Author: Evan Mercer

  • Robinhood Chain Sets Record with $875M in DEX Volume as Tokenized Stocks Surge

    Robinhood Chain Sets Record with $875M in DEX Volume as Tokenized Stocks Surge

    Robinhood Chain processed a record 5.52 million transactions on Aug. 30 as decentralized exchange activity and tokenized stock trading reached new highs.

    DEX volume on the network climbed to a record $875 million, according to the Wu Blockchain Data Center. Uniswap v4 accounted for $432 million of the total, while Uniswap v3 generated a further $357 million.

    Activity also surged on Pons, Robinhood Chain’s largest token launchpad. The platform recorded 22,600 token creations and $187 million in trading volume on Aug. 30, with both figures representing all-time highs.

    Source: Wu Blockchain Data Centre

    Tokenized Stocks Drive New DEX Volume

    The most significant development may be the source of the network’s growing activity.

    Data from Token Terminal shows that the seven most-traded tokenized stocks generated $4.3 billion in decentralized exchange volume over the past 30 days. Three of those assets are traded on Robinhood Chain.

    Uniswap alone has processed approximately $1.5 billion in tokenized stock volume on Robinhood Chain in around six weeks.

    Source: Token Terminal

    The figures point to a broader shift in the real-world asset market. Tokenized equities give investors blockchain-based access to traditional securities while also generating trading fees for decentralized exchanges, issuance revenue for asset providers, and transaction demand for the networks that support them.

    For decentralized finance, tokenized stocks create a new category of activity beyond crypto-native assets. Decentralized markets can increasingly capture trading tied to securities originating in traditional finance, rather than competing only for memecoin, stablecoin, or perpetual-futures volume.

    Robinhood Chain Revenue Surges

    The impact is already visible in blockchain application revenue. On Aug. 31, applications on Robinhood Chain generated $2.66 million over 24 hours, ahead of Hyperliquid L1 at approximately $1.7 million and Ethereum at $1.27 million.

    Robinhood Chain’s 24-hour revenue was also nearly six times higher than Base’s approximately $438,000 during the same period.

    A single day of revenue does not establish a lasting lead, particularly against networks with deeper liquidity and longer operating histories. However, the figures show how quickly tokenized securities can influence blockchain economics when trading volumes reach scale.

    Robinhood Chain’s recent growth suggests that tokenized stocks could become more than a distribution product for investors. They may also develop into a significant source of fees, liquidity, and transaction demand across the decentralized finance ecosystem.

  • Kalshi Imposes First Lifetime Ban on George Santos for Market Manipulation

    Kalshi Imposes First Lifetime Ban on George Santos for Market Manipulation

    Kalshi, the regulated U.S. prediction-market exchange, has issued its first permanent trading ban, barring former Representative George Santos and fining him more than $70,000 for allegedly manipulating a contract linked to his own attendance at a public event, according to CoinDesk.

    The penalty, detailed in a disciplinary record published on Kalshi’s website and confirmed by a company spokesperson, is the most severe sanction the exchange has imposed. It comes as prediction markets face growing scrutiny over whether they can prevent trading based on public figures’ actions and non-public information.

    What Kalshi Says George Santos Did

    Kalshi’s disciplinary record says Santos made a series of large trades in a market whose contracts depended on whether he attended an appearance by President Donald Trump earlier this year. The record says Santos then made public statements about his attendance in an effort to influence the market’s outcome.

    Santos ultimately bet that he would not attend the event, and he did not appear. Kalshi imposed the fine in the final days of August, in addition to banning him from the platform for life.

    Santos did not respond to CoinDesk’s request for comment. He was expelled from Congress in 2023 amid criminal fraud investigations and was serving a prison sentence when Trump commuted his sentence last year.

    Kalshi Announces Broader Enforcement Action

    Kalshi said the Santos case was one of five new enforcement matters. The other four traders received temporary bans after cooperating with investigators.

    The exchange described the cases as part of its responsibility under its regulations to serve as a first line of defense against market manipulation. A spokesperson said Santos “faces additional financial penalties and will be banned permanently from trading on Kalshi given his lack of cooperation.”

    The action followed a separate Commodity Futures Trading Commission order issued Friday, August 28. Under that order, former White House aide Gabriel Perez was directed to pay more than $170,000 and was barred from trading for three years over bets on “mention” contracts involving Trump.

    The CFTC said Perez’s penalties were reduced because of what it described as exemplary cooperation. Perez had worked as a teleprompter operator. “Mention” contracts pay out when prominent figures speak specific words during public addresses.

