Bitcoin and crypto seem to be on the verge of mainstream adoption, with US spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) shattering inflow records, Goldman Sachs holding more crypto ETF shares issued by BlackRock than any other institution, and corporate treasuries from Strategy to Bitmine embracing digital assets.

However, a recent survey from Bank of America showed three-quarters of global fund managers remain steadfast in their refusal to touch digital assets.

According to Max Gokhman, deputy chief investment officer for Franklin Templeton Investment Solutions, the paradoxical numbers aren’t due to regulatory uncertainty or operational complexity, as those barriers have largely been addressed.

In an interview with CryptoSlate, Gokhman said the skewed numbers stem from fear, misconception, and the industry’s struggle with abandoning deeply held beliefs about what constitutes legitimate investment.

Gokhman spent years watching traditional finance grapple with the digital asset revolution. He noted:

“The biggest reason is it takes a while for an established industry to realize that they’re falling behind. There’s this fear of the unknown that exists.”

The stewardship paradox

Fund managers pride themselves on fiduciary responsibility, but this protective instinct has created a paradox: the desire to safeguard client assets prevents managers from accessing opportunities their clients increasingly demand.

According to Gokhman:

“Part of being a good steward is being aware of what your clients want. Clients from retail to institutional level are more interested in digital assets, but they’re finding that their investment managers are not actually there with solutions.”

The resistance stems from persistent misconceptions. One notion is that it’s all hyper-speculative and lacks value, while the other is that there is a lack of staff with the expertise to create legitimate investment solutions using digital assets.

The memecoin trap

When Gokhman encounters skeptical colleagues, the conversation follows a predictable script. Traditional finance stalwarts mention memecoins as representative of the entire crypto ecosystem, revealing what he called a surface-level understanding.

Just as equity markets span from blue-chip dividends to speculative biotechs, digital assets range from established protocols generating real revenue to purely speculative tokens.

His response has become automatic: 

“Because you invest in equities, does that mean you’re only buying pink sheet penny stocks? High-yield debt has plenty of companies that most rational investors wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole. Most asset managers will tell you they own emerging market equities and distressed debt. That’s a key asset class for them.”

Gokhman stressed that the skepticism is selective. Managers are comfortable holding Venezuelan bonds, instruments that have defaulted multiple times, while balking at Bitcoin, which has never missed a payment in 15 years.

While fund managers debate crypto’s legitimacy, the market has quietly transformed. The data Gokhman cited punctures the retail narrative: 89% of Bitcoin transactions on exchanges exceed $100,000. He highlighted:

“That’s not retail money. The market is becoming more institutionalized.”

Educational challenge

Franklin Templeton’s response involves a three-tier campaign targeting central bankers, institutional intermediaries, and retail investors. The middle tier, which is crucial, consists of wirehouses and platform owners who control access to millions yet remain ignorant of client demand.

Gokhman questions these players about whether they asked their clients if they wanted crypto. He adds: 

“They may have a Coinbase account where they have most of their wealth. You’re just not capturing that.”

Traditional advisors often discover wealth sits fragmented across platforms, with professionally managed portfolios containing none of the digital assets clients accumulate independently.

Franklin Templeton’s breakthrough lies in translation: expressing blockchain concepts in traditional finance language. When analyzing Solana, they don’t invoke revolutionary rhetoric but calculate discounted cash flows.

Gokhman explained:

“If you have something like Solana where actual fees are being paid on every transaction, we can project the growth of those transactions. Those are future cash flows. We can discount them back to the present.”

The approach demystifies digital assets by applying familiar analytical frameworks that any investor with basic valuation training can understand.

It all comes to yield

As Federal Reserve rate cuts approach, Gokhman sees opportunity. Traditional yield sources offer diminishing returns just as institutions face mounting pressure to generate income, and crypto can provide an alternative.

According to him:

“Everyone needs income. Staking is one clear way to do it. When people tell me about being worried about this [crypto] all being a scam, well, have you worried about the government just canceling all the debt? Because I’ve had that happen.”

Recent SEC guidance on liquid staking represents a potential inflection point. For the first time, regulated products can offer staking yields without requiring direct crypto ownership.

If crypto ETFs with staking enabled are approved, Gokhman predicts the resistance cannot persist indefinitely. He predicted:

“When we can give the yield, I think it’s going to drive even more adoption.”

