The US crypto exchange Gemini wants to completely withdraw from Europe and Australia.
Man will its operational business focus on the USA and Singapore and lay off up to 200 employees.
The management justifies the step with the need to streamline the operational structure and secure profitability in an increasingly challenging market environment. The retreat from several international markets is intended to reduce the effort of adapting to regulations in different states and to concentrate resources on regions with higher priority.
Realignment on two core markets
The planned job cuts affect employees in Europe, the USA and Singapore. Gemini expects to incur around $11 million in costs as a result of the restructuring. These include severance payments, social benefits, costs for site closures and consulting expenses.
The majority of the financial burden is expected to be recorded in the first quarter. The measures are expected to be completed by the end of the first half of 26.
Gemini is reacting like numerous other tech and crypto companies, which have been compensating for falling sales and a difficult financing environment with staff cuts since the beginning of the year.
Consequences for customers in Europe and Australia
Gemini sets clear deadlines for customers in the affected regions. From March 5, 2026, accounts will be transitioned to a withdrawal-only mode before being permanently closed on April 6, 2026.
Image created with ChatGPT-AI (DALL E)
Customers should close their open futures positions, stop staking activities and secure their transaction histories. Gemini is working with eToro for the transition, but emphasizes that customers can also transfer the management of their assets to any other asset manager.
The new market environment
The withdrawal from several international markets is one of the clearest consolidation measures to date by a major crypto exchange in the current market environment. While competitors rationalize but maintain their global presence, Gemini relies on a radical focus.
Whether the strategy is successful in the long term depends largely on the development of US regulation, market dynamics and the profitability of the remaining business areas.
Saylor wants to coordinate quantum and other security risks with cyber/crypto experts and a Bitcoin security board.
Saylor’s core message is: Don’t panic and don’t rush into a protocol fix. Global consensus is crucial because hasty upgrades could create new problems.
Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) reported earnings in Q4/2025Call announced a new Bitcoin security program. According to Michael Saylor, the background is the growing attention to possible future risks – in particular the potential threat from quantum computers, but also “all other emerging security threats”. The move comes at a time when Strategy says it holds 713.52 Bitcoin, controlling around 3.4% of the maximum Bitcoin supply.
Saylor clearly relied on a double message in the call. On the one hand, he appealed to the market not to panic and not to force hasty decisions – especially not to make hasty protocol changes that could end up causing more damage than the feared threat itself.
On the other hand, he offered Strategy, as the largest corporate holder, a role that is more organizational and moderating: taking responsibility, structuring debates, networking the community, without already demanding a concrete technical solution or defining a schedule.
Saylor’s position on the Bitcoin quantum computer danger
Saylor deliberately placed quantum computing into a larger narrative. He portrayed quantum fear as part of a long history of existentially charged Bitcoin threat narratives – “FUD” waves that have accompanied Bitcoin since its early years. In this logic, the quantum threat is “only the most recent” manifestation. The key is not to react reflexively, but rather to remain attentive and able to act.
The core of his argument: A hasty “fix” for a potential problem could itself create new security risks. Saylor explicitly warned that technical interventions could create new attack surfaces – “new attack surfaces, additional complexity and new error or failure modes”. He is alluding to a classic security dilemma: a patch can harden a system in the short term, but can make it more fragile in the long term due to additional complexity – to the point that “the therapy is worse than the disease”.
In terms of content, Saylor positioned the quantum threat as a medium to long-term issue. His central assessment: It would be “probably ten years or longer” before quantum computing actually becomes a real threat – and he presented this as the consensus view. At the same time, he put the question of a “Bitcoin special problem” into perspective: If quantum computers could reliably break certain cryptography, not only Bitcoin would be affected, but a significant part of the digital security infrastructure.
Saylor sees the biggest obstacle less in the mere existence of possible technical solutions than in the social mechanics of Bitcoin changes. Even if there were concrete, implementable approaches, there would still need to be a “global consensus” in the Bitcoin community. Today there is no such consensus – neither about the fact that existing cryptography libraries are at acute risk, nor about what exactly should be done.