    Why Prediction-Market Enforcement Matters

    Prediction markets have spent the past year seeking to reassure regulators and institutional partners that their platforms can resist manipulation. That effort has gained importance as companies such as Cantor Fitzgerald open Kalshi markets to institutional clients and trading volumes increase.

    Self-enforcement is a key part of that argument. Platforms that investigate suspicious activity and impose penalties can cite those actions as evidence that their compliance systems are working.

    Rival platform Polymarket has said it uses machine learning, blockchain analytics, trade surveillance and open-source research to identify unusual activity. The company says it has referred more than 100 cases to authorities, including bets linked to a U.S. soldier accused of using classified information to wager on the capture of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and possible insider trading before U.S. military action in Iran.

    Polymarket has also said its systems block the vast majority of U.S. users from accessing its international platform, as required under a 2022 settlement with the CFTC.

    Kalshi’s disciplinary record illustrates how a lightly monitored market tied to one person’s behavior can become vulnerable to manipulation. BlockchainReporter has examined a similar dynamic in coverage of sophisticated traders’ structural advantage on Kalshi.

    Key unanswered questions include how far federal scrutiny will extend and whether other prediction-market platforms will impose permanent bans of their own. Kalshi has said federal authorities have reportedly examined the Santos trades, while the wider regulatory environment—including state efforts to prohibit prediction markets—suggests that the industry’s enforcement practices will remain under close scrutiny through the U.S. midterm elections.

  • Ontology Halts Mainnet Transactions as Technical Team Investigates Potential Security Issue

    Ontology Halts Mainnet Transactions as Technical Team Investigates Potential Security Issue

    Ontology Suspends Mainnet Block Production Over Potential Security Concern

    Ontology suspended block production on its mainnet on Aug. 31 while its technical team and network validators investigated a potential security concern. The project described the halt as a preventive measure and said it had not confirmed a security incident or found evidence that user assets had been lost or compromised.

    Ontology announced the suspension at 09:09 UTC. Based on its preliminary assessment, the ONT and ONG crypto assets, as well as other on-chain assets, remained unaffected. The project did not report a loss, compromise, or active attack in its initial updates.

    Ontology mainnet remained at block 20,770,893

    A public-node snapshot showed that the chain had remained at block 20,770,893. Ontology’s developer documentation lists dappnode1.ont.io as a public MainNet node, and a height request recorded at 13:30:49 UTC returned that block number.

    The block was timestamped at 08:24:26 UTC on Aug. 31. That put the interval between the block timestamp and the later snapshot at five hours, six minutes, and 23 seconds.

    The elapsed time reflects the period since the last block visible through the documented public node. The unchanged block height does not explain why production stopped, but it is consistent with Ontology’s statement that mainnet operations had been suspended.

    Security review details remain undisclosed

    Ontology said it identified the potential concern during a daily security check. Its notice did not disclose the technical condition under review, the systems that might be involved, or the findings required for block production to resume.

    The project did not provide an estimated duration for the suspension. It said it would issue a separate announcement before or when the network resumed and that it would not process on-chain transactions while block production remained halted. Ontology did not publish a restart timetable in its initial notice.

    The interruption is therefore distinct from a confirmed exploit or attack. While the network outage is evident, Ontology’s statement on asset safety was a preliminary assessment made while the investigation was still in progress.

    Next update will determine the halt’s duration

    The next significant development will be whether validators resume block production and what Ontology’s security review reveals. A restart will establish the total duration of the pause, while a later technical explanation could clarify whether the precautionary halt prevented an incident or addressed a concern that ultimately did not develop into one.

    Related Reading: MANTRA Chain is back online, but silent code changes spark developer concerns

  • Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, and Cardano Reveal Four Very Different Stories Through Active Addresses

    Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, and Cardano Reveal Four Very Different Stories Through Active Addresses

    Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, and Cardano are showing sharply different patterns in active addresses, highlighting major differences in blockchain usage and network demand.

    Bitcoin Activity Reflects Changing Investor Behavior

    Bitcoin’s active-address count has fallen significantly compared with previous major market cycles, even though its price remains well above historical levels. According to the latest analysis from Alphractal founder Joao Wedson, the decline does not necessarily signal weaker network usage.

    Bitcoin investors increasingly hold their coins for longer periods and move them less frequently. At the same time, ETFs, custodians, exchanges, and the Lightning Network are playing a larger role in the ecosystem.

