given timeframe. Total value locked: The cumulative value of assets deposited in a DeFi protocol over time. Net flow to exchanges: It is the net difference between an asset's deposits to and withdrawals from centralized exchanges. Unlike traditional financial data that is often delayed, opaque, or reported by intermediaries, on-chain data is real-time, verifiable, and provides a comprehensive evaluation of the economic activity of a network. Why On-Chain Time-Series Data Matters The importance of on-chain data lies in its ability to offer a unique perspective on the activity of a digital asset across entire blockchain networks, moving beyond mere price charts and exchange volumes. 1. Measure network health and adoption This helps to differentiate a project with real utility from one driven by hype. A price rise with flat or decreasing active addresses may indicate a speculative bubble, whereas an increase in both indicates a healthy, growing ecosystem. For example, by monitoring metrics such as active addresses and transaction volume, analysts can assess user adoption and utility across a network. Major financial institutions, including Artemis and Visa, now rely on on-chain analytics for investment decisions. 2. Predict investor behavior It is the closest thing to observing the real-time intentions of market participants. By tracking whale activity or changes in the supply held by long-term holders, analysts can gain insight into market sentiment. For instance, large net outflows from popular exchanges might suggest investors are moving their assets to cold storage, which is indicative of long-term holding sentiment (bullish), while large inflows could suggest the intent to sell (bearish). 3. Improved security and forensics On-chain analysis helps to identify suspicious activities. Security firms and law enforcement tap into the time-series transaction history to trace the movement of stolen or illicit funds across the blockchain. This ability to trace funds is crucial for the transparency and security of the ecosystem. How to Analyze On-Chain Time-Series Data The process involves several steps, including: 1. Data collection Extraction: Raw blockchain data is massive and unstructured. Infrastructure providers such as QuickNode handle over eight billion blockchain requests daily, pulling data directly from blockchain nodes across 30+ chains. Processing: Analytics platforms decode transactions, classify addresses (exchanges, miners, and smart contracts), and organize information into structured databases. Metric calculation: Sophisticated metrics require complex calculations. Entity adjustment algorithms group related addresses, preventing double-counting. Clustering algorithms identify patterns to classify users as traders, holders, or miners. Visualization: Many platforms provide customizable dashboards where users chart metrics over different timeframes, compare multiple metrics, and analyze correlations between on-chain activity and prices. Distribution: Data reaches users through web interfaces, APIs, email alerts, and Telegram notifications, enabling proactive decision-making. 2. Statistical and predictive modeling Analysts apply traditional time-series techniques to the on-chain metrics, such as: Moving averages: To smooth out short-term noise and identify the underlying trend. Correlation analysis: To determine how changes in an on-chain metric relate to changes in the asset's price. Machine learning (ML): Advanced ML models are increasingly used to combine multiple on-chain metrics to create predictive forecasts, identifying complex patterns that precede major market shifts. Challenges and Limitations Storage and scalability: Bitcoin and Ethereum handle only 7–15 transactions per second, far below enterprise requirements. This creates challenges for applications needing high-frequency updates. Cost considerations: Storing data on public blockchains incurs gas fees for every transaction. For applications requiring millions of data points, costs become prohibitive. Interpretation complexity: No single metric tells the complete story. Successful analysis requires synthesizing multiple metrics while understanding their relationships. Data quality variations: Community-driven platforms can have inconsistencies. Verify sources and understand methodology before concluding. Technical barriers: Platforms requiring SQL knowledge have steep learning curves. More user-friendly platforms sacrifice flexibility for accessibility. Bottom Line On-chain time-series data is no longer an optional tool for traders who aim to understand cryptocurrency markets. Instead, it is a foundation upon which sound analysis and strategy are based. It will become increasingly important as the blockchain matures and integrates with traditional finance. By providing transparent, verifiable insights into blockchain activity over time, it enables everyone from individual traders to major institutions to make informed decisions based on actual network behavior rather than speculation. These metrics reveal market cycles, investor sentiment, security vulnerabilities, and adoption trends that are otherwise impossible to determine through traditional analysis. While challenges around scalability and interpretation remain, continuous platform improvements make this information increasingly accessible.  