This is precisely why a “rush to a hypothetical solution” is risky: it would increase the likelihood of contention, fragmentation and potentially flawed implementations, while the threat may still be years away.
Despite this reluctance, Saylor announced a concrete organizational measure. Strategy wants to initiate a security program that explicitly positions itself at the interface between the Bitcoin community and security expertise. Saylor literally said:
“Strategy will initiate a Bitcoin security program coordinated with the global cybersecurity community, the global cryptosecurity community and the global Bitcoin Security Committee to contribute to consensus and solutions to address the quantum computing threat, as well as any other emerging security threats.”
Michael Saylor announced that Strategy is launching a global effort to develop quantum-resistant upgrades for Bitcoin. pic.twitter.com/7H0eKCcsYy
Strategy is not committing to a specific technical upgrade, but is trying to define itself as a hub: coordination, exchange, standards discussions and, above all, the attempt to prepare for consensus building before the pressure becomes great.
At the same time, Saylor emphasized that relevant answers must come from across the board, not from a single corporate initiative. He repeated this pattern in the Q&A.
When Fundstrat CEO Tom Lee asked about “quantum vulnerable wallets” and possible paths for core developers, Saylor declined to advocate “a specific solution” or “a time frame.” Strategy’s role is to support communities and “facilitate” consensus building, not to “accelerate” processes – and thereby possibly solve problems “that may not even exist in this form.”
Billie Eilish used her winner’s speech on the Grammy Awards on Sunday (1 February) to criticise the elevated Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Minneapolis.
The singer had picked up the ‘Tune of the Yr’ award for her single ‘Wildflower’ on the main night time in music, when she mentioned that ‘nobody is unlawful on stolen land’ (in reference to the colonisation of the Americas).
However the 24-year-old has confronted criticism for her feedback. And now her brother and collaborator, Finneas, has defended her in opposition to the ‘highly effective previous white males’.
The pair wore ‘ICE OUT’ badges as they took to the stage on the Grammys, with the singer saying she felt ‘actually hopeful’ within the room, expressing a must ‘preserve combating’.
“And f**ok ICE, that is all I am gonna say. Sorry!” Eilish concluded.
The pair aren’t simply brother and sister however music powerhouses, collaborating on all her albums. (Kevin Winter/Getty Pictures for The Recording Academy)
Viewers within the divided US gave a blended response to her speech, however the siblings have typically been outspoken on political points.
And Finneas has been clear in his stance within the rising tensions round ICE.
Following Eilish’s speech, he shared a publish on Threads studying: “Seeing numerous very highly effective previous white males outraged about what my 24-year-old sister mentioned throughout her acceptance speech.
“We are able to actually see your names within the Epstein information.”
He additionally shared posts from others, together with one which reads: “Each two weeks essentially the most cartoonishly evil males on Earth get mad at Billie Eilish for saying ‘what if we might make the world a greater place ’ lol.”
After Eilish’s speech referencing being on ‘stolen land’, individuals have been fast to pull up that the singer’s reported $3 million (£2.1 million) household residence within the Highland Park neighbourhood of Los Angeles sits on land initially belonging to the Tongva individuals.
Finneas mentioned ‘previous white males’ have been outraged by his sister’s feedback. (Kevin Winter/Getty Pictures for The Recording Academy)
And a consultant for them since confirmed this hypothesis, as they informed MailOnline: “Because the First Folks of the better Los Angeles basin, we do perceive that her house is located in our ancestral land.
“Eilish has not contacted our tribe straight relating to her property, we do worth the occasion when Public Figures present visibility to the true historical past of this nation.”
The Tongva individuals spokesperson expressed ‘appreciation’ for Eilish’s assertion as they urged her and others to incorporate reference to their nation.
“It’s our hope that in future discussions, the tribe can explicitly be referenced to make sure the general public understands that the better Los Angeles basin stays Gabrielino Tongva territory,” the spokesperson added.
LADbible Group contacted representatives for Eilish for remark.
