A Taiwan-issued stablecoin pegged to either the country’s dollar or the US dollar could enter the market in the second half of 2026 based on related legislation.

Miner margins are collapsing as hash price hits record lows. This guide explains 2025 economics, break-even tests and what struggling operators can do.

Revolut adds Solana support for payments, transfers, and staking, letting users transact with USDT, USDC, and SOL directly in-app.

The post Revolut integrates Solana for payments, transfers, and staking appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Polymarket's US app launch may drive institutional interest in crypto prediction markets, potentially reshaping event forecasting methods.

The post Polymarket launches US app after CFTC approval appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Shiba Inu’s core development team is escalating its response to the Shibarium bridge exploit after a new on-chain investigation mapped the hacker’s Tornado Cash laundering trail to KuCoin deposit accounts. Reacting to on-chain sleuth Shima (@MRShimamoto) on X, core developer Kaal Dhairya wrote “Great work! This needs to be amplified. I will also ensure it’s sent to the FBI attached to the open investigation report and request Kucoin to cooperate.”

Shiba Inu Sleuth Exposes Shibarium Hacker

The Shibarium bridge was exploited in mid-September in an attack estimated at around $2.3–$2.4 million, after the perpetrator seized a super-majority of validator keys and withdrew assets including ETH, SHIB and KNINE. K9 Finance DAO, Shibarium’s liquid-staking partner, launched a bounty process that started at 5 ETH, later advanced to a 20 ETH smart-contract offer and ultimately to a final 25 ETH proposal endorsed directly by the Shiba Inu team. The exploiter never accepted, and K9 Finance has since confirmed that the unclaimed ETH in the bounty contract has been returned to contributors, with Shib.io receiving back 20 ETH.

In a detailed 1 December thread, Shima said the “Shibarium Bridge hacker foolishly chose not to accept the K9 bounty – it’s finally time to share the investigation we’ve been working on,” describing months of tracing that involved thousands of transactions and 111 wallets. His reconstruction shows 260 ETH flowing from exploit-linked wallets into Tornado Cash, with 232.49 ETH ultimately reaching KuCoin through 48 deposits into 45 unique KuCoin deposit addresses, which he believes are largely operated by money mules rather than the hacker directly.

According to his write-up and an accompanying MetaSleuth dashboard, the trail begins with the original exploit address and nine “dumping” wallets. Those wallets received the stolen tokens, liquidated them gradually for ETH over roughly a week, and sent a total of 260 ETH into Tornado Cash. Of that amount, 250 ETH entered the mixer’s 10-ETH pool and 10 ETH the 1-ETH pool in an attempt to break on-chain linkability between the hack and any later withdrawals.

The critical breakthrough, Shima says, came about forty days after the exploit. A wallet already tied to the hacker cluster sent exactly 0.0874 ETH to what was intended to be a clean Tornado withdrawal wallet. That minor top-up, he describes as “one stupid mistake” that “completely unravelled their Tornado Cash laundering,” because it established a direct on-chain connection between the exploit side of the graph and a supposedly anonymous post-mixer address. From that contaminated node he was able to work outward, clustering multiple Tornado withdrawal wallets, intermediaries and final KuCoin “funnel” wallets.

Shima reports that each funnel wallet typically routes funds to two KuCoin deposit addresses, creating a final cluster of 45 KuCoin endpoints and roughly two dozen depositors that he argues can be treated as money-mule cash-out accounts. He says the full address list, transaction graph and methodology were first shared privately with the Shibarium team so they could approach law enforcement and KuCoin while any funds remained within reach. However, he recounts that KuCoin’s fraud desk insisted on receiving a formal law-enforcement case number before acting on the evidence.

The official ShibariumNet X account has now publicly backed the research: “Thanks to @MRShimamoto for doing all the hard work here to compile this thread. We truly appreciate your diligence and methodical approach. Hopefully this investigation can continue with the help of the proper authorities. The communities need answers.”