The transformation will likely accelerate suddenly. Institutional adoption often follows the pattern of persisting skepticism until competitive pressure forces mass movement.

The great crypto divide persists between the 75% of fund managers clinging to familiar frameworks and a growing coalition recognizing that client service requires embracing technological change. 

The question isn’t whether this divide will close, as economic pressure guarantees eventual adoption. The question is which managers will lead and which will scramble to catch up.

Mentioned in this article

The landmark US GENIUS Act could serve as a major catalyst for stablecoin adoption both domestically and abroad. But rather than simply boosting demand for dollar-backed digital currencies, it may unintentionally push capital into the tokenization market as investors seek yield on their holdings.

That was one of the key takeaways from a recent interview with Will Beeson, a former Standard Chartered executive and now founder and CEO of Uniform Labs, a developer of institutional liquidity solutions for tokenized financial markets.

A central provision of the GENIUS Act is its blanket ban on yield-bearing stablecoins, which prevents holders from earning interest on their digital dollar balances. According to Beeson, this restriction will accelerate the flow of capital into tokenized real-world assets (RWAs).

“With yield-bearing stablecoins off the table, institutions need a compliant way to earn yield while staying liquid,” Beeson told Cointelegraph. “Capital is already shifting.”

He noted that trillions of dollars in non-interest-bearing stablecoins are poised to enter digital finance. “Institutional holders aren’t going to sit on idle, depreciating assets. They’ll demand yield — and infrastructure that makes accessing it […] compliant,” he said, adding: 

“The next phase isn’t about holding idle stablecoins. It’s about programmatic access to risk-free yield, and the ability to move between cash and high-quality assets at will.”

Beeson’s view is shared by Aptos Labs’ Solomon Tesfaye, who told Cointelegraph that the GENIUS Act will benefit tokenization as much as it does stablecoins.

To meet this need, Beeson’s Uniform Labs is building Multiliquid, an institutional liquidity layer for tokenized markets that enables programmable, real-time conversion between tokenized assets, such as US Treasurys and money market funds, and stablecoins.

Multiliquid’s open-architecture design allows compliant issuers to integrate without commercial agreements.

While declining to name partners, Beeson confirmed that Uniform Labs is “working with a number of leading institutions, fintechs, and stablecoin issuers” ahead of its production launch later this year.

Before launching Uniform Labs, Beeson served as chief product officer at Libeara, a tokenization platform incubated by Standard Chartered’s SC Ventures.

Related: Tokenized money market funds emerge as Wall Street’s answer to stablecoins

Tokenization surge to broaden beyond private credit, government bonds

Although the GENIUS Act gives newfound legitimacy to stablecoins — and to digital currencies more broadly — “the next phase of digital assets is focused on asset tokenization,” wrote Sandra Waliczek, a member of the World Economic Forum’s blockchain and digital asset division.

Waliczek highlighted tokenization’s potential to level the investing playing field for asset classes like real estate and private equity, which have historically been restricted to wealthier investors.

“Tokenization changes this by enabling asset fractionalization, breaking assets into smaller, more affordable units,” she wrote.

So far, the nearly $26 billion tokenization market has largely centered on private credit and government bonds. But as Beeson noted, the disruption will extend far beyond those segments, encompassing “corporate bonds, credit and credit funds, commodities, equities, real estate funds, private equity funds, and ultimately private equity and real estate assets themselves.”

Related: GENIUS Act scrutinized for stablecoin yield ban as TradFi tokenization gains steam

]]> https://earlybirdsinvest.com/genius-ban-wont-stop-institutions-from-seeking-stablecoin-yield-ex-standard-chartered-exec/feed/ 0 52711 https://earlybirdsinvest.com/japans-crypto-paralysis-is-cultural-tax-cuts-wont-fix-it/ https://earlybirdsinvest.com/japans-crypto-paralysis-is-cultural-tax-cuts-wont-fix-it/#respond Mon, 11 Aug 2025 00:29:54 +0000 https://earlybirdsinvest.com/japans-crypto-paralysis-is-cultural-tax-cuts-wont-fix-it/

The following article is a guest post and opinion of Maksym Sakharov, Co-founder and CEO of WeFi.