    The growing influence of exchange-traded funds is particularly notable. US-based spot Bitcoin ETFs have recorded $3.31 billion in inflows so far in August. This shift in how investors access and hold $BTC may help explain why on-chain activity has not risen at the same pace as Bitcoin’s price.

    Rather than showing that Bitcoin is being used less, the trend may reflect its expanding role as a reserve asset. More activity is now taking place through financial products and other market structures instead of directly on the blockchain.

    Ethereum and Tron Show Strong Network Usage

    Ethereum’s network activity has started accelerating again, with active addresses approaching 1 million. This is happening even though a significant portion of the ecosystem operates on Layer 2 networks, indicating that Ethereum remains highly relevant as financial infrastructure.

    Tron has recorded more than 4 million active addresses, giving it the strongest performance among the four blockchains by this measure. Wedson said much of Tron’s activity appears to be driven by payments and stablecoins, particularly USDT, rather than speculation surrounding the price of TRX.

    The network has become a major infrastructure layer for transferring digital dollars, helping support its high level of address activity.

    Is Cardano Struggling to Gain Usage?

    Cardano presents a starkly different picture. Its network activity has fallen sharply since 2021 and remains at very low levels compared with its historical performance.

    Wedson explained that prices can rise because of narratives, liquidity, and speculation, while on-chain activity provides a clearer indication of whether people are actively using a blockchain.

    Cardano’s weak activity follows years of criticism over the network’s slow development and its difficulty converting its technology into broader real-world usage. More recently, the blockchain has faced significant pressure, including a public warning from founder Charles Hoskinson about a “wave of failures” and the closure of important dApps.

    In the market, $ADA briefly reached $0.254 this month before retreating to $0.196 at the time of writing. Despite the recent price weakness, some market commentators remain optimistic. Analyst Sssebi said he expects $ADA to return to its previous all-time high of $3.10 during the coming bull market and believes it could move above that level.

  • Bitcoin Holds Above $79K Despite Pressure After Nearly 25% August Rally

    Bitcoin Holds Above $79K Despite Pressure After Nearly 25% August Rally

    Bitcoin posted a cumulative gain of nearly 25% in August as the cryptocurrency began its monthly close above $79,020, despite continued pressure and several sessions of high volatility across major trading venues.

    The largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization held the $78,200-$78,700 range during the past 48 hours. The technical support came as liquidity continued to increase across regulated spot trading platforms.

    Data from CoinGlass showed that short-position liquidations on major exchanges exceeded $180 million over the past week. Market analysts said the liquidations triggered automatic buybacks on the open market, adding bullish momentum while programmed institutional selling continued.

    Bitcoin’s daily spot trading volume surpassed $34 billion on the last business day. Data from CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko indicated that the level was 14% above the moving average recorded in the middle of the month.

    Meanwhile, the funding rate for Bitcoin perpetual contracts remained moderate at approximately 0.008% over the past 24 hours. Market analysts said the figures suggest that the latest move is being driven primarily by spot buying rather than excessive speculative leverage in derivatives.

    Bitcoin Derivatives and Institutional Demand

    Spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the United States recorded net inflows of $420 million over the past five trading sessions.

    Official issuer data showed that the cumulative net inflows offset outflows recorded earlier in the third quarter. Analysts at Bloomberg Intelligence said steady demand from institutional asset managers had helped reduce the amount of Bitcoin available on over-the-counter (OTC) desks.

    Bitcoin’s mining difficulty reached a record 102 trillion hashes in the latest biweekly adjustment. Technical documentation from the protocol showed that the network’s average computing power, or hashrate, stood at 730 EH/s at the end of August, reflecting continued expansion of mining infrastructure.

    Long-term Bitcoin holders also showed signs of stability after the latest price increase. Metrics from analytics firm Glassnode indicated that more than 65% of the total circulating supply had remained dormant for over a year. The firm’s technical report said slower distribution by these holders has historically been associated with structural consolidation phases before new volatility cycles.

    The next major economic event for Bitcoin markets is scheduled for the first week of September, when the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics is due to release its official nonfarm payrolls and employment report. The data could directly influence expectations for Federal Reserve monetary policy.

  • BIP-110 Supporters Revive Minority Fork, Cut Block Size to Just 300 KB

    BIP-110 Supporters Revive Minority Fork, Cut Block Size to Just 300 KB

    Twenty-three days after the BIP-110 minority chain split from Bitcoin, the alternative network has resumed producing blocks under a new Blake2b proof-of-work system.