Madison Beer has spoken out in criticism of a misogynistic query she was requested in a ‘very male dominated room’.
The American singer-songwriter burst onto the music scene when her cowl of Etta James’ track ‘At Final’ was shared on social media by Justin Bieber.
She went on to launch her first EP in 2018 and has since been nominated for 2 Grammys, solidifying her standing as one of many greatest upcoming names within the business.
Sadly, as is the case with industries each massive and small, a component of misogyny and sexism stays, notably when it is relating to somebody as conventionally enticing because the 26-year-old performer.
Beer has now hit out on the prejudice that continues to exist on the planet after she was requested a query with misogynistic undertones.
The musician wasn’t impressed with the query (Gilbert Flores/Penske Media through Getty Photographs)
Chatting with the Hollywood Reporter, she mentioned: “It’s assumed that [women] can’t be the boss, they will’t be the CEO. As a lot as we’ve progressed as a society in lots of methods, I really feel like these issues additionally nonetheless very a lot exist.
“I’ve this tremendous good watch that I put on [and] love that. I used to be out just lately [and] it was a really male dominated room. Somebody complimented my watch and requested, ‘Did your boyfriend get it for you?’
“I’m like, ‘No, I purchased it for myself. Thanks although.’”
Contemplating US President Donald Trump just lately criticised a feminine journalist for ‘not smiling’, whereas distinguished figures within the ‘manosphere’ similar to Andrew Tate proceed to realize traction on-line, it is easy to see why instances of misogyny are nonetheless so widespread.
The Grammy nominee was additionally questioned about her inventive position in her music (Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Photographs for The Recording Academy)
Beer added: “It’s simply humorous. In little methods, I really feel like issues nonetheless bleed by which might be, in my view, underlying misogyny. This dude assumed that I couldn’t afford to purchase myself this watch.
“Perhaps I look into issues too deeply, however I’m like, nicely, that’s most likely since you assume {that a} lady can’t be making sufficient cash to take action. I don’t know what it’s, however I believe there’s a layered factor there that comes up.
“Even somebody like me, who I really feel like I’m my very own boss… I run my life. I don’t report back to anybody. I steer my very own ship. There are nonetheless feedback that get made by males.”
Sadly, it most likely will not be the final time one thing like this occurs to a star, with Javier Bardem beforehand shutting down a reporter who requested a sexist query about working together with his spouse Penélope Cruz.
Gordon Ramsay has damaged his silence on the continued feud between his household and the Peaty household.
Adam Peaty, the Olympic gold medallist swimmer, was formally topped the chef’s son-in-law when he married his daughter Holly on the again finish of 2025.
What promised to be a gorgeous celebration was considerably overshadowed after Adam’s mom Caroline dropped the bombshell that she had not been invited following weeks of gossip concerning a household feud.
Though Gordon might need a repute for being offended, he was surprisingly delighted with the concept of his daughter marrying one of many world’s finest breaststrokers, and he was even ‘misplaced for phrases’ once they confirmed that they’d go by Mr and Mrs Ramsay Peaty the night time earlier than the marriage.
Nonetheless, the superstar chef was extra upset concerning the state of affairs concerning his new in-laws which sadly noticed them lacking from the December marriage ceremony.
Talking to the Daily Mail, he spoke concerning the ‘upsetting’ state of affairs: “It’s all self-inflicted from their aspect, as a result of we’ve accomplished nothing – none of what you’ve learn: no rudeness, no ignorance – we welcomed them. We despatched a chauffeur-driven automotive for them to come back to the engagement social gathering and handled them like royalty. So to get that barrage of press was very hurtful. Tana took it very significantly.”
Adam and Holly married in late December (Karwai Tang/WireImage)
He added: “It was Adam and Holly’s needs for them to not attend and so we needed to respect that. There’s stuff they should type out as mother and father. That’s nothing to do with Tana and me. However we’re very aware we need to transfer on and permit Holly and Adam to proceed beginning their lives collectively.”
Caroline had additionally spoken to the Daily Mail on the eve of the marriage to share her disappointment that she would not be capable to see her son get married.