RADEX MARKETS has launched the second phase of its Black Friday promotion, rolling out a new set of trading incentives aimed at boosting activity into the end of the year. The broker said Black Friday Phase 2 will run from 15 December to 29 December 2025 and includes a 40% commission reduction designed to improve cost efficiency for active traders across selected instruments. Under the limited-time offer, RADEX MARKETS clients receive a 40% commission drop on forex and gold trading during the promotional window. For traders, commission reductions can have an outsized impact on overall performance when strategies involve frequent entries, short holding periods, or the use of hedging tactics that generate higher turnover. Gold trading is also set to benefit from additional pricing incentives, with RADEX MARKETS stating that the promotion includes exclusive spread reductions for gold. Combined with the commission drop, the additional spread adjustment positions the Phase 2 campaign as a targeted push toward high-volume participants who prioritise predictable costs when trading major FX pairs and precious metals. How New and Existing Clients Can Access the Offer The broker has outlined separate participation routes for new and existing users, aiming to make the promotion accessible while maintaining a clear onboarding process. For new clients, the reduced commissions are available by registering through the dedicated Black Friday promotional page on the RADEX MARKETS website, which is intended to activate the promotional pricing immediately upon account setup. For existing users, RADEX MARKETS is extending an earlier incentive rather than replacing it. The firm said it has prolonged its 25% cashback bonus, shifting the original end date from 12 December through to 29 December 2025. This extension keeps the cashback offer in play during Phase 2, effectively layering an ongoing rewards mechanism alongside the commission reductions for eligible traders. Existing clients can continue receiving $3 cashback for every lot traded until the promotion concludes, according to the broker. In practical terms, this structure is designed to reward higher trade frequency, with the cashback operating as a direct rebate linked to trading volume, rather than a one-time bonus or tiered points scheme that may be harder for users to quantify in real time. Takeaway: RADEX MARKETS’ Black Friday Phase 2 runs from 15–29 December 2025, pairing a 40% commission reduction on forex and gold with an extended $3-per-lot cashback offer for existing clients—an aggressive, volume-linked pricing push into year-end trading. Why Brokers Are Using Pricing Campaigns to Compete for Active Traders RADEX MARKETS is positioning the campaign as part of a broader commitment to competitive trading conditions, highlighting access to more than 1,000 products and “competitive spreads” as part of its core proposition. In the retail trading market, promotions built around trading costs remain a common strategy for driving engagement, particularly during peak seasonal windows when traders reassess platform value and brokers compete for wallet share. For traders focused on forex and gold, the combination of commission and spread adjustments is notable because it concentrates on two of the most actively traded categories in CFD and margin trading. Gold, in particular, often attracts heavy participation around macroeconomic and risk-off narratives, while major FX pairs remain the default venue for liquidity-driven strategies. By tuning pricing in these markets, RADEX MARKETS is directing the offer toward segments most likely to generate consistent turnover. RADEX MARKETS said the promotion reflects its “ongoing dedication to client value,” describing the Phase 2 incentives as a way to offer enhanced trading conditions and reward clients through the end of December. The broker stated it operates as a trading name under GO Markets International Ltd Co (Securities Dealer Licence No SD043) and offers trading across forex, metals, CFDs/indices, and share CFDs, positioning the promotional window as a short, time-boxed opportunity for traders seeking lower execution costs during the final stretch of the year.  

