“This whale currently owns $563.9M of ETH directly through spot holdings as well as $818.7M in a loan position on AAVE,” the blockchain analytics platform said in a Wednesday post on X, adding:
“He has just added another $105.36M of ETH today alone.”
The whale has also borrowed $270 million of stablecoins from the decentralized lending platform Aave to potentially expand its ETH position, Arkham Intelligence added.
Besides this whale, Lookonchain noted that another whale is also borrowing to buy ETH, with “83,816 $ETH($288.6M) deposited on Aave and has borrowed $122.89M in stablecoins.”
Besides the #66kETHBorrow whale, another whale 0x9992 is also borrowing to buy more $ETH!
2 hours ago, 0x9992 borrowed 10M $USDC from Aave to buy 2,909 $ETH.
He currently has 83,816 $ETH($288.6M) deposited on Aave and has borrowed $122.89M in stablecoins.… pic.twitter.com/ZxFsQaexqo
These moves coincide with BitMine’s continued push into Ethereum. Over the past week, the company added 110,288 more ETH, bringing its total holdings to 3.5 million ETH (valued at approximately $12.5 billion), thereby cementing its position as the largest corporate holder of ETH.
This strengthens the narrative that whales and institutions view the recent ETH price drawdown as a good entry opportunity.
Can ETH price return to $4,000?
From a technical perspective, Ether’s price action is forming a potential V-shaped recovery chart pattern on the daily chart, as shown below.
ETH is retesting the 100-day simple moving average (SMA) at $3,450. Bulls need to push the price above this level to increase the chances of the price rising to the neckline at $4,172 and completing the V-shaped pattern.
Such a move would represent a 21% increase from the current price.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.
Metaplanet’s quarterly Bitcoin valuation gains dropped sharply as the aftermath of October’s crypto market crash continues to weigh on corporate Bitcoin treasuries.
Japanese investment company Metaplanet recorded 10.6 billion yen or $1.4 billion in Bitcoin (BTC) valuation gains during the third quarter of the year, down 39% from the 17.4 billion yuan ($2.4 billion) it posted in the previous quarter, according to earnings figures the company shared Thursday on X.
“The Company’s Bitcoin Treasury Business continues to progress steadily in line with plan and is not dependent on short-term price fluctuations,” Metaplanet said.
The company also reported a stock amortization cost of $26 million for the third quarter, which refers to the total costs associated with issuing new shares during this period.
The stock amortization cost is often used as a gauge of the cost of raising capital for a company.
Metaplanet, also known as “Asia’s Strategy,” aims to acquire 210,000 Bitcoin by the end of 2027, through equity financing opportunities.
Corporate crypto holders and Bitcoin treasuries are still feeling the pressure in the aftermath of the record $19 billion crypto market crash on Oct. 10.
Metaplanet’s Bitcoin holdings have been in the red since the market crash, as the investment firm acquired its Bitcoin holdings at an average cost of $108,000 per coin, nearly 5% below the current BTC price of $103,000.
“The company owns 30,823 bitcoins at an average acquisition cost of $108k/BTC. The giant position is now 5% underwater,” wrote macro analyst Kashyap Sriram in an X post on Nov. 6.
The analyst also criticized Metaplanet’s recent $100 million Bitcoin-backed loan, which it raised to buy more BTC in an effort to lower their total cost basis. The investment firm secured the $100 million loan on Oct. 31 using its Bitcoin holdings as collateral.
Metaplanet’s stock price fell over 27% during the past month and over 6.5% during the past five days, according to Yahoo Finance data.
The company’s stock price was also pressured by reports that Japan Exchange Group (JPX) was exploring new restrictions on publicly listed cryptocurrency holding firms, Cointelegraph reported on Thursday.
However, Metaplanet’s CEO, Simon Gerovich, said that JPX’s concerns only apply to companies with poor approval processes that have potentially sidestepped proper governance or disclosure rules.
