Mining revenue hits structural lows as hashprice sinks, costs rise and payback periods stretch past 1,000 days, squeezing even the largest operators.

Buterin warns that quantum computers could threaten Ethereum’s cryptography sooner than expected and outlines how the network can prepare safely.

Bitnomial's launch could enhance regulatory trust and attract more retail investors to the crypto market, potentially boosting mainstream adoption.

The post Bitnomial set to launch first CFTC-regulated spot crypto trading appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Japan's tax reform could boost domestic crypto trading by simplifying taxation, aligning digital assets with traditional financial products.

The post Japan plans 20% flat tax on crypto gains in 2026 tax reform outline appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Strategy CEO Phong Le has revealed the instance in which his company may be forced to sell its Bitcoin holdings. This comes amid concerns about the MSTR stock crash, which puts the company at risk of seeing its mNAV drop below 1. 

Strategy CEO Reveals When They Will Sell Bitcoin

During an interview on the ‘What Bitcoin Did’ podcast, the Strategy CEO said they could sell Bitcoin to fund dividend payments on their preferred shares if the mNAV is trading below 1. He alluded to the BTC yield, which is their primary KPI, and that under 1x mNAV, it is more “creative” to sell their BTC holdings to pay the dividends. 

The Strategy CEO explained that they typically raise capital when their mNAV is above 1 to fulfill their obligations, even when it is below 1. He alluded to the 2022 crypto winter when they bought back their Bitcoin-backed loans as proof that they had prepared in advance for such market conditions. However, when they are unable to raise capital, Phong Le stated that they will have no option but to sell their BTC holdings. 

Strategy data shows that their mNAV is currently at 1.19. Meanwhile, the company currently holds 649,870 BTC, worth around $55 billion. With the MSTR stock on a downtrend, Michael Saylor’s company still faces the risk of seeing its mNAV fall below 1 for a sustained period. TradingView data shows that the stock is now down over 40% year-to-date (YTD) from a 2025 high of around $455. 

There were recently rumors that Strategy supposedly sold some of its Bitcoin holdings, which Saylor quickly denied. The company then went on to make one of its largest purchases this year, buying 8,178 for $836 million. This formed part of the proceeds from the company’s STRE offering. 

Saylor Teases Another Bitcoin Purchase

In an X post, Michael Saylor teased another Bitcoin purchase from Strategy. He posted the company’s BTC portfolio tracker with the caption, “What if we start adding green dots?” It is worth noting that these conventional Sunday posts have usually preceded a BTC purchase announcement by the company the following day. 

Based on this, Strategy likely bought more Bitcoin between November 24 and 30 last week. This comes amid the Bitcoin downtrend, with the flagship crypto again dropping below the psychological $90,000 level. Besides the BTC crash, the possibility of an exclusion from MSCI indices is another factor that paints a bearish picture for Saylor’s company. The MSCI will decide by January next year whether treasury companies like Strategy should remain in their indices. 

At the time of writing, the BTC price is trading at around $86,000, down over 5% in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap.

Dogecoin’s entry into the ETF market has changed the tone of the entire meme-coin sector, possibly opening the door for the likes of Shiba Inu and BONK. What began as a community hype token is now tied to a fully regulated product, and that achievement has pushed attention toward other popular meme coins. BONK and Shiba Inu are now the next names being discussed as institutions explore broader exposure to alternative cryptocurrencies.

BONK Moves Ahead With A Fully Listed ETP In Europe

Although the early inflows into Dogecoin’s ETF launch have been largely more underwhelming than what most expect, the establishment of an exchange-traded product for the king of meme coins opens up conversations about other meme coins. 

BONK is a standout example, taking a decisive step forward with the launch of an exchange-traded product tied to the meme coin on the SIX Swiss Exchange. The debut immediately led to an intraday rally as traders reacted to the token gaining a presence on one of Europe’s most established regulated markets. 

SIX is Switzerland’s largest and Europe’s third-largest stock exchange. Therefore, the ETP gives investors access to BONK without having to manage custody themselves, making it far easier for traditional market participants to gain exposure.

