Bitcoin fudged the breakout to $93,000 as global TradFi markets stumbled and BTC spot investors failed to provide the necessary volume.

Need to know what happened in crypto today? Here is the latest news on daily trends and events impacting Bitcoin price, blockchain, DeFi, NFTs, Web3 and crypto regulation.

Vanguard will open its platform to crypto ETFs and funds, offering more than 50 million clients access to Bitcoin, Ether, XRP, and Solana.

The post Vanguard will open trading access to crypto ETFs and funds starting tomorrow appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Kalshi launches tokenized event contracts on Solana, enabling regulated, on-chain trading of event outcomes on the blockchain network.

The post Kalshi brings tokenized event contracts to Solana appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Tesla and SpaceX chief Elon Musk has stoked fresh debate about Bitcoin after a recent social post in which he said the cryptocurrency is “based on energy” and that energy cannot be faked. The comment, posted on X, quickly drew attention from investors and politicians alike.

Musk’s remark landed as markets moved. Bitcoin was down, and trading roughly around $86,500 at the time of the post, and crypto coverage noted a flurry of reactions across social feeds and trading desks. Some market watchers saw the statement as a boost for BTC’s narrative as an inflation hedge.

Musk Frames Bitcoin As ‘Energy Money’

According to Musk, the act of mining ties Bitcoin to physical energy: miners consume electricity to secure the network and mint new coins, which he said makes Bitcoin harder to fake than printed fiat.

In a fresh clip shared from Nikhil Kamath’s interview, Musk makes his stance clear:

Out now @elonmusk pic.twitter.com/dQVLniUgWA

— Nikhil Kamath (@nikhilkamathcio) November 30, 2025

The line of argument presents energy use not as a flaw but as a kind of proof that creates scarcity. Several crypto outlets ran pieces unpacking the idea and how it contrasts with past criticism Musk voiced about mining’s environmental toll.

Market Moves And Political Echoes

Traders and some policy figures reacted quickly. Bitcoin backers posted support, while others urged caution. Meanwhile, separate coverage noted that SpaceX recently moved almost $270 million worth of Bitcoin, a move that traders flagged as potentially market-swaying. Those on both sides of the debate said Musk’s post could influence investor sentiment, at least in the short run.

The core of the claim is simple: you cannot manufacture energy the way a central bank can print more currency. That idea appeals to people worried about rising public spending on tech and AI, which some analysts say could put pressure on fiat money.

But critics point out a gap: energy used to mine Bitcoin does not become a stored reserve like gold. It is consumed. Value, they argue, still relies heavily on trust and demand, not energy alone.

Musk’s comment marks a visible shift from his earlier stance in 2021 when Tesla paused Bitcoin payments over mining energy concerns.

Since then, the mining sector has changed in parts, with more projects claiming use of renewables, while others still depend on fossil fuels. The debate now mixes technical, economic and political threads, making clear answers hard to find.

Featured image from Lovepik, chart from TradingView

Peter Schiff has never hidden his distaste for Bitcoin, but his latest comment on X has added a new twist to his long-running feud with the cryptocurrency. The economist, known globally as one of BTC’s most persistent skeptics, admitted that he made a major mistake when he first encountered it more than a decade ago. 

His mistake, however, was not about failing to buy early or doubting a successful technology. Instead, Schiff insisted that his real error was assuming other people would recognize why Bitcoin wouldn’t work. 

Biggest Mistake Was Trusting People To Understand Bitcoin’s Flaws

In his recent tweet, Schiff stated that he initially believed most people would see Bitcoin the same way he did, as a system destined to fail because it is not backed by anything physical and therefore has no real value. He added that the people foolish enough to buy it then are the same people who will refuse to sell even as the market proves him right.

The comment reinforced the core of Schiff’s philosophy: BTC’s worth, in his view, rests entirely on speculation, not fundamentals. According to him, the cryptocurrency’s design means that it cannot function as a reliable store of wealth, medium of exchange, or unit of account.

The post immediately drew many reactions, most of them from Bitcoin supporters who are of the notion that Schiff’s bitterness comes from missing out when Bitcoin traded for less than $1.

Bitcoin believers argued that his supposed mistake wasn’t intellectual but financial. The counterclaim is that Schiff is frustrated because he ignored Bitcoin when it traded for less than a dollar. One reply from BTC advocate Carl Menger captured the mood perfectly. He wrote that Schiff’s real mistake was failing to buy when he first encountered the asset at $1, adding that Schiff is now “an old salty pal yelling at it.” Other commenters also echoed the sentiment.

