Today's Cryptocurrency Prices by Market Caps
The global cryptocurrency market cap today i $2.31T
Market Cap
$2.31T
24h Trading Volume
$70.34B
BTC Dominance
56.22%
|
#
|
Name
|
Price
|
1h %
|
24h %
|
7d %
|
Market Cap
|
Volume (24h)
|
Chart (7d) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
—
|
|||||||
|
No cryptocurrencies found Try adjusting your search query |
||||||||
Latest Crypto News
View All News
Retail Sells, Whales Accumulate — Should You Buy XRP at $1.06?
XRP’s next move comes down mostly to risk tolerance as the token trades near $1.06 — about 4.5% lower over the past 24 hours — while the CLARITY Act remains stalled in Congress. The market is divided on whether now is the time to cut losses or add to positions, and on-chain data from Santiment helps explain why. A split market Santiment’s metrics show a clear bifurcation: retail-sized wallets are steadily exiting, while the largest holders are quietly accumulating. Small wallets have reduced their combined XRP holdings by roughly 5.2% over the last five weeks — a type of selling often driven by trading fatigue when a token grinds sideways. By contrast, wallets in the 100,000–100 million XRP range have added about 600 million XRP since mid-June. That accumulation helped lift XRP from roughly $1 at the end of June to around $1.16 in late July, even though the price has since pulled back to $1.06. Why it matters Historically, periods where whales buy while retail sells have sometimes preceded rebounds, which is the core of the current debate: should investors sell now to cut losses, or buy the dip and ride the whale-led accumulation? The answer will largely depend on how much weight you give to the on-chain accumulation trend versus short-term price action and regulatory risk. Regulatory backdrop Regulatory clarity is also a live factor. The CLARITY Act’s progress in Congress — and the timing of any related developments, including the RLUSD adoption Santiment flagged — could influence whether large holders continue buying into dips. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse has urged lawmakers to move forward, saying, “Perfect can’t be the enemy of good. Let’s get this done!” A practical checklist before deciding Whether you’re considering selling, holding, or buying more XRP, Santiment and market commentators suggest checking three things first: - Your personal loss threshold: decide in advance what drawdown you can tolerate. - Portfolio allocation: how much of your total holdings are already in XRP? - Regulatory catalysts: how likely and how soon are the CLARITY Act or RLUSD adoption to clear hurdles? Execution basics If you decide to exit, you can use a market order for an immediate sale or set a stop-loss at a chosen price to limit downside. Choosing to buy more is a bet that the whale accumulation continues and that retail selling has largely run its course. Bottom line Retail wallets have been shedding XRP while whales buy the dip — that split remains the clearest signal for anyone weighing a July cut-loss move with XRP at $1.06. The calculus will likely shift if and when the CLARITY Act or RLUSD adoption materialize, so traders should monitor both on-chain flows and regulatory developments before making a final call. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Bitcoin Slips to $63K After BlackRock Sales, Tech Rout and Fed/Geopolitics Fears
Bitcoin has slid back to the mid-$60k range, dropping to about $63,000 after briefly reclaiming $66,000 earlier this month. CoinGecko data shows BTC is down nearly 3% on both the daily and weekly charts, though it remains roughly 5.6% higher than a month ago. What’s driving the pullback? - Risk-off flows from equities: A heavy sell-off in AI-related stocks appears to have spilled over into crypto. Shares of major memory-chip makers SK Hynix and Samsung plunged amid intensifying Chinese competition and growing uncertainty, and that weakness in tech names likely weighed on risk assets more broadly. - Institutional moves and retail reaction: Last week BlackRock reportedly sold more than $400 million worth of Bitcoin. While the market likely absorbed that volume, the sale may have signaled weaker hands to exit, amplifying short-term pressure. - Technical resistance: Bitcoin is running into meaningful resistance around $66,000 after an earlier peak near $82,000 in May. The market has struggled to build momentum past that zone. - Geopolitical and macro risks: Renewed tensions between the U.S. and Iran have dented investor confidence and pushed oil prices higher. Rising energy costs can feed into higher inflation expectations—July inflation prints are being watched closely—and could increase the odds of further Fed rate hikes. Higher rates historically create a tougher environment for risk assets, including Bitcoin. What to watch next - Key levels: A decisive break above $66,000 would be bullish; failure to hold $63,000–$60,000 could invite deeper consolidation. - Macro data: July inflation figures and any Fed commentary on rate policy will be important for risk appetite. - Institutional flows and regulatory moves: Further large trades from institutions could move price sentiment, and progress on crypto-focused legislation—such as the CLARITY Act, which aims to clarify rules and boost investor protections—could improve confidence and capital inflows if passed. Bottom line: Bitcoin’s latest dip looks driven by a mix of cross-asset risk-off, notable institutional selling, and macro-geopolitical pressure. While it’s still up month-over-month, traders will be watching technical resistance at $66k, inflation data, institutional flows, and regulatory developments to gauge whether a recovery is likely or a deeper pullback is on the cards. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Kalshi Denied Emergency Stay — NY Can Enforce Gambling Laws, Clouding Crypto Prediction Markets
Kalshi fails to win emergency relief from NY enforcement while its appeal proceeds A federal judge in Manhattan declined on July 27 to block New York from enforcing its gambling laws against KalshiEX while the exchange’s appeal works its way through the courts. What happened - U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres (SDNY) denied KalshiEX’s request for an emergency injunction pending appeal in KalshiEX LLC v. Williams. The three-page order also rejected Kalshi’s alternate request for short-term administrative relief. - The order does not dismiss Kalshi’s appeal (filed with the Second Circuit as No. 26-1835) or resolve the underlying case; it only refuses to shield Kalshi from New York enforcement during the appellate process. - Kalshi had appealed after Torres on July 7 denied its motion for a preliminary injunction. That earlier ruling concluded the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) likely does not preempt New York’s gambling laws as applied to Kalshi’s sports-event contracts. Why the court refused emergency relief - An injunction pending appeal requires a stronger showing of likely success than a standard preliminary injunction. Torres said Kalshi failed to satisfy any of the four required factors in the earlier proceeding and did not identify extraordinary circumstances that would justify reversing that decision. - Kalshi argued it faced a Hobson’s choice: violate New York law or comply and risk losing federal registration. Torres found the claimed risk speculative and viewed the expected costs as monetary—insufficient to establish irreparable harm. The CFTC rule proposal and the court’s view - Kalshi pointed to a June proposed rule from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) asserting that the CEA expressly preempts state laws regulating transactions on CFTC-registered exchanges and proposing standards for reviewing event contracts involving gaming, unlawful conduct, war, terrorism and assassination. - Torres did not invalidate or formally reject that proposed rule. Citing the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, she emphasized that courts must independently interpret statutes and reiterated her view that the CEA does not automatically displace all state gambling laws covering swap-like transactions. The CFTC proposal completed its public-comment period on July 27 but is not a final rule. Broader legal landscape and why this matters to crypto/prediction markets - The issue of federal preemption is split across courts. In April the Third Circuit (2–1) held New Jersey could not regulate Kalshi’s sports-event contracts because they fell within the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction. Other courts, including Torres in SDNY, have taken a narrower view, allowing states to apply gambling laws in many cases. - The split broadened July 27 when a Minnesota federal judge temporarily blocked that state’s ban on direct prediction markets, finding several Kalshi and Polymarket contracts likely met the federal definition of swaps (though the judge warned later relief might be narrower). - Kalshi has faced additional state-level restrictions (e.g., Washington), and the CFTC has sued multiple states, arguing that federally registered exchanges should operate under a single national derivatives framework. Those fights have direct implications for crypto-native prediction markets and any platforms offering event-based contracts, which could face a patchwork of state enforcement unless federal preemption is clarified. What’s next - The Second Circuit will consider Kalshi’s emergency motion; its decision could temporarily halt New York enforcement while the appeal is resolved. After ruling on the emergency relief, the appeals court will address the merits, including whether New York’s gambling laws are preempted by the CEA. - Separately, the CFTC may revise or finalize its proposed prediction-market rule after reviewing public comments; no deadline for a final rule has been announced. Bottom line: For now, New York regulators remain free to enforce state gambling laws against Kalshi unless an appellate court intervenes. The coming rulings and any CFTC rulemaking will be closely watched by crypto and prediction-market platforms operating across state lines. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