    The split occurred at block height 961632 after a group of supporters argued that the Bitcoin blockchain should be used only for financial transactions. The minority chain initially stalled because miners struggled to find blocks while operating with the difficulty inherited from the main Bitcoin network.

    BIP-110 supporters mined blocks through height 961639. At block 961640, however, the chain accelerated under new Blake2b consensus rules. The block was mined by a pool or entity known as Silent Wave. Luke Dashjr continues to describe the effort as a rehearsal, while the next software release is reportedly expected on Sept. 1. Blockchain data showed that more than 800 minority-chain blocks had been mined since the change at the time of writing.

    Dashjr gets the 300 kB block size he wanted

    Alongside the proof-of-work change, Dashjr and other minority-chain developers reduced the block size to 300 kB. Dashjr has advocated a smaller Bitcoin block size for years. Bitcoin.com News reported on his proposal in 2019, after the idea was first introduced in a 2017 Bitcoin Improvement Proposal.

    While much of the Bitcoin block-size debate focused on whether the 1 MB limit was too small, Dashjr consistently argued that it should be reduced further. His 2019 proposal, like BIP-110, failed to gain significant adoption.

    According to the newly launched btc-blake2b.org website and its FAQ page, the Blake2b chain now uses the 300 kB limit. “While those limits are on, a block may also be no larger than about 300 kB (800,000 weight units),” the FAQ page explains.

    The minority chain’s block-size change was predicted two weeks earlier on X. The BIP-110 chain has also faced mockery on the platform, where $BTC supporters have said they cannot take the “sh**coin” seriously.

    BIP-110 fork lacks support from major crypto exchanges

    The forked cryptocurrency associated with the BIP-110 minority chain is not listed on any centralized exchange. Major market-data platforms, including CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap, do not display a ticker for the asset.

    Despite the absence of centralized exchange support, the project’s leading supporters have downplayed the issue.

    “Let’s not use centralized KYC exchanges for the Blake chain, let’s just earn bitcoin by selling goods and services, and buy goods and services to spend our bitcoin,” BIP-110 developer Chris Guida wrote on X. “Screw fiat,” he added.

    Bitcoin community rejects Blake2b fork

    Bitcoin supporters have continued to reject the claim that the Blake2b chain is Bitcoin. Following the relaunch, Bitcoin historian Pete Rizzo wrote: “Just In: The failed BIP 110 fork has officially relaunched and removed Bitcoin’s proof of work algorithm; it is now its own incompatible blockchain with its own cryptocurrency,”

    Guida rejected that characterization, responding: “Nah, the Blake chain is Bitcoin. Sha256 was never a defining feature of Bitcoin.”

    The minority chain is now producing blocks, but the broader Bitcoin community generally treats the split as settled and identifies Bitcoin-Blake2b as a separate fork rather than Bitcoin itself. Whether the bitcoin-blake2b asset develops meaningful market value remains uncertain. For now, it has no major centralized exchange listings and limited support across the wider cryptocurrency market.

  • Kalshi Bans George Santos Over $17,839 Market Manipulation

    Kalshi Bans George Santos Over $17,839 Market Manipulation

    Kalshi has permanently banned former U.S. Representative George Santos and imposed a $71,356 penalty after determining that he manipulated an event market tied to his attendance at President Donald Trump’s 2026 State of the Union address. The exchange said Santos earned $17,839.57 from the trades.

    Kalshi says Santos traded on an outcome he could control

    In an Aug. 28 disciplinary notice, Kalshi said Santos placed large trades between Feb. 2 and Feb. 25 in contracts that paid out depending on whether he attended the address.

    Because Santos’s attendance determined the contracts’ result, he could directly influence the underlying event. Kalshi Rule 5.17(z) prohibits members from trading contracts when they can affect the outcome.

    Despite the restriction, Kalshi’s compliance department found that Santos bought and sold contracts tied solely to his own attendance. His positions included both “Yes” contracts, which paid if he appeared at the event, and “No” contracts, which paid if he did not.

    During the trading period, Santos published several statements about his travel and attendance plans. Kalshi said some of the posts were false or misleading and were intended to move prices before he bought or sold the related contracts.

    The exchange determined that the statements affected the market as intended. By shifting between “Yes” and “No” positions while controlling information about his plans, Santos generated $17,839.57 in profit, according to the notice.