She stated: “Me going would simply trigger much more of a storm and I don’t need to break his marriage ceremony day. I wished to be there quietly to look at him get married, however that may’t occur now.
“I don’t know if they’re too younger or don’t worth household as a lot as I’ve, however they don’t perceive that household is the muse to every part.”
Adam’s mother and father have been reportedly fuming once they weren’t invited (Bryn Lennon/Getty Photographs)
It appears as if the feud first started when Caroline wasn’t invited to Holly’s hen do, with Adam’s aunt slamming the bride on a now-deleted Instagram submit.
She wrote: “@hollyramsayy I am so glad that you just had a terrific hen do. As a bride, you deserve that. Nonetheless, as an individual, you have been divisive and hurtful in direction of a girl who I’ve liked and proceed to like deeply.”
The message continued: “A lady who opened her residence and coronary heart to you. You determined, for no matter purpose, to not invite her, your potential mother-in-law, to your hen night time, but Adam invited his father-in-law, your dad, to his stag night time.
“You invited your mum (fairly rightly) and even your mum’s assistant, your sisters, your mates, my niece, however not my sister, your future mother-in-law. I’ve additionally seen messages passing between her and Adam about this and different issues, and, fairly frankly, I anticipated higher of you and undoubtedly of Adam. You’ve inflicted a damage on my sister that may take a really very long time to heal if ever.”
Household feuds actually appear to be the flavour of the month, given one other marriage ceremony between Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz led him to distance himself fully from his mother and father David and Victoria, with the latter by the way incomes herself an invitation to Adam’s marriage ceremony and Holly’s hen do.
The XLS‑80 additional module for the XRP Ledger is a significant technological advance. The new “permissioned domains” enable clearly defined segments in a public ledger for the first time.
This gives banks, financial service providers and tokenization projects access to an open, yet compliant infrastructure – a balancing act that many blockchains have failed to achieve so far.
Permissioned domains are based on the previously introduced credentials framework XLS-70. This allows onchain proof of identity such as KYC and AML credentials to be integrated directly into the transaction flow.
With XLS‑80, operators can now define domains in which only wallets with certain, predefined credentials are allowed to operate. The XRP ledger remains completely public, but clear access restrictions apply within a domain.
This mechanism creates a hybrid structure that both meets regulatory requirements and preserves the benefits of an open network.
Foundation for liquidity and tokenization
The introduction of permissioned domains is a prerequisite for the upcoming permissioned DEX, which is expected to be activated in mid-February. For the first time, institutional players can operate regulated trading venues directly on the XRPL without having to resort to private or isolated blockchains.
For tokenization projects – for example in the RWA area – an environment is created in which assets can be traded securely, traceably and in compliance with regulatory requirements.
Companies like Billiton Diamond, which are already planning triple-digit million dollar tokenizations, will benefit directly from this new infrastructure.
Image created with ChatGPT-AI (DALL E)
Technical implementation and governance issues
XLS‑80 introduced new ledger objects and transaction types, including PermissionedDomain, PermissionedDomainSet, and PermissionedDomainDelete. Domain operators can define up to ten credential types that are required for access.
Wallets with these proofs are automatically recognized as authorized. Despite the technical elegance, governance remains a critical point: the security and integrity of the domains depends largely on the trustworthiness of the credential authors and the operators.
Risks such as compromised credentials or inadequate monitoring must be mitigated through clear processes and audits.
Importance for the DACH region
For the DACH region, where clear regulation and compliance traditionally play a central role, the activation of permissioned domains is a strategic milestone.
Swiss banks like UBS and Julius Baer, German FinTechs and Liechtenstein providers such as LCX thus receive an infrastructure that meets institutional requirements without giving up the advantages of a global public ledger.
With the combination of openness, compliance and scalability, the XRP ledger could become a preferred tool for tokenization, regulated trading venues and institutional applications.
Ripple brings compliance directly to the XRP ledger with “Permissioned Domains”. For the first time, institutions could trade on a public DEX without taking on counterparty risk “blindly”.
