The following is a guest post and opinion of Rostyslav Bortman, Founder of Ethereum Ukraine.

Even in wartime Kyiv, innovation doesn’t pause. At ETHKyiv 2025, more than 100 hackers proved it—shipping privacy-first dApps, competing for grants, and showing what’s possible when the world’s toughest challenges meet Web3 grit.

But the real shockwaves came from the founders themselves: Vitalik Buterin and Tomasz K. Stańczak, Executive Director at the Ethereum Foundation, who both appeared as the event’s online speakers, dropped two bombshells—400 TPS on Ethereum L1 this year, and a near future where anyone can run a full node on their smartphone.

So what’s next for the protocol? When does 400 TPS arrive, and what does “Ethereum on your phone” actually mean for developers and users? Here’s what we learned at ETHKyiv 2025.

Next-Gen UX: Nodes on a Phone

Vitalik Buterin’s keynote at ETHKyiv 2025 cut straight to Ethereum’s core roadmap. The biggest reveal:

“Pretty soon you’ll be able to spin up a node on your smartphones and even smartwatches.”

According to Buterin, instead of relying on servers with terabytes of storage, soon users will be able to run a full Ethereum node “without heavy-duty resources.” This first-of-its-kind case will be possible thanks to zero-knowledge Ethereum Virtual Machines (zkEVMs) that the Ethereum Foundation is currently implementing.

zkEVMs are making nodes drastically lighter, cutting storage through verifying transactions without revealing and importing any information about them.

On Ethereum’s L2s, zkEVMs already cut transaction costs by up to 90% and settle in their finality under three seconds. Buterin said the next step is bringing these improvements to the Ethereum mainnet, making blockchain interactions on it as fast and affordable as traditional web applications.

400 TPS with 3-Slot Finality by 2026

At ETHKyiv 2025, Tomasz K. Stańczak, Co-Executive Director of the Ethereum Foundation, spelled out exactly what’s next for Ethereum’s backbone: real performance gains on the mainnet itself.

He revealed that by the end of 2026, Ethereum will move to 3-Slot Finality (3SF), slashing average transaction confirmation time from 15 minutes down to only 36 seconds. For users, this will bring the experience of instant traditional digital payments while keeping all the benefits of decentralization.

Stańczak laid out the near-term milestones:

Ethereum L1 will hit 400 transactions per second (TPS) by the end of 2025.

Block gas limits will reach 100 million this year, with a jump to 60 million per block in a month or two (as of publication date—ed.).

For context: scaling Ethereum L1 is essential because it anchors the entire ecosystem, providing the security, settlement, and censorship resistance Layer 2s depend on. With faster mainnet throughput, users get greater assurance their transactions are finalized on a decentralized, global network—not bottlenecked by L2 operators.

As Vitalik Buterin summed up:

“The goal is to make Ethereum more private, more censorship-resistant, and at the same time, so easy that even people far from tech feel safe using it every day.”

What’s Really Fueling Ethereum’s Value and Mass Adoption?

For me and all the Ethereum followers, some big questions have always remained: what actually underpins Ethereum’s value, and what could trigger mass adoption?

When I pressed both Vitalik Buterin and Tomasz Stańczak for answers at ETHKyiv 2025, they each zeroed in on different but connected drivers.

Tomasz pointed to three non-negotiables: privacy, data protection, and transparency. According to him, these are precisely what enterprise clients and regular users now expect from any blockchain platform.

“Ethereum is a global network, and increased adoption directly boosts the value of the whole ecosystem,” he explained.

The more Ethereum is used for real-world utility—by businesses and by individuals—the more demand, and ultimately, value accrues.

Vitalik, meanwhile, framed the adoption question around financial utility. His thesis: mass adoption comes when Ethereum becomes the rails for real-world assets, particularly tokenized stocks and bonds.

“They’re the gateway to mass adoption and the bridge between traditional finance and Web3,” he said.

With heavyweights like BlackRock, Deutsche Bank, and Coinbase actively leveraging Ethereum for asset tokenization, we’re already seeing the lines blur between traditional finance’s $117 trillion market and Web3 infrastructure.

In short: Ethereum’s real value isn’t just speculative, but it’s being built right now at the intersection of security, privacy, and practical financial applications. That’s where mass adoption starts to look inevitable.

Why ETHKyiv 2025 Matters for Ukraine and Beyond

ETHKyiv 2025 indeed stood out for its access to global thought leaders. Despite all the war-related risks, developers here heard first-hand insights from Ethereum’s most influential builders.

As Stańczak himself described it:

“Enterprise, DeFi, explorations, AI, research, day-to-day problems, working with people—we have to understand the direction and give feedback. A lot of it.”

His daily routine—hours spent answering questions from developers—underscores how Ethereum’s power lies in its people, not just its protocol.

Crucially, ETHKyiv 2025 was never just another tech event on the calendar. Held against the backdrop of an ongoing war, it became living proof of something bigger: even in the darkest times, Ukraine’s tech community chooses to build, learn, and connect with the global ecosystem.