This development builds on BONK’s rising activity within the Solana ecosystem. Its trading volume and market capitalization have been climbing for weeks, and the ETP adds a form of legitimacy rarely given to meme coins. BONK now joins a very small group of community hype tokens that have crossed into regulated investment territory, giving it a stronger foundation as demand from new classes of investors grows.

The new BONK ETP was issued by Bitcoin Capital, a firm known for launching multiple cryptocurrency ETPs across major European markets. “With the Bonk ETP now listed on SIX Swiss Exchange, investing in Bonk has never been easier. Investors don’t need crypto expertise; they can trade Bonk just like any other stock. We’re making community-driven digital assets accessible to everyone, while meeting high security and regulatory standards,” added Marcel Niederberger, CEO of Bitcoin Capital 

Shiba Inu Attracting Institutional Interest

Shiba Inu has not yet secured an exchange-traded product of its own, but the token is steadily carving out its place in the wider fund landscape as major institutions begin weaving it into their early product designs. Even as Shibarium’s activity has cooled in recent weeks, SHIB is still part of broader conversations about regulated exposure.

One of the clearest examples comes from T. Rowe Price, a heavyweight in traditional finance with more than $1.7 trillion in assets under management. The firm recently submitted a filing for an actively managed crypto ETF that lists SHIB among its holdings.

Shiba Inu also appeared in Grayscale’s assessment of cryptocurrencies viewed as structurally viable for future spot-ETF models. These developments indicate that long-term positioning for Shiba Inu is becoming stronger as institutions evaluate which assets fit into their next generation of crypto funds.

The US government has opened a security review into Bitmain, the Beijing-based manufacturer that sells most of the world’s Bitcoin mining rigs. A months-long federal investigation, known internally as Operation Red Sunset, has been probing whether Bitmain’s machines can be remotely steered for spying or used to interfere with the American power grid. The question sounds abstract, the kind of thing that belongs in a classified memo. But the answers land in very ordinary places: repair benches in North Dakota, shipping yards in Oklahoma, and the upgrade calendars of every miner who depends on Chinese hardware.

Before you can follow what breaks, you have to understand what Washington is actually doing.

Inside Operation Red Sunset

According to documents reviewed by Bloomberg and people familiar with the matter, Red Sunset has been running across several agencies for roughly two years. Homeland Security is in the lead, with support from the National Security Council. The goal of the investigation is to determine if Bitmain rigs can be controlled from the outside in a way that makes them useful for espionage or sabotage.

Federal agents have already gotten touchy with hardware. Some Bitmain shipments were stopped at US ports and pulled apart on inspection tables, their chips and firmware examined for hidden capabilities. Officials also looked at tariff and import questions, blending security worries with more routine trade enforcement.

In an emailed statement to Bloomberg, the company called it “unequivocally false” to say it can remotely control machines from China, and said it complies with US law and doesn’t engage in activity that threatens national security. It also said it has no awareness of any investigation called Operation Red Sunset and that past detentions of its hardware were tied to Federal Communications Commission concerns, where “nothing out of the ordinary was found.”

Officials are not debating this in a vacuum. A Senate Intelligence Committee report has already flagged Bitmain devices as vulnerable and open to manipulation from China. A few years ago, researchers found Antminer firmware that allowed remote shutdown; Bitmain framed that as an unfinished anti-theft feature and later patched it, but the episode left a mark.

Red Sunset also sits on top of a concrete case. In 2024, the US government forced a Chinese-linked mining operation near a missile base in Wyoming to shut down because of national security risks tied to thousands of rigs at that site. The hardware was similar, the geography far more sensitive.

So the government is looking at Bitmain as more than a vendor. It is treating the company as an infrastructure player that lives close to the grid and sometimes close to strategic locations. That is how you end up with an ASIC manufacturer in the same document set as telecom companies and power equipment.

And all of this is unfolding while Bitmain deepens its ties to a very visible American client.

America’s mining machine is full of Bitmain metal

In March, a small, relatively unknown listed firm announced it would spin out a new Bitcoin mining venture with Eric and Donald Trump Jr. as investors. The new business, called the American Bitcoin Corp, wants to be the “world’s largest, most efficient pure-play Bitcoin miner” and plans to run 76,000 machines across Texas, New York, and Alberta. To get that insane number of miners, it turned to Bitmain.