Last month, Japan’s Financial Services Agency proposed a wholesale reclassification of cryptocurrencies that would introduce a flat 20% tax on digital asset income and help introduce crypto exchange-traded funds.

For a long time, the country’s progressive tax system has imposed levies on crypto gains at rates of up to 55%, a factor many feel makes investing in crypto quite unattractive.

Institutionalized Inertia

However, this is not the only obstacle in the path of a potential Bitcoin ETF approval in Japan; it’s not even the most pressing. Late last year, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba seemingly dismissed the idea of crypto ETFs, questioning whether the government should promote digital assets like it does traditional investments.

His ruling coalition lost its majority in the upper house following a bruising contest that saw them fall three seats shy of the 50 needed to maintain their advantage. Yet, even as political control hangs in the balance—and Ishiba vows to stay regardless of the election outcome—one thing has remained consistent: Japan’s deep-rooted caution.

Ishiba’s noncommittal stance on ETF approvals is merely a symptom of a deeper malaise. The country’s regulatory reflex isn’t about consumer safety alone—it’s about an entrenched culture of compliance that resists risk at all costs. This mindset, not the much-maligned 55% crypto tax, is what’s truly stifling innovation.

The irony is that Japan was once ahead of neighbors like South Korea and Hong Kong. It recognized crypto as a means of payment back in 2017 and built some of the world’s earliest regulatory infrastructure. Furthermore, in the second quarter of 2024, Metaplanet kick-started a wave of Bitcoin buying by Japanese listed companies, amassing a treasury worth almost $2 billion in BTC at last count. And that’s not all. Progress has also been made in the development of stablecoins and crypto payments infrastructure, with Sumitomo Mitsui signing an MoU with Ava Labs and Fireblocks in preparation to issue fiat-pegged cryptocurrencies.

Yet, beneath these seeming success stories lies a bureaucratic labyrinth killing businesses. Under the current framework, small startups with dreams of offering virtual asset services have found it hard to meet the stringent requirements that include extensive documentation, a local bank account, a Japan-based compliance team, and at least 10 million yen in capital, among others.

Some may argue that the rules are there to protect users, and that’s valid. But couldn’t there be a happy balance between consumer protection and leeway for innovation? It almost feels like the FSA is isolating regulators from builders, with pencil pushers designing rules without stress-testing them against real-world tech constraints.

If taxes were the real barrier for Web3 innovation, the FSA’s proposed reforms would ignite a boom.

Reform Roadmap

To pivot from compliance to competitiveness, Japan needs to rewire some of its long-held approaches. For starters, the government must sunset the pre-approval model and adopt a quicker system that lets exchanges release tokens with post-launch audits. Here, tokens just need to meet baseline disclosure and security attestation requirements to be listed. Full regulatory and technical audits can then be conducted within 30 days of the launch. This way, investor protections are still preserved through enforceable audit sanctions and delisting authority, while at the same time dramatically reducing listing lead times.

The country’s regulators also have to launch dynamic sandboxes that could use zero-knowledge proofs for privacy-safe verification. There’s also a need for state capital injection. Japan could create a $500 million FSA-matched fund directly backing Web3 startups that meet security benchmarks, effectively giving it some skin in the game.

Finally, to foster cooperation and shake off its bureaucratic isolation, the financial regulator could seat tech founders on its advisory boards. This would give it a firsthand look at industry pain points, allowing it to shape policies with the end user in mind rather than to be defensive, status quo-preserving tenets.

These are not radical demands. They’re already standard in the jurisdictions that are now leading global crypto adoption.

Builders are watching. With populist parties like Sanseito gaining traction on “Japan First” rhetoric, the political winds are shifting. If Ishiba’s coalition falls, a new administration could usher in a more innovation-friendly era. But only if Japan’s regulators pivot away from their risk-averse DNA. Without that shift, tax reform will be cosmetic, ETFs will remain in limbo, and Japan’s early advantage in crypto will fade into history.

Mentioned in this article

Billionaire Bill Miller IV says proof‑of‑stake blockchains such as Ethereum and Solana are unlikely to “win at the end of the day,” arguing that Bitcoin’s proof‑of‑work design confers a durability other networks can’t match. 