The potential game changer: separate matching worlds (“open” vs. “permissioned”) on the same XRPL DEX.
With the activation of Permissioned Domains on February 4, 2026, a feature went live on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) that is currently causing quite a bit of hype in the XRP community. And Ripple itself is of course also fueling the topic.
The idea is quickly explained: Permissioned domains are intended to give institutions access to decentralized exchanges (DEX). So not via any private side setups, not via off-chain constructs, but on the XRP Ledger.
Central to this is another XRPL amendment that has yet to go live. RippleX, the development arm of Ripple Inc., specifically refers to the Permissioned DEX (XLS-81). The necessary validator approval has been achieved. If the Supermajority holds, activation will follow on February 18th.
Ripple wrote about this on Wednesday via X:
“The full permissions structure to access compliant liquidity pools on XRPL will soon be available to institutions.”
Permissioned Domains are now live on XRPL Mainnet, and Permissioned DEX has achieved validator consensus to activate in 2 weeks!
Soon, the full „permissioning stack“ will be available for institutions to access compliant liquidity pools on XRPL.
Why this could be a game-changer for Ripple and XRP
Permissioned domains are, at their core, an access layer. They define a controlled area in which it is determined what evidence an account must provide in order to be allowed to participate.
These proofs are called “credentials”. So verifiable attestation – about identity, compliance status, approval by jurisdiction, things like that. They are issued by “trusted parties”. Classic regulatory topics, just not outsourced to a closed platform, but depicted as a mechanic in the ledger.
Mayukha Vadari of RippleX-Entwickler describes it on X like this:
“Credentials are on-ledger receipts from a trusted issuer that confirm a user’s identity or status. Permissioned domains create a safe, secure environment in which only properly accredited participants can operate. The permissioned DEX allows institutions to trade securely within a permissioned domain on the DEX.”
It sounds dry, but it’s the point: Regulated players should be able to use the XRPL-DEX without immediately running afoul of their compliance requirements. And with that the discussion shifts. It’s no longer just about “DEX vs. CEX”. But about something else:
Can you split a public DEX so that certain order books are only used by verified participants – while the open market continues to run in parallel?
Domains are the basic requirement. Credentials are the “ID”, the access permission. Important: The order book matching logic is actually separated. Ripple explains it like this:
“An approved offer can only be matched with other valid approved offers. Open offers can be matched with other open offers, but not with permitted offers.”
In plain language this means: two separate execution worlds – on the same DEX. A regulated order book can therefore prevent orders from being placed against any unknown counterparty. The public DEX remains unaffected. Just separately.
This separation is practically a hard requirement for institutions. What matters is not who can read the ledger. But who ends up as the opposing party in the match.
Ripple names FX swaps, payouts (e.g. payroll/contractor), B2B cross-border transfers and treasury conversions as areas of application. So wherever a DEX setup would be attractive, but compliance is non-negotiable.
The thesis behind it: “Institutional DeFi” should no longer fail because of the technology. Permissioned domains are intended to set the framework. The Permissioned DEX is intended to create the platform on the XRP Ledger.
IOTA and Teesside University are bringing the TWIN system into real operation. It builds on UK Government projects from 2025.
TWIN is used as part of the Digital Trade Testbed infrastructure at Teesside International Airport.
The IOTA Foundation and the Teesside University are starting a comprehensive cooperation to put the TWIN system – an application based on IOTA technology for the digital exchange of trading data – into operational use.
Four government employees were seconded to the IOTA Foundation for a year to develop concrete pilot applications together with industry, port authorities and border points.
Timely data – fast processing
The tests so far show that digital processes enable significant gains in efficiency. Today, many trade documents only reach the authorities shortly before the goods arrive – too late to correct errors in time.
This leads to delays, a lot of manual effort and unnecessary storage of goods at the borders. With TWIN, data can be made available up to 20 hours earlier, reducing error rates, reducing costs and increasing transparency.
According to British experts, digitized documents could save up to £1.2 billion a year and reduce processing time by up to 75%. A 2024 LSE study also estimates that digitalization of trade could increase UK GDP by 1.3%.