A coordinated attack on Hyperliquid wiped out nearly $5 million from the protocol’s Hyperliquidity Provider (HLP) vault, when an unknown trader burned through $3 million in capital to manipulate the POPCAT market and trigger cascading liquidations.
Blockchain analytics company Lookonchain shared on Thursday that it all started when the attacker withdrew 3 million USDC (USDC) from the OKX crypto exchange and split the funds into 19 fresh wallets. The trader then funneled the assets into Hyperliquid to open over $26 million in leveraged longs tied to HYPE, the platform’s POPCAT-denominated perpetual contract.
After this, the trader built a $20 million buy wall near the $0.21 price point. This became an artificially created signal of strength that pushed the market upward before the orders were cancelled. When the wall collapsed, liquidity thinned as price support vanished.
This meant that dozens of highly leveraged positions were forced into liquidation, and HLP absorbed these losses. Hyperliquid’s vault showed a $4.9 million loss in the aftermath, one of the largest single-event hits incurred by the platform since its launch.
Hyperliquid market manipulator burns millions “for the plot”
While the attacker caused damage to Hyperliquid, the event revealed that the market manipulator’s own $3 million capital was completely wiped out. This suggested that the attacker’s goal was structural damage rather than profit.
The sequence represented a clear example of a trader intentionally setting fire to their own capital to shock an onchain derivatives venue, exploit its liquidity architecture and stress-test the limitations of an automated liquidity provider vault.
The event differentiated itself from typical market manipulation incidents because the attacker did not exit the event with a profit.
Instead, the trade structure suggested that the goal was to create artificial liquidity and collapse it to drag Hyperliquid’s vault into the liquidation cascade.
Onlookers reacted to the move with varying sentiments. A community member speculated that the $3 million was hedged, suggesting that the attacker had positions locked in elsewhere. Another X user described the event as the “costliest research ever.”
Another community member suggested that the event was not an attack, but rather a $3 million performance art piece. “Only in crypto do villains burn millions for the plot,” the X user wrote.
Meanwhile, a community member described it as “peak degen warfare,” where an attacker exploited the automated liquidity provider’s absorption.
The X user said this was a reminder that perp markets without sturdy liquidity buffers are open season for anyone willing to “light money on fire.”
Hyperliquid temporarily pauses withdrawals
On Thursday, community member jconorgrogan reported that the Hyperliquid bridge had stopped processing withdrawals.
The developer said that the contract was paused using the “vote emergency lock” function, indicating that the team had initiated precautionary measures against potential manipulation.
After about an hour, the developer reported that the platform started processing withdrawals again.
Hyperliquid did not issue any official announcements linking the POPCAT incident to the temporary freeze on withdrawals.
Ripple is spending about $4 billion to combine prime trading, treasury tools, payments and custody into a single integrated setup.
RLUSD trials aim to settle real card payments and corporate payouts onchain, then sync results back into ERP and TMS systems.
To scale, Ripple needs strong controls with clear reserves, strict compliance checks and transparent accounting rules.
Success will show in the data through faster settlements, lower costs and consistent real-world volume every day.
Ripple is positioning itself for a bigger role in traditional finance. In an interview at Swell 2025, the company described its $4 billion acquisition spree as the foundation for moving institutional money on the XRP Ledger alongside existing banking workflows.
The push comes after:
A new $500-million raise at a reported $40 billion valuation
A deal to acquire multi-asset prime broker Hidden Road for about $1.25 billion
A Ripple USD (RLUSD) pilot with Mastercard, WebBank and Gemini aimed at settling card payments onchain.
Taken together, the plan spans custody through Metaco, prime brokerage access and stablecoin-based settlement that integrates with the treasury and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems already used by banks and corporates.
What the $4 billion actually buys
Prime brokerage and credit: Ripple agreed to acquire non-bank prime broker Hidden Road for about $1.25 billion, giving institutions unified market access, clearing, financing and, where supported, the option to use RLUSD as eligible collateral.