What Is Behind Trump Media’s Move Into Fusion Energy? Donald Trump’s social media company is set to merge with fusion-power developer TAE Technologies in a $6 billion all-stock deal, expanding the Trump family’s business footprint into one of the most capital-intensive sectors in the energy landscape. The announcement comes days after fusion executives met U.S. officials to push for federal support as power demand from AI data centers climbs. Trump Media and Technology Group, the parent of Truth Social, will become the holding company for a collection of businesses spanning social media, mobile services, TAE Power Solutions and TAE Life Sciences. After the deal closes, expected in mid-2026, shareholders from both firms will each control about 50% of the combined entity. News of the merger sent Trump Media shares soaring more than 33% in premarket trading, boosted by retail-trader interest on platforms such as Stocktwits. The company, however, remains unprofitable and reported a $54.8 million loss in the third quarter. Investor Takeaway The deal gives Trump Media a stake in a high-risk fusion venture backed by major corporate investors, while TAE gains access to public-market capital during a period of surging demand for new power sources. Why Fusion—and Why Now? Electricity consumption from AI data centers has pushed policymakers and investors back toward nuclear options once considered politically or economically out of reach. Utilities are restarting idle reactors, expanding existing sites and negotiating for next-generation modular units. Fusion, which seeks to replicate the process that powers the sun, sits at the far end of that spectrum. TAE Technologies, supported by Google, Chevron, Venrock, Wellcome Trust and others, has raised more than $1.3 billion and is working on neutral beam systems designed for fusion and related applications. The firm’s pitch is that advances in plasma control, beam systems and power electronics can cut costs for fusion development and eventually support commercial systems. Nuclear fusion remains an unproven technology for grid-scale electricity. Advocates believe it can deliver abundant power with minimal pollution and no long-lasting radioactive waste, but no commercial reactor exists today. The companies say that once the merger closes, they intend to choose a site and begin work on what they describe as the world’s first utility-scale fusion power plant. How Will the Combined Company Operate? Devin Nunes, CEO of Trump Media, will serve as co-CEO of the merged group alongside TAE’s Michl Binderbauer. The boards of both companies approved the agreement, which places a pre-revenue social media firm and a heavily funded fusion startup under the same public structure. TAE Power Solutions and TAE Life Sciences—spinouts focused on power management and medical applications—will sit under the same umbrella as Truth Social. The combination is unusual, merging a political media platform with a complex energy-technology developer. Trump Media’s revenue currently comes almost entirely from advertising on Truth Social, while TAE is a private R&D-driven operation with no commercial fusion output. For TAE, the deal opens a path to public-market financing as U.S. agencies signal readiness to support high-risk energy projects. Industry groups met government officials this week urging direct federal investment and clear policy frameworks for fusion development. Regulators have already backed research partnerships, and a number of states are revisiting nuclear permitting to cope with grid strain. Investor Takeaway The merger creates a company that blends volatile media assets with long-horizon fusion research—an unusual pairing that may draw both speculative interest and scrutiny as construction plans advance. What Comes Next for Trump Media and TAE? If the merger proceeds on schedule, the new company will need to secure a site, permitting and financing for a utility-scale fusion plant—something no private firm has ever attempted at this level. The project’s feasibility, timeline and regulatory hurdles remain open questions. At the same time, Trump Media continues to face financial pressure. The company posted shrinking revenue last quarter and relies on its user base on Truth Social to support advertising sales. Bringing an energy-technology operation into the same structure raises questions about how the combined firm will balance capital needs across unrelated businesses. Still, the deal places one of the most politically visible media companies in the United States inside one of the most ambitious corners of the energy sector. With AI data-center power consumption climbing and utilities warning about shortages later this decade, fusion developers see an opening to gain attention—and potentially capital—from markets now focused on long-term energy constraints.

Copy trading has become one of the most notable trends in retail investing, promising everyday users access to the strategies of top performers. The real challenge lies in the technology that can mirror trades instantly, securely and at scale. In the United States, dub became the first copy-trading platform to deliver a compliant, fully regulated trading experience through its licensed brokerage partners — and much of that success is tied to the work of Andrii Humeniuk, a Ukrainian engineer with deep expertise in building scalable systems across global tech hubs. Joining at the prototype stage, he helped turn dub into a production-ready platform used by tens of millions of users. In 2025, dub raised a Series A and became a major player in the market. In this interview with Finance Feeds, Andrii explains how he built dub’s architecture to handle billions of transactions each month, why real-time copy trading is technically complex and how transparency can reshape retail investing. Andrii, could you tell us how your work on the dub platform began? What responsibilities did you take on when you joined the company, and what was the most challenging aspect at the start? I joined dub when the platform was still in an early prototype stage. I liked the idea right away and its potential was clear, but the system needed an architecture that could grow into a full-scale real-time trading platform. My first focus was to take that early version and turn it into a production-ready system that could handle live trading, portfolio replication and the financial compliance requirements that come with scale. I led the team that developed dub’s core trading and rebalancing engine, which drives all real-time portfolio synchronization. I introduced an event-driven, state-machine architecture to make sure every transaction is handled with accuracy, fault tolerance and full traceability. This made it possible to mirror creator portfolios across thousands of users with sub-second consistency. I also worked on shaping the engineering culture and internal processes, from code reviews to CI/CD and observability. So you were one of the first engineers in the company and essentially transformed a prototype into a market-ready fintech product. In your view, which architectural and product decisions were most important for bringing the application to market and attracting investor interest? One of the most important decisions was to design the platform as an event-driven distributed system instead