A Long History Of Harsh Criticism Against BTC

Schiff’s skepticism is not new. Over the years, he has repeatedly maintained that Bitcoin is nothing more than a digital bubble. He has also insisted that BTC lacks any underlying value because it is not tied to a physical commodity, unlike gold. Despite the introduction of Bitcoin ETFs and its growing institutional presence, he maintains that wider adoption does not change what he calls its “fundamental uselessness.”

Bitcoin’s trajectory tells a very different story from the one painted by critics like Schiff. The cryptocurrency has expanded on a scale few assets in modern history can match, reaching levels of global relevance that go far beyond its early niche. 

Its price may be moving through a period without clear bullish momentum, but it still ranks among the largest assets in the world. In fact, BTC now sits as the 9th biggest asset by market capitalization, ahead of companies such as Meta, Saudi Aramco, and Tesla.

Cardano is entering a very important phase in its development, as its founding institutions are attempting to deliver the core infrastructure that every major blockchain already treats as standard.

On Nov. 27, a new proposal sought community approval to allocate 70 million ADA tokens (worth about $30 million) to onboard tier-one stablecoins, custody providers, cross-chain bridges, pricing oracles, and institutional analytics.

The effort is backed jointly by Input Output, EMURGO, the Cardano Foundation, Intersect, and the Midnight Foundation, an unusually coordinated coalition for a network often criticized for slow alignment and decentralized drift.

The central message behind this collaboration is unmistakable: Cardano wants to enter 2026 with the economic plumbing it has lacked for years.

Why the Cardano pivot matters

The integrations push arrives at a moment when Cardano’s economic base is still relatively shallow.

For context, DefiLlama data shows that the Charles Hoskinson-led network has about $248 million in TVL and roughly $40 million in stablecoins, as well as a limited pool for lending, liquidity provision, and RWA issuance compared with ecosystems that treat these assets as foundational utilities.

In comparison, Ethereum alone carries more than $170 billion in stablecoins, reflecting the scale gap Cardano is trying to close.

So, without deep stablecoin reserves, liquidity pathways, or institutional tooling, Cardano would continue to struggle to generate the network effects that make a blockchain economically relevant.

The network’s fragility came into focus earlier this month when it experienced a brief chain split.

While the disruption was resolved quickly, it intensified scrutiny on Cardano’s operational maturity, particularly its limited real-time analytics, monitoring, and other safeguards expected in institutional-grade environments.

The budget set up for the integration aims to systematize the onboarding of top-tier vendors, including milestones, audits, service-level agreements, and transparent delivery tracking.

So, instead of one-off deals or ad hoc negotiations, supporters say the fund would create a formal, accountable pipeline for onboarding the infrastructure Cardano has historically lacked. Tim Harrison, a director at Input Outputs, said:

“This is the kind of unity and focus that will accelerate growth across DeFi, DePIN and RWA.”

Why these integrations might not be sufficient for Cardano

The integrations push comes after Hoskinson had spoken about what truly limits Cardano’s DeFi growth.

Last month, the Cardano founder acknowledged the network’s DeFi gap but pushed back against the notion that landing USDC, USDT, or other fiat-backed stablecoins would “magically” transform adoption.

According to him:

“No one’s ever made the argument and explained how the existence of one of these larger stablecoins is magically going to make Cardano’s entire DeFi problem go away, make the price go up, massively improve our MAUs, our TVL, and all these other things.”

Instead, he points to a behavioral bottleneck by noting that millions of ADA holders participate in staking and governance, but few make the leap into DeFi. He also added that the network faces coordination and accountability challenges.

Hoskinson argued that this creates a classic chicken-and-egg problem, in which the network’s current low liquidity discourages integrations, and the lack of integrations keeps liquidity low.

Considering this, Hoskinson’s roadmap ties the network DeFi growth to Bitcoin interoperability and the Midnight privacy network. He believes these integrations could channel “billions” in volume into Cardano-native stablecoins and lending protocols if executed well.

That framing matters for the new budget.

If the challenge Cardano is facing is organizational, stemming from fragmented efforts, slow vendor onboarding, and the absence of a structured pathway for stablecoins and custody providers, then a community-mandated integrations program could provide the governance mechanism the ecosystem lacks.