Treasury software integration: A roughly $1-billion deal for GTreasury connects Ripple to corporate treasury management system (TMS) and ERP workflows, including cash positioning, foreign exchange, risk management and reconciliation. This allows onchain settlements to be reflected within existing finance systems.
Stablecoin payments stack: The purchase of Rail, valued at about $200 million, adds virtual accounts, automated back-office tools and cross-border stablecoin payout capabilities. It serves as the operational layer for routing RLUSD through real business-to-business (B2B) payment flows.
Bank-grade custody and controls:Metaco, acquired in 2023, provides segregation of duties, policy engines and institutional key management for tokens, stablecoin reserves and enterprise wallets.
Card and merchant settlement pilot: In partnership with Mastercard, WebBank (the issuer of the Gemini card) and Gemini, Ripple is testing RLUSD settlement on the XRP Ledger. The initiative marks an early step toward shifting traditional fiat card batches to stablecoin-based settlement.
Capital and distribution: The new $500-million funding round gives Ripple room to integrate its acquisitions and expand sales to banks, brokers and large corporations.
Each line item targets a distinct function, including prime access, treasury connectivity, payment operations, custody and the capital that ties them together. The structure is designed to reduce overlap and demonstrate how all the pieces fit.
Did you know? In corporate finance, most treasurers still reconcile payments by importing batch files into ERP and TMS platforms. Any onchain settlement that can auto-generate those files helps reduce manual work at month-end.
How an enterprise would use Ripple
A) Cross-border payouts for a corporate treasurer
First, the treasury team sets the ground rules in the company’s TMS, defining approval limits, currency caps and eligible beneficiaries.
Next comes funding. The finance team moves cash from the operating account and converts a portion into RLUSD or XRP (XRP) through connected banking channels or prime brokerage access, assigning wallets to each subsidiary or business unit.
When a payout is created, the treasurer decides how to handle foreign exchange, choosing whether to convert before sending or upon receipt, and routes the transaction through Ripple’s payments stack with optional conversion at the edge for last-mile fiat delivery.
Settlement is nearly instant. The ledger event, invoice reference and payment details flow back into the ERP and TMS platforms, so reconciliation happens automatically.
Safekeeping is handled either in-house, with role-based policies and hardware security module (HSM) and multiparty computation (MPC) controls or through a qualified custodian. Duties are separated to align with enterprise governance policies.
Throughout the month, real-time transaction limits, the Travel Rule and Know Your Customer (KYC) checks and thorough auditing help maintain controls and support the month-end close.
B) Broker-dealer liquidity and financing
A broker or market desk connects to spot and derivatives venues through prime brokerage APIs to centralize market access, credit, clearing and settlement. RLUSD or XRP can be posted as collateral depending on the platform’s rules. Each platform decides how much of that collateral’s value counts toward a loan or trade (called a haircut) and which asset gets used first if more funds are needed (called margin priority).
Financing is activated as needed, whether term or intraday, against approved collateral with real-time visibility into limit utilization. Positions are netted to custody at the end of the day, and any excess funds are swept to the treasury for working capital or short-term yield. Trade and position data feed into risk, profit and loss (PnL) and compliance dashboards, with records archived for audits and regulatory reviews.
C) Card and merchant settlement
In the card pilot, the acquirer nets a day’s merchant transactions and prepares a single batch. The net amount settles in RLUSD on the XRP Ledger, with the option to convert to fiat immediately at the sponsor bank.
The treasury team imports the batch file, closes receivables and updates cash positions in the ERP and TMS platforms as usual.
Disputes and chargebacks continue under existing card network rules, and any fiat adjustments map directly to accounting entries. This means finance teams do not need to modify their existing month-end close process.
Did you know? Auditors increasingly ask for deterministic links between a payment instruction, its onchain transaction and the corresponding accounting entry. API-native evidence packs can significantly shorten audit timelines.
What changes if this all lands?