Corporate filings show American Bitcoin agreed to buy 16,000 Bitmain rigs for $314 million. Instead of paying cash or tapping traditional debt, the company pledged 2,234 BTC to secure the hardware. The structure is unusual enough that a former SEC enforcement attorney told Bloomberg the terms probably belong in more detailed disclosure.

That one deal captures the dependency problem in miniature. A high-profile miner, tied to the president’s family, is staking thousands of Bitcoin and ambitious growth targets on a Chinese supplier that sits inside a national security investigation. Officials already worry that the arrangement creates conflicts of interest for an administration that wants to turn the US into the “crypto capital of the world.”

But, despite the crazy amount of power they want to put into mining Bitcoin, the president’s sons are just a drop in a very, very large sea. Over the last decade, US miners have installed hundreds of thousands of Bitmain units across the country. The business of creating new Bitcoin in North America rests almost entirely on the shoulders of Antminers, powered by chips and code that were never designed with this level of geopolitical heat in mind.

So when you ask what happens “if Bitmain gets hit,” you are really asking what happens when the central vendor in that stack runs into federal policy, not just market risk.

What breaks first if Washington swings

Every serious miner runs a pipeline of dead hardware. Because fans fail, power supplies blow, and hashboards burn. Some of that can be handled in-house, but a large chunk is pushed through authorized repair centers that live inside the Bitmain ecosystem. The company lists overseas and regional repair hubs that cover the US market, with shipping lanes that loop through places like Arkansas, North Dakota, and Oklahoma.

That pipe is very fragile and the most likely to break first. If the US government opts for hard measures, such as putting Bitmain or key affiliates on an entity list or imposing targeted sanctions, the easiest lever to pull is at the border. Spare parts could sit in temporary warehouses until they get to customs for “review.” A process that used to take days could stretch into weeks while lawyers and compliance teams sort through new rules.

For a single mining operation, the effect will show up slowly. Availability would drop a few points as more machines sit dark waiting for parts, and the on-site pile of failed units would continue to grow. Operators with deep pockets will, of course, be able to stockpile spares and hedge with a second vendor. But smaller miners, who bought a few containers of rigs with structured financing and do not have a warehouse full of backup boards, will be the ones to feel real stress real fast.

Next in line would be the headline orders.

If Red Sunset ends with softer measures, such as additional licensing for specific chips or mandatory export reviews, Bitmain might still ship S21 and T21 orders into the US, just on a slower schedule. A miner who expected six-week lead times could easily face three or more months for delivery, plus paperwork. If the outcome is tougher, and Bitmain ends up restricted from supplying certain US buyers, those orders could easily turn from scheduled capacity into open questions.

Because the sector is heavily financed, time wasted is not just time wasted: it’s time plus interest, covenants, and equity guidance. A public miner that has told investors it would reach a certain exahash number by a specific quarter now has to explain why the gear is stuck somewhere between Shenzhen and Houston.

As soon as uncertainty hits the new-machine pipeline, the secondhand market lights up. Older Antminers that were being run down toward retirement suddenly look attractive, as long as their efficiency is not too far off the curve. MicroBT and Canaan, Bitmain’s main competitors, watch their sales teams get very busy very fast.

But they don’t have a magic warehouse full of high-efficiency gear either. They have their own production bottlenecks, chip allocations, and promised deliveries. If US miners try to pivot en masse, lead times on alternative hardware extend as well. Some of that gap will be filled with gray routes, rigs shipped through third countries, or bought from intermediaries that can still access Bitmain stock without tripping US rules.

Three paths from here

From the outside, it’s tempting to think in binary terms: either Bitmain is banned or nothing happens. In practice, there are three broad paths.

In the first, Red Sunset fades quietly. DHS keeps watching, maybe files some internal recommendations, and the government decides that the current industrial security practices, network segmentation, and firmware audits are enough to manage the risk. Bitmain remains politically awkward but commercially available. Miners diversify a bit more into MicroBT and Canaan, yet the basic structure of the US fleet stays intact, and hash rate growth keeps following something close to its current course.