Open infrastructure for accurate supply chain data
The TWIN system combines the British government’s open information sharing architecture with a new supply chain platform developed by IOTA. The aim is a secure, authorization-based, cross-border data exchange.
Image created with ChatGPT-AI (DALL E)
It integrates into existing government systems and enables more detailed advance information, for example on the type and origin of goods. This means that risks can be better assessed, resources can be used more specifically and compliant deliveries can be processed more quickly.
For the industry, it means less bureaucracy, automated data collection via open APIs and the ability to store documents, such as invoices, as legally valid electronic commercial documents (ETDs) on the IOTA ledger.
Scalable implementation in the Digital Trade Testbed
With the integration into the Digital Trade Testbed, a physical-digital environment is created for the first time in which new technologies can be tested and scaled under real conditions.
Teesside University provides infrastructure and industry connections, while the IOTA Foundation provides technical expertise and works closely with seconded government staff.
The tests remain open to other partners from business, science and administration – a consciously collaborative approach, as the modernization of global trade processes can only succeed with the interaction of all those involved.
The partnership marks the decisive step towards a modern, interoperable and efficient trading system that can show how open DLT infrastructures can create concrete economic benefits.
Spanish BBVA has joined the EU banking consortium Qivalis, which will launch a euro stablecoin. There are now twelve banks in the project, including ING, BNP Paribas, UniCredit, DZ Bank and CaixaBank.
This is a clear signal for the European financial sector: banks no longer want to have to deal exclusively with US stablecoins in the global stablecoin competition, but rather want to create a viable digital stablecoin infrastructure themselves.
The “Euro Coin” is supposed to be MiCA-regulated by the Dutch central bank licensed, making them one of the first fully regulated stablecoins in Europe.
The stablecoin market is currently clearly dominated by US providers. Tether (USDT) and Circle (USDC) control the majority of global sales, while Euro stablecoins have so far been barely relevant.
For banks and companies in the DACH region, this means a dependence on US infrastructure, which is neither regulatory nor geopolitically desirable.
The Qivalis consortium will change that and establish a Euro stablecoin that can be used for payment transactions as well as for all matters related to tokenized securities.
Consequences of a Euro coin
With the Spanish BBVA, the consortium gains additional technical experience, particularly in the area of blockchain-based financial products.
A Euro coin will bring significant advantages for the economy: faster cross-border payments, lower transaction costs and, for the first time, true 24/7 processing.
Image created with ChatGPT-AI (DALL E)
This is particularly relevant for export-oriented medium-sized companies, FinTechs and institutional investors. At the same time, the EU stablecoin could serve as a settlement asset for tokenized bonds, fund shares and other money market products – an area that is growing rapidly in Germany, Austria and Switzerland and requires standardized on-chain payment methods.
Pilot projects begin in 2026
If licensing takes place as planned, market observers expect the first pilot projects to take place this year. The initial focus is likely to be on B2B payments and treasury applications.
In the long term, the EU stablecoin is expected to displace US competition in Europe. The decisive factor will be whether the EU banking consortium can deliver at least the same level of interoperability and user-friendliness – areas in which US providers have so far been clearly ahead.
Glassnode sees Bitcoin True Market Mean as new resistance, while $70,000-$80,000 is the first demand zone.
Despite possible buyer zones, realized losses are increasing and the derivatives/options market remains defensive. Without visibly increasing spot demand, any recovery is likely to be more corrective than a real trend reversal, according to Glassnode.
According to Glassnode, Bitcoin hasWeekly report from February 4th lost central technical and on-chain support: the price fell below the “True Market Mean”. This brings a clearly bearish regime to the fore, but it remains unclear how long this phase will last this time.
According to Glassnode, the True Market Mean is an important anchor for the actively circulating coins, which has repeatedly acted as the last support line in the previous “shallow bear phase”. Glassnode interprets the fact that Bitcoin is now falling below this mark as a signal that the bear market is entering a confirmed phase, drawing parallels to 2022.