Charter and Fed access
If Ripple or one of its affiliates obtains a bank charter and a US Federal Reserve master account, the setup would change for clients. Stablecoin reserves could be held directly at the Fed instead of through a commercial intermediary, reducing counterparty and settlement risk. Payment flows would also gain clearer finality windows and fewer intermediaries, which is important for treasurers who measure every leg of cost, latency and reconciliation.
Stablecoin treatment and controls
Scale depends on maintaining bank-grade discipline. Expect scrutiny over reserve segregation, stress testing, intraday liquidity management and whether RLUSD can qualify as a cash equivalent in specific contexts. Independent attestations and transparent look-throughs to reserve assets will likely be a gating requirement for many finance teams.
Card networks and sponsor banks
For card settlement and merchant payouts, alignment on disputes, chargebacks, refunds and consumer protections is essential. The onchain component must map one-to-one with existing rules so operations teams do not need to redesign their exception-handling processes.
Travel Rule, sanctions and data
Cross-border payouts require KYC and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) processes that meet correspondent banking standards, along with reliable virtual asset service provider (VASP) information exchange and sanctions screening. Institutions will look for standardized data payloads, including beneficiary information, purpose codes and audit trails that integrate directly into compliance systems.
Accounting and reporting
Finance teams will need clear policies defining the instances when RLUSD should be classified as cash, restricted cash or a digital asset, how foreign exchange (FX) is recognized and how network fees are recorded. ERP connectors, detailed sub-ledgers and tight month-end reporting packs will determine whether “day two” operations function as a routine process.
Did you know? The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Travel Rule sets a data-sharing threshold, typically around $1,000 or 1,000 euros, for VASPs. This is why stablecoin payout infrastructure emphasizes standardized beneficiary data and purpose codes.
How this differs from rivals
Most firms in this space focus on a single specialty:
Stablecoin issuers concentrate on the token and fiat on- and off-ramps.
Custodians provide safekeeping and policy controls.
Payment companies handle fund transfers.
Treasury vendors connect to ERP systems.
Prime brokers offer market access and credit.
Ripple’s bet is to package these components for institutions. The goal is to let a finance team move seamlessly from instruction in treasury to funding through RLUSD or XRP and then to execution in payments or prime brokerage. Finally, safekeeping takes place in custody without the need to stitch together multiple vendors.
The upside is straight-through processing with a single client setup, unified controls, a shared data model and fewer reconciliation breaks.
The risk lies in breadth over depth, as specialists may still outperform a full-suite solution in their specific niches. For Wall Street buyers, the key question is whether an all-in-one stack can lower total cost and latency across the entire workflow while maintaining bank-grade controls.
How to judge the Wall Street pitch
If this bridge is real, it will appear in unglamorous places first, such as treasury dashboards, card-settlement files and auditor sign-offs.
The tells are fairly simple:
RLUSD moving through merchant batches and supplier payouts
The prime, treasury and payments components operating under one client contract
Concrete charter and master-account developments that determine where reserves sit and how settlement finality is achieved.
If those signals start to appear, and corridor-level data shows better performance than the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) and Automated Clearing House (ACH) networks on cost and speed, that will be the turning point. The story will then move beyond headline mergers and acquisitions. It will begin to take shape inside the everyday infrastructure of finance.
Singapore-based cloud Bitcoin miner BitFuFu doubled its third-quarter revenue from the previous year, driven by demand for cloud mining and equipment as miners sought to capitalize on the rising price of Bitcoin.
Total revenue increased 100% to $180.7 million compared to the same period last year, with cloud mining making up $122 million, according to BitFuFu’s Q3 earnings report on Wednesday.
The increase was sparked by strong demand for cloud-mining solutions, users buying up mining equipment, and the continued expansion of mining capacity.
BitFuFu has doubled its third-quarter revenue compared to last year, thanks to a surge in cloud mining interest. Source: BitFuFu
BitFuFu operates its own mining farms, where it mines Bitcoin (BTC) directly. Additionally, it sells mining machines, provides hosting services, and allows users to rent or purchase hash rate for a fee.
