The tokenization of equities, while seen as a promising way to democratize access to publicly listed company stocks, has not gained traction as expected. Proponents of tokenization argue that existing regulations block the widespread adoption of equity tokenization. The Slow Burn of Equity Tokenization: Hype Versus Reality Although the tokenization of equities is widely accepted […]

Bitcoin Magazine

Trustodial: An Ontological Dilemma A lot of criticism has been circulating after the recent announcement that Wallet of Satoshi will be returning to the United States shortly thanks to the integration of Lightspark’s recent “Spark” system, specifically focusing around the issue of trust models and whether the new version of Wallet of Satoshi constitutes a noncustodial wallet or not.  Spark is a system based on statechains (explainer article there). Statechains don’t have the most clear cut trust model. Spark is essentially the channel factory version of statechains, with numerous statechains nested inside of a transaction tree built on a single on-chain UTXO.  Statechains are a Layer 2 system that allow entire UTXOs to be freely transferred off-chain with no liquidity constraints, but with the requirement of accepting some trust tradeoffs. You must trust that an operator, the service provider essentially, will delete private key material every time the statechain is transferred.  So let’s look at what makes something noncustodial. 

• A user has unilateral control over their funds, or the ability to regain it. 
• No other party (or parties) has the ability to prevent the user from spending their funds, or regaining their ability to, or to spend them without the involvement of the user. 

The first quality definitively applies to statechains. Just like a Lightning channel a user has the ability to use a pre-signed transaction to reclaim their funds after a timelock period to ensure honest settlement. The second quality isn’t so clear cut in terms of applying or not applying.  The statechain protocol requires the operator and original user to collaboratively generate a key that neither party ever has full knowledge of. Using their shares they can collaborate to pre-sign the users withdrawal transaction. When the original user transfers it to someone else, the original user, new user, and operator all collaborate to “regenerate” the same key but with a different set of shares between the new user and operator.  After signing the new user’s withdrawal transaction, the operator is then supposed to delete the share they generated with the original users. This prevents the operator from ever signing a new transaction with the original user, and the shorter timelock on the new user’s transaction guarantees that they can spend theirs before the original user can spend his.  If the operator does not delete old key shares, then it would be possible for them to collaborate with any past user who kept their key share to steal the funds in the statechain. The Operator If the operator is doing what they are supposed to and deleting their old key shares every time the statechain is transferred, they are not a custodial system. They physically are incapable of signing any transactions in collaboration with anyone except the current and rightful owner of the statechain. The pre-signed transactions decrementing timelock guarantees that the current owner can always confirm their withdrawal transaction before any previous owner.  Operators can even run their software in an SGX enclave or other secure computing environment, and have the enclave enforce the correct behavior of the software. It can even provide proofs (granted you trust the environment to not be broken) of this that others can verify.  They also have a strong incentive to operate the protocol honestly, because in doing so they are not required to comply with the regulations that come along with being a custodial service holding other people’s money.  The Users End users have a unilateral withdrawal transaction. This can be used any time after the timelock for their ownership expires and before the timelock for the previous owners time window expires. If the operator stops responding or disappears, they have this option.  But they have to trust that the operator is operating the protocol honestly, and deleting past key shares. There is no way for them to really verify that. As mentioned above, something like the SGX enclave could handle security for the operator’s software and sign proofs it is running honest software. But all that is doing is moving the point of trust away from the operator and onto Intel, the makers of the SGX enclave.  Even when dealing with a truly honest operator, who has only ever run honest software and never cheated a single user, a user can never actually know that they are an honest operator. They can only see that the operator has been honest, and hope they will continue to be.  So….? There is no real clear cut answer. In the situation where an operator is actually being honest, it fits all the criteria I laid out above to be noncustodial. The user has an unimpeded ability to gain full access to their funds, and no one else is able to stop them from doing that or steal their funds.  The problem is that it isn’t verifiable.  There is no way to trustlessly verify as a user that you have trustless control over your funds. Even if you actually do.  So there is a problem with labeling it as noncustodial, because even if it is it is not possible for a user to ever truly verify it. But there is also a problem with calling it custodial, because the operator cannot do anything to move funds without collaborating with another user and the current user has a unilateral withdrawal transaction. This creates a dilemma in terms of categorizing tools in the space.  I don’t know what the solution is, but the first step I think is acknowledging the technical realities occurring before jumping to label things one way or another (why not a new category?) because of your own incentives. These types of questions, especially in an environment of glacially slow Bitcoin protocol changes, will become more frequent as developers struggle with the trade offs of Bitcoin’s current limitations. Bitcoin is a programmable money, and the ways people will program it won’t always fit neatly into our predefined boxes.  This post Trustodial: An Ontological Dilemma first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Shinobi.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Showed Up in DC — And Washington Took Notice By Zack Cohen, Bitcoin Policy Institute Before diving into the recap, I want to say thank you. On behalf of the entire team at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, thank you to everyone who attended, supported, spoke, tuned in, or participated in any way. We spent months preparing for our third Bitcoin Policy Summit. What unfolded in Washington last week exceeded anything we could have expected. More than 1,000 people joined us: builders, policymakers, students, agency staff, journalists, energy experts, and human rights advocates. And what they found was not a party dressed up as a conference, but a serious two-day working session that reflected how far the Bitcoin conversation has come – and where it’s going. Bitcoin has long been misunderstood or sidelined in DC. It’s been easy for policymakers to dismiss or ignore it. But the 2025 Summit sent a different signal: Bitcoin isn’t going away. It’s not on the fringe. It’s at the center of emerging conversations about national strategy, economic strength, digital rights, and innovation. A Welcome That Set the Tone We opened the week with a packed welcome party, co-hosted with our friends at PubKey. To outsiders, DC may seem like a rigid town — buttoned-up, formal, slow-moving. But if you spend real time here, you know the truth: DC runs on relationships. And relationships are built in places like this. Over 450 attendees gathered in a room buzzing with live karaoke, strong cocktails (shoutout to Unchained for devising the Old Fashioned Bull Run and the Miner’s Mule), and constant conversation. It was loud. It was joyful. But most of all, it was serious energy. Bitcoiners had arrived. Who Was in the Room This year’s summit brought in:

• 1,000+ total attendees
• 300+ public policy professionals
• 35 congressional offices, including 12 members of Congress
• 100+ federal government employees
• 50+ members of the press
• 49 universities
• 90,000+ livestream viewers

Attendees included national security experts, financial regulators, think tank analysts, open-source developers, nonprofit leaders, and more. Bitcoin’s coalition is broadening, and it showed. What We Talked About The program was structured around clear themes: national security, energy, privacy, financial inclusion, and legislative strategy. Keynotes, panels, and lightning talks made space for both technical depth and broad vision. In the opening segment, Zack Shapiro outlined BPI’s national strategy framework — a vision of American Bitcoin leadership grounded in open-source values, resilience, and forward-looking policy. That was followed by a sharp panel on Senate priorities, including the BITCOIN Act. Alex Leishman gave a data-rich talk on the American Bitcoin advantage — why our institutions, capital markets, and rule of law position the US to lead. Alex Gladstein brought the human rights lens to life, reminding the room that Bitcoin is still the most powerful freedom technology of the 21st century. Patrick Witt, Deputy Director of the President’s Council on Digital Assets, reiterated the administration’s strategic interest in Bitcoin, highlighting ongoing progress: “There will be the forthcoming report on the interagency activities. We’ve already taken some steps with the SPR. The question now is, how do we follow that up with an accumulation plan? There’s no shortage of opportunities and work to be done. So after we leave here, I’ll get right back to it.” Two democrats, Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) and Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) joined Bitcoin Core’s 10th known developer Matt Corallo and BPI Co-president Grant McCarty to discuss the need for making the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act bipartisan.  At one point during the panel, Rep. Torres remarked,  “The value of Bitcoin is more secure than the value of gold because you can always find more gold, but the supply of Bitcoin in the world is going to remain fixed in perpetuity.” Rep. Gottheimer, who recently signed on as a co-sponsor of the bill, joined Rep. Torres on stage to explain his decision to co-sponsor the bill and underscore the importance of protecting innovators and preserving the integrity of the open-source development ecosystem. In one of the most high-impact sessions, BPI’s Zack Shapiro sat down with SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce to discuss ETF structure, qualified custody, and what the future of Bitcoin-native financial infrastructure might look like. It was detailed, honest, and substantive — exactly what this moment calls for. Office Hours and the Q&A Room New this year, we introduced structured office hours: one-on-one sessions where attendees could sit down with our research fellows. These conversations dug into mining, privacy, regulation, and monetary strategy in an unfiltered setting. The Q&A Room added another layer of depth. Cygnal CEO Brent Buchanan walked through a recent poll of 800 likely midterm voters. The findings were clear: Bitcoiners are becoming a political constituency. Ignore them at your own risk. Anna Chekhovich also led a foundational Bitcoin 101 session for policymakers, breaking down the basics of Bitcoin in plain language, rooted in her global human rights work. Bitcoin on the Hill BPI’s Day on the Hill marked the largest coordinated effort to date of Bitcoin advocates engaging directly with lawmakers. Over 120 attendees participated in 118 confirmed meetings with congressional offices:

• 48 Senate offices
• 70 House offices
• Over 10 meetings at the member level
• Offices from 68 Democrats and 50 Republicans
• Representation from 28 states, DC, and a U.S. territory