In the second, Bitmain is pushed into a managed box. That could mean formal mitigation agreements where the company has to meet strict firmware attestation standards, submit to third-party audits, and confine certain repair and assembly work to vetted onshore partners. Exports might require extra licenses, and high-risk sites, such as those near sensitive grid infrastructure or military facilities, could face special rules.

That version is annoying rather than catastrophic for miners. Lead times will stretch, legal costs rise, and engineers spend more time proving that their operations meet whatever new security bar Washington sets. Hardware will still flow, of course, just with more friction and a higher all-in cost per installed terahash.

The third path is the one everyone in operations dreads: sanctions or an entity list designation that bites directly into sales, firmware support, and dollar clearing. In that world, Bitmain equipment becomes toxic for regulated US buyers almost overnight. Repair centers struggle to move parts across borders. Software updates are frozen in a legal gray area. Existing fleets can still run, but their owners have to think very hard about how long they want to stay dependent on a vendor that can’t service or upgrade their machines.

Hash rate wouldn’t collapse, because this isn’t not Huawei in the core network. But growth plans would bend. Quite a bit of capacity that was supposed to plug into American grids during the next two quarters would slip or move abroad, and the narrative that Bitcoin mining is becoming a US-heavy, grid-friendly industry would start to look a little thinner.

Why this matters beyond mining Twitter

On the surface, this is a niche story about customs holds, but underneath, it’s a test of how the US treats the physical infrastructure of Bitcoin.

Washington has already decided that mining locations can matter, as Wyoming learned when its Chinese-linked facility near a missile base was shut down. It has a live probe into Bitmain’s hardware, with agents tearing down rigs and lawyers debating whether Chinese-made ASICs should be treated more like telecom gear than gaming cards. And it has a presidential family whose flagship mining venture is tied, by contract, to that same supplier.

If the government backs away or leaves with just a slap on the wrist, the message is that Bitcoin’s industrial layer can live with high scrutiny but still function inside a global hardware market. If it pushes Bitmain into a restricted box, the message is very different. Miners will read it as the start of a broader campaign to localize or at least de-risk key parts of the mining stack.

For everyone else, the stakes sit one abstraction higher. The security budget that protects Bitcoin is paid through these machines. The more expensive, complicated, and politically fraught it becomes to operate them in the US, the more of that budget shifts somewhere else.

The headline question is what breaks first inside the mining machine if Bitmain gets hit. The quieter question is whether the US wants those machines humming along its own power grid or prefers to push them back out into someone else’s backyard.

The post If Bitmain gets hit, what breaks first in the US mining machine? appeared first on CryptoSlate.

When Upbit detected unauthorized withdrawals of roughly $36 million in Solana tokens from a hot wallet on Nov. 27, CEO Oh Kyung-seok went on record within hours. He stated:

“The entire amount will be covered by Upbit’s holdings, with no impact on customer assets.”

Six years earlier, Upbit said the same thing after losing 342,000 ETH, worth around $50 million at the time, to North Korea-linked hackers. Both times, customers saw no losses, and both times, the exchange absorbed the hit from its own treasury.

This is the hot wallet insurance model, where exchanges warehouse counterparty risk so that platform-level breaches don’t haircut users.

The system might have three forms: self-insurance from corporate reserves, dedicated emergency funds like Binance’s SAFU, and third-party crime policies with named limits.

The model has become standard practice at Tier 1 centralized exchanges, turning what would have been Mt. Gox-style insolvencies into operational losses that reopen within days.

But “users don’t lose” doesn’t mean markets don’t react. Even when deposits are ultimately safe, immediacy and liquidity are not. Hacks still freeze withdrawals, collapse order-book depth, widen spreads, and trigger reflexive pullbacks by market-makers.

The insurance model changes who eats the loss and how fast platforms can credibly reopen. It doesn’t erase counterparty risk.

Upbit: self-insurance from hacks as a corporate balance sheet

Upbit’s approach is, in effect, self-insurance with no explicit policy limit. The promise depends entirely on the exchange’s solvency and access to capital.

In both the 2019 Ethereum hack and the 2025 Solana breach, Upbit treated hot-wallet losses as operational expenses absorbed by Dunamu, its parent company.

The 2025 incident moved fast. Around 4:42 a.m. local time, roughly 54 billion won in various tokens from the Solana ecosystem tokens drained to an unknown address.