However, even with a coordinated onboarding framework, the budget will only shift outcomes if it ultimately mobilizes passive ADA holders into active liquidity and attracts issuers with market makers willing to support real volume.

The 2026 stress test

Next year will test whether Cardano’s governance and new vendor pipeline can translate its integrations budget into measurable economic growth.

So, if even one major fiat-backed stablecoin arrives with market-maker depth, Cardano’s $40 million stablecoin base could plausibly expand into the low-hundreds-of-millions, a range consistent with early adoption phases on other L1s.

Moreover, Cardano’s $248 million DeFi TVL could reach $500 million if the network secures credible custody and analytics platforms. Notably, this is a level at which lending, RWAs, and liquidity routing begin to compound rather than stall.

Also, bridges, pricing oracles, and institutional wallets remain significant integrations necessary for the network’s growth.

Without them, liquidity will continue to circulate elsewhere. With them, Cardano enters 2026 with the minimum infrastructure required to compete for regulated DeFi pilots, RWA issuance, and BTC–ADA liquidity flows tied to its Bitcoin interoperability roadmap.

The post How Cardano plans to use $30M to bring real liquidity to the network appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin is rapidly expanding on Ethereum rather than the company’s native XRP Ledger (XRPL).

According to CryptoSlate data, RLUSD’s total circulating supply has surged to $1.26 billion within 12 months of its launch. Of this, roughly $1.03 billion, or 82% of the total supply, resides on Ethereum, while the $235 million balance is on XRPL.

These numbers show that the market seems to favor the deep liquidity and composability of the Ethereum Virtual Machine over the more compliance-focused architecture of the XRPL.

Why RLUSD is growing on Ethereum

The primary driver of this disparity is the maturity of the underlying financial stack.

On Ethereum, RLUSD entered an environment where dollar liquidity is already entrenched. Data from DeFiLlama confirms that Ethereum continues to lead all chains in total value locked (TVL) and stablecoin supply, providing a turnkey ecosystem for new assets.

So, any new stablecoin that can plug into major DeFi protocols like Aave, Curve, and Uniswap immediately benefits from existing routing engines, collateral frameworks, and risk models.

RLUSD’s presence on Aave and Curve confirms this. The USDC/RLUSD pool on Curve now holds approximately $74 million in liquidity, ranking it among the larger stablecoin pools on the platform.

For institutional treasuries, market makers, and arbitrage desks, this depth is non-negotiable. It ensures low-slippage execution for trades in the tens of millions, facilitating basis trades and yield-farming strategies that drive modern crypto capital markets.

On the other hand, the XRPL is still in the nascent stages of building a DeFi foundation. Its protocol-level automated market maker (AMM) went live only in 2024. So all RLUSD-related pools on the ledger, such as the USD/RLUSD pair created in January 2025, still suffer from shallow depth and limited follow-through.

Moreover, the XRPL AMM design has not yet attracted the liquidity provider density seen in EVM ecosystems.

Consequently, a dollar of RLUSD placed on XRPL presently finds far fewer venues for swaps, leverage, or yield than the same dollar deployed on Ethereum.

RLUSD’s growing user base on Ethereum

Critics might argue that RLUSD’s Ethereum supply is merely “vanity metrics,” large sums minted but sitting idle.

However, a deeper analysis of on-chain transfer data refutes this. RLUSD is showing a genuine product-market fit with Ethereum, characterized by high velocity and recurring usage.

According to Token Terminal, weekly RLUSD transfer volume on Ethereum now averages approximately $1.0 billion, a dramatic increase from the $66 million average seen at the start of the year.

The data shows an apparent structural shift of a steady upward trend through the first half of 2025, followed by a “re-basing” to a significantly higher floor in the second half.

Crucially, recent weeks show activity clustering around this elevated level rather than spiking and reverting. In market structure terms, a rising baseline typically signals a transition from a distribution phase to a utility phase.

This implies that the token is being used in ongoing, recurring flows, such as institutional settlement and commercial payments, rather than isolated speculative events.

Transfer counts support this thesis. Weekly transactions on Ethereum now average 7,000, up from 240 in January.

The fact that transfer counts are rising in parallel with volume is a critical health indicator. If volume were rising while counts remained flat, it would suggest a market dominated by a few whales moving massive sums. Instead, the concurrent rise points to broader participation.

Furthermore, the holder data suggest a healthy dispersion of risk. According to data from Etherscan, Ripple’s RLUSD has attracted roughly 6,400 on-chain holders on Ethereum as of late November 2025, up from just 750 at the start of the year.