of a conventional service stack. Every operation, whether a trade, a rebalance or a payout, is represented as a discrete event flowing through Kafka streams. This approach gave us horizontal scalability, full traceability and strong fault isolation across all trading workflows. We paired this with finite-state machine patterns for orchestrating transactions. Every portfolio action moves through clear stages, with every transition persisted and idempotent. This makes execution deterministic and lets us recover cleanly from failures without losing data. On the product side, we embedded analytics and engagement features directly into the trading core, which helped turn dub from a trading app into a real-time social investing ecosystem. Dub is real-time copy-trading that allows retail users to mirror the trades of hedge funds, financial influencers and even politicians. Which of these key features were the most challenging to implement from an engineering perspective, and what role did you play in their launch? The most complex and defining feature was the real-time copy trading engine itself – the system that mirrors every trade from a creator’s portfolio to thousands of follower accounts almost instantly. When a creator bought or sold an asset, those actions were propagated reliably, consistently, and in the correct order across the entire network. The biggest challenge was achieving speed, accuracy and fault tolerance at the same time. We needed to synchronize live market data, user allocations, and broker confirmations in real time without ever duplicating or losing a transaction. I led the architecture and implementation of this engine, building an event-driven workflow controlled by a finite state model. To support this, we built a hybrid in-memory and cold storage model combining Redis and PostgreSQL, which let us process billions of events each month while keeping portfolios consistent and auditable. I also introduced dynamic Kafka partition rebalancing and idempotent transaction safeguards so each trade could be executed only once, even under retries or concurrent processing. Dub is responsible for processing financial transactions and operates under strict financial regulations. What technical strategies did you design to ensure security, compliance, and reliability while keeping the product fast and intuitive for users? From the start, I treated security, compliance, and reliability as core parts of the architecture, not as layers added later. We designed a multi-layered reliability model using deterministic state machines, distributed consistency and strong observability. Each workflow runs through an idempotent finite state process with clear checkpoints, which lets the system recover safely from failures without losing data or duplicating a trade. For compliance, we built auditable pipelines where every event is immutably logged and traceable. To maintain performance, we used selective caching and a hybrid storage setup: Redis for live state, PostgreSQL for durable transactions, and S3 for long-term retention. Your specialization lies in building architecture “from scratch” to enable rapid business growth. What universal principles would you highlight for startups that aim to scale as quickly and sustainably? My approach is to design and build systems that deliver both velocity and control. For me, the core principles are straightforward. The first principle is modularity before scale: start with a clean architecture and move to microservices only when required. The second is observability as culture. At dub, every service emits structured metrics, traces and logs. This made it possible to see system behavior in real time, debug incidents in minutes instead of hours and measure exactly how changes affected performance. The third is automation over heroics. CI/CD pipelines, environment parity and reproducible infrastructure through Terraform or Kubernetes are not luxuries – they are how you protect speed while keeping consistency. The fourth is designing for failure, not for perfection. And finally, every technical decision needs to support a clear business outcome. In your work with dub and your earlier experience at Glovo, you encountered different cultural and technological contexts. How did those experiences – in Spain, the U.S., and Ukraine – shape your leadership style and technical decision making today? Each environment I worked in taught me something different about building technology and leading teams. In Ukraine, where I started my career, the engineering culture is very hands-on and resourceful. Teams solve complex problems with limited tools, and that mindset shaped my foundation – deliver no matter the constraints and value technical depth and precision. At Glovo in Spain, I learned what it means to operate at scale. I led infrastructure initiatives that improved observability and resilience across teams, and that experience taught me how to design for global reliability while still enabling local autonomy. Moving to the United States and joining dub pushed me to bring both perspectives together and apply them in a fast-moving fintech environment. Today, my leadership style is a blend of those three worlds. Which technologies or trends in fintech do you find most promising, and where do you see the biggest challenges for yourself in the coming years? Fintech is entering a phase where real-time intelligence and transparency are becoming the new standard. The most promising technologies are the ones that make financial systems more open, explainable, and efficient without sacrificing trust. I see huge potential in three areas. The first is programmable finance and composable infrastructure. API-driven brokerages and modular financial primitives let companies build trading, payments or lending capabilities almost like Lego blocks, which speeds up innovation but also demands stronger architectural discipline. The second is AI-powered analytics and personalization that allow systems to understand user behavior, portfolio risk and market context in real time. The third is blockchain-based settlement and asset tokenization. For me personally, the challenge is staying ahead of the complexity curve – leading teams that can integrate AI, data streaming and security at scale without losing simplicity. What is your broader vision for how dub, and fintech in general, can democratize investing and empower a new generation of retail investors? With dub, we’re building a system where transparency replaces privilege. Anyone can see how top creators – analysts, fund managers or even public figures – allocate their portfolios, learn from their strategies and automatically mirror those moves in real time. What once required millions in assets and a full trading desk can now be done from a phone with a few taps. Democratization also depends on trust and education. My goal is to make these systems explainable – every trade, rebalance and performance metric should be visible, auditable and easy to understand. My vision is to make professional-grade investing accessible to everyone, not just people with institutional access or deep financial expertise. I want to keep pushing that evolution – where finance feels as open and collaborative as technology itself, and where anyone, no matter their background, can build wealth through shared intelligence.