At press time, Shiba Inu (SHIB) traded at $0.00000878

Crypto firm Ripple has revealed how it is capturing the projected $16 trillion tokenization industry by onboarding several institutions onto the XRP Ledger (XRPL). The firm alluded to security and how its custody service is helping solve this issue. 

Ripple Comments On How It Is Capturing The Tokenization Industry Using XRP Ledger

In an X post, Ripple indicated that it has managed to capture some of the projected $16 trillion industry onto the XRP Ledger through the adequate security it provides institutions. The crypto firm stated that it provides a security environment that mirrors the rigor of the banks it serves, combining HSM with FIPS-certified hardware to deliver security that scales. That way, they can protect assets without sacrificing operational speed. 

Ripple further noted that legitimate integration with the global financial system requires verification. That is why they adhere to SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 standards, ensuring that the infrastructure of these institutions that tokenize on the XRP Ledger is compliant with necessary regulations.  

Commenting on this, Ripple’s Head of Information Security, Akshay Wattal, said that in crypto, security isn’t a feature but the foundation of institutional trust. He added that effective custody requires in-depth architecture, battle-tested cryptography, and the governance rigor of a global financial institution. 

Notably, Ripple provides custody solutions to global banks, including BBVA, SG Fogre, DBS Bank, and DZ Bank. However, these banks are yet to tokenize on the XRP Ledger even as institutions move to tap into this $16 trillion industry. The crypto firm continues to propose several ways to onboard these institutions onto the network. 

One of Ripple’s proposals is the introduction of Confidential Multi-Purpose Tokens (MPTs) on the XRP Ledger in order to provide privacy for these institutions. The company’s developer, Ayo Akinyele, also recently proposed native XRP staking on the network, which could compel these institutions to build on XRPL, as they can earn yields while doing so. 

Progress On Other Sides Of Its Business

In addition to its custody service, Ripple is also making progress in other areas of its operations, which also drives value to the XRP Ledger. The company announced yesterday that it had partnered with fintech company RedotPay, which has integrated Ripple Payments to launch a crypto conversion feature for Nigerian users. 

The development also provides a huge boost for XRP, which will be one of the supported assets on RedotPay’s “Send Crypto, Receive NGN” feature. Ripple revealed that there are plans to support its RLSUD stablecoin in the future. Meanwhile, Bitcoinist reported that the crypto firm had scored a major win after the Monetary Authority of Singapore approved an expanded scope of payment activities for the company. This enables Ripple to broaden the range of regulated payment services it offers in the country.

The conventional wisdom says veteran holders don’t sell into weakness. They accumulate through drawdowns, harvest gains during euphoria, and otherwise sit still while newer cohorts churn.

Late 2025 is testing that model. Across Ethereum, XRP, and pockets of the DeFi stack, dormant whales are moving supply to exchanges as mid-term buyers flee, creating a bifurcated distribution pattern that reveals which assets have genuine cost-basis depth and which remain top-heavy with recent entrants.

Distribution without capitulation

What makes this moment distinct is not the fact of selling, as veterans always rotate, but the timing and composition.

Ethereum whales accumulated 460,000 ETH as the price slid below $3,200 in mid-November, yet Santiment’s Age Consumed metric slowed rather than spiked.

That divergence matters: if fewer very old coins are moving while aggregate whale balances rise, the pressure comes from holders in the three-to-ten-year band trimming positions rather than ICO-era wallets dumping.

Glassnode data shows those mid-duration cohorts selling roughly 45,000 ETH per day, a measured pace that contrasts with the panic-driven spikes seen earlier in the year when both short- and long-term holders exited simultaneously.

XRP tells the opposite story. Dormant Circulation for the 365-day cohort spiked to its highest level since July as whales transferred months-long holdings to Binance, reactivating supply that had been untouched through the prior rally.

CryptoQuant’s 100-day simple moving average for the Whale-to-Exchange Flow metric peaked on Nov. 6, signaling a multi-month uptrend and suggesting the distribution is structural rather than episodic.