1inch Opens Aqua to All: Self‑Custodial, Risk‑Controlled Liquidity on 13 EVM Chains
1inch has opened Aqua — its shared DeFi liquidity layer — to all users, eight months after the protocol first launched in developer-only mode. The public rollout, announced Tuesday, spans 13 EVM chains including Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, BNB Chain and Robinhood Chain. A user-facing front end had originally been planned for the first quarter. What Aqua is and how it works - Aqua is positioned as “the foundation for scalable, capital-efficient DeFi.” Unlike a traditional liquidity pool, Aqua functions as a registry: liquidity providers (LPs) approve a token balance and create positions that can draw on that approval. Tokens remain in the provider’s wallet — they are not deposited into a protocol contract. - When a swap matches a position’s terms, Aqua atomically pulls the required tokens from the provider’s wallet and returns proceeds plus fees. Approvals are set per token and per chain and can be revoked at any time, preserving self-custody. - 1inch emphasizes that this model caps counterparty exposure by actual holdings rather than by the sum of positions: for example, a single $100,000 wallet balance could support positions that collectively quote $300,000, but swaps can only execute against tokens actually present in the wallet. Risk-controlled execution and “verified counterparties” - Every swap on Aqua must be executed by a “verified counterparty” — defined by 1inch as a market maker or arbitrage bot whose verification is enforced on-chain at swap time. 1inch bills Aqua as the industry’s first “risk-controlled liquidity venue,” framing it as a step toward more risk-aware and regulated DeFi. - The protocol’s single-owner position model is designed to deter tactics like just-in-time fee skimming; 1inch says the economics of such attacks become unattractive, potentially costing attackers as much as 44% of provider fee income. Safety checks, incentives and caveats - Aqua has undergone eight independent audits from firms including OpenZeppelin, Nethermind, Hexens and Bailsec. - To kickstart activity, the 1inch Foundation committed 10 million 1INCH in provider rewards, and the 1inch DAO added 500,000 USDC, to be distributed via Merkl. - 1inch warns Aqua is aimed at experienced users: fees are not guaranteed, prices can move against positions, and providers remain exposed to market and smart contract risks. Why it matters 1inch says Aqua could change how capital and yield strategies operate in DeFi by increasing usable liquidity without forcing LPs to relinquish custody. If adoption grows among market makers and bots, Aqua may reduce fragmentation and route more activity through a risk-controlled layer — potentially shifting the infrastructure dynamics of the decentralized markets it plugs into. 1inch’s launch-day messaging summed it up bluntly: “Liquidity providers: it’s time to wake up. Use 1inch Aqua to find more activity in more markets, without letting your tokens out of your wallet.” Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Fortitude unveils 12MW Nebraska Zcash data center, cutting mining costs to about $40/coin
Fortitude, the Digital Currency Group (DCG)-owned miner, has flipped the switch on its first greenfield data center — a 12-megawatt Zcash mining site in Grand Island, Nebraska — advancing a push to control its own power and cut mining costs as it prepares to go public. The newly completed facility, Fortitude’s first built from scratch rather than leased, has finished construction and electrical testing and is now ready for commercial operations. It boosts the company’s owned power portfolio to more than 60 megawatts spread across seven sites, and comes as Fortitude pursues a planned public listing via a previously announced business combination with HeartSciences (Nasdaq: HSCS). Why this matters - Cost punch: Fortitude projects the Grand Island site will lower its direct cash cost to mine Zcash from about $70 per coin to roughly $40 per coin, assuming successful deployment of new miners and stable power, network and market conditions. With Zcash trading around $489 per coin at the time of the announcement, that gap would materially widen potential operating margins. - Cheaper electricity: The site will buy power at about $0.045 per kWh and is sited between two solar generation facilities and adjacent to a substation with excess capacity. That location lets the operation act as an interruptible load — scaling back consumption during grid stress — and tap lower-cost, locally available generation. - Hardware and integration: Fortitude attributes much of the expected savings to next-generation, more efficient mining hardware combined with its owned-and-operated power strategy. CEO Andrea Childs framed the move as