Every market cycle creates opportunity, and confusion. In 2025, AI presales are launching faster than most investors can properly evaluate them. Dashboards look familiar. Every project promises intelligence, automation, or early access to the next trend. For investors and decision-makers, the challenge is no longer discovering new AI crypto tokens, but identifying which ones actually align with real market demand and durable infrastructure. Many projects sound similar on the surface, yet they pursue very different goals beneath the branding. Some focus on tooling. Others chase analytics. A smaller group attempts to reshape how capital itself moves. That difference matters more than timing a launch window. With that lens, three names appear repeatedly in analyst discussions this year: IPO Genie ($IPO), Ozak AI, and DeepSnitch AI. Each takes a distinct approach to AI, and only one is consistently positioned as a full-stack market contender. IPO Genie ($IPO): AI Infrastructure Built For Private Market Access “The Radar Screen Institutions Missed the First Time” IPO Genie appears first in most analyst comparisons for a reason. Unlike typical AI tokens centered on automation or analytics, IPO Genie focuses on where long-term value is increasingly created: private markets. Industry research suggests that over 80% of long-term value creation now happens before companies go public, pushing serious capital deeper into private markets. IPO Genie is designed specifically for that shift. Its core technology, known as Sentient Signal Agents, uses AI to scan financial data, startup performance indicators, and market sentiment to surface early-stage opportunities before they reach public exchanges. That distinction becomes clearer when placed next to other AI presales. What IPO Genie Does IPO Genie combines AI-driven deal discovery with tokenized access to private and pre-IPO investments. Instead of predicting token prices, its AI systems identify companies, sectors, and momentum signals across venture markets. The $IPO token functions as an access and governance layer, enabling participation in curated deals through audited smart contracts. Key Elements Include: AI-powered predictive deal discovery rather than task automation Tokenized exposure to private and pre-IPO markets DAO governance and behavior-based staking incentives Institutional-grade infrastructure using CertiK audits, Fireblocks custody, and Chainlink-verified data This positioning places IPO Genie closer to financial infrastructure than a conventional AI utility token. Who IPO Genie Is For IPO Genie tends to attract investors looking beyond short-term trading narratives. It appeals to those interested in early-stage exposure, structured governance, and long-term participation in private market flows. Analysts often compare its community dynamics to early Solana or Avalanche ecosystems, where engagement preceded broader recognition. Why Analysts Are Watching IPO Genie Several factors explain the attention. IPO Genie reportedly raised $2.5 million rapidly during early presale stages, signaling demand beyond casual speculation. More than 60% of total supply is already committed, with pricing moving upward in structured stages. Analysts also highlight its compliance-first approach, which lowers friction for broader adoption and institutional participation. IPO Genie has stepped into mainstream visibility as an official sponsor of a Misfits Boxing event in Dubai on December 20th, 2025, featuring Andrew Tate versus Chase DeMoor. The sponsorship placed the project in front of a global audience during a high-attention cultural moment. Taken together, IPO Genie is often described as an AI-powered gateway to private markets rather than another automation-focused token, one reason it consistently leads presale comparisons. Ozak AI ($OZ): Automation-Focused Intelligence For On-Chain Efficiency “A Precision Tool Built for Specific Jobs” Ozak AI takes a different route. Its focus is on AI-driven automation and optimization across blockchain environments. Rather than addressing capital access, Ozak AI concentrates on