When combined with dormant-supply reactivations across both one-year-plus and three-to-twelve-month bands, the pattern is clear: XRP’s 2025 moves systematically drew out older holders who had waited through consolidation and now see exits as the rational trade.

Although the flow of whale exchanges has subsided, it remains among the highest levels observed in 2025.

The trade-off embedded in these flows is straightforward. Ethereum’s whales are rotating, and older holders are selling into strength as new buyers enter at higher cost bases, building a rising realized cap floor even as the price consolidates.

XRP’s whales are distributing into a market where latecomers already hold most of the realized cap at elevated prices, leaving no absorption cushion if spot demand continues to fade.

Realized cap as the structural tell

Realized cap measures the aggregate cost basis of all coins, weighted by the price at which they last moved. For assets that built genuine cost-basis ladders over multiple cycles, realized cap acts as long-term support.

For assets that printed most of their realized cap in a single blow-off, the structure is brittle: when the top cohort sells, there’s little underneath.

Ethereum’s realized cap was $391 billion as of Nov. 18, according to Santiment, absorbing distribution from older holders via fresh inflows even as price chopped sideways.

That continued accumulation at varied entry points means the network retains cost-basis diversity, short-term holders sit more exposed if another leg down materializes, but veteran cohorts trimming at $3,200 don’t collapse the entire structure because new participants filled the gap at intermediate levels.

XRP’s realized cap nearly doubled from $30 billion to $64 billion during the late-2024 rally, with $30 billion of that coming from buyers who entered in the last six months.

By early 2025, coins younger than 6 months accounted for 62.8% of realized cap, up from 23%, concentrating cost basis at cycle highs. Glassnode’s realized profit-to-loss ratio has trended downward since January, indicating that recent entrants are now realizing losses rather than gains.

When whales send old coins to exchanges in November, reactivating dormant supply at precisely the moment latecomers turn underwater, the realized cap imbalance becomes the central vulnerability.

Dormancy as a leading indicator

Dormancy metrics track when previously idle supply reenters active circulation. Spikes in these indicators don’t automatically signal tops, but rather signal regime change.

When holders who weathered prior cycles decide conditions warrant an exit, their movement often precedes broader distribution because they operate on longer time horizons and larger position sizes than retail cohorts.

Ethereum’s Age Consumed spikes in September and October came from ICO-era wallets finally moving after years of inactivity, but those moves happened into strength rather than panic.

By mid-November, as whales holding 1,000 to 100,000 ETH accumulated over 1.6 million ETH, the Age Consumed metric quieted, meaning the heavy flows were driven by large holders rotating rather than ancient wallets capitulating.

That creates a floor: if the oldest cohorts aren’t selling and mid-term whales are buying, spot absorption can handle measured profit-taking from the three-to-ten-year band.

XRP’s dormancy pattern broke the other way. The 365-day Dormant Circulation hit levels unseen since July, with repeated red spikes as old coins woke up and moved to exchanges.

The reactivations became more frequent as the price struggled to hold above $2, suggesting that holders who sat through the consolidation decided the risk-reward no longer justified their patience.

When dormancy spikes coincide with weakening spot demand and a top-heavy realized cap, the signal is unambiguous: veterans are distributing into a market that can’t absorb it without breaking price support.

Who holds the bag

If Ethereum’s distribution continues at the current pace, three-to-ten-year holders selling 45,000 ETH daily while whales accumulate and realized cap rises, the outcome is a market with higher long-term support but increased short-term volatility.

New entrants at $3,000-$3,500 become the marginal sellers if price breaks lower, while veteran cohorts sit on unrealized gains large enough to weather another drawdown.

If XRP’s dormant-supply reactivations persist while the realized cap remains concentrated among holders with six-month-or-newer holdings, the path narrows.

Each wave of veteran distribution pushes recent buyers further underwater. Because those recent buyers account for the majority of realized cap, their capitulation would collapse the cost-basis floor rather than merely test it.