Cloud mining demand increasing with hashrate
BitFuFu’s cloud-mining users increased over 40% to 641,526 compared to the same time last year, and mining equipment sales raked in $35 million, compared to only $0.3 million the same time last year.
The average cost of Bitcoin during Q3 last year was $61,000, in contrast to $114,500.
“This growth reflects strong demand for mining machines, supported by the sustained upward trend in Bitcoin prices,” the miner said.
The network hashrate has also been on the rise and is sitting at 1.19 billion, up from 687.19 million one year ago, according to analysis platform Ycharts. Cloud mining enables users to mine cryptocurrency without needing to maintain and upgrade the hardware themselves.
However, BitFuFu CEO Leo Lu said continuing to self-mine Bitcoin has continued to contribute to the company’s growth and revenue.
“Our strong third-quarter results demonstrate the benefits of our differentiated dual-engine model, combining recurring cloud-mining revenue with direct participation in Bitcoin price appreciation through our self-mining operations.”
“This model gives us multiple levers to manage volatility and sustain profitability through cycles, and our strong balance sheet provides the flexibility to invest where returns are most compelling,” he added.
BitFuFu mined 174 Bitcoin in Q3, and also increased its total holdings by 19% to 1,962 coins compared to the same time in 2024.
Crypto could see an “unexpected November rally” with the latest indicators showing traders are getting increasingly fearful, which usually results in a shift of money from weaker hands to long-term accumulators.
Social media comments about Bitcoin (BTC) are evenly split between bullish and bearish, while Ether (ETH) has just over 50% more bullish vs bearish comments. Both are less than usual, Santiment said in an X post on Wednesday.
At the same time, less than half the comments on social media about XRP (XRP) are bullish, making it one of the most “fearful moments of 2025” for the token.
The Crypto Fear & Greed Index, which tracks overall market sentiment, returned a score of 15 out of 100 on Thursday, marking “extreme fear,” the lowest rating since February.
Joe Consorti, head of Bitcoin growth at trading and liquidity protocol Horizon, said the overall sentiment among traders is at the same level it was in 2022, when Bitcoin was around $18,000, citing data from Glassnode.
However, Santiment said traders’ souring moods could be “welcomed news for the patient,” and fuel an “unexpected November rally,” because there are more diamond-handed holders waiting to snap up what weaker hands sell.
Crypto sentiment is down on social media, but that could be a good thing. Source: Santiment
“When the crowd turns negative on assets, especially the top market caps in crypto, it is a signal that we are reaching the point of capitulation,” Santiment said.
“Once retail sells off, key stakeholders scoop up the dropped coins and pump prices. It’s not a matter of if, but when this will next happen.”
Mow argues that selling pressure is coming from people who bought Bitcoin in the last 12 to 18 months and are taking profits due to fears that the cycle has peaked.
“These are not Bitcoin buyers from first principles, but rather speculators that follow the news,” he said.
“This cohort of sellers is also depleted, and HODLers with conviction have now taken their coins, which is always the best case scenario. 2026 is going to be a great year. Plan accordingly.”
Dormant Bitcoin holders moving large sums to exchanges raises concerns about long-term confidence amid growing concerns about the potential impact of quantum computing.
Strong inflows into Bitcoin ETFs failed to lift sentiment, with traders instead rotating toward fast-rising privacy coins, such as ZEC and DCR.
Bitcoin (BTC) has repeatedly struggled to maintain prices above $106,000 since early November, despite the S&P 500 sitting 1% below a new all-time high. Meanwhile, gold, the traditional store of value, has pared its recent losses and now trades just 4% below its prior record of $4,380.
Many traders say that factors unique to the cryptocurrency industry may be affecting Bitcoin’s performance, but are these serious enough to keep BTC from reaching $112,000 again?