improving efficiency, analytics, and execution for decentralized systems. What Ozak AI Does Ozak AI develops tools designed to automate on-chain processes and enhance data-driven decision-making. These tools support developers, protocols, and advanced users seeking optimization rather than investment exposure. Who Ozak AI Is For Ozak AI is typically suited to technically inclined users and development teams. It appeals less to investors seeking broad market exposure and more to those focused on infrastructure efficiency. Why Analysts Are Watching Ozak AI Analysts note Ozak AI’s potential within specific niches, particularly if adoption expands among developers. However, its success remains closely tied to integration and usage rather than network effects. In IPO Genie vs Ozak AI comparisons, analysts often point out a clear distinction: Ozak AI refines tools, while IPO Genie targets markets. DeepSnitch AI ($DSAI): Monitoring And Detection Through AI Analytics “A Microscope, Not a Map” DeepSnitch AI occupies a narrower but clearly defined segment of the AI token landscape. Its focus is on monitoring, detection, and analytical insight rather than access or automation at scale. What DeepSnitch AI Does DeepSnitch AI applies machine learning to detect anomalies, risks, or patterns across data streams. This positions it closer to security analytics and surveillance-style intelligence. Who DeepSnitch AI Is For DeepSnitch AI appeals to users and organizations prioritizing risk detection and data monitoring. Its applications are specialized rather than broad. Why Analysts Are Watching DeepSnitch AI Analysts acknowledge the relevance of AI-driven detection tools as blockchain systems grow more complex. Still, growth potential depends heavily on adoption within specific verticals. In IPO Genie vs DeepSnitch AI discussions, DeepSnitch is often viewed as complementary technology rather than a full ecosystem play. Side-By-Side Comparison: How These AI Tokens Stack Up  Feature IPO Genie ($IPO) Ozak AI ($OZ) DeepSnitch AI ($DSAI) Core AI Focus Predictive deal discovery Automation & optimization Monitoring & detection Market Scope Private & pre-IPO markets On-chain tooling Security analytics Target Audience Long-term investors, decision-makers Developers, technical users Risk-focused users Presale Momentum High, multi-stage demand Early-stage Early-stage Infrastructure CertiK, Fireblocks, Chainlink Varies by integration Analytics-centric Comparison Anchor Early Solana-style ecosystem Utility-focused Niche intelligence This is where surface-level similarities begin to break down. IPO Genie Vs Ozak AI: Market Access Versus Automation When weighing IPO Genie vs Ozak AI, the contrast is straightforward. Ozak AI improves processes within existing systems. IPO Genie, top new ai token, attempts to open entirely new access points to private capital. Analysts tend to favor broader market narratives when assessing long-term impact, which explains IPO Genie’s stronger positioning. IPO Genie Vs DeepSnitch AI: Ecosystem Breadth Versus Specialization In IPO Genie vs DeepSnitch AI comparisons, breadth becomes the deciding factor. DeepSnitch AI offers focused intelligence. IPO Genie integrates AI with governance, staking, and private market participation, supporting larger network effects over time. Conclusion Comparing these three projects highlights how differently AI can be applied in crypto. Ozak AI targets efficiency. DeepSnitch AI emphasizes detection. IPO Genie focuses on access, governance, and early-stage markets. For analysts and decision-makers evaluating the best AI crypto projects 2025, IPO Genie stands out as the most comprehensive presale, not because of hype, but because of scope, infrastructure, and alignment with where value is forming. If you missed early ecosystems like Solana before broader adoption, IPO Genie represents a different kind of opportunity worth watching as 2025 approaches. Join the IPO Genie presale today:   Official website Telegram Twitter (X)  Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. Always do your own research before investing in crypto.