The risk is self-reinforcing: whales distribute, latecomers sell at losses, realized cap falls, and the next cohort of holders faces an even weaker support structure.

For protocols like Aave, where dormancy data remains sparse, a single address crystalizing $1.54 million in losses by selling 15,396 AAVE into a downtrend signals forced or fear-driven exits from recent entrants, not long-term holders harvesting gains.

When those losses happen while the asset trades below all major moving averages and broader DeFi risk appetite deteriorates, late-cycle capital is exiting rather than rotating.

Who decides the floor

The central question is whether this cycle’s dormant supply reactivations represent healthy rotation, veteran holders exiting at profits while new capital enters at higher bases, or the beginning of a broader deleveraging where top-heavy realized caps collapse under sustained distribution.

Ethereum’s data suggests that older coins are moving. Still, the bulk of recent flow comes from mid-term whales trimming rather than ancient wallets dumping, and rising realized cap confirms fresh money continues to average in.

XRP’s data suggests that dormancy spikes are drawing out one-year-plus holders, while 62.8% of realized cap sits with buyers who entered in the last six months.

The outcome depends on which cohort blinks first. If recent entrants hold and spot demand stabilizes, veteran distribution gets absorbed, and the market builds a higher floor through turnover.

If latecomers capitulate before veteran sellers exhaust themselves, realized cap falls, cost-basis depth evaporates, and the next support level sits far below the current price.

Whales are stirring. Whether that’s a rotation or a rout depends on who’s left to catch what they’re selling.

The post While Ethereum whales rotate, XRP data shows a fatal concentration flaw that leaves one group holding the bag. appeared first on CryptoSlate.

BlackRock, the largest asset management firm in the world, has described tokenization as the most critical market upgrade since the early internet.

On the other hand, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) describes it as a volatile, untested architecture that can amplify financial shocks at machine speed.

Both institutions are looking at the same innovation. Yet, the distance between their conclusions captures the most consequential debate in modern finance: whether tokenized markets will reinvent global infrastructure or reproduce its worst fragilities with new velocity.

The institutional divide on tokenization

In a Dec. 1 op-ed for The Economist, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink and COO Rob Goldstein argued that recording asset ownership on digital ledgers represents the next structural step in a decades-long modernization arc.

They framed tokenization as a financial leap comparable to the arrival of SWIFT in 1977 or the shift from paper certificates to electronic trading.

In contrast, the IMF warned in a recent explainer video that tokenized markets could be prone to flash crashes, liquidity fractures, and smart-contract domino cascades that turn local failures into systemic shocks.

The split over tokenization arises from the fact that the two institutions operate under very different mandates.

BlackRock, which has already rolled out tokenized funds and dominates the spot ETF market for digital assets, approaches tokenization as an infrastructure play. Its incentive is to expand global market access, compress settlement cycles to “T+0,” and broaden the investable universe.

In that context, blockchain-based ledgers look like the next logical step in the evolution of financial plumbing. This means the technology offers a way to strip out costs and latency in the traditional financial world.

However, the IMF operates from the opposite direction.

As the stabilizer of the global monetary system, it focuses on the hard-to-predict feedback loops that arise when markets operate at extremely high speed. Traditional finance relies on settlement delays to net transactions and conserve liquidity.

Tokenization introduces instantaneous settlement and composability across smart contracts. That structure is efficient in calm periods but can propagate shocks far faster than human intermediaries can respond.

These perspectives do not contradict each other so much as they reflect different layers of responsibility.

BlackRock is tasked with building the next generation of investment products. The IMF is tasked with identifying the fault lines before they spread. Tokenization sits at the intersection of that tension.

A technology with two futures

Fink and Goldstein describe tokenization as a bridge “built from both sides of a river,” connecting traditional institutions with digital-first innovators.

They argue that shared digital ledgers can eliminate slow, manual processes and replace disparate settlement pipelines with standardized rails that participants across jurisdictions can verify instantly.

This view is not theoretical, though the data requires careful parsing.