Upbit froze all Solana deposits and withdrawals, shifted remaining assets to cold storage, and froze a portion of the stolen LAYER tokens on-chain.

The exchange said it was working with projects and law enforcement to freeze even more of them, but the core commitment was immediate: no customer losses.

That commitment is credible because Upbit is large and liquid. But it’s not a statutory guarantee. There is no external insurer backstopping the promise, no deposit insurance scheme, and no formal reserve ratio that regulators audit.

The model works until it doesn’t: until a hack is large enough relative to equity that full reimbursement strains or breaks the balance sheet.

Binance and SAFU: a formalized internal fund

Binance created the Secure Asset Fund for Users in July 2018, diverting about 10% of trading fees into dedicated publicly visible cold wallet addresses.

Binance has repeatedly said SAFU is meant for “unexpected extreme cases” such as major hacks. As of press time, the fund was valued at around $1 billion.

When Binance suffered its May 2019 hot wallet breach, resulting in the loss of 7,000 BTC, it paused withdrawals and announced that all affected accounts would be made whole from SAFU, with no user losses.

Internal figures indicate that only about 2% of total exchange funds are in the compromised hot wallet, making it feasible to socialize the loss across the SAFU pool rather than push it to customers.

SAFU is an internal insurance fund: ring-fenced, pre-funded from fees, with an implicit commitment to cover large platform-level hacks, but it’s not a statutory guarantee.

If a breach exceeded the fund balance and Binance’s equity, customers would take losses. But the public visibility of the fund and the fee-funding mechanism make the promise more transparent than Upbit’s balance-sheet approach.

Crypto.com: mixing self-insurance with third-party cover

On Jan. 17, 2022, Crypto.com detected unauthorized withdrawals on a subset of user accounts and halted all withdrawals for about 14 hours.

Later disclosures put the loss at roughly $34 million in BTC, ETH, and other tokens, affecting 483 accounts. The exchange stressed that “no customers experienced a loss of funds” because it either blocked the unauthorized withdrawals in time or fully reimbursed affected users.

Subsequent communications highlighted a new protection program offering coverage of up to $250,000 per account in the event of certain third-party breaches.

Public reporting notes that exchanges like Crypto.com and Coinbase carry crime policies that pay out if the platform itself is hacked, but not if an individual loses funds due to their own credential compromise.

The distinction matters. Crime policies typically cover platform-wide breaches, insider theft, or fraudulent transfers involving the exchange’s own systems. They do not cover phishing, SIM-swaps, or users losing private keys.

Coverage is finite and conditional, with named limits and exclusions that can leave customers exposed if a breach falls outside policy terms or exceeds the limit.

Third-party policies and captive structures for hacks

Coinbase has long disclosed a crime insurance policy with a $255 million limit on its hot wallet balances, placed through Aon with Lloyd’s syndicates.

The policy is designed to cover platform-wide breaches but explicitly excludes losses from someone compromising an individual user’s login.

Gemini took the captive route, launching “Nakamoto Ltd.” in Bermuda to provide $200 million in coverage for Gemini Custody, topping up what the commercial market would offer.

Newer regulated exchanges now market “100% hot wallet insurance” as a selling point. HashKey Global says user assets are protected by comprehensive insurance, including 100% hot wallet insurance, with 90% kept in cold storage.

The spectrum runs from implicit promises backed only by equity and retained earnings, to ring-fenced internal funds, to formal insurance contracts with named limits and exclusions.

The market is maturing: recent research estimates the crypto exchange hot wallet insurance segment at about $1.4 billion in 2024, with projected growth to roughly $12 billion by 2033 as exchanges, custodians, and regulators push for more formalized loss mitigation.

Markets still react when users don’t lose

Even when users are made whole, hacks change how traders price counterparty risk. Bybit’s February 2025 $1.5 billion hack illustrates this perfectly.

Bitcoin market depth on Bybit collapsed from normal levels to about $100,000 immediately after the incident, then recovered to roughly $13 million by the end of the first quarter, in line with pre-hack conditions.

Spreads widened across BTC and the top 30 altcoins, only to tighten again over several weeks as market-makers returned.