    Kalshi cited violations involving market manipulation, trading with material nonpublic information, trading on an outcome a member can influence, and using a deceptive scheme connected to exchange activity. The exchange’s compliance department also found that Santos did not cooperate promptly and fully with its internal investigation.

    Under the settlement, Santos cannot access Kalshi directly or through another person or account. The exchange also imposed a $71,356 penalty, exactly four times the profit amount listed in its notice. The disciplinary document took effect on Aug. 28.

    Social media posts moved Santos attendance contracts

    A separate Commodity Futures Trading Commission order issued on July 31 provided a more detailed timeline of Santos’s trades. According to the regulator, Santos opened his Kalshi account on Feb. 11 and deposited about $7,000, using the funds exclusively to trade on his own attendance.

    From Feb. 12 through Feb. 22, Santos accumulated 30,874 “Yes” contracts at a total cost of $6,695.94. While holding the position, he asked his X followers whether he should wear a serious suit or a bedazzled one to the address.

    After the post, the “Yes” contract rose from about $0.15 to $0.70. Santos then sold the entire position for a $3,448.43 profit and withdrew $10,146.07 through a Venmo account created four days earlier, the CFTC said.

    Later on Feb. 22, an airline notified Santos that his flight to Washington, D.C., had been canceled. He booked a train that night, then posted the following morning that bad weather had made his trip difficult and suggested that the address might not take place. The “Yes” price fell from $0.63 to $0.28 after the post.

    On the evening of Feb. 23, Santos posted that he would attend from the House gallery. According to the federal order, a video repeating his attendance plans pushed the contract price from $0.40 to $0.70.

    About 40 minutes after publishing the video, Santos began buying “No” contracts. He eventually acquired 23,855 contracts for $8,650.66. His train was canceled about an hour after he began building the position, but he later responded, “I am” when another user asked whether he was still going.

    With both his flight and train canceled, Santos had not bought another ticket when he posted on Feb. 24 that he was watching the address on an airport television. The “Yes” contract fell from $0.73 to $0.02, increasing the value of his opposing position.

    The CFTC found that Santos closed the “No” trade early on Feb. 25 for a $14,390.57 profit. Combined with his earlier gain, the two positions generated the amount later addressed in Kalshi’s disciplinary action.

    Federal penalties are separate from Kalshi’s lifetime ban

    Kalshi’s sanction is separate from the CFTC settlement, which imposed different payment amounts and a shorter restriction covering all federally registered trading venues.

    As crypto.news previously reported, the CFTC ordered Santos to disgorge $17,569.98, pay a $17,500 civil penalty, and stop trading on any CFTC-registered entity for three years. Santos consented to the July order without admitting or denying its findings or legal conclusions.

    The regulator applied Section 6(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act and Regulation 180.1, which prohibit manipulative or deceptive conduct involving swaps. The order classified the State of the Union event contracts as swaps because their payouts depended on a future event with possible financial, economic or commercial consequences.

    Although Kalshi cited Santos for failing to cooperate with its inquiry, the CFTC recognized his cooperation in the federal investigation. The findings relate to two separate reviews conducted by the exchange and its regulator.

    Earlier in June, federal investigators were examining the trades after Kalshi froze Santos’s account and referred the activity to authorities. The CFTC later resolved its part of the matter through the July settlement, while the reported Justice Department inquiry has not received a publicly announced resolution.

    Prediction markets expand controls after insider-trading cases

    Kalshi operates as a designated contract market under CFTC oversight, making its event contracts subject to federal derivatives rules and exchange-level restrictions. Users trade contracts priced according to the perceived likelihood of outcomes involving politics, sports, economic data and other public events.

    Concerns about privileged information have increased as contracts tied to speeches, political decisions and unpublished content attract more trading. In February, Kalshi imposed a $20,397.58 penalty and a two-year suspension on a MrBeast-affiliated editor over trades involving unreleased YouTube videos.

    A separate federal case involves U.S. Army Special Forces member Gannon Ken Van Dyke, whom prosecutors accused of using classified information to earn about $409,881 from Polymarket contracts linked to the capture of Nicolás Maduro. A federal judge paused the CFTC case in August while the related criminal proceeding continues. Van Dyke has pleaded not guilty and disputes whether the contracts qualify as swaps.

    Kalshi has also introduced employer-disclosure rules, a whistleblower channel and risk reviews for proposed markets. In June, it partnered with StarCompliance so participating financial firms could connect employee accounts to internal monitoring systems.

    The exchange said it conducted more than 150 investigations during the first quarter of 2026, blocked more than 100 suspected insider-trading attempts and referred 20 cases to law enforcement.