According to Token Terminal, the broader tokenized ecosystem is approaching $300 billion, a figure heavily anchored by dollar-pegged stablecoins like USDT and USDC.

However, the actual test lies in the roughly $30 billion wedge of regulated real-world assets (RWAs), such as tokenized Treasuries, private credit, and bonds.

Indeed, these regulated assets are no longer restricted to pilot programs.

Tokenized government bond funds such as BlackRock’s BUIDL and Ondo’s products are now live. At the same time, precious metals have moved on-chain as well, with significant volumes in digital gold.

The market has also seen fractionalized real estate shares and tokenized private credit instruments expand the investable universe beyond listed bonds and equities.

In light of this, forecasts for this sector range from the optimistic to the astronomical. Reports from firms such as RedStone Finance project a “blue sky” scenario in which on-chain RWAs could reach $30 trillion by 2034.

Meanwhile, more conservative estimates from McKinsey & Co. suggest the market could double as funds and treasuries migrate to blockchain rails.

For BlackRock, even the conservative case represents a multi-trillion-dollar restructuring of financial infrastructure.

Yet the IMF sees a parallel, less stable future. Its concern centers on the mechanics of atomic settlement.

In today’s markets, trades are often “netted” at the end of the day, meaning banks only need to move the difference between what they bought and sold. Atomic settlement requires every trade to be fully funded instantly.

In stressed conditions, this demand for pre-funded liquidity can spike, potentially causing liquidity to evaporate exactly when it is needed most.

If automated contracts then trigger liquidations “like falling dominoes,” a localized problem could become a systemic cascade before regulators even receive the alert.

The liquidity paradox

Part of the enthusiasm around tokenization stems from the question of where the next cycle of market growth may originate.

The last crypto cycle was characterized by memecoin-driven speculation, which generated high activity but drained liquidity without expanding long-term adoption.

Advocates of tokenization argue that the next expansion will be driven not by retail speculation but by institutional yield strategies, including tokenized private credit, real-world debt instruments, and enterprise-grade vaults delivering predictable returns.

Tokenization, in this framing, is not merely a technical upgrade but a new liquidity channel. Institutional allocators facing a constrained traditional yield environment may migrate to tokenized credit markets, where automated strategies and programmable settlement can yield higher, more efficient returns.

However, this future remains unrealized because large banks, insurers, and pension funds face regulatory constraints.

The Basel III Endgame rules, for example, assign punitive capital treatment to certain digital assets classified as “Group 2,” discouraging exposure to tokenized instruments unless regulators clarify the distinctions between volatile cryptocurrencies and regulated tokenized securities.

Until that boundary is defined, the “wall of money” remains more potential than reality.

Furthermore, the IMF argues that even if the funds arrive, they carry hidden leverage.

A complex stack of automated contracts, collateralized debt positions, and tokenized credit instruments may create recursive dependencies.

During periods of volatility, these chains can unwind faster than risk engines are designed to handle. The very features that make tokenization attractive, such as the instant settlement, composability, and global access, create feedback mechanisms that could amplify stress.

The tokenization question

The debate between BlackRock and the IMF is not about whether tokenization will integrate into global markets; it already has.

It is about the trajectory of that integration. One path envisions a more efficient, accessible, globally synchronized market structure. The other anticipates a landscape where speed and connectivity create new forms of systemic vulnerability.

However, in that future, the outcome will depend on whether global institutions can converge on coherent standards for interoperability, disclosure, and automated risk controls.

The post BlackRock bets on tokenization, but IMF warns of uncontrollable ‘atomic’ domino effect appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Ethereum price has climbed over 13% since December 1, helped by a broader market recovery and growing optimism ahead of today’s Fusaka upgrade, which improves how efficiently the network processes transactions. ETH is still down more than 17% over the past month, but the recent bounce and several technical signals look similar to what happened just before the Pectra upgrade in May 2025, when Ethereum rallied 56% in seven days.

The question now is simple: can Fusaka trigger that kind of move again?