How low can the Bitcoin price fall?
The true market mean is currently around $80,200 and is now becoming crucial resistance. Below, Glassnode points to the “Realized Price,” which is currently around $55,800 – a historical area where long-term capital typically becomes more active again.
Bitcoin True Market Mean, Quelle: Glassnode
For short-term price ranges, Glassnode refers to the UTXO Realized Price Distribution (URPD), i.e. the distribution of the UTXO cost bases across price levels. Glassnode writes:
“Current distributions show notable accumulation of newer entrants in the $70,000-$80,000 area, suggesting early positioning of buyers ready to absorb weakness at these levels. Below this zone, a dense supply cluster between $66,900 and $70,600 stands out as a particularly compelling area. Historically, zones with highly concentrated cost bases often act as short-term ones Shock absorbers where selling pressure is more likely to meet responsive demand.”
Bitcoin UTXO Realized Price Distribution (URPD), Source: Glassnode
At the same time, the report provides a second, less comfortable signal: measurable stress in the market is increasing. Glassnode writes:
“During the current contraction, the 7-day simple moving average of realized losses has risen to over $1.26 billion per day. This reflects a significant increase in fear and frustration following the loss of true market mean. Historically, spikes in realized losses often coincide with periods of acute seller exhaustion where marginal selling pressure begins to fade.”
The report also gives a concrete example: When the rebound from the 72,000 region occurred, the daily realized losses briefly jumped to over 2.4 billion US dollars – almost double the 7-day average at the time.
According to Glassnode, such extreme values often mark short-term turning points at which forced sales turn into temporary stabilization. Importantly, this is not evidence of a cyclical bottom, but rather a pattern that suggests short-term exhaustion.
Trend reversal not yet foreseeable
While the first buying zones are becoming visible on-chain, spot demand remains structurally weak, according to the report. The 30-day average of spot volume remains extremely low, despite Bitcoin falling from $98,000 to $72,000 – a rather bearish sign:
“Historically, resilient reversals have been accompanied by spot volume rising aggressively as new demand is ready to take over the other side. In this case, volume has increased only moderately in the decline, suggesting that activity is largely reactive and dominated by distribution and de-risking rather than belief-driven accumulation.”
Bitcoin spot volume across all exchanges, source: Glassnode
At the same time, long positions were liquidated hard on the futures markets, which further strengthened the downward momentum. The report emphasizes that a leverage reset is not in itself a bottoming signal – without real spot demand, the market remains vulnerable.
“From here on out, price’s ability to stabilize will depend on whether this leverage reset is enough to clean up excess risk or whether further de-leveraging is required. A sustained recovery typically requires spot demand to step in rather than relying solely on liquidation-driven positioning cleanups.”
The options market also remains defensive. Short-term implied volatility increased towards 70% when retesting the 73,000 region, and the 1-week IV is around 20 vol points above the level from two weeks ago. In addition: The downside skew becomes steeper – puts are in greater demand relative to calls. This keeps hedging costs high and shifts the probability further towards negative outcomes.
Additionally, the 1-week volatility risk premium has turned negative:
“The 1-week volatility risk premium has turned negative for the first time since early December and has fallen to about -5. This is a sharp reversal from about +23 a month ago. A negative volatility risk premium means that implied volatility is now trading below realized volatility.”
For market makers and gamma sellers, this is a constellation that can increase hedging activity – and thus increase short-term volatility. Glassnode summarizes the situation like this:
“With leverage flushed out but spot demand still lacking, the market remains vulnerable and any recovery rally is likely to be corrective rather than reversal.”
This means that the price zones mentioned in the report are now the crucial reference points: $80,200 as resistance (True Market Mean), $70,000-80,000 as the first demand zone, $66,900-70,600 as a cost base cluster and $55,800 (Realized Price) as a historical area in which long-term buyers have often become more active again in the past.
As CNF reported yesterday, Galaxy Digital also warned in its latest report that the BTC price could fall as low as $58,000.
Credentials: Verifiable… 