Throughout the hackathon, the wartime context was impossible to ignore, yet it wasn’t a shadow but a driving force. Performances by Moisei Bondarenko, the violinist-soldier whose music echoes through liberated Ukrainian cities, reminded everyone that innovation and humanity must go hand in hand. So did the tactical medicine session led by combat medic Artem Rudy, bringing practical skills and a sense of shared resilience to the room.

This is what set ETHKyiv 2025 apart: it was a gathering of minds and hearts, a testament to the persistence of community, curiosity, and shared values—even in wartime. The world watched not just for the tech, but for the spirit of resilience and solidarity that Ukraine’s builders brought to the stage.

Mentioned in this article

Shares of NextEra (NEE -1.82%) fell on Monday, down by as much as 5.2% before recovering to a 2.3% decline as of 3 p.m. ET.

NextEra is both a utility and a developer of renewable power systems, and has therefore been under pressure since details of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill began emerging back in May.

Renewables-related stocks did bounce back a bit this month after the Senate’s version appeared to offer some tax credit relief that had been restricted in the House’s version passed back in May. But over the weekend, a few new provisions divided certain renewable energy stocks into winners and losers, with NextEra coming up on the short end.

Chinese components and start dates restricted further

In the final version of the Senate bill that is getting a vote today, the renewable tax credit is more relaxed relative to the very restricted House version, but is still not as loosened as many in the industry would have hoped.

While an earlier version of the Senate bill required utility-scale renewable projects to begin construction by the end of 2027, the current version now restates the project must be placed into service by that time. That could speed up near-term development but halt growth in the industry after 2027.

Additionally, the new version of the bill puts an unexpected tax on projects that use Chinese components, which are often cheaper and sometimes the only source for certain project components. While good news for U.S. panel and component suppliers, the provision has the potential to raise costs for developers, such as NextEra.

Image source: Getty Images.

NextEra should manage, albeit in an adverse environment

While NextEra’s earnings is divided between its utility business, Florida Power & Light, and its development business, NextEra Energy Resources, the development business contributed nearly half of the company’s adjusted (non-GAAP) earnings last quarter. The bill being passed today therefore raises questions about the growth of that important Resources segment beyond 2028.

So while NextEra’s 3.2% dividend should be protected by the FPL utility, the growth of the payout may be incrementally harder to come by, unless there’s a change in power in Washington three years from now.

The FOMC minutes came out yesterday.

These are the detailed notes from the Fed’s latest policy meeting – in this case, from May 6 – 7, when they decided to leave interest rates unchanged at 4.25% – 4.50%.

Traders dig into these notes to look for hints about what the Fed’s planning next – specifically, whether a rate cut is on the horizon.

(Because lower rates = bullish for crypto.)

So…are we getting one?

Hate to break it to ya, but it doesn’t look like it.

According to the minutes, Fed officials are worried about two things getting worse at the same time: inflation and unemployment.

That puts them in a tough spot:

• If they cut rates to help the job market, inflation could rise;

• If they raise rates to fight inflation, unemployment could rise.

A no-win scenario. So, they agreed that the safest thing to do now is to be cautious.

Translation: the Fed will probably keep rates the same when they meet again on June 17 – 18.

And yeah, the markets aren’t thrilled about that.

On a more positive note, though, Nvidia’s Q1 earnings also came out yesterday – and they crushed it. Revenue and profits were both better than expected.

While that’s not directly tied to crypto, it still matters. Big wins in the tech sector tend to improve overall investor confidence. And when the mood’s good, major cryptos often ride that wave too.

Plus, it’s another W for AI, which feeds into the crypto + AI narrative.

This followed Bitcoin’s drop to $76,000 amid a sharp and aggressive retracement from the mid-$80,000 range it traded in for the past several weeks.

NUPL and NUL are valuable tools for assessing the behavioral state of Bitcoin holders. These metrics are derived from the difference between Bitcoin’s current market price and the realized price — the average price at which all coins were last moved on-chain.

NUPL = (Market Cap – Realized Cap) / Market Cap
NUL = (Realized Cap – Market Cap) / Market Cap

NUPL shows the ratio of unrealized profits in the network. A high NUPL suggests that most coins are profitable, while a low or negative NUPL indicates widespread losses. NUL, its inverse, measures unrealized losses.

A high NUL suggests that many coins are held below their acquisition cost, which is typically associated with capitulation or fear. Together, these indicators help identify market cycles, sentiment transitions, and inflection points that precede major moves.

A NUL of 0.0578 meant that 5.78% of Bitcoin’s market cap was in an unrealized loss. This implies that a considerable cohort of market participants, mostly those who entered near Bitcoin’s March peak, found themselves holding BTC at a loss. This is a meaningful psychological shift, as it signals the onset of fear among short-term holders and the sharp cooling of the bullish sentiment we’ve seen at the beginning of the year.

To put this in context, the lowest NUL reading before 2025 occurred on Dec. 15, 2024, when it reached 0.0. That day, Bitcoin was trading above $104,000, and nearly all holders were in profit. Around the same time, NUPL peaked at 0.6349, a level historically associated with euphoric sentiment and overheated market conditions. These readings were consistent with a mature bull phase, often followed by distribution and increased volatility.