Conditions Look Similar to Pectra — And Big Buyers Are Returning

During the Pectra phase (May 6–13), Ethereum surged 56% after flashing standard bullish divergence. That pattern occurs when price makes a lower low, but RSI (Relative Strength Index, a momentum meter from 0–100) makes a higher low. It often signals that sellers are losing control even as the chart still looks weak. More of a trend reversal.

P.S.: The Pectra upgrade dropped on May 7, 2025.

The same setup is forming now.

Between November 4 and December 1, ETH made a lower low, but RSI formed a higher low. That mirrors the exact structure that appeared before the Pectra move.

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

Large holders also show early accumulation.

The number of Ethereum addresses holding at least $1 million has risen from 13,322 to 13,945, a 4.68% increase. Since each wallet holds a minimum of $1 million, this reflects at least $623 million in added capital entering the network’s top tier of holders. Big buyers entering ahead of a major technical upgrade is historically a constructive sign.

Together, the divergence pattern and fresh large-wallet inflows build a case that Fusaka could act as a catalyst — if the key breakout level is cleared.

One Cost-Basis Cluster and One Ethereum Price Level Decide Everything

Whether ETH shows a Pectra-style extension depends on clearing a single supply wall. Glassnode’s Cost Basis Distribution reveals the heaviest near-term supply cluster between $3,154 and $3,179, where about 2.76 million ETH sits. This aligns almost perfectly with the chart’s resistance at $3,166 (a strong resistance and support line).

A clean daily Ethereum price candle above $3,166 would:

• show buyers have almost absorbed the largest supply zone

• open room for a push toward $3,653

If momentum mirrors the Pectra structure, a 56% extension from December’s lows would target roughly $4,262, which also matches a strong historical ceiling.

On the downside, ETH’s structure weakens below $2,996. Losing that range exposes $2,873, and if selling pressure expands, $2,618 becomes the deeper support to watch for the Ethereum price.

The post Could the Fusaka Upgrade Light the Fuse for a Pectra-Like 56% Ethereum Price Rally? 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 to read how the Bitcoin mining sector is changing. Skyrocketing costs, collapsing fees, and the rise of AI are forcing miners to rethink their playbook, turning once-stable operations into a battleground for next-generation compute power.

Crypto News of the Day: AI Takes Over Bitcoin Mining Racks as Costs Explode and Profitability Craters

The CoinShares Bitcoin Mining Report Q4 2025 reported that the sector has hit its breaking point. Production costs have surged to all-time highs, hash price has collapsed, and artificial intelligence (AI) is now outbidding miners for their own infrastructure, triggering the most dramatic structural shift the sector has ever faced.

The industry entered Q2 2025 with a brutal new reality:

• The average cash cost to mine one BTC among public miners jumped to approximately $74,600,
• All-in costs soared to $137,800.
• Transaction fees, once a buffer for miner revenue, fell below 1% of block rewards in May and June, the weakest contribution since the 2024 halving.

Yet even as margins collapsed, the Bitcoin network continued to climb, smashing through 1 Zetta hash/s for the first time in August.

Public miners contributed only about 80 EH/s of year-to-date growth, meaning most of the expansion is now coming from private operators, sovereign miners, and well-capitalized energy players with vastly cheaper power.

The result: miners are being diluted by hashrate growth they are no longer driving.

AI Moves In — And It Pays 10–20× More Per Megawatt

A far bigger disruption is unfolding at the infrastructure level. Industrial-scale mining campuses, comprising 100MW to 1GW sites, share nearly identical power, cooling, and rack density requirements with modern AI datacenters.

That overlap has turned mining facilities into prime targets for hyperscalers.

Deals from Google–TeraWulf, Google–Cipher, and multi-site agreements with Fluidstack signal the same direction, that big-tech is moving into miner-built capacity at a premium.

The math explains why. Bitcoin mining yields roughly $1 million per megawatt, while AI compute generates $10 million to $20 million per megawatt.

No miner can ignore that spread.