This wasn’t performative. It was strategic. For many in Congress, these were the first real conversations they’d had with serious, mission-driven Bitcoin advocates. Reflections What stood out this year was the tone. Bitcoiners came dressed in suits. Not as a costume, but as a signal. We came to engage seriously. The excitement in the room wasn’t hype — it was grounded in focus, preparation, and a shared sense that this moment mattered. And DC responded. Policymakers and staff weren’t just open, they were engaged. They asked good questions. They listened. The distance between Bitcoin and Washington is shrinking, fast. Personally, the most striking realization was that Gen Z had shown up in force. It wasn’t just the number of young people in the room—it was their presence. They were engaged, sharp, curious, and genuinely excited to be part of the conversation. I’ve been to more conferences than I can count, and this was the first time it felt like my peers weren’t watching from the sidelines. They were in it—asking questions, driving dialogue, shaping the future. And best of all, we’re only just getting started. This Is Only the Beginning The Bitcoin Policy Institute is uniquely positioned to host a summit that answers to no one but its mission. Bitcoin isn’t asking for special treatment. It’s not lobbying for handouts. It’s making a case, on the merits, for why it matters to American sovereignty, innovation, and economic freedom. That case just got a lot harder to ignore. See you next year. This is a guest post by Zach Cohen. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
This post Bitcoin Showed Up in DC — And Washington Took Notice first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Zack Cohen.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Treasury Companies Are Bubbles Half a year has passed since the publishing of my initial report on the company then-named MicroStrategy, now simply Strategy. Other than a name change, the company has since then broadened the arsenal of its financial products, accumulated more bitcoin, and fueled a wide array of companies copying Michael Saylor’s playbook. There seem to be bitcoin treasury companies everywhere. Due for an update, we will now investigate whether or not these bitcoin treasury companies’ operations are in line with the predictions made in the initial report, and yet again attempt to conclude where all this is eventually going. A Cause for Alarm In December last year, the company seemed near invincible: With its bitcoin yield KPI accumulating at a mind-boggling annual rate of above 60%, optimism reigned. It was no wonder then that most of the arguments carefully laid out in the report released at that time were either ridiculed, ignored, or met with snarling challenges to sell the shares short. The share price, denominated either in dollar or bitcoin, is at time of writing flat compared to those days and so far offers little in terms of vindication. Tragically few understood or even reached the most important conclusion of my December report, which concerns the source of the bitcoin yield. We will therefore iterate what’s wrong with the company’s metric, and why this should be a cause of alarm for any serious investor. The bitcoin yield — the increase in bitcoin per share — reaching old shareholders comes from the pockets of new shareholders. The new shareholders, many of them buying shares in the hope of getting a high bitcoin yield themselves, provide the bitcoin yield either directly by buying Strategy common shares created in the company’s world-record sized ATM (“at the market”) offerings or indirectly by buying the shares borrowed (and then sold) by delta neutral hedge funds that simultaneously hold the company’s convertible bonds. This is the Ponzi part of company operations — publicly boasting a bitcoin yield far higher than any conventional yield, while obfuscating the fact that the yield stems, not from the sale of company goods or services, but from the new investors themselves. They are the yield, and the harvesting of their hard-earned money will continue as long as they willingly provide it. The size of the harvest is in proportion to the size of the confusion, here measured as the premium of common shares over company net assets. This premium is nurtured by complicated but inviting company narratives, promises, and financial products. Because the word “Ponzi” has been thrown Bitcoiners’ way for over a decade, they have become accustomed — and rightly so — to simply disregard such critiques altogether. But just because a company within the Bitcoin sector intentionally or inadvertently has constructed a Ponzi scheme, that does not obviously mean that bitcoin itself is a Ponzi. The two assets are separate. During metallic monetary standards of the past, Ponzi schemes existed, but that does not mean the precious metals themselves ever were, or are, such schemes. When I make this claim of Strategy in its current form, I mean it from the point of definition, not from tiresome hyperbole. The Accumulation Continues Before drawing any further conclusions, it is first time to pick up where we left off in the initial report, and map relevant company decisions made over the last six months. Strategy announced on December 9 that approximately 21,550 bitcoin had been acquired for about $2.1 billion (average price: approximately $98,783 per bitcoin). This purchase was conducted with proceeds from the ATM outlined in the famous 21/21 Plan initiated earlier the same year. Just a few days later, over 15,000 more bitcoin were purchased, also through the ATM offering, and a few days after that announcement, about 5,000 more were purchased. The end of 2024 saw the company requesting from its shareholders an amendment to increase the number of authorized shares of class A common stock from 330,000,000 shares to 10,330,000,000 shares — in other words, a 30x. The number of authorized shares of preferred stock was to be increased from 5,000,000 shares to 1,005,000,000 shares — a 200x. All this, though not the same as stating the full amount to actually be issued, was done to give the company more liberty in future financial operations as the 21/21 Plan quickly ran its course. By also focusing on preferred stock, another variant of funding could now be pursued. The full year ended with about 446,000 bitcoin owned by Strategy, and with a company bitcoin yield of 74.3%. Perpetual Strike Preferred Stock The new year started with an 8-K filing stating that Strategy was now ready to seek the new funding through preferred stock. The new instrument, as the name implies, was to be senior to the company’s common shares, meaning the owners of the preferred shares had a stronger claim on any future cash flows. Initially, a $2 billion raise was the stated goal. While the new instrument was being prepared, 450,000 bitcoin had been accumulated by January 12. At the end of the month, all 2027 convertible bonds were called on to be redeemed for newly issued shares, as the conversion price was now below the market price of the shares. Any Strategy convertible bond far “in the money” becomes unappealing to the largest buyers of such instruments — the gamma-trading, delta neutral hedge funds — who prefer early conversion followed by new convertible bond issuance over holding the old bonds until maturity. On January 25, 2025, the company finally filed its prospectus for Strike perpetual preferred stock ($STRK), and about a week later, 7.3 million Strike shares were issued with 8% cumulative dividends on the liquidation preference of $100 per share. In practice, this meant a $2 per share quarterly dividend in perpetuity, or until the shares are converted to Strategy shares in case the price of the latter reaches $1,000. Conversion was defined at the ratio 10:1, meaning 10 Strike shares must be converted for every new Strategy share. In other words, the instrument is akin to a dividend-paying perpetual call option on Strategy common shares. If deemed necessary, Strategy can pay the dividends in the form of its own common shares. On February 10, about 7,600 bitcoin were purchased with the proceeds from the Strike issuance as well as from conventional ATM offering of common shares. On February 21, Strategy issued $2 billion worth of convertible bonds maturing March 1, 2030, with a conversion price of about $433 per share, representing a conversion premium of about 35%. About 20,000 bitcoin could quickly be purchased with the proceeds. Shortly thereafter, a new prospectus was published, enabling the company to issue up to $21 billion worth of Strike perpetual preferred stock, meaning the already ambitious 21/21 Plan of last year now seemed to morph into something even more massive. Perpetual Strife and Stride Preferred Stock As soon as the company had publicly announced its ambitious expansion of its funding plan, yet another instrument was announced; Strife ($STRF), a perpetual preferred stock similar to Strike, was to go live with 5 million shares. It was to offer 10% annual dividends in cash — paid quarterly — instead of 8% in cash or common shares. Strife, unlike Strike, had no equity conversion feature, but was senior to both common shares and Strike. Any dividend delay was to be compensated by higher future dividends, with a maximum of 18% total annual dividend rate. At time of issuance, the initial plan of issuing 5 million shares seems to have been increased to 8.5 million shares, raising over $700 million. With ATM activity for the common shares as well as for Strike, Strategy could finally announce in March that the company held over 500,000 bitcoin. April saw mostly regular common share ATM activities, until that type of funding was all but depleted. Strike ATM activity continued as well, but due to what was likely low liquidity, the dollar amount raised was negligible. With the proceeds, Strategy’s total bitcoin position climbed above 550,000 bitcoin. On May 1, Strategy announced the intention of launching another $21 billion common share ATM offering. This announcement came very shortly after the ATM arm of the initial 21/21 Plan had been exhausted, and fully vindicated the logic outlined in the previous report as well as on X. As any premium to net assets creates an arbitrage for the company, management is bound to continue to print new shares overvalued relative to underlying bitcoin assets in order to capture it. Issuance started almost immediately, and more bitcoin could be accumulated. As the fixed income arm of the initial 21/21 Plan already had been extended with the new preferred stock in mind, investors now faced a massive 42/42 Plan, meaning a maximum of $42 billion in common share issuance and $42 billion in fixed income security issuance. May also saw the SEC filing of a new $2.1 billion ATM offering for the Strife perpetual preferred stock instrument. At the end of the month, all three ATM offerings were printing shares for the acquisition of new bitcoin. In the beginning of June, yet another instrument was announced: Stride ($STRD), a perpetual preferred stock asset similar to Strike and Strife, was soon to launch. It was to offer 10% optional, noncumulative dividends in cash, had no equity conversion feature, and was junior to every other instrument except the common shares. A little less than 12 million shares worth about $1 billion were initially issued, paving the way for about 10,000 more bitcoin for the company coffers. A Dazzling Mosaic of Bitcoin Treasury Companies With the STRK, STRD, and STRF products launched, and Strategy’s 21/21 Plan in full swing, the full picture of what has been going on in the last six months should be clearer. I pointed out in the initial report that the main rationale behind the convertible bonds was not, despite the claims of the company, to offer bitcoin exposure to a section of the market in need and want of such. The buyers of the bonds were almost all of them delta neutral hedge funds, and, being simultaneously short Strategy shares, they never had any actual bitcoin exposure. It was all a ruse. The true reason that Strategy offered these securities to lenders was that it gave retail investors an impression of financial innovation targeting a multitrillion-dollar industry, as well as facilitating further bitcoin accumulation without equity dilution. And as the investors bid on the common shares, so did the price discrepancy to net assets and the opportunity of risk-free bitcoin yield grow in proportion. The greater the economic confusion, coupled with Michael Saylor’s way with words and vivid analogies, the larger the company’s arbitrage opportunity. By issuing three different perpetual preferred stock securities over the last six months, in addition to the various convertible bonds already in place, these complicated financial products could now create an appearance of financial innovation, thus spurring further bidding on the common shares. At the time of writing, the common shares trade near double that of net assets, which is a great feat by company management, given the large size and activity of the common share ATM offerings. It means Strategy can continue to buy about two bitcoin for the price of one in a risk-free fashion. In 2024, the company could enjoy tailwinds originating from the popular “reflexivity flywheel” theory, where it was argued that the more bitcoin the company purchased, the more its shares would increase in value, resulting in the opportunity to buy even more bitcoin. In 2025, this self-referential stupidity morphed slightly to a “torque” narrative, manifesting itself as official company depictions of fixed income cogwheels rotating the core that is the common shares, with bitcoin yield produced from the machinery as a result. Exactly from where, or how, the yield was created, few investors seemed to be asking themselves, and instead the made-up dynamic was mindlessly celebrated.