  • Strive Adds $143 Million in Bitcoin, Becoming the Fifth-Largest Public Holder

    Strive Adds $143 Million in Bitcoin, Becoming the Fifth-Largest Public Holder

    Strive has strengthened its position among corporate Bitcoin holders after purchasing 1,800 $BTC for approximately $143 million. The acquisition increased the company’s Bitcoin treasury to 23,156 $BTC, moving Strive ahead of Bullish and into fifth place.

    Strive bought the Bitcoin between August 24 and August 28 at an average price of $79,431 per coin. The latest purchase extends the company’s aggressive Bitcoin accumulation strategy.

    Strive accelerates its Bitcoin strategy

    The purchase follows Strive’s acquisition of 1,110 $BTC during the previous week. As a result, the company added 2,910 $BTC over two weeks for approximately $224.5 million.

    The buying spree highlights Strive’s growing commitment to Bitcoin as a central treasury asset. The company now ranks behind Strategy, Twenty One Capital, Metaplanet, and MARA Holdings.

    Equity issuance supports Bitcoin purchases

    Strive continues to fund its Bitcoin expansion through ASST common stock and SATA preferred stock programs. Its Class A share count increased by 3.58 million during the most recent reporting quarter.

    The number of SATA shares also rose by 803,099 to approximately 9.07 million. However, issuing additional equity can reduce the value held by existing shareholders.

    Strive has created up to $4.2 billion in potential fundraising capacity. The company could use that capital to purchase more Bitcoin if market prices are favorable, giving it substantial room to expand its treasury further.

    Related: Ripple Emerges as Top Holding in New York-Traded C1 Fund

    Source: cryptonews.net

  • Lazarus Moves $30 Million Through Hyperliquid as U.S. Talks Advance

    Lazarus Moves $30 Million Through Hyperliquid as U.S. Talks Advance

    Wallets linked to North Korea’s Lazarus Group have sold more than $30 million worth of Bitcoin through Hyperliquid over the past three weeks, converting the proceeds into Ethereum and Solana before transferring the assets to centralized exchanges, according to Arkham blockchain data.

    Lazarus-linked wallets move Bitcoin into ETH and SOL

    Arkham said wallets associated with the North Korean state-sponsored Lazarus Group sold more than $30 million in Bitcoin on Hyperliquid during the three-week period. The wallets then used the proceeds to buy Ethereum and Solana, sending the assets to exchanges including Kraken, LBank and KuCoin.

    Crypto investigator ZachXBT first identified the addresses in 2024. Arkham later labeled them as connected to Lazarus.

    Public blockchain records show transfers between addresses but do not identify the individuals or entities controlling receiving exchange accounts. CoinDesk reported that it could not determine who held the accounts or whether the exchanges knew about the reported source of the funds.

    Kraken said compliance is central to its operations and that it continuously monitors blockchain activity with support from analytics providers. The exchange said its controls are designed to identify and block assets connected to sanctioned wallets before they reach the platform.

    LBank said it uses industry-standard compliance tools for continuous monitoring. The exchange described illicit transfers across platforms, blockchains and jurisdictions as an industry-wide problem that no single company can independently detect or resolve.

    KuCoin said it could not confirm the reported activity without reviewing the underlying wallet data. It also cautioned that public blockchain records do not reveal every action taken after assets arrive at a centralized platform, including account restrictions, regulatory reports and other risk controls.

    Hyperliquid transfers raise U.S. sanctions concerns

    The reported transfers have a direct U.S. regulatory dimension because the Treasury Department has sanctioned Lazarus Group and identified it as a cyber organization controlled by the North Korean government.

    U.S. authorities have linked Lazarus to several digital-asset thefts, including the $625 million Ronin Network attack in 2022. As previously reported by crypto.news, former Defense Secretary Mark Esper recently cited North Korean hacking groups while arguing that regulated domestic crypto markets could give U.S. law enforcement better access to customer and transaction records.

    Using a decentralized trading venue can complicate enforcement because Hyperliquid allows users to connect a wallet and trade without opening a traditional brokerage account. Its public blockchain still records transactions, enabling firms such as Arkham to trace transfers between labeled addresses.

    However, the presence of assets linked to a sanctioned actor on a decentralized platform does not establish that Hyperliquid assisted the activity or knew who controlled the wallets. CoinDesk’s report also did not establish that Kraken, LBank or KuCoin credited the transferred assets to unrestricted customer accounts.