Industry Splits: AI Megacampuses vs. Mobile, Ultra-Low-Cost Miners

The sector is now diverging into two clear models:

1. 1. Megascale miners → fully or partially converting to AI/HPC

These facilities can upgrade their electrical topology and uptime standards to meet enterprise requirements. They’re signing decade-long contracts and shifting from volatile block rewards to stable, capacity-based revenue.

2. Low-cost, mobile miners → shifting to stranded energy

Miners unable to compete with AI are moving off-grid: flare gas, remote hydro, and surplus renewables. Portable rigs are being deployed everywhere cheap energy exists, echoing mining’s early decentralized roots.

This migration marks a long-term reshaping of the industry, and not a temporary cycle.

According to a CoinShares report:

• Hashprice averaged approximately $50 per PH/s/day throughout Q2, continuing its post-halving slide.
• With difficulty rising, fees stagnant, and Bitcoin trading mostly sideways, older ASIC fleets have been forced offline.

Analysts expect hashprice to remain range-bound between $37–55 per PH/s/day through 2028 unless BTC rallies far faster than hashrate growth.

A Structural Shift: AI Outbids Bitcoin

For the first time in Bitcoin’s history, miners are being priced out of their own infrastructure.

AI’s superior economics, hyperscaler deal flow, and the rising cost of industrial mining are pushing the industry into a permanent transformation.

The Bitcoin network remains strong, where hashrate is still climbing, but the business of mining is being rewritten fast.

This puts miners at an impasse, to either go big into AI, or go remote into stranded power.

Chart of the Day

Byte-Sized Alpha

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

• Yi He appointed Binance co-CEO amidst legal and regulatory challenges.
• Kevin Hassett as Trump’s Fed pick: How will his policy impact crypto in 2026?
• Ethereum Fusaka goes live today: Can it trigger a Pectra-like rally?
• Is Bitcoin ready to end its 5-week downtrend or face rejection at $95,000?
• Vanguard ‘degen effect’ fuels 10% surge for Bitcoin in explosive rebound.
• PENGU token jumps 30% on NHL Deal, but $108 million sell-off sparks fear.
• Binance marks 3 altcoins for delisting: Everything you need to know.
• V-shape bounce, rare Bitcoin signal, $13 billion Fed shock: What’s coming?

Crypto Equities Pre-Market Overview

The post Bitcoin Mining Hit Its Breaking Point — Now AI Is Taking Over Its Racks | US Crypto News appeared first on BeInCrypto.

The XRP price is rebounding sharply as the broader crypto market slowly recovers from a months-long downtrend. Although XRP is still more than 43% below its all-time high, a market analyst has outlined what needs to happen before the cryptocurrency can rally again. The analyst has shared a rather blunt assessment of XRP’s recent performance, highlighting its vulnerability and weakened price action. 

XRP Price Rally Hinges On Bitcoin’s Recovery

A crypto market expert identified as ‘Guy on Earth’ has issued a fresh warning on X, highlighting that the XRP price is currently sitting at precarious levels and “hanging on for its dear life.” His outlook was cautious as he stated that the cryptocurrency is barely maintaining a crucial monthly bull market support level. 

In his view, a potential XRP price rally now depends on a shift in Bitcoin’s behavior. The analyst explained that the altcoin market has suffered from maximum stress in recent months and will only begin to recover once BTC stages a rebound. He highlighted that the cryptocurrency needs to trigger a recovery rally while its dominance levels decline, giving altcoins enough room to regain former momentum and stage a rally. 

Without this change in Bitcoin, the pressure on XRP is likely to continue. Recently, BTC climbed roughly 7% and is now trading above $93,000. Within the same period, the XRP price has surged more than 9% to $2.19. This trend highlights a correlation between Bitcoin’s positive price action and XRP’s upward movement. 