While the supply growth has been driven by “chunky” batch issuances rather than drip minting, the holder count has followed a smooth upward curve.

The friction between RLUSD and XRPL

The structural divergence between the two networks explains why the “permissionless” growth loop has favored Ethereum.

On Ethereum, RLUSD functions as a standard ERC-20 token. Wallets, custodians, accounting middleware, and DeFi aggregators are already optimized for this standard.

Once a protocol like Curve “wires in” a token, it becomes part of the standard dollar-pair universe alongside USDC and USDT, accessible to any address without prior authorization.

On the other hand, XRPL’s design choices, while technically robust, impose significantly higher friction on the user.

To hold RLUSD on the native ledger, users generally must maintain an XRP balance to satisfy reserve requirements and configure a specific trustline to the issuer. If the issuer enables the `RequireAuth` setting, which is a feature designed for strict compliance and granular control, accounts must be explicitly allow-listed before they can receive tokens.

So, while Ripple notes that these features appeal to banks that require explicit control, they act as a brake on organic adoption.

Essentially, the compliance tools that make XRPL attractive to regulated entities are the same features that slow down wallet-to-wallet distribution.

In a market where capital seeks the path of least resistance, the operational burden of trustlines renders XRPL less competitive for the high-frequency, automated flows that define DeFi.

RLUSD’s path to growth

Despite the ledger imbalance, the overall trajectory of RLUSD puts Ripple within striking distance of a major market tier.

Token Terminal has stated that Ripple would cement itself as the third-largest stablecoin issuer globally, behind only the incumbents Tether and Circle, if RLLUSD’s market cap were to grow 10x from current levels.

Considering this, RLUSD’s growth depends heavily on whether Ripple can leverage its Ethereum success to eventually jumpstart its native chain.

A base-case projection for the next six months sees RLUSD’s Ethereum supply climb from roughly $1.0 billion to a range of $1.4 billion to $1.7 billion. This assumes that Curve liquidity remains in the $60 million to $100 million band and that CEX and OTC demand continues to grow.

Under this path, XRPL would likely see its pools accumulate more liquidity over time but remain a small fraction of the aggregate issuance.

Meanwhile, a more aggressive “catch-up” scenario for XRPL would require deliberate market intervention. If Ripple or its partners commit to multi-month AMM reward programs and successfully mask trustline configurations behind single-click wallet interfaces, the native ledger could begin to erode Ethereum’s lead.

With these levers, XRPL liquidity could plausibly reach $500 million and claim up to 25% of the total supply.

However, the downside risk for the native ledger is real. If Ethereum cements its lead and the Curve USDC/RLUSD pool expands beyond $150 million, the network effects may become insurmountable. In that scenario, Ethereum could retain 80% to 90% of the supply indefinitely.

For now, Ripple finds itself in a paradoxical position: to succeed in its ambition to become a top-tier stablecoin issuer, it must rely on the infrastructure of its biggest rival.

The post RLUSD supply hit $1.26B, and 82% of it now sits on Ethereum, not XRPL appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Vanguard, the $8 trillion US asset manager, will allow crypto-focused ETFs and mutual funds to trade on its platform from December 2, ending its long-standing refusal to support digital asset products. 

The decision marks a major shift for the world’s second-largest asset manager and opens regulated crypto access to more than 50 million brokerage customers.

Vanguard Abandons Its Anti-Crypto Policy

The firm confirmed it will support products that hold Bitcoin, Ether, XRP, Solana, and other regulated cryptocurrencies. 

However, it will continue to block funds tied to meme coins and will not launch its own digital asset products.

Vanguard spent years resisting crypto exposure and repeatedly framed Bitcoin and other digital assets as speculative. 

The company rejected spot Bitcoin ETFs after their January 2024 debut and even restricted customer purchases of competing funds. 

For years, Vanguard executives argued that crypto lacked intrinsic value, produced no cash flows, and did not fit long-term retirement strategies.

However, persistent demand pressured the firm to rethink its stance. Bitcoin ETFs became one of the fastest-growing product categories in US fund history, with BlackRock’s IBIT alone gathering tens of billions in assets. 

This scale, combined with a steady shift in investor preferences, weakened the rationale for exclusion.

Leadership Changes Helped Clear the Path

The policy shift follows more than a year of internal debate. Vanguard’s former CEO, Tim Buckley, was widely seen as the main opponent of crypto adoption. 