    Any U.S. plan to offer Hyperliquid-linked products domestically would need to address sanctions screening, customer identification and account-level controls. Wallet checks can identify previously labeled addresses, but funds may pass through multiple assets or wallets before reaching another venue.

    A recent Hyperliquid testnet deployment illustrated how a permissioned version of its infrastructure could operate. In August, a deployer using Kraken’s name whitelisted 10 wallets and tested controls for canceling orders, reducing positions and moving collateral.

    Neither Kraken nor Hyperliquid had confirmed ownership of the deployment when the report appeared. Because Hyperliquid’s testnet allows outside deployments, the use of the Kraken name alone did not prove that the exchange created or operated it.

    Payward explores regulated Hyperliquid access for U.S. traders

    Bloomberg reported that Kraken parent company Payward is in advanced discussions with Hyperliquid Labs about offering selected perpetual contracts to American traders through Bitnomial, its CFTC-regulated derivatives business.

    People familiar with the talks told Bloomberg that Payward had presented the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with an outline of the proposed structure. Any agreement would still require regulatory approval, while the financial terms remain unknown. Payward and Hyperliquid Labs declined to comment to Bloomberg.

    President Donald Trump brought the potential U.S. expansion into public view during an Aug. 19 White House event. Referring to CFTC Chair Michael Selig, Trump said he understood that the regulator was working to bring Hyperliquid into the United States in a “fully compliant and legal fashion.”

    A Payward arrangement would give eligible U.S. customers access through a registered operator rather than Hyperliquid’s permissionless interface. Commodity derivatives offered to American retail traders generally must use CFTC-regulated entities, and wallet screening alone does not replace exchange, clearing and brokerage requirements.

    Payward already has the regulatory infrastructure required to operate in the U.S. derivatives market. The company completed its Bitnomial purchase in May after agreeing to pay as much as $550 million in cash and stock.

    The acquisition gave Payward control of a designated contract market, a derivatives clearing organization and a futures commission merchant. Together, the three registrations cover trading, clearing and brokerage services under CFTC oversight.

    Kraken launched regulated perpetuals for eligible U.S. customers in June. The service allows supported users to trade spot, margin, traditional futures and perpetual futures through Kraken Pro while using Bitnomial’s regulated structure.

    Hyperliquid remains a leading decentralized perpetuals platform

    Hyperliquid operates its main exchange through HyperCore, an on-chain trading system that handles order matching, margin calculations and liquidations. Users trade from connected crypto wallets, while the platform’s primary permissionless interface does not require a conventional brokerage account.

    Perpetual futures differ from dated futures because they have no fixed expiry. Funding payments between long and short traders help keep contract prices close to the value of their underlying assets, allowing positions to remain open as long as traders meet margin requirements.

    DefiLlama data showed that Hyperliquid had processed approximately $5.19 trillion in cumulative perpetual trading volume at the time of writing. Its perpetual markets recorded about $60.44 billion in seven-day volume and $204.95 billion during the previous 30 days.

    Open interest stood at roughly $13.3 billion, representing the notional value of outstanding perpetual positions. DefiLlama also recorded more than $32.6 billion in cumulative liquidations on the platform, including approximately $2.25 billion during the preceding 30 days.

    Beyond markets operated by the core protocol, Hyperliquid Improvement Proposal 3 allows outside developers to launch independent perpetual exchanges using HyperCore. Deployers select their contracts, collateral, leverage limits, funding settings and price sources after staking 500,000 HYPE.

    Validators can slash the stake if a deployer manipulates an oracle or violates market rules. HIP-3 operators receive half of the trading fees generated by their markets, while newer permission tools tested on the network could allow individual deployers to restrict access to approved wallets.

  • Hyperliquid and Kraken Parent Explore Regulated U.S. Futures Launch

    Hyperliquid and Kraken Parent Explore Regulated U.S. Futures Launch

    Hyperliquid Labs and Payward, the parent company of Kraken, are in advanced discussions to offer selected Hyperliquid-linked perpetual futures to U.S. traders through Bitnomial, a derivatives exchange regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

    Hyperliquid may reach U.S. traders through Bitnomial

    Bloomberg reported on Aug. 31 that Hyperliquid Labs and Payward are considering a structure that would list selected crypto perpetual futures on Bitnomial, the U.S. derivatives exchange owned by Kraken’s parent company.