Despite the recovery, Guy on Earth has warned investors and traders to stay realistic and manage their exposure carefully, given the market’s fragile state. His accompanying chart supports this caution. It shows that following a sharp impulse move that pushed XRP into a multi-year high zone, the price has stalled beneath a clear ceiling marked by repeated monthly rejections. Below the price structure, XRP’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) has declined, reflecting fading strength. 

XRP Price To 10x In 2026 Crypto Super Cycle

Presenting a more bullish outlook for XRP, crypto analyst Amonyx has examined its price potential within the broader altcoin market cycle. He suggested that the crypto supercycle in 2026 will be massive. His analysis places XRP at the centre of this bullish expansion, predicting a powerful price surge.

Amonyx shared a chart illustrating three distinct altcoin seasons during past bull market cycles, each marked by explosive performances relative to Bitcoin. The first two cycles show a massive surge followed by prolonged cooldown periods. The current cycle highlights a larger structure, suggesting that the upcoming altcoin season in 2026 could be more powerful than the last two. If this trend holds, the analyst predicts that XRP’s price could skyrocket 10x from its current level of $2.19 to approximately $22.

Dogecoin is staging a sharp rebound from a key technical level that one analyst has flagged as the potential low of its current correction.

Is The Dogecoin Bottom In?

On X, crypto analyst Kevin (@Kev_Capital_TA) highlighted the $0.138 region as the decisive line. Posting a weekly DOGE chart, he wrote: “$0.138 still holding strong on Dogecoin. If DOGE can hold this level (Macro .382 + 200W SMA) and BTC + USDT hold their respective support and resistance levels then $0.138 will be the lows for this corrective period. Still got work to do. Main focus is still BTC and USDT D.”

His chart shows Dogecoin trading on the 1-week timeframe, with the price recently wicking down into a dense support cluster around $0.138 and rebounding. That area coincides with the 0.382 Fibonacci retracement of the prior advance, explicitly marked “0.382 (0.13827),” and the rising 200-week simple moving average that has now climbed into the same zone. Furthermore, this area coincides with an upward trendline that has guided DOGE’s price action since mid-2023; a decisive break below it would be technically fatal.

The bounce has been visible on lower timeframes as well. DOGE traded as low as $0.13443 yesterday before surging to $0.152 today, gaining more than 13% at the intraday high.

Kevin has been emphasizing this level for weeks. On November 22 he told followers: “$0.138 is massive support on Dogecoin folks. You really do not want to see that lost on 3D-1W closes. Obviously BTC’s performance will be the determiner to that outcome so focus there first along with USDT D.” In his framework, the integrity of the DOGE support cluster is inseparable from Bitcoin’s higher-timeframe structure and stablecoin flows.

The macro background is shifting in his favor. Yesterday Bitcoin rebounded from $86,184 to $92,307, extended to $93,958 today and is currently around $92,816. Commenting on BTC, Kevin noted: “A close above $91K on the 3D-1W candle supports the idea that the counter trend rally is beginning in my BTC corrective phase reversal zone. One day doesn’t make a trend let’s see what we can do.”

That statement builds on his November 25 outlook, where he argued that the corrective phase he has been tracking since August–September on BTC and the “Total 2” altcoin index is nearing completion. “There will be a bottom formed and a counter trend rally in the coming weeks on BTC and Altcoins,” he wrote, adding that “the corrective phase is almost over” but still needs “a little more time to form a proper bottom.”

Kevin’s DOGE chart maps the alternatives clearly. Above, horizontal resistance near the 0.5 Fibonacci retracement sits around $0.19, while lower support is marked at the 0.236 retracement near $0.093 alongside longer-term trendlines.

Whether $0.138 becomes the definitive bottom of Dogecoin’s correction depends on two conditions Kevin keeps repeating: DOGE must continue to hold the macro 0.382 plus 200-week SMA and the uptrend line on 3-day to weekly closes, and Bitcoin must confirm its own counter-trend rally with sustained higher-timeframe strength.

For now, the market has made its tell clear. The answer to whether the Dogecoin bottom is in starts—and potentially ends—at $0.138.

At press time, Dogecoin traded at $0.14976.