Preferred shares are financial assets, and not subject to the laws of physics. Being an engineer, it is not surprising that Saylor should come up with all these fallacious analogies so that bitcoin yield would appear to stem from what can only be viewed as financial alchemy. But since there are no actual company revenues to speak of, no actual banking (the company borrows, but does not lend), the bitcoin yield must in the end stem from the earlier outlined Ponzi element of the company’s business model; retail investors are dazzled by carefully curated narratives, causing them to bid up the price of common shares enough for the bitcoin yield opportunity to materialize. Whatever bitcoin yield originating from the various debt instruments cannot yet be considered settled as debt must eventually be paid off. Only the bitcoin yield stemming from common share ATM offerings is immediate and final — a true profit. A Bubble of Bitcoin Treasury Companies Oblivious or not to the fact that narratives can’t influence reality forever, the massively successful bitcoin yield concept of Strategy has spread like a wildfire among management teams of smaller companies all over the world. CEOs have seen how Strategy insiders, by continuously dumping shares on the retail investors currently chasing the shares, have become immensely rich, and so have started copying the playbook. The constant Strategy insider selling can be verified by looking at the numerous Form 144 filings. Many of these companies have successfully pulled this off, already enriching management and old shareholders at the expense of new ones. But it must all end at one point, and many of these companies, grasping in desperation at the bold, new strategy of becoming bitcoin treasury companies (due to the conventional main business struggling or even failing) will be the first that are compelled to sell their bitcoin assets to pay creditors when things take a turn for the worse. Michael Saylor himself once admitted that he was desperate before stumbling over bitcoin.