    Under the proposed arrangement, eligible U.S. customers would trade the contracts through Bitnomial instead of connecting directly to Hyperliquid’s decentralized platform. The companies have not disclosed which assets would be included, how many contracts could be listed, or whether $HYPE would be among the underlying tokens.

    According to Bloomberg, Payward has already presented the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with an outline of the arrangement. Regulatory clearance is still required, and the companies have not announced a launch date or commercial terms.

    Bitnomial would provide the U.S. trading venue, customer access, and compliance infrastructure. Hyperliquid technology would support the assets or markets linked to the selected products, separating the regulated contracts from the permissionless platform used by the protocol’s existing customers.

    U.S. users remain unable to access Hyperliquid directly. An August filing cited in earlier coverage of the protocol said the platform continued to restrict U.S. users. It also said Hyperliquid Strategies was not aware at the time of any pending CFTC approval process for the network.

    The discussions do not represent approval for Hyperliquid itself to operate as a U.S. exchange. Instead, Bloomberg’s reported structure would place any American trading activity within Bitnomial’s regulated system and limit access to contracts selected for that venue.

    Payward controls a complete U.S. derivatives platform

    Payward completed its acquisition of Chicago-based Bitnomial on May 1. The transaction had initially been valued at up to $550 million in cash and stock, although the final price was not disclosed.

    The acquisition gave Payward control of a designated contract market, a derivatives clearing organization, and a futures commission merchant. Together, the three CFTC-regulated entities allow Bitnomial to provide exchange trading, clearing, and brokerage services within one corporate group.

    As crypto.news previously reported, Bitnomial spent more than a decade securing the licenses required to operate that structure. Payward said when the acquisition was announced that Bitnomial would retain its regulatory framework and continue serving third-party clients after joining the company.

    The infrastructure has already supported Kraken’s U.S. expansion. In June, Kraken introduced perpetual futures for eligible American clients through Bitnomial, placing the contracts alongside spot, margin, and traditional futures products on Kraken Pro.

    Kraken said customers could use a single collateral pool across perpetual futures and other derivatives positions. John Palmer, Kraken’s global head of derivatives, said the arrangement reduced the need for traders to split capital and positions across separate platforms.

    Perpetual futures differ from dated futures because they have no fixed expiration date. Recurring funding payments between long and short traders help keep the contract price close to the value of its reference asset.

    The format is common on offshore exchanges and decentralized platforms, but federal derivatives rules have historically limited U.S. access. Bitnomial’s involvement could give American traders access through a supervised exchange without opening Hyperliquid’s full range of onchain markets to U.S. customers.

    CFTC review will shape the final structure

    The CFTC would be the primary federal regulator for the proposed crypto derivatives because Bitnomial operates under the Commodity Exchange Act. Depending on the final structure and the assets referenced, regulators would need to determine how the contracts should be classified and whether the listing process satisfies applicable exchange requirements.

    Groups linked to Hyperliquid are already engaging U.S. regulators on related issues. In an Aug. 24 comment letter, the Hyperliquid Policy Center asked the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC to recognize qualifying cash-settled equity perpetuals as security futures.

    The group argued that regulators should first examine how a derivative is structured and traded before using its underlying asset to divide oversight. Under its proposal, futures-like perpetual contracts tied to individual stocks would fall under the security futures framework jointly administered by the SEC and CFTC.

    According to the policy center, HIP-3 markets using Hyperliquid infrastructure processed more than $480 billion in cumulative notional volume during their first 10 months. The markets use central limit order books and continuous margin, while funding payments help align perpetual contract prices with their reference assets.

    The proposed Payward arrangement concerns selected crypto contracts, not unrestricted access to HIP-3 or the broader Hyperliquid platform. Bloomberg did not report that the SEC is involved in the discussions, and neither Payward nor Hyperliquid has published a list of the proposed contracts.

    U.S. regulators would also expect the regulated venue and its intermediaries to apply customer identification, anti-money laundering, and sanctions controls. Those requirements differ from the permissionless access model used by decentralized trading protocols.

    $HYPE extends its August rally

    $HYPE traded at about $84.50 when checked, up roughly 3% over 24 hours after recovering from an earlier decline. The token had gained more than 60% since the start of August, although available reports did not establish that expectations of U.S. access were responsible for the entire monthly advance.

    Hyperliquid processes more than $4 billion in daily trading volume, according to figures cited in the original report. Any Bitnomial offering would cover only a selected portion of Hyperliquid-linked markets. The companies have not disclosed whether revenue from the U.S. contracts would flow to the protocol or affect $HYPE’s existing token-buyback system.