His departure and the appointment of Salim Ramji — a former BlackRock executive with experience in blockchain initiatives — signaled a potential pivot.

Ramji did not push the firm toward issuing its own crypto funds but supported granting customers access to regulated products. 

That move aligns crypto with Vanguard’s treatment of other non-core assets, such as gold ETFs.

Market Conditions Did Not Stop the Move

The reversal comes during a deep crypto drawdown and heavy ETF outflows since early October. Bitcoin’s market value has fallen sharply, and leveraged positions have suffered heavy losses. 

Yet Vanguard said digital asset ETFs have continued to operate smoothly and maintain liquidity through volatile periods.

The firm noted that operational processes for servicing crypto products have matured since 2024. It added that its clients increasingly expect access to a wide range of asset classes through a single brokerage platform.

What the Decision Means for Investors

Starting Tuesday, Vanguard customers can buy and sell most regulated crypto ETFs and crypto-focused mutual funds. The company will still screen products for compliance and will exclude any vehicle tied to SEC-defined memecoins.

Vanguard stressed that it has no plans to build proprietary crypto offerings.

Instead, it aims to accommodate diverse risk profiles while maintaining its conservative product philosophy.

The move is likely to strengthen digital asset legitimacy across traditional finance. It also marks a symbolic turning point for a firm long considered crypto’s most persistent holdout.

The post Vanguard Reverses Years-Long Crypto Ban With New Trading Features From Tomorrow appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Since its inception in 2009, Bitcoin has shown a consistent four-year cycle. It’s driven by massive moves centered around Bitcoin’s halving, peaking with a blow-off top the next year.

Since the 2024 halving, Bitcoin prices have trended higher, but none of the signs of a speculative blow-off top have occurred in 2025, at least within the timeframe consistent with the four-year cycle.

Without that blow-off top, the rest of the crypto market has stalled out, since soaring Bitcoin prices tend to kick off altcoin season.

End of the Famous Bitcoin Cycle?

With Bitcoin prices down 30% from their early October highs, it’s clear that the four-year price cycle has lost its validity.

This is a sensible development, since BTC is rapidly maturing as an asset class. Rising institutional interest also means that Bitcoin’s cycles will more likely center around economic cycles.

One area where investors have noted a strong correlation with Bitcoin is with global liquidity:

While there has been a strong correlation since the start of 2024, even that trend has broken in recent months.

Should that trend establish itself, Bitcoin could jump higher – and even kick off an altcoin season.

Michael Saylor recently called out the four-year cycle as “dead.” Saylor sees a massive repricing soon, which may explain his rush this year to acquire as much Bitcoin as possible.

However, liquidity isn’t the only factor.

Economic Activity

Some investors today are turning to the relationship between Bitcoin’s price and the US Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI).

The PMI measures manufacturing sector health and serves as an economic leading indicator. 

When PMI is above 50, it suggests expansion; below 50 indicates contraction. 

In theory, a strong PMI signals economic growth, which could influence Bitcoin through several channels:

• Strong PMI → robust economy → risk-on sentiment → higher appetite for speculative assets like Bitcoin
  
• Weak PMI → economic concerns → potential Fed easing → more liquidity → potentially supportive for Bitcoin

However, even tools like PMI fail to work as a one-stop indicator for Bitcoin and the crypto cycle. 

Sometimes, Bitcoin trades as a “risk-on” asset (correlating positively with stocks and economic strength). 

Other times, it trades as a “risk-off” hedge (like digital gold during uncertainty), and it will even move independently based on crypto-specific factors.

Data also shows that the correlations between Bitcoin and PMI are unstable and vary across different time periods.

Bitcoin often responds more strongly to monetary policy signals (Fed decisions, liquidity conditions) than to real economy indicators like PMI.

When PMI does seem to matter, it’s typically through the broader risk sentiment channel rather than a direct mechanistic relationship.

If you’re looking to use PMI as a Bitcoin trading signal, you’d likely find it less reliable than monitoring Fed policy, liquidity conditions, or crypto-native metrics. But a growing economy likely won’t hurt – as sometimes that can push Bitcoin higher even when monetary conditions are tightening.

Sentiment – The Factor that Can Drive Extremes

Cryptocurrencies, particularly Bitcoin, lack traditional valuation anchors like earnings, dividends, or cash flows. 

Without these fundamental metrics, price discovery relies heavily on what people believe the asset should be worth. 