Avelacom has expanded its presence on the Equinix London data centre campus in Slough with a new Point of Presence (PoP) in LD7, strengthening its infrastructure offering for trading firms that depend on speed-sensitive market access. LD7 is part of one of the world’s most significant financial data-centre clusters, connecting traditional venues and digital asset ecosystems through dense interconnection and proximity hosting. The company said the new PoP reduces physical distance to London-based exchanges and surrounding market participants, including brokerage firms and custodians. For proprietary trading firms and other latency-sensitive users, that proximity can translate into faster access to real-time market data feeds and improved order execution performance, particularly for strategies where milliseconds influence fill quality. Avelacom positioned the build-out as a response to rising institutional demand for colocation and dedicated connectivity, as more venues and liquidity ecosystems look beyond cloud-first deployments and back toward physical infrastructure for predictability, performance, and tighter operational control. Latency Improvements Highlight Demand for Global Trading Routes Avelacom highlighted performance gains on one of the most actively used global routes for FX and crypto market participants: London to Tokyo. Following the LD7 deployment, the firm said the route is now delivered at under 138 milliseconds round-trip latency over fibre, and under 130 milliseconds using a hybrid fibre and microwave path. For firms trading across time zones and asset classes, these marginal improvements can be meaningful. Lower round-trip latency supports faster market data consumption, quicker order acknowledgements, and tighter synchronisation between execution logic and venue responses—especially in markets where price discovery is highly competitive and fragmented across multiple venues. The LD7 expansion also aligns with a broader industry trend of building infrastructure that supports both traditional and digital markets from the same proximity footprint, as institutional traders increasingly run multi-asset strategies that span FX, listed derivatives, and crypto instruments. Takeaway: By launching a new PoP in Equinix LD7, Avelacom is strengthening its London colocation footprint and advertising sub-138ms London–Tokyo round-trip latency—an infrastructure play aimed at prop firms and other institutions trading across traditional and digital venues. Broader London Footprint Supports Colocation and On-Demand Servers Prior to LD7, Avelacom already operated Points of Presence in Equinix LD4, LD5, and LD8. Together, these London facilities form a highly interconnected environment used by exchanges, network providers, market data vendors, and buy-side and sell-side trading firms. Adding LD7 extends Avelacom’s reach across the campus and increases optionality for clients seeking to optimize proximity to specific venues or counterparties. The company said the new PoP supports both colocation and on-demand server offerings, targeting firms that want to deploy compute closer to liquidity sources without committing to long infrastructure build cycles. In practice, this approach can help firms scale capacity around market events, extend connectivity to additional venues, and reduce operational friction when entering new markets or launching new strategies. Aleksey Larichev, CEO of Avelacom, said: “Adding LD7 to our network expands the infrastructure options for our institutional clients. As more exchanges move from cloud to physical environments, clients increasingly rely on colocation and dedicated connectivity to stay competitive.” The expansion signals how latency optimization remains a core differentiator for infrastructure providers supporting increasingly sophisticated trading demand in London’s multi-venue ecosystem.

What Did the SEC Clarify for Broker-Dealers? The SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets has released long-requested guidance explaining how broker-dealers should handle the custody of “crypto asset securities,” including tokenized versions of stocks and debt instruments. The customer protection rule requires broker-dealers to maintain “physical possession or control” of customer assets — a standard that predates blockchain rails and has been a sticking point for firms exploring tokenized products. In Wednesday’s notice, the Division said it is issuing these views as an interim measure while the Commission evaluates broader custody rules and industry feedback. The guidance arrives at a time when the SEC is paying closer attention to the fast-growing tokenization segment, which SEC Chair Paul Atkins has repeatedly highlighted in recent remarks. Under the update, the SEC defines “crypto asset securities” to include “tokenized versions of an equity or debt security,” drawing a clear line between these assets and other digital tokens. Broker-dealers handling such instruments must be able to show exclusive control over the private keys used to move the tokens on a blockchain. Investor Takeaway The SEC has now confirmed that tokenized stocks and bonds fall squarely under “crypto asset securities.” Any broker-dealer touching them must meet strict custody and key-management standards. How Does a Broker-Dealer Prove “Physical Possession or Control” Onchain? The SEC says a broker-dealer can regard itself as having “physical possession or control” if it maintains exclusive access to the private keys for a given asset. This means the broker’s systems, personnel, and policies must prevent anyone — internally or externally — from being able to move customer tokens without authorization. The SEC notes that this requires written policies to protect keys from theft, loss, or misuse, alongside operational controls designed to prevent unauthorized transfers. If a firm cannot guarantee that exclusivity, it cannot claim custody. Likewise, if the broker is aware of any “material security or operational problems” in the blockchain network hosting the asset, it cannot count the asset toward custody requirements. “A broker-dealer does not deem itself to possess a crypto asset security if the broker-dealer is aware of any material security or operational problems or weaknesses with the distributed ledger technology and associated network … or is aware of other material risks posed to the broker-dealer’s business by custodying the crypto asset security,” the SEC wrote. What Risks Must Broker-Dealers Plan For? The guidance stresses that custodying onchain securities involves more than key control. Firms must prepare for protocol-level disruptions such as network attacks, consensus failures, hard forks, or “blockchain malfunctions.” The SEC expects broker-dealers to maintain written plans for handling such events, ensuring assets remain protected and that the firm can meet regulatory obligations. In addition, the SEC notes that firms must be able to comply with court orders to freeze, burn, or seize assets — actions that may not be trivial on certain chains. Broker-dealers handling tokenized equity must also monitor governance proposals, upgrade schedules, or other protocol changes that could affect asset integrity or transferability, and “take appropriate action to reduce its exposure to such risks.” This expectation may require custodians to follow chain-level governance discussions and factor those developments into their risk frameworks. The SEC did not prescribe how this monitoring should occur, but the message is clear: custody of tokenized securities requires continuous technical and operational vigilance. Investor Takeaway Broker-dealers must treat onchain securities as live systems, not static instruments. The SEC expects them to follow network health, governance changes, and chain behavior to manage custody risk. What Comes Next? The Division called the guidance an “interim step,” suggesting that broader rulemaking around crypto asset custody is still underway. For now, the update clarifies how traditional intermediaries can participate in tokenized equity and debt markets without violating the customer protection rule. The move also signals that tokenized securities are no longer treated as edge-case experiments. By framing them directly within the customer protection rule and requiring real custody standards, the SEC is outlining a path for broker-dealers to support tokenized assets while staying inside the existing regulatory framework. Whether this guidance unlocks broader participation remains to be seen, but it reduces one of the major compliance uncertainties for firms exploring tokenization and onchain settlement.