US Dollar Index (left, red) vs. BTC/USD (right). Source: TradingView / Cointelegraph
The recent strengthening of the US Dollar Index (DXY) against a basket of major currencies reflects renewed confidence in the US Treasury’s ability to manage its fiscal challenges. When investors fear stagnating growth amid persistent inflation — a scenario often described as stagflation — the domestic currency typically weakens, as monetary expansion becomes unavoidable.
For that reason, traders often highlight the long-standing inverse correlation between the DXY and Bitcoin’s price. By contrast, the US stock market tends to benefit from a stronger dollar and lower interest rates. Reduced borrowing costs lift corporate valuations, while favorable exchange rates make imported goods more affordable when priced in the local currency.
Companies pursuing Bitcoin reserve strategies, such as Strategy (MSTR) and Metaplanet (MTPLF), have previously been among the largest corporate buyers, especially when their shares traded at a premium to their underlying assets. The mNAV multiple captures this relationship, representing the value of the Bitcoin held relative to the company’s enterprise valuation.
Bitcoin price downturn erases share issuance incentive for companies
The recent downturn in the cryptocurrency market has largely erased this advantage, removing the incentive for companies to issue additional shares. At current price levels, any new issuance would dilute existing shareholders, making it an unattractive option without a meaningful mNAV premium.
These companies can still raise funds through debt or convertible notes, but such financing is typically less beneficial for investors. Debt holders often demand collateral, which effectively reduces the amount of Bitcoin factored into a company’s enterprise value; thereby limiting potential mNAV growth.
Investor anxiety deepened after long-term Bitcoin holders, including those from 2018 or earlier, began selling amid a 20% pullback from the all-time high of $126,220. One prominent case is believed to involve Owen Gunden, an arbitrage trader from the era of the failed Japanese Mt. Gox exchange, who reportedly holds more than $1 billion worth of Bitcoin.
In the past week alone, Owen transferred more than 1,800 BTC to the Kraken exchange, valued at over $200 million. While it’s not unusual for long-dormant addresses to move funds, traders are questioning whether these transactions reflect waning long-term confidence, particularly amid growing concerns about quantum resistance and the sharp rallies in privacy-focused cryptocurrencies.
Zcash (ZEC) has surged 99% over the past 30 days, followed by a 74% gain in Decred (DCR), a 37% rise in Dash (DASH) and a 22% increase in Monero (XMR). Despite $524 million in net inflows into Bitcoin spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) on Tuesday, buyer sentiment remains muted, leaving the odds of BTC reaching $112,000 in the near term relatively low.
The selling by long-term Bitcoin holders, persistent US dollar strength and growing interest in privacy-focused tokens are collectively restraining Bitcoin’s recovery, keeping prices under $106,000 and signaling that meaningful upside may remain limited.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
The phenomenon of financial bubbles is hotly debated among industry operators, and there are several academic papers on the subject, starting with Professor Didier Sornette’s 2014 study of financial bubbles. In fact, the paper defines a “bubble” as a period of unsustainable growth with prices rising faster and faster, i.e., growing more than exponentially. Obviously, bubbles by definition are destined to burst and bring prices back to their starting value or worse.
In the recent past, Bitcoin (BTC) has experienced periods of more than exponential growth, followed by very sharp declines, called “crypto winter,” a period when no one talked about Bitcoin and other assets anymore, meaning there was a freeze around the sector, and prices collapsed. Previous declines following the Bitcoin price bubble were -91%, -82%, -81%, and -75% in the last crypto winter, respectively.
So far, the price trend of Bitcoin has followed a distinct cycle marked by halving every 210,000 blocks, equal to about 4 years, which has rhythmically determined periods of decline, recovery, and then exponential growth.
In 2011, together with Professor Ruggero Bertelli, Diaman Partners published a paper on a deterministic statistical indicator called the Diaman Ratio. This indicator creates a linear regression between prices on a logarithmic scale (as shown above for the price of Bitcoin) and time.