This creates space for sentiment to be the primary driver. 

Studies of crypto market behavior consistently show that social media activity, search trends, and news sentiment have measurable predictive power for short-term price movements in ways that exceed their impact on traditional assets.

The crypto market also has structural features that amplify sentiment, including high retail participation (which leads to more emotional trading), 24/7 trading (with no circuit breakers to cool emotions), high leverage availability, and rapid information dissemination through crypto-native social channels. 

Fear and greed cycles can become self-reinforcing quickly.

Here’s where it gets complicated: what looks like “pure sentiment” often includes assessments of fundamental factors. 

When investors get excited about institutional adoption news, is that sentiment or recognition of changing supply/demand fundamentals? 

When macro concerns drive people toward Bitcoin as a hedge, sentiment is the transmission mechanism for macro factors.

During stable periods, you might see something like: 40% macro conditions (Fed policy, inflation, dollar strength), 30% supply/demand fundamentals (adoption metrics, on-chain activity, halving cycles), and 30% pure sentiment/speculation.

During euphoric bull runs or panic crashes, sentiment could dominate at 60-70%+, temporarily overriding both fundamentals and macro logic. 

These are the periods where asset prices detach most dramatically from any rational valuation model. Investors who can recognize when sentiment is in control are best positioned to profit from those conditions.

Academic studies attempting to decompose crypto returns generally find that sentiment indicators explain 20-40% of price variance in normal conditions, but this can spike much higher during extreme market phases. 

Notably, crypto markets show much stronger “momentum” and “herding” effects than traditional markets, which are often hallmarks of sentiment-driven trading.

The cryptocurrency market is probably best understood as fundamentally sentiment-driven in the short to medium term, with macro and supply/demand factors providing boundaries and direction over longer timeframes. 

Bringing It Together

Clearly, there’s no one signal or trend for investors to look at to determine Bitcoin’s cycles. 

An expanding economy should be bullish for Bitcoin prices. A contracting one shouldn’t be – unless there’s a massive infusion of liquidity in the system.

Individual indicators like global liquidity, credit market conditions, business conditions and market sentiment will all play a role.

Beyond Bitcoin, individual crypto projects working on real-world problems will rise or fall with their prospects. 

Meme coins will rise and fall much faster – driven by the short-lived magic of memes themselves.

But bear in mind, even with Bitcoin moving beyond its four-year, retail-driven cycle, the fundamental concept remains intact.

As Bitwise CIO Matt Houghton recently noted:

“The reason bitcoin’s price is up ~28,000% over the last ten years is that more and more people want the ability to store digital wealth in a way that isn’t intermediated by a company or a government.”

And when Bitcoin takes off again, the altcoins will follow.

The post Bitcoin’s Famous 4-Year Cycle Is Breaking Down — What Now? appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Bitcoin is fighting to reclaim the $90,000 level after a sharp drop earlier today, adding fuel to growing fears of a deeper downtrend. Market sentiment has weakened noticeably, with selling pressure intensifying across spot and derivatives markets.

Traders remain cautious as liquidity thins and volatility increases, creating an environment where even minor inflows can trigger outsized price reactions. The recent rejection below $90K highlights the fragility of the current structure and raises questions about whether Bitcoin is entering a more prolonged corrective phase.

However, beneath the surface, on-chain data reveals a striking counter-signal. According to On-Chain Mind, Bitcoin is currently printing the largest hidden-buying spike of the entire cycle. Order flow analysis tracks the relationship between actual buy/sell pressure and the corresponding price movement. When the two do not align, hidden divergences emerge: positive divergences indicate aggressive buying despite muted price action, while negative ones reflect stealth selling.

The size of this hidden-buying spike suggests a major imbalance in favor of buyers—an early sign that large players may be quietly accumulating while the broader market focuses on the decline. Whether this hidden demand can offset the prevailing sell pressure will determine Bitcoin’s next decisive move.

Hidden Buying Supports Reversal Narrative Despite Macro Fear

According to On-Chain Mind, the persistent hidden-buying spike remains one of the strongest signals favoring a future upside reversal. Even after Bitcoin’s most recent drop, the imbalance between real buying pressure and price action suggests that large players are still absorbing supply.

While this type of signal does not guarantee an immediate rebound—and may take several weeks to fully materialize—it indicates that buyers have not exhausted their resources. Historically, such divergences appear near cyclical inflection points, when sentiment is weakest, but accumulation quietly strengthens beneath the surface.