In a July 28 interview with CNBC’s “Closing Bell,” the billionaire investor said recent US policy moves may give proof‑of‑stake assets a short‑term boost, but not a lasting edge over Bitcoin.

Miller assessed how market structure proposals define decentralization:

“If you look at the way the legislation [the CLARITY Act] was written, it allows technologies like Ethereum and Solana blockchains to be classified as ‘decentralized,’ when they are actually not.” 

He added that if those chains launched today, “they would go through a much different process.”

His core objection is governance, describing proof of stake as whoever has a big stake in the blockchain gets to “say what happens.” 

In Miller’s view, “that’s exactly how society works today, it’s not really a technological revolution.” By contrast, he called Bitcoin’s proof‑of‑work consensus “a game‑changing technology,” arguing that the energy cost tied to creating new bitcoin underpins network integrity rather than entrenching large token holders.

Regulatory-driven rally

Miller linked recent market gains in Ethereum to Washington’s policy calendar, pointing to the signing of the GENIUS Act and the advance of the CLARITY Act. 

President Donald Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law on July 18, creating the first federal framework for dollar‑backed stablecoins. 

The House cleared it on July 17 after bundling it procedurally with CLARITY and an Anti‑CBDC measure the prior day. The Senate then approved the consolidated version before the bill went to the White House. 

While CLARITY moved as part of that package to speed floor action, the enrollable text that ultimately became law was the GENIUS stablecoin framework. 

Miller’s point is that policy momentum can lift assets based on proof of stake, but he doubts it alters the long‑run race with Bitcoin. He added:

“People need to start thinking what problems these various blockchains solve. And the answer is: most of them actually don’t solve any real problems except for Bitcoin.”

Solving accountability

He framed Bitcoin as a solution to monetary accountability, mentioning its transparent and immutable ledger as a way to audit “who owns what” and where funds are flowing.

Other chains, in his view, don’t solve an additional problem that Bitcoin hasn’t already addressed, and they lack its liquidity and first‑mover momentum.

That thesis extends to corporate balance sheets: 

“It’s my take that in 20 or 30 years, every company will be a Bitcoin treasury company.” 

Furthermore, the billionaire predicted that bond managers buying “Bitcoin‑regulated bonds” and equity managers adding Bitcoin‑linked exposures will outperform peers who don’t. 

Miller concluded that it “remains to be seen” whether proof-of-stake technology can deliver a lasting advantage.

Mentioned in this article

Decentralization was blockchain’s founding promise—but in finance, milliseconds move markets. Unless Web3 can match Wall Street’s sub-second speed, users will keep choosing the faster rails of traditional finance. We see this in decentralized networks like Ethereum, which processes around 15 transactions per second, compared to Visa’s 24,000.

Ever since the internet irrevocably changed finance, the world has never looked back. In fact, speed is an essential component underpinning every facet of how finance operates. It’s the difference between closing an arbitrage opportunity or missing out on it altogether, or seeing life-changing funds hit your account right before you miss an important payment.

At the same time, traditional finance is still incredibly opaque, saddled with hidden fees, and designed to keep an elite few at the top while everyone else is locked out entirely. In order for blockchain to truly revolutionize the systems in place today—and to offer users alternatives that are transparent, open, and equitable—the Web3 ecosystem will have to get a whole lot faster.

The Chains We Have Today Don’t Cut It

Bitcoin is the most well-known cryptocurrency in existence. This is largely because it was the first one, inspiring the idea of an internet-native system of exchange not tied to any one government or nation. However, despite its international renown, builders still can’t ignore that Bitcoin has a 10-minute block time and can handle only 10 transactions per second.

Ethereum marginally improves upon this, but its average of 14 transactions per second is still incredibly slow compared to centralized payment processors. Ethereum transactions can also carry high gas fees, which are a major barrier to widespread adoption. When compared to the NASDAQ, which processes 20,000 stock-market transactions per second on average, it’s clear how egregiously blockchain-based systems fall behind.

Additionally, while blockchain’s principles of decentralization and trust are important, outside crypto-native circles most people do not care as much about decentralization as they do about performance. Many users prefer centralized systems, like traditional banks or exchanges, because they are faster, cheaper, and much more efficient.