Without going into detail about this indicator, which is actually very useful for those who use quantitative tools to make investment decisions, the purpose of this first part of the analysis is to verify how much and how Bitcoin has entered a bubble in the past. To do this, if DR 1, it means that growth is more than exponential, which corresponds to Prof. Sornette’s definition of bubbles.
Diaman Partners took the daily historical series of Bitcoin, calculated the one-year DR, and checked when it was greater than 1.
The graph clearly shows that in previous cycles there were periods of more than exponential growth, while in the recent cycle, apart from an attempt when ETFs were approved in the United States and the price of Bitcoin exceeded the 2021 high before the 2024 halving, a phenomenon that had never happened before, the Diaman Ratio was never much higher than 0.
Does this mean that Bitcoin cycles will no longer follow the four-year rule, with crypto winter starting toward the end of the second year of the cycle? It is too early to say, but most likely the growth structure of Bitcoin has changed. To test this hypothesis, we took the volatility of the Bitcoin price with a 4-year observation window, equal to the halving cycle, and slid this volatility calculation window over time to see if it remains constant or decreases over time.
The graph shows a sharp decline in volatility, which in the early years of development was over 140% on an annual basis, then gradually declined to a current value of around 50% or less. While lower volatility also means lower expected returns, it also means greater price stability for the future and fewer surprises.
In fact, if we take the rolling annual return chart, i.e., take the performance of one year in 2011 and then calculate the return for one year on a day-by-day basis, it is clear that in the past there were returns that have decreased over time and in the last three years have in fact remained flat, confirming that the theory of the Bitcoin cycle, with fantastic years followed by a catastrophic year, has been somewhat broken.
Bitcoin rolling 1-year returns. Source: Diaman Partners
The chart above shows that average annual returns have gradually declined, with no peaks at all in the last cycle, confirming the hypothesis that Bitcoin’s risk-return structure has changed. Yet the price of Bitcoin has risen from $15,000 in December 2022 to $126,000 at recent highs, so a very attractive return has still been achieved in this cycle, but with less fanfare than in previous cycles.
4-year Bitcoin annual rolling returns. Source: Diaman Partners
The graph of average annual returns over a four-year observation period shows a clear trend toward declining Bitcoin returns over time, which is understandable when considering the total market cap of Bitcoin, as it is one thing to double an asset worth $20 billion, but quite another to double an asset worth $2 trillion.
Bitcoin wealth generated per cycle. Source: Diaman Partners
On the other hand, assuming that we can consider the rise of the fourth halving cycle to be over, which no one can deny or affirm with certainty, the total wealth generated so far is greater than in other cycles, confirming, if confirmation were needed, that Bitcoin, understood both as a network and as an asset in itself, has generated more wealth than any other type of investment in just 15 years of history.
Drawing conclusions from this analysis, from a statistical point of view:
On four occasions, Bitcoin can be considered to be in a ‘bubble’ phase, i.e., with more than exponential returns, but unlike traditional bubbles that then burst in a few months, Bitcoin has shown resilience in its growth, which on average has a Diaman Ratio of less than 1 with high but not exponential growth. In fact, a power law can describe the growth of Bitcoin’s price very well.
It can also be clearly seen that these “bubble” phenomena have decreased in intensity and duration over time, so much so that in the last cycle that began in 2024, there has been (at least for now) no more than exponential price growth.
Both returns and volatility are decreasing, suggesting that reaching values above one million (if ever) will probably take 15 years, and therefore, many predictions of Bitcoin reaching $13 million in 2040 are statistically very unlikely.
The approval of ETFs in the United States, with BlackRock’s IBIT spot Bitcoin ETF reaching $100 billion in assets under management in less than three years, becoming by far the fastest-growing financial product in history, has broken the Bitcoin cycle that predicted periods of growth, hypergrowth, and crypto winter, with new highs being reached after the next halving.
Greater stability in returns and lower volatility suggest that the crypto winter will not be “very cold” with losses exceeding 50-60% as in previous cycles, but could alternate periods of decline with new highs without the exponential jumps seen in the past.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
XStocks, a tokenized equity platform created by real-world asset (RWA) tokenization firm Backed and crypto exchange Kraken, has surpassed $10 billion in total transaction volume just over four months after its launch, signaling a growing appetite for tokenized investment products.