Coinlaw data from November 2025 noted that even a technical KRW transfer suspension on Upbit coincided with an estimated 70% drop in liquidity and a sharp fall in Upbit’s share of global top 10 volumes, highlighting how quickly capital can step back from a single venue.

The pattern is consistent: frozen withdrawals, wider spreads, thinner depth, and a reflexive liquidity provider pullback. Even when deposits are ultimately safe, immediacy is not.

Traders who need to move capital or hedge positions face hours or days of illiquidity. Market-makers who provide depth pull back until they are confident the platform is stable.

What the model does and doesn’t solve

Hot wallet insurance greatly reduces the odds that a single exchange hack wipes out customer coins. It changes who eats the loss and how fast platforms can credibly reopen.

Upbit, Binance, and Crypto.com all absorbed platform-level breaches from reserves or internal funds and reopened within days, avoiding the years-long insolvency proceedings that followed Mt. Gox.

But coverage is finite and conditional. It often applies only to platform-level breaches, not to phishing or SIM swaps.

A sovereign guarantee doesn’t back it, the way bank deposits are. And it does nothing to stop the short-term fallout that actually moves markets: frozen withdrawals, wider spreads, thinner depth, and a reflexive pullback of liquidity.

The lesson is that hot wallet insurance is real and functional, but it’s not deposit insurance. It depends on the exchange’s solvency and liquidity, the adequacy of internal funds or external policies, and the platform’s willingness to honor promises when reserves are tested.

For users, the model means counterparty risk is lower than it was in the Mt. Gox era, but it’s not zero. For markets, it means hacks still dominate headlines and price action even when every customer ends up whole.

The post $36 million Upbit hack revives the quiet truth about hot-wallet ‘insurance’ appeared first on CryptoSlate.

As the final month of the year begins, the focus now shifts to profits. However, the beginning of December has been rather unpleasant, given that over $162 billion was wiped out of the crypto market today. However, some altcoins have managed to continue their rise.

BeInCrypto has analysed three such altcoins that could be looking at new all-time highs in the coming week.

Rain (RAIN)

RAIN is trading at $0.0080, placing it just 7% below its all-time high of $0.0086. The altcoin remains one of the strongest performers, holding close to record levels despite broader market volatility.

For RAIN to reach a new ATH, it must secure $0.0079 as solid support. A successful bounce from this level could drive the price toward $0.0100, signaling renewed bullish momentum and heightened investor confidence.

Want more token insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Crypto Newsletter here.

If investors take profits early, RAIN could lose momentum and fall toward the $0.0067 support level. A drop below this threshold would invalidate the bullish outlook and delay any attempt at setting new highs.

Monero (XMR)

XMR is trading at $412, holding just below the $417 resistance level. The privacy-focused altcoin sits relatively close to its all-time high of $471, keeping bullish expectations alive despite broader market uncertainty.

Reaching the ATH would require only a 14% increase, supported by investor demand and a decisive flip of the $450 resistance into support. The Ichimoku Cloud currently signals intact bullish momentum, suggesting XMR may attempt another upward move if market conditions cooperate.

If investors take profits or broader sentiment weakens, XMR could face renewed selling pressure. A breakdown from current levels may send the price toward $364, which would invalidate the bullish outlook and delay any attempt at retesting the all-time high.

Undead Games (UDS)

UDS is trading at $2.97, sitting just below the key $3.00 resistance level. This psychological barrier must be flipped into support for the altcoin to maintain its upward trajectory and strengthen its short-term recovery outlook.

The ATH sits 16% higher at $3.44, and current indicators support a move toward it. The Parabolic SAR remains below the candlesticks, signaling an active uptrend. If UDS secures $3.20 as support, the momentum could drive a breakout toward new highs.

If selling pressure emerges, UDS could retrace to the $2.73 support level. A breakdown below this zone would weaken the bullish structure and potentially send the price toward $2.59 or lower, invalidating the bullish thesis entirely.

The post 3 Altcoins That Could Hit All-Time Highs In The First Week Of December appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Welcome to the US Crypto News Morning Briefing—your essential rundown of the most important developments in crypto for the day ahead.