The transition from those extreme highs to the current mid-range suggests a market undergoing correction rather than collapse. NUPL remains above 0.4, indicating that most investors are still in profit. However, a rising NUL implies that losses are growing among recent entrants, particularly those who bought into strength late in the cycle.

First, April’s elevated NUL and declining NUPL reveal that the market has shifted from a risk-on to a highly reactive, cautious sentiment. Profit margins have compressed, and a growing share of coins have slipped into loss. This shows that short-term holders are under immense pressure, and the market recalibrates after a rally.

Second, the relatively modest rise in NUL, still well below 0.1, indicates that this is not a widespread capitulation event. Historically, NUL levels above 0.1 have been associated with deep bear markets and network-wide stress. The current 0.0578 level points to a correction with localized losses, likely centered around recent buyers.

Third, NUPL’s resilience above 0.4 supports the thesis that long-term holders remain largely in profit and unshaken. These holders typically serve as a stabilizing force during volatility, and their conviction often sets the foundation for new accumulation zones.

Fourth, Bitcoin’s price action shows that while the price dropped significantly from its peak, it remained in a historically elevated range above $76,000 and up to $85,000 in April. This further supports the view that the drawdown was technical rather than structural, with little evidence of panic selling or systemic deleveraging.

The NUPL and NUL data clearly show a market in transition. The recovery in both ratios as of April 10 shows that the broader market structure remains intact, with most holders still in profit.

This setup resembles historical phases in which the market consolidates before setting the stage for a new upswing, provided macro conditions remain favorable.

The post Unrealized losses hit highest level since October 2023 as Bitcoin dropped to $76k appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has abruptly dropped a lawsuit accusing JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Zelle of failing to protect consumers from $870 million in losses on the Zelle network over seven years.

The lawsuit, filed in December, alleged Zelle’s parent company and the big banks often left victims of fraud on the instant payments platform to “fend for themselves.”

Today, The CFPB told the court that it’s dismissing the action with prejudice, and without an explanation.

The move follows the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken the agency by halting most of its operations, including investigations and rule-making.

The administration’s stance reflects a broader goal of cutting federal bureaucracy, with Trump labeling the agency as a source of “waste, fraud, and abuse” that has harmed financial institutions.

The CFPB’s lawsuit followed an investigation by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations led by Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, who alleged Zelle and the banks routinely fail to adequately protect and reimburse consumers who use the popular network.

Don’t Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox

Check Price Action

Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram

Surf The Daily Hodl Mix

&nbsp

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any losses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing.

Generated Image: Midjourney

Gemini co-founder Cameron Winklevoss has urged the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to compensate the crypto exchange for its legal expenses and dismiss officials involved in its now-closed investigation.

On Feb. 26, Winklevoss disclosed that the SEC had officially dropped its investigation into Gemini without filing charges.

The exchange later confirmed this, noting that the decision came nearly two years after the inquiry began and almost a year after receiving a Wells Notice.

The SEC’s decision aligns with its recent pattern of withdrawing cases against crypto firms. In the past week alone, the agency has abandoned investigations into OpenSea, Robinhood, and Uniswap and paused its lawsuit against Binance.

Slams SEC’s approach

Despite the SEC’s decision, Winklevoss condemned the agency’s actions, arguing that the prolonged investigation had significantly damaged the crypto industry and the US economy.

He estimated that Gemini alone incurred tens of millions in legal fees and suffered hundreds of millions in lost innovation and productivity.

According to him:

“The SEC cost us tens of millions of dollars in legal bills alone and hundreds of millions in lost productivity, creativity, and innovation. Of course Gemini is not alone. The SEC’s behavior in aggregate towards other crypto companies and projects cost orders of magnitude more and caused unquantifiable loss in economic growth for America.”

Winklevoss pointed out that the SEC’s aggressive enforcement approach discouraged engineers and entrepreneurs from entering crypto. He also highlighted how some projects might have been abandoned or never even started because of the hostile enforcement environment.

To prevent such regulatory overreach, Winklevoss suggested that companies should be reimbursed triple their legal costs if investigations fail to result in charges. He also recommended that SEC officials responsible for unjustified enforcement actions be permanently barred from future agency roles.

He added:

“Just like the SEC bars individuals from trading securities if they break the law, there should be a process that bars those like Gary Gensler who weaponize the law, as well those who participate in the weaponization, from ever being appointed to or hired by an agency again. Lifetime ban in this case.”

Winklevoss concluded that without real accountability, regulatory agencies would continue to hinder innovation and economic growth in the United States.

He said:

“We will not rebuild trust and integrity in federal agencies unless there are serious consequences for bad faith actors. Operation Chokepoint didn’t stop at 1.0. It continued to 2.0 because not enough was done to hold bureaucrats accountable for their actions during 1.0. And there will be a 3.0 unless there is a real, public reckoning for 2.0.”

Mentioned in this article