This constructive signal emerges at a time when fear in the market is amplified by external narratives. Renewed headlines about a China Bitcoin ban, despite being recycled and lacking substantive policy updates, have resurfaced across social media, contributing to confusion and short-term panic. Similarly, fresh waves of Tether FUD—focused on reserve transparency and regulatory scrutiny—have pressured liquidity conditions and fueled risk-off behavior.

Together, these storylines have exaggerated bearish sentiment, overshadowing the more nuanced on-chain developments. While retail reacts to alarming headlines, order flow data suggests that sophisticated investors are taking the opposite stance. If hidden accumulation continues, this correction may ultimately resolve with a stronger recovery than current sentiment implies.

Related Reading: Bitcoin STH Loss Transfers Fall 80% From Peak – What Comes Next?

Bitcoin Attempts to Stabilize After Sharp Breakdown, but Trend Remains Fragile

Bitcoin’s 1-day chart reflects a market still under heavy corrective pressure following the steep decline from the $110,000 region. The breakdown sliced through the 50 SMA and 100 SMA with little resistance, signaling a decisive shift in momentum. Price is now hovering below both moving averages, which have begun to curl downward—an early sign that the medium-term trend has weakened. The 200 SMA around the $109,000 zone sits far above the current price, underscoring how aggressive the correction has been.

After reaching a local low near $83,000, BTC has attempted to rebound, but the reaction remains modest. The latest bounce failed to reclaim $90,000 convincingly, forming a lower high that aligns with bearish continuation.

Volume spikes during sell-offs reinforce the dominance of sellers, while buying activity remains comparatively muted. Until BTC can flip the 50 and 100 SMAs back into support—now clustered around $101,000–$108,000—bulls will struggle to regain control.

The chart also shows increasing distance between price and the 200 SMA, a condition that often precedes temporary relief rallies. However, unless Bitcoin closes back above the $95,000–$98,000 region, downside risks persist. For now, BTC is attempting to stabilize, but the broader trend continues to favor caution.

Featured image from ChatGPT, chart from TradingView.com

A sudden drop in XRP balances across major crypto exchanges has led to speculations about how this might affect the cryptocurrency’s price action. The movement was highlighted by analyst Vincent Van Code, who explained that the transfers are not simply a sign of long-term holders scooping up supply. 

Instead, he pointed to the expanding influence of newly launched Spot XRP ETFs, which are now absorbing a significant share of market activity that once took place on retail platforms.

ETF Demand Is Pulling Liquidity Away From Exchanges

Van Code noted that billions of XRP leaving Binance, Upbit, and Kraken are largely flowing into ETF custodial wallets. This changes the way the market reacts to buying and selling pressure because retail exchanges now operate with thinner liquidity. When daily trading volume on those platforms averaged around the multi-billion-dollar range, it required very large orders to create noticeable price movement. 

Now that volume has contracted, even moderate-sized trades can produce sharp intraday swings. The effect is a market environment that is fundamentally supported by ETF buying, yet increasingly sensitive to smaller sell-offs or sudden bids.

Even as exchange liquidity drops, Van Code noted that high-frequency trading firms are preventing price dislocations. These groups have already mastered the arbitrage models used in Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, and they have now adapted the same systems for XRP. 

Whenever the ETF price drifts above or below its underlying value, the bots immediately correct the gap, keeping both markets tightly aligned. This mechanism makes sure that XRP still gets purchased during ETF creation events and provides a layer of structural stability, even though retail charts may begin to show more frequent spikes and dips.

What This Means For XRP’s Approach To New Price Highs

In Van Code’s view, the long-term picture for XRP is strengthened by this shift, even though the short-term experience for traders may become more uncomfortable. When XRP enjoyed daily spot volumes in the range of $2 billion to $3 billion on exchanges, you would typically need more than $200 million in concentrated buying or selling to push the price 5% to 10% in either direction. 

Now that on-exchange volume has dropped toward levels below $1 billion a day, the equation looks very different. A sell order or resistance wall of around $15 million can now swing XRP by roughly 12% to 18% within a single hour in these thinner conditions. However, the saving grace is these arbitrage bots. 

According to the analyst, XRP is still on track to reach $5. However, until the price adapts to reduced spot volume on exchanges, traders should be prepared for air pockets up to 20% in price, where relatively modest buy or sell flows can cause outsized moves.