Grab a coffee, because today’s story is not what it first appears to be. MicroStrategy’s new $1.44 billion cash wall has sparked more questions than answers, landing at a moment when markets feel unusually tense, and every move seems to hint at something deeper beneath the surface.

Crypto News of the Day: MicroStrategy Builds USD Reserve as Market Panic Tests Saylor’s Bitcoin Doctrine

MicroStrategy’s latest move was supposed to calm nerves. Instead, it has become the new focal point of a market gripped by fear, speculation, and a fast-approaching liquidity stress test.

On Monday, Strategy Inc. (formerly MicroStrategy) confirmed it has established a $1.44 billion USD Reserve. This cash buffer is designed to cover dividends and interest for up to 21 months.

Strategy chair Michael Saylor also revealed that the firm has added 130 BTC to its already massive treasury.

“Strategy has acquired 130 BTC for ~$11.7 million at ~$89,960 per bitcoin. As of 11/30/2025, we hodl 650,000 BTC acquired for ~$48.38 billion at ~$74,436 per bitcoin,” Saylor indicated.

The announcement arrived barely a day after traders obsessively dissected Michael Saylor’s cryptic “green dot” comments. Speculation ranged from an MSTR buy to the firm adding to its BTC stockpile.

The new purchase brings the company’s holdings to 650,000 BTC, or roughly 3.1% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist.

A Cash Reserve—Or a Warning Sign?

The company framed the USD Reserve as a strategic evolution. Saylor called it “the next step in our evolution” and essential for facing near-term volatility.

“…the reserve currently covers 21 months of Dividends. We intend to use this reserve to pay our Dividends and grow it over time,” Strategy CEO Phong Le indicated.

However, these remarks did not bring stability, but rather stress, coming after the MicroStrategy executive admitted to a scenario once considered unthinkable: a potential sale of Bitcoin.

In a recent interview, CEO Phong Le acknowledged a “kill switch” tied to two conditions:

• MicroStrategy’s stock trades below 1.0x mNAV—meaning the company is valued at less than the Bitcoin it owns.
• The firm cannot raise capital through equity or debt.

As of this writing, mNAV sits above 1x, pulling away from the 0.9x danger zone, below which, MicroStrategy could be pushed toward BTC-funded dividend obligations.

Markets are already on edge, with Jim Cramer, cited in a recent US Crypto News publication, issuing a warning.

“This kneejerk, somewhat vicious, decline smacks of anticipation of hedge funds blowing up over the Japan carry-trade… and Strategy/Bitcoin given that at this level they are almost the same thing,” wrote Cramer.

The line “almost the same thing” captures the structural shift: MicroStrategy has functionally become a leveraged Bitcoin ETF with a software company attached. That structure works spectacularly when Bitcoin rips higher, but compresses violently when liquidity tightens.

And liquidity is tightening fast.

MicroStrategy insists it faces no forced liquidation risk. However, the admission of a sale condition, combined with a $1.44 billion cash wall, marks a turning point.

Where Saylor once said, “We will never sell Bitcoin,” investors now have a measurable tripwire:
0.9× mNAV.

Bitcoin’s next move won’t just shape market sentiment; it may decide whether MicroStrategy remains the face of corporate Bitcoin accumulation or becomes the first high-profile test of its limits.

Chart of the Day

Byte-Sized Alpha

Here’s a summary of more US crypto news to follow today:

• Crypto funds roar back with $1.07 billion inflows as rate-cut hopes surge.
• Ripple wins Singapore approval as XRP whales drive market shift.
• Japan’s bond shock slams crypto: $640 Million liquidated as 10-year JGB hits 17-year high.
• 4 US economic events to shake Bitcoin sentiment in the first week of December 2025.
• Ethereum breaks down from key pattern, opening a path toward 28% crash.
• Fed to end QT: Could this trigger multi-year altcoin rally akin to 2019-2022?

Crypto Equities Pre-Market Overview

The post MicroStrategy Builds $1.44 Billion Cash Wall Amid Rising Market Fear | US Crypto News appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Crypto analysts Nik and Doctor Profit have provided insights into why the Bitcoin price is crashing today. The flagship crypto has again dropped below the psychological $90,000 level, sparking bearish sentiments among market participants. 