Despite Ethereum’s decentralized trust, its slow speed and high costs are a serious drawback. Simply put, the most widely used chains are not even close to competing with traditional offerings. This means users will have to look to faster, more centralized offerings to help close the gap.

Speed Is the Killer Feature

Right now, even the most crypto-native circles are starting to sacrifice decentralization for speed. For example, performance-focused chains like Solana, with 400-millisecond block times, support up to 3,000 transactions per second—bringing us closer to traditional offerings. The rise of centralized platforms such as Hyperliquid further bolsters this trend.

In May 2025 alone, Hyperliquid’s trading volume surged by 50%, according to DeFiLlama, highlighting the increasing number of traders who are prioritizing speed over a decentralized ethos.

But even with its incredible momentum, Hyperliquid is still not the endgame. It relies too heavily on infrastructure that isn’t open or composable, and it serves only a small portion of DeFi traders’ needs. The platform lacks the extensibility and interoperability needed to support the transition of modern finance into digital assets on a global scale.

To strike a balance between performance and decentralization, projects can adopt best practices such as batching transactions to reduce on-chain load, using off-chain order books for faster execution, and optimizing state differences to minimize gas costs and latency.

The real killer app for blockchain technology will be a platform that combines decentralization with performance and that’s as fast, smooth, and cheap as centralized alternatives like Revolut. Once that happens, there won’t be any more conversations about “DeFi vs. TradFi” or “centralization vs. decentralization.”

Instead, we’ll simply have a new standard for the financial industry that operates as fast and as seamlessly as the internet itself.

History is unequivocal: the fastest networks become the default. For blockchain, trust alone isn’t a moat—latency is. The builders who deliver Web2-grade speed without sacrificing openness will own the next decade of finance.

Mentioned in this article

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

Legal expert Bill Morgan has commented on accusations that Ripple would dump its XRP escrow holdings at some point. He explained why that won’t happen and noted how the escrow strategy is good for the altcoin’s price. 

Ripple’s Escrow Will Buttress XRP Price Not Deflate It

In an X post, Bill Morgan noted that even the SEC recognized that Ripple’s escrow was intended to buttress the XRP price and not deflate it. He added that even the Commission considered this to be one of the factors that would give investors an expectation of profit from the crypto firm’s efforts. 

The legal then remarked that this is just one of the points that clearly debunks the ‘dump theory’ around Ripple’s escrow. His response was in reply to a crypto community member who criticized XRP holders who think that the escrow is good for their holdings. He then indicated that the crypto firm would at some point dump its holdings on these investors. 

Meanwhile, Bill Morgan had earlier noted how there hasn’t been a stark difference between Ripple’s escrowed funds in 2017 and now. He revealed that the crypto firm had 55 billion XRP in escrow in late 2017 while it now has 35 billion in escrow. Ripple unlocks 1 billion XRP monthly. As such, these escrowed funds should have reduced drastically since 2017. 

However, Ripple typically relocks a significant portion of these coins following the monthly unlocks, which explains why the crypto firm’s holdings haven’t flooded the market. Notably, the firm uses these coins for its on-demand liquidity (ODL) services. As such, the coins that are left unlocked are in demand, which also provides a boost for the XRP price. Ripple is also looking to expand its operations, which could further boost the altcoin’s adoption. 

Reason For the Escrow ‘Dump Theory’

In response to the accusations against Ripple, Bill Morgan suggested that many of these crypto community members have been simply sidelined on the recent XRP price rally. As such, he believes this is why they are trying to spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD). In an X post, he asked a particular critic if they missed out on XRP when it was still trading at $0.20.

Indeed, the XRP price had traded around this level in 2023 and remained stuck in the $0.50 range for most of 2024 before finally taking off in the last quarter of the year, recording a rally of over 500%. The altcoin has continued this run this year and last week rallied to a new all-time high (ATH) of $3.65. 

At the time of writing, the XRP price is trading at around $3.50, up in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap.

Featured image from Getty Images, chart from Tradingview.com

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

From Michael Saylor to David Bailey, Anthony Pompliano to Jack Mallers, and everyone in between, there’s a rising tide of executives buying bitcoin for their corporate treasuries. Large companies and Wall Street are vacuuming up billions of dollars’ worth of BTC every week, yet its price remains relatively untouched. One Bitcoiner took to Twitter to ask why and received more than 1.3K replies. Here’s the best:

“Can anyone explain to me why companies are buying billions of dollars of bitcoin every week and the price is virtually unchanged over the last 6 months?”