• Metaplanet was once known as Red Planet Japan and struggled mightily to be profitable in Japan’s budget hotel sector.
• Before Méliuz SA desperately adopted a bitcoin acquisition strategy, it had undergone a 100:1 reverse split.
• Vanadi Coffee SA drifted ever closer to bankruptcy, managing five cafes and a bakery in Spain’s Alicante region, but its pivot to a bitcoin strategy now seems to have performed miracles for its share price.
• The notorious meme stock company Trump Media & Technology, with no revenue to speak of, is now pursuing billions of dollars in funding for the purpose of creating a bitcoin treasury company in order to rescue a share price trading at all-time lows.
• Bluebird Mining Ventures Ltd, also in desperation, I would imagine — at least if the share price is any indicator — just recently decided to sell any gold it managed to mine in order to fund bitcoin purchases for its treasury; the shares are at time of writing up almost 500% in a month.
• H100 Group, a small and until recently struggling Swedish biotech company, has, at the time of writing returned, to its investors about 1,500% in a month on news that Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, is funding the company through some type of convertible bonds, for the pursuit of a bitcoin treasury strategy.

The list could go on and on, but I think the point is made; it is not Microsoft, Apple, or Nvidia that are becoming bitcoin treasury companies, but failing companies with nothing to lose. Jesse Myers, a Strategy supporter and a direct influence on Michael Saylor’s bitcoin valuation modeling, admitted that,  “[…] with MicroStrategy, Metaplanet and Gamestop, they are all zombie companies. They all had […] a reason to take a serious look in the mirror and say, we can’t keep doing the strategy that we’ve… the path we’ve been on. We have to radically reinvent our approach to delivering shareholder value.”  All these desperate companies have looked at Michael Saylor and Strategy and believe they have found a clear path to riches. By copying the financial alchemy themselves, they are now all involved in a great transfer of wealth as the bitcoin treasury company bubble runs its course. When the Mosaic Breaks Though part of the impressive company mosaic, Strike, Strife, and Stride are all senior to equity. The same is true for the convertible bonds, not all of them are currently “in the money.” Future free cash flow will always have to reach holders of these instruments before whatever is left can go to owners of the common shares. In good times, this is obviously not a problem due to the rather low debt ratio of the company; in bad times, the value of all company assets decline considerably while debt obligations remain — like tall, looming threats to any new creditor. Due to a phenomenon sometimes referred to as debt overhang, any new creditor will be hesitant to lend for the purpose of paying off other debt obligations. What started as an enchanting collection of narratives and exaggerations morphs into something turning on its creator. This is all exacerbated by the fact that a prolonged bitcoin bear market will cause further sell pressure on the asset by the many bitcoin treasury companies then in distress. The more popular Strategy’s playbook becomes, in other words, the deeper the future bitcoin crash, likely wiping out much of the equity of most companies having pursued such a strategy to the bitter end. In summary: Michael Saylor likes bitcoin. He, like all of us, prefers more bitcoin to less bitcoin. It is then extremely naive to think that he will let company management pass on what is by definition an arbitrage. When common shares trade at a premium to net assets, the company can create risk-free profits for its old shareholders by transferring wealth from the buyers of newly issued shares. This will continue in the form of ever-larger common share ATM offerings alongside new, obfuscating ”innovative products”, despite protests and mutterings about equity dilution. Evidence of this claim is my prediction made in March, coming true in the form of a new $21 billion ATM offering barely one and a half months later. If Strategy does not act on this arbitrage, all the copy-cats will capture it instead as they attempt to increase their bitcoin treasury in an equally risk-free manner. In the frantic scramble to create and expand all these arbitrage opportunities, companies will take on debt in various forms, and danger abounds. During the next bitcoin bear market, the Strategy share price will reach — and then break below — net assets per share, inflicting large bitcoin-denominated losses on anyone buying at today’s premium. The best action a Strategy investor can take today is doing exactly what the company and its insiders are all doing: Sell the shares!  Bitcoin is no longer the main strategy of this company, nor of any of the now multiplying bitcoin treasury companies; you are. This is an edited version of the article posted on the author’s Medium page. A fuller assessment is featured in the next Bitcoin Magazine Print issue — be sure to get your subscription now. BM Big Reads are weekly, in-depth articles on some current topic relevant to Bitcoin and Bitcoiners. If you have a submission you think fits the model, feel free to reach out at editor[at]bitcoinmagazine.com. This post Bitcoin Treasury Companies Are Bubbles first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Emil Sandstedt.