Crypto.com is strengthening one of the most important — and often overlooked — parts of its business: fiat banking access. The exchange announced an expansion of its partnership with DBS Bank, giving users in Singapore new and improved ways to deposit and withdraw both Singapore dollars (SGD) and U.S. dollars (USD). While product launches and token listings tend to grab attention, access to reliable banking rails is what keeps crypto platforms functional in regulated markets. In Singapore, where oversight is strict and expectations are high, that access is increasingly hard to secure. What’s changing for users in Singapore? Under the updated arrangement, DBS will support additional SGD and USD deposit and withdrawal channels for Crypto.com users. Transfers will move through DBS-backed banking rails, adding redundancy and speed to how funds flow between traditional bank accounts and the Crypto.com App. A notable addition is the use of dedicated virtual accounts. These accounts allow users to move funds more directly, reducing friction and minimizing the delays that often come with shared or intermediary-based banking setups. For everyday users, that typically means faster deposits, cleaner reconciliation, and fewer failed transfers. The DBS integration sits alongside Crypto.com’s existing banking relationship with Standard Chartered. Together, the two partnerships give Crypto.com one of the most robust fiat infrastructures among crypto platforms operating in Singapore. Why does this matter beyond convenience? Over the past few years, banking access has become one of the biggest points of failure for crypto companies. Even large exchanges have seen services disrupted when banks pulled back or regulators tightened rules. Singapore has taken a different approach. Rather than banning crypto activity outright, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has focused on regulation, licensing, and risk controls. That framework allows crypto firms to operate — but only if they meet high standards. By expanding its relationship with DBS, Southeast Asia’s largest bank by assets, Crypto.com is signaling that it plans to stay firmly inside that framework. This isn’t a workaround or a temporary solution. It’s long-term infrastructure built with a systemically important financial institution. Investor Takeaway Stable banking access reduces headline risk. For traders and investors, this lowers the chance of sudden fiat freezes that can disrupt trading or withdrawals. How does Crypto.com stack up against competitors? Many global exchanges still rely on payment processors or offshore banking routes for fiat access in Asia. Others have quietly scaled back services after failing to secure local banking partners. Crypto.com’s setup in Singapore stands out because it combines two major international banks under a single regulatory umbrella. That level of redundancy matters. If one rail slows or tightens, users aren’t left stranded. This doesn’t guarantee higher volumes overnight, but it strengthens Crypto.com’s credibility with regulators, institutional clients, and risk-conscious retail users — a group that continues to grow as the market matures. What’s the strategic angle from here? Singapore is more than just another market for Crypto.com. It’s the company’s headquarters and a core base for regional expansion. Enhancing fiat access here suggests further investment rather than consolidation. That could mean broader currency support, deeper integration with traditional financial services, or expanded offerings for institutional and high-net-worth clients — all within MAS guidelines. Across the industry, the message is becoming clear: crypto platforms that want to survive the next regulatory cycle need real banking partners, not temporary fixes. Crypto.com’s move with DBS puts it on the right side of that divide. Investor Takeaway Singapore remains a benchmark market. Exchanges that expand under MAS oversight may be better positioned as regulation tightens globally.