Bitcoin Cam’s question clearly reflects the broader sentiment of Crypto Twitter, receiving over 800,000 views in a few hours and more than 1,300 replies. Even Bitcoin skeptic Peter Schiff chimed in with his 2 cents:

“The whales who already own a bunch of Bitcoin are selling to these buyers to cash out their huge gains.”

But the best reply came from SightBringer, who provides signal-bearing intelligence across macro, crypto, and capital. He said:

“They’re buying billions and the price isn’t moving because this isn’t a market anymore – it’s a controlled ignition chamber.”

Then he broke it down point by point:

1. ETF flows are real. Sovereigns and institutions are accumulating cold bitcoin.

Basically, large investors like BlackRock and Fidelity are buying real bitcoin through special funds called ETFs. This isn’t just pretend money; these are actual coins being tucked away for the long term.

In 2025, public companies bought a record number of bitcoins, and these ETFs are seeing billions in new money come in. The coins are being taken off exchanges, so fewer are left for everyone else to buy or sell.

2. Exchange liquidity is fake. Most trading happens on fractional reserves of “paper bitcoin” – IOUs, not actual coins.

Here, SightBringer explains that most trading on big crypto exchanges doesn’t actually move real coins. Instead, it’s just “paper bitcoin” (IOUs or promises to deliver bitcoin later).

This means there’s a lot of trading, but not much real bitcoin changing hands. If everyone tried to take their coins out at once, things could get messy (think Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) in 2023). This makes the market seem bigger than it really is.

3. Whales are rotating old supply out silently. Early miners and OTC wallets are feeding demand without triggering price – precisely to keep it low during transition.

Echoing Schiff’s reply, in point 3, SightBringer means that large holders, known as whales, aren’t selling their old coins on the open market. Instead, they’re selling quietly to new buyers or moving coins to private wallets.

This keeps the price from jumping around. In April alone, Glassnode revealed that whales had absorbed more than 300% of the newly mined bitcoin supply, drastically reducing the coins available to everyone else.

4. Volatility is being suppressed. BlackRock, Fidelity, and macro funds need price stability to finalize compliance, settlement rails, and balance sheet integration.

Big companies and funds don’t like wild price swings. They need stable prices to make sure everything works smoothly. BlackRock and others are even saying bitcoin is less volatile than before, which is good for them, as the asset becomes more credible to investors.

5. The real breakout is being delayed by design. Because once this thing moves, it won’t come back. It becomes untouchable.

SightBringer maintains that the market is being manipulated, with the BTC price being held back on purpose. When it finally breaks out, it could go exponentially higher, and it might not come back down. That’s why the big players are getting ready now, so they’re in the best position when the real move happens.

“The real question isn’t “why isn’t it moving?” It’s: Who’s making sure it doesn’t and why?”

Mentioned in this article

Analytics platform Swissblock is outlining the path forward for Bitcoin (BTC) amid stiff resistance at a level just below the all-time high.

According to Swissblock, Bitcoin is “stalling below $110,000” and the upward trend is now under pressure as a broad trading range appears to form between the resistance level and a price of $100,000.

“Consolidation may last, but one thing’s clear: No breakout without strong fundamentals.”

Bitcoin is trading at $104,447 at time of writing, around 7% below the all-time high of just under $112,000 reached last month.

Earlier in the week, Swissblock had warned that a failure by Bitcoin to break out amid a lack of fresh investor flows could lead to a double-top.

A double-top is an extremely bearish technical reversal pattern formed when the price of an asset forms two consecutive peaks, an indication that there’s a strong resistance level that the price is unable to pierce through.

According to Bitcoin Vector, a joint report by Swissblock and on-chain analyst Willy Woo, BTC liquidity has been trending lower for the past couple of days, an indication of falling volume levels, a declining number of transactions and reduced activity.

But Bitcoin Vector says a further correction is unlikely.

“Here’s the interesting part: network growth remains stable, participants are not leaving the market.

This aligns with a key point from Bitcoin Vector: profit-taking remains low, meaning selling pressure is limited.”

Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram

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

Check Price Action

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