On the heels of significant progress in its protracted legal battle, Ripple, the blockchain-based payments firm closely associated with the XRP cryptocurrency, confirmed Wednesday that it has filed an application with the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)for a national banking license. The license would allow the company to potentially act as a custodian for its own reserves under federal banking regulations amid President Donald Trump’s explicitly crypto-friendly administration. Ripple’s application follows a similar move by Circle, signaling a trend among stablecoin issuers seeking federal oversight as U.S. legislation to regulate stablecoins and crypto market structure advances. Ripple is Seeking To Create A National Trust Bank In The US Ripple submitted its application to the OCC on Wednesday (July 2). The company’s chief executive officer Brad Garlinghouse shared the news on the X (formerly known as Twitter) social media platform, following a report from the Wall Street Journal. “True to our long-standing compliance roots, Ripple is applying for a national bank charter from the OCC,” he stated. “If approved, we would have both state (via NYDFS) and federal oversight, a new (and unique!) benchmark for trust in the stablecoin market.” True to our long-standing compliance roots, @Ripple is applying for a national bank charter from the OCC. If approved, we would have both state (via NYDFS) and federal oversight, a new (and unique!) benchmark for trust in the stablecoin market.

Earlier in the week via… https://t.co/IdiR7x3eWZ— Brad Garlinghouse (@bgarlinghouse) July 2, 2025 The license would allow Ripple to extend its cryptocurrency services and operate across state lines under federal laws. Ripple is the issuer of the $440 million dollar-pegged RLUSD stablecoin regulated by the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS). Earlier this week, Ripple subsidiary Standard Custody & Trust Company applied for a Federal Reserve master account, as Garlinghouse noted, which would allow the firm to hold RLUSD’s dollar reserves directly with the US central bank — boosting security and transparency. Ripple’s move comes just two days after its rival stablecoin issuer Circle confirmed its own application to secure a national bank charter. Anchorage Digital is the only crypto company with such a bank charter. Stablecoin issuers are seeking bank charters partly due to expected regulatory demands under the GENIUS Act stablecoin legislation that recently passed the Senate — and which President Trump urged the House to pass “LIGHTNING FAST” so that he can sign it into law. If Ripple indeed secures the national trust bank charter, The Wall Street Journal suggested that the San Francisco-based firm would likely offer additional crypto-related services in the future. XRP was priced at $2.26 as of press time, reflecting a 4.2% gain on the day.

Grayscale’s proposal to convert its Digital Large Cap Fund (GDLC) into a spot ETF made headway this week after the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on Tuesday gave the sign-off on an accelerated basis for the listing and trading of the fund on NYSE Arca. However, investors will have to wait longer as its debut has been temporarily delayed. SEC Hits Pause On GDLC Conversion To ETF The SEC put a pause on converting the Grayscale Digital Large Cap Fund LLC a day after agency staff approved the fund to start trading.  “This letter is to notify you that, pursuant to Rule 431 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 CFR 201.431, the Commission will review the delegated action,” the letter, addressed to the New York Stock Exchange, stated. “In accordance with Rule 431(e), the July 1, 2025 order is stayed until the Commission orders otherwise.” It can be found here on the SEC website. We have a few theories as to why this happened.

1. The SEC doesn't want to let anything to launch under the 19b-4 process until they officially approve or come up with some framework for digital assets in the ETF wrapper. pic.twitter.com/WegC5d2Tcj— James Seyffart (@JSeyff) July 2, 2025 Bitcoin comprises around 80% of the fund’s holdings. Roughly 11% of the ETF’s assets would be in Ethereum, while Solana accounts for approximately 2.8% of the fund, Ripple’s XRP commands over 4.8%, and Cardano (ADA) has a weighting of 0.8% in the fund. The SEC told NYSE that it would let it know “of any pertinent action taken by the Commission.” Bloomberg ETF analyst James Seyffart suggested the delay may be tied to the SEC’s ongoing efforts to create an internal framework for issuing crypto exchange-traded products. The SEC doesn’t want to let anything launch under the 19b-4 process until they officially approve or come up with some framework for digital assets in the ETF wrapper,” Seyffart noted. Bloomberg’s senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas concurred with this observation. The plot thickens. Upper level of SEC telling $GDLC it can't launch until otherwise notified. Not sure why, no other info than this letter. My guess tho: They want to issue the crypto ETP listing standards before any '33 act spot ETFs hit market with these other coins. So likely… https://t.co/Za7rYk1o0E— Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) July 2, 2025 While the SEC greenlighted Bitcoin and Ethereum spot ETFs, it has yet to give the nod to other altcoin spot products, including those tracking the price of Solana, XRP, and Cardano. The Bloomberg analysts are confident the regulator will approve such crypto products by year-end, though.