strategic vertical integration: “Owning the asset rather than leasing capacity from someone whose incentives run opposite to ours is intended to give us a degree of flexibility that we believe few operators have.” She also emphasized Fortitude’s focus on Zcash, saying the asset’s mining economics are less mature and less crowded than Bitcoin’s and that Fortitude’s vertically integrated model positions it to benefit from Zcash’s growth. A new entrant with legacy roots Launched in January 2025 out of DCG’s Foundry mining division, Fortitude follows a “venture mining” playbook: mine proof-of-work coins (including Bitcoin and Zcash), then reinvest profits into more equipment and new sites to expand its footprint. The Grand Island project is an early example of that strategy in action. Broader backdrop The announcement comes as miners nationwide scramble for low-cost power amid rising competition from AI data centers and greater scrutiny of data-center electricity and water consumption. Grand Island officials say Fortitude designed the facility to operate as a flexible grid resource and to limit community impact. Childs added: “Competition for power has intensified, but in our view, it hasn't slowed us down. By developing and owning our own sites, we seek to control our power costs directly rather than relying on third-party vendors to set them for us.” Bottom line: Fortitude’s new Nebraska facility is a concrete step in its push to pair owned, low-cost power with efficient hardware — lowering Zcash mining costs and strengthening the company’s argument as it moves toward a public listing. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Myanmar law: death penalty for coerced scam victims, life sentences for crypto fraudsters
Myanmar’s military-backed parliament has approved a tough new law that makes the death penalty available for people who use violence or unlawful detention to force others into running online scam operations — and imposes life sentences for those who run crypto-related fraud. Key points of the law - The draft published in May stipulated that “the death penalty shall be imposed” when coercion or unlawful detention used to force victims into scam operations results in the victim’s death. - The same draft set a maximum penalty of life imprisonment for anyone who operates an online scam center or commits “digital currency scams (crypto scams),” with coercion offenses carrying terms from 10 years to life. - A lower-house MP, Aye Chan, told AFP the death-penalty provision survived into the final approved text and that “the important parts of the bill remained the same.” The full text has not yet been released. Political and legal context - This is the first law passed by the government of Min Aung Hlaing, the general who led the 2021 coup and formally became civilian president in April. Under Myanmar’s constitution, a quarter of parliamentary seats — 166 — are reserved for the military; the USDP won 339 of the remaining seats in phased elections that Aung San Suu Kyi’s dissolved party could not contest. - Myanmar resumed judicial executions in 2022, hanging four activists — the first state executions since 1976. In April, days after taking office, Min Aung Hlaing commuted every existing death sentence in the country to life imprisonment. Three months later, parliament has legislated new capital punishments tied to scam-related violence. Regional crypto-crime backdrop - International authorities have increasingly linked Southeast Asian compounds and militias to transnational cyber-scam networks. In May 2025 the U.S. Treasury designated the Karen National Army (formerly the Karen Border Guard Force) as a transnational criminal organization, saying its territory on the Thai border “is home to multiple cyber scam syndicates” and that it “has benefitted from its connection to Burma’s military.” The KNA denies involvement. - The UN Office on Drugs and Crime estimates scam operations across East Asia, Southeast Asia and Oceania produced between $88.3 billion and $114.1 billion in losses in 2025, with people from at least 80 countries found inside scam compounds. The UNODC has warned that police in the region still struggle to trace scam proceeds on-chain. - Regional responses include Cambodia advancing its own bill that would impose life terms for compound bosses. U.S. prosecutors this month seized about $25 million in crypto tied to scams routed through the region. What it means for crypto and enforcement The new Myanmar law explicitly names “digital currency scams” among the offenses that can trigger life imprisonment, and it creates the harshest penalties where coercion leads to death. But the move highlights a broader enforcement problem: even as governments legislate tougher sentences and carry out asset seizures, tracing and recovering crypto-linked proceeds across borders remains technically and legally difficult — a challenge UN agencies and prosecutors continue to flag. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news