The platform debuted earlier this year with more than 60 tokenized equities, including Nvidia, Amazon, Tesla and Meta Platforms, as well as several exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Each xStock token is fully backed 1:1 by the underlying equity or ETF, issued by Backed in partnership with Kraken.
XStocks operates across Ethereum, Solana, BNB Chain and Tron, expanding accessibility across major blockchain ecosystems.
In addition to total trading volume, xStocks reported nearly $2 billion in onchain transaction activity and participation from over 45,000 onchain holders, with aggregate assets under management of $135 million.
The xStocks offering is one of several products with exposure to tokenized equities. Other players include Securitize, which issues tokenized shares, funds and other RWAs on the blockchain, and Robinhood Markets, which has also begun rolling out stock tokens in select markets.
Tokenized stocks grow rapidly despite being in regulatory gray area
The rapid growth of tokenized equities has occurred even as the sector continues to operate in what some experts describe as a legal gray area, according to John Murillo, Chief Business Officer at fintech company B2Broker.
Murillo was referencing the fact that tokenized shares are typically digital representations of exposure to an underlying financial asset, rather than the shares themselves.
“It is crucial to understand that investors do not own actual shares; they hold tokens issued by intermediaries, which may entitle them to payouts if the underlying shares increase in value or are sold,” he told Cointelegraph.
Despite regulatory uncertainty, industry data indicate that the total value of tokenized public stocks currently held onchain is approximately $666 million, a figure that excludes cumulative trading volume.
Franklin Templeton has expanded its tokenization and investor platform, Benji, to the Canton Network, marking another step in the growth of institutional blockchain infrastructure for tokenized investment products.
The integration, announced Wednesday, connects Franklin Templeton’s proprietary Benji Technology Platform to Canton, a blockchain network designed for regulated financial institutions. The move enables Benji’s tokenized assets, including its onchain US government money market fund, to be used as collateral and liquidity within Canton’s Global Collateral Network.
Each Benji token represents a share of Franklin Templeton’s tokenized money market fund, with yields calculated intraday and ownership recorded onchain.
The collaboration aims to link regulated tokenized investment products with institutional digital-asset markets, as more traditional financial institutions explore blockchain adoption amid clearer regulatory frameworks.
Canton’s Global Collateral Network connects banks, market makers and asset managers, allowing them to tokenize and mobilize assets for collateral management and settlement.
The network’s institutional focus has attracted major backers, including HSBC and BNP Paribas. Its developer, Digital Asset, recently raised $135 million to expand Canton’s infrastructure and ecosystem.
By joining Canton, Franklin Templeton adds regulated, onchain investment products to a growing roster of tokenized instruments on the network, further bridging the divide between traditional finance and digital-asset markets.
Franklin Templeton is among a growing number of major financial institutions turning to the tokenization of real-world assets (RWAs) — a shift that Hashgraph CEO Eric Piscini attributes partly to “rules getting clearer in major markets.”
Piscini pointed to BlackRock’s tokenized fund initiatives, Citi’s exploration of digital asset custody and Franklin Templeton’s Benji platform as examples of traditional finance embracing blockchain-based infrastructure.
Proponents argue that trillions of dollars in RWAs could eventually move onchain, citing benefits such as faster settlement, improved transparency, lower operational costs and enhanced liquidity. Still, as Pharos CEO Alex Zhang noted in a recent Cointelegraph op-ed, building a compliant and interoperable foundation for tokenized finance takes time.
The total value of tokenized real-world assets excluding stablecoins has climbed to roughly $36.6 billion, according to industry data. Institutional funds make up about $3 billion of that figure, while tokenized US Treasurys account for approximately $8.4 billion.
The tokenized RWA market has experienced significant expansion this year. Source: RWA.xyz