Independent crypto analyst Ali Martinez cautioned of a potential downside for Bitcoin after spotting a bearish signal from a reliable technical indicator. In a recent post on the X platform, Martinez told his followers that the Tom DeMark (TD) Sequential indicator, which has predicted every major Bitcoin crash, had flashed again. The indicator, according to Martinez, was warning that a 63% reversal could be in the offing. “The Tom DeMark Sequential just gave a quarterly sell signal. This is a rare warning that has historically preceded brutal drawdowns,” the pundit stated. Martinez noted that the TD Sequential sent a sell signal in 2015, and a 75% Bitcoin drop ensued. In 2018, the same setup saw Bitcoin plummet by over 85%. The TD Sequential indicator is an oscillating trend-following chart overlay indicator that is used to identify short-term trend reversals based on changes in intraday highs and lows. In other words, the indicator sparks when an asset sees an overextended rally and is due for a brutal correction. In this case, the indicator predicts that the BTC price could see a frantic drop from the current level, dropping as much as 63%, to trade hands at around $40,000. Such a move would mark a huge drawdown as Bitcoin has been trading above the psychologically important $100K level for the most part in recent months. Today, BTC topped the $110,000 mark for the first time since June 11 after U.S.-listed spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) drew in roughly $408 million on Wednesday — a sign of investors’ unwavering confidence. Since May 1, these BTC products have registered $9.91 billion in inflows, approximately 20% of their total inflows since launching in January 2024, data from Farside shows. The world’s largest and oldest crypto was valued at $110,295 as of publication time, a more than 2.4% gain since Wednesday.

We’re thrilled to announce that Kraken ranked #2 globally in Kaiko’s Q2 2025 Exchange Ranking, up from our #3 spot in Q1. This advance reflects what our global community already knows: We aren’t just one of the world’s leading crypto exchanges, we’re a platform that’s constantly improving, evolving and pushing the industry forward. Kaiko’s exchange ranking is among the most rigorous in the space, offering a data-driven assessment across multiple core dimensions, including market quality, legal and regulatory compliance, security practices and transparency standards. Kraken performed well across all of these categories, with especially strong marks in market depth, order book consistency, regulatory footprint and data openness. This report highlights not just where we stand today, but how our long-term strategy continues to deliver for traders, institutions and crypto-native builders alike. First off, who is Kaiko? Kaiko is a leading provider of cryptocurrency market data, analytics and indices, offering businesses institutional-grade, regulatory-compliant solutions. These solutions are used by Kaiko Indices to conduct its independent quarterly assessment of spot cryptocurrency exchanges, ranking them based on various factors, including liquidity. Here’s a breakdown of why Kraken was ranked the #2 global exchange by Kaiko. Consistently excellent and only getting better From day one, Kraken has been built with a clear purpose: To accelerate the global adoption of cryptocurrency while raising the bar for trust, reliability and service in the industry. Being recognized as Kaiko’s #2 global exchange is a validation of that mission. But this isn’t a victory lap. It’s a milestone on a much longer journey. What distinguishes Kraken isn’t just one strength, it’s many, including our product performance, risk management and client-first culture. Let’s take a closer look at how our values align with the criteria Kaiko evaluates: Market quality: Deep liquidity, tight spreads, real volume In the category of market quality, Kaiko assesses how exchanges support price discovery, reduce slippage and maintain liquid books across pairs and time zones. At Kraken, we’ve built one of the deepest and most stable liquidity pools in crypto. Our professional-grade infrastructure handles billions of dollars in daily volume, with ultra-fast execution and minimal downtime. We support advanced order types and provide deep books across spot, margin and derivatives markets – all while maintaining consistently tight spreads and low latency. Clients, from retail traders to institutions, rely on Kraken because we provide true market depth (not inflated metrics). Our volume is real, our spreads are competitive and our uptime is world-class. Security and compliance: Always ahead of the curve We have long set the benchmark for security and compliance in crypto, in large part because of our multiple, global-market licenses and registrations, our strong operational track record and our continued investment in compliance and client protection. Kaiko’s ranking incorporates both regulatory posture and security controls. We treat regulation as a path to legitimacy, not a burden. We’re registered in multiple major jurisdictions, including the U.S., U.K., EU, Canada, Australia and beyond. Our client fund safeguards, storage protocols and regular penetration testing ensure we meet (and often exceed) institutional security expectations. This is why Kraken is trusted by governments, hedge funds, asset managers and high-volume traders worldwide. Transparency: Clear data, real metrics, honest communication Kaiko also weighs data openness and transparency – values that are woven into Kraken’s DNA. We publish real-time market data, historical feeds, proof of reserves attestations, and clear API access across all products. Where others may obscure volume, mislead with synthetic metrics, or delay disclosures, Kraken believes in openness by default. We back our claims with verifiable facts – and in crypto, that’s everything. We’re also one of the first major exchanges to support regular third-party audits, enabling clients to independently verify that their assets are backed 1:1. Transparency isn’t just a feature. It’s a responsibility we’ve embraced from day one. Momentum that matters While we’re honored to hold the #2 position globally, what excites us most is the direction we’re heading. In Q4 of 2024, Kraken was in the top five. In Q1 2025, we moved up to #3. Now, in Q2, we’ve risen again –  and we’re not slowing down. That kind of sustained momentum is only possible because of the Kraken team’s unwavering focus on:

• Client-first innovation, from intuitive UX to advanced trading features
  
• Resilience and security at every layer of the stack
  
• Global expansion with regulatory alignment
  
• Open and honest engagement with our users and the broader ecosystem
  

We’re proud to be building a platform that supports the future of finance – the next billion people coming into crypto. Built for the long run Kraken’s rise in Kaiko’s ranking is the result of years of focused effort, values-driven decisions and community trust. But our work isn’t finished. We will continue to innovate, listen and lead with integrity. Whether you’re a new trader or an experienced institution, we’re committed to giving you the tools, security, and transparency you need to thrive in crypto. Thank you to our clients, our partners, and the Kraken team for helping us reach this milestone. We’re proud to be #2 — and more driven than ever to build what comes next. Get Started with Kraken The post Kraken rising: #2 in Kaiko’s Q2 2025 Exchange Ranking appeared first on Kraken Blog.

At Kraken, we’re committed to building a secure and trusted platform for our clients. Over the past few years, we’ve significantly strengthened our global compliance framework – investing deeply in the people, processes and systems that keep our platform secure. We recently reached a key milestone in that journey: the completion of a multi-year effort to enhance our sanctions compliance program across the board. This achievement reflects not only our ongoing engagement with regulators – including the finalization of commitments made in past years – but also the ongoing advancement of Kraken’s approach to risk, oversight and operational excellence. As part of our ongoing work with U.S. regulators, Kraken recently completed its third and final certification with the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) – an external validation of the robust controls and processes we’ve put in place to manage sanctions risk. A companywide effort toward a common goal What began as an initiative to enhance our sanctions controls quickly evolved into something much bigger: An overarching effort to build one of the most robust, scalable and future-proof compliance programs in the industry. What powers compliance at Kraken:

• GeoIP firewalls & VPN screening
  Sophisticated tools that proactively restrict unauthorized access based on geographic and network indicators.
  
• Comprehensive screening across the board
  End-to-end product, client, and transaction-level screening to ensure real-time risk detection.
  
• Over 100 embedded internal controls
  Automated checks and balances built into every layer of Kraken’s infrastructure.
  
• Upgraded policies, procedures and processes
  A ground-up redesign of how compliance is approached across teams and workflows.
  
• Rigorous risk assessments, audits and training
  Regular evaluations and company-wide education to keep our defenses sharp and aligned.
  
• Sanctions controls at every layer
  Holistic safeguards integrated throughout Kraken’s architecture.
  
• Regulatory benchmarking and licensing expansion
  Tools and standards that enable smoother licensing and faster time-to-market globally.
  
• Proactive engagement with regulators
  Open, constructive dialogue that helps shape thoughtful, effective regulation.
  
• Enhanced due diligence for investors, M&A and product launches
  Strategic compliance integrated into how we grow.

Every one of these upgrades is a step toward our larger goal: making Kraken the most trusted and secure venue for crypto. Together, these capabilities help protect our clients, strengthen trust and reinforce Kraken’s role as a responsible industry leader. Built for scale, designed for trust Strong compliance isn’t just about risk reduction – it’s a strategic advantage. With these improvements, Kraken is ideally positioned to:

• Expand our business into new countries and with new products
  
• Foster stronger banking relationships
  
• Navigate regulatory environments with confidence
  
• Reduce audit and operational risk
  
• Support faster, safer growth across markets

The compliance infrastructure we’ve built is scalable, resilient, and dynamic – designed not only to meet today’s demands but to anticipate those of tomorrow. We’re proud of how far we’ve come and even more excited for where we’re headed. Because at Kraken, building responsibly isn’t just a goal. It’s how we lead the way, create a safer industry ecosystem and accelerate crypto adoption. Get Started with Kraken The post Strengthening sanctions compliance: Building for scale and trust appeared first on Kraken Blog.

We’re thrilled to announce that SOGNI is available for trading on Kraken! Funding and trading SOGNI trading is live as of Wednesday, July 2, 2025. To add an asset to your Kraken account, navigate to Funding, select the asset you’re after, and hit ‘Deposit’.  Make sure to deposit your tokens into networks supported by Kraken. Deposits made using other networks will be lost. Trade on Kraken Here’s some more information about this asset: SOGNI AI Sogni AI is a decentralized platform for creative AI and GPU rendering, powered by the SOGNI token. Built for artists, developers and GPU providers, it enables users to generate visuals and videos, contribute computing power and earn rewards. With a focus on accessibility, privacy and ownership, Sogni AI blends powerful tools with a community-first approach to make decentralized AI creation open to all. Please note:  

• Trading via Kraken App and Instant Buy will be available once the liquidity conditions are met (when a sufficient number of buyers and sellers have entered the market for their orders to be efficiently matched).
• Geographic restrictions may apply

Get Started with Kraken Will Kraken make more assets available? Yes! But our policy is to never reveal any details until shortly before launch – including which assets we are considering. All of Kraken’s available tokens can be found here, and all future tokens will be announced on our Listings Roadmap and social media profiles. Our client engagement specialists cannot answer any questions about which assets we may be making available in the future. The post SOGNI is available for trading! appeared first on Kraken Blog.