Why The Bitcoin Price Is Crashing Today

In an X post, Nik remarked that the Bitcoin price didn’t dump because of bad news but because the “clock flipped.” He noted that a large number of algos sold off at the same time with the daily close, and also considering that it is a new week and a new month. The analyst added that it is not traders making decisions but portfolios rebalancing in real time. 

Nik explained that with this Bitcoin price crash, inventories have adjusted, hedges have reset, and risk has been flushed from the market. He noted that the candles may look emotional, but that the behavior is mechanical. The analyst also indicated that retail investors may have also dumped their coins out of panic. 

Nik stated that time-based algos usually ignite the sell-off, and then everyone is forced to react to their flow. He added that the effect was strong enough today to shake the Bitcoin price, with the crash dragging the broader crypto market along. BTC dropped below $90,000 today, after recovering to $92,000 last week. 

Meanwhile, Nik stated that most people usually miss the signs of a potential Bitcoin price crash because they focus on patterns drawn by humans rather than flows controlled by machines. He added that the market doesn’t only react to price but also to time. 

Not Yet Enough Liquidity For A Major Crash

In an X post, crypto analyst Doctor Profit said that there isn’t enough downside liquidity yet to trigger a major Bitcoin price crash. This is why he expects a sideways range between the current price and the EMA50, around $100,000, in the coming days or weeks. The analyst noted that the two largest liquidity clusters in the short term are at the $97,000 and $107,000 regions. 

However, Doctor Profit remains bearish in the long term. He declared that a major move down is planned, but that the script must be followed and that the required liquidity is not yet in place. The analyst told market participants to expect a boring sideways phase with confirmed targets of between $70,000 and $75,000 by the start of 2026.  

Doctor Profit reiterated that such moves to the downside for the Bitcoin price take time. He explained that the crash could unfold as a strong drop, followed by a long sideways consolidation, then a fake relief rally, and then the continuation of lower lows. 

At the time of writing, the Bitcoin price is trading at around $85,800, down over 5% in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap.

Large Dogecoin holders have sharply reduced their on-chain activity, with whale transactions falling to their lowest level in more than two months, according to fresh network data shared by on-chain analyst Ali Martinez.

Posting a Santiment chart on X, Martinez stated that “whale activity on the Dogecoin network has dropped to the lowest level in the past two months.” The chart tracks DOGE’s price against the number of transactions larger than $1 million. It shows frequent, tall spikes in high-value transfers in early October 2025, when price was oscillating near the upper end near $0.27.

Dogecoin Whales Plummets Sharply

On the day of the October 10 crash, the largest peak occurred when more than 280 Dogecoin whales made a transaction. This was followed by a progressive decline through late October and November. By November 29, the whale-transaction bar fell to 3 even as price trades around $0.15.

The drop has sparked debate about what it signals for market structure and liquidity. Responding to Martinez, analyst account CryptoGames3D argued that “whale activity dropping on Dogecoin could mean one of two things: either whales are holding tight and waiting, or they’re stepping out of the game; both cases bring risk. With low liquidity from big holders, even modest selling could hit prices hard.” The comment underlines concerns that thinner participation from large entities can make order books more fragile if conditions turn.

In a separate post on November 29, Martinez outlined what he called “key levels for Dogecoin DOGE,” citing “support at $0.08” and “resistance at $0.20.” Those levels are mirrored in a Glassnode cost-basis distribution heatmap he shared, which maps DOGE’s price since early 2024 against realized price bands where supply last moved.

The heatmap reveals a dense cluster of supply around $0.08. A highlighted range between roughly $0.07999 and $0.08145 contains about 27.37 billion DOGE, marking it as a major realized-price support zone. Higher up, a second but thinner band between approximately $0.20103 and $0.20470 holds around 12.22 billion DOGE, forming a significant resistance cohort. The color scale, running from about 5 million to 31 billion DOGE, emphasizes how pronounced the lower cluster is relative to other price areas.

Taken together, the datasets present a tightly framed picture. DOGE is currently trading between a heavy long-term holder cost basis near $0.08 and a resistance pocket around $0.20, while the count of $1 million-plus transfers has compressed to a multi-month low.

At press time, DOGE traded at $0.137.