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
Ironwood Hard Fork Seals Zcash's Orchard Pool, Trapping Any Potential Counterfeit ZEC
Zcash will activate the Ironwood hard fork on July 28 to “seal” the problematic Orchard shielded pool and close a window of uncertainty created by a recently discovered cryptographic bug. What’s happening - Ironwood (NU6.3) is scheduled to activate at block 3,428,143 on July 28. The upgrade retires the current Orchard pool and brings in a new shielded pool built from the corrected cryptographic circuit. - Rather than trying to identify or freeze individual coins, the upgrade effectively locks the old Orchard pool and limits how much ZEC can leave it using a “turnstile” mechanism that prevents more ZEC exiting the pool than legitimately entered. Why this matters - A security researcher, Taylor Hornby, discovered the Orchard flaw on May 29. The bug could, in theory, have allowed an attacker to create counterfeit ZEC inside Orchard without leaving an obvious public trace. - Zcash developers patched the vulnerability and temporarily disabled Orchard, then restored it via the NU6.2 hard fork with corrected cryptography. The team says exploitation is “unlikely,” but because Orchard transactions are private, users cannot independently prove that no counterfeit ZEC was ever created. - Ironwood does not attempt to retroactively detect or remove any potential counterfeit coins. Instead, it addresses the unresolved supply-question by trapping any hypothetical excess value inside the retired Orchard pool and limiting what may flow into broader circulation. Practical effects for users and operators - Ordinary users do not need to take immediate action before the fork. However, wallets, exchanges and other providers may temporarily suspend deposits, withdrawals or related services while they update software. - After activation, funds cannot be sent or received inside the old Orchard pool. They can only leave via the turnstile; moving funds into the new pool will require wallets to add migration support. Wallets that don’t implement the required tools may show funds as temporarily unavailable. - Node operators can verify that circulating ZEC does not exceed the network’s monetary rules once the new pool is in place. Broader follow-up work - The Orchard incident spurred wider security work across the Zcash ecosystem. An AI-assisted review using Anthropic’s Mythos system found no additional serious vulnerabilities after the original disclosure. - Developers are pursuing independent audits and formal verification of the updated cryptographic system to reduce the risk of future hidden counterfeiting flaws and to give users stronger ways to verify supply rules. Summary Ironwood is a defensive, forward-looking upgrade: it doesn’t prove whether the bug was previously exploited, but it prevents any hypothetical counterfeit ZEC from escaping the sealed Orchard pool and entering wider circulation. Zcash users and service providers should watch for provider-specific guidance and prepare for temporary service interruptions as the network and ecosystem complete the migration. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
FTX to Send Nearly $900M to Creditors on July 31 — Small Claims to Receive 120%
FTX will send nearly $900 million to creditors on July 31 as the bankrupt exchange pushes forward with its recovery plan — even as efforts to win clemency for former CEO Sam Bankman‑Fried lose political traction. What’s happening - The July 31 distribution is the fifth round under the court‑approved plan and will go to creditors in the Convenience and Non‑Convenience classes who completed required steps before the June 16 record date. - Payments will be routed through approved providers BitGo, Kraken or Payoneer, and recipients should see funds arrive one to three business days after the distribution begins. - This round brings total payouts since the November 2022 Chapter 11 filing to roughly $10 billion. Who gets what - Small convenience claims (allowed claims under $50,000) that have not yet been paid are set to receive 120% of their allowed claim value under the recovery plan. - Larger claims (> $50,000) will receive a smaller percentage in this round — roughly a 9% payment this cycle — bringing cumulative recoveries for those creditors to about 103–105%. - FTX says future distribution dates will depend on claim approvals and eligibility, and creditors must complete verification steps and use an approved distribution provider to receive funds. Background and controversies - The repayment program has been funded through recovered cash, investments and asset sales undertaken by the estate during bankruptcy proceedings. - Some sales have drawn criticism after assets later soared in value. For example, the estate sold a 5% stake in Anysphere (developer of Cursor) for $200,000 in 2023; that stake was later valued at roughly $3 billion if a reported $60 billion valuation is accurate, prompting questions from creditors about timing and valuation of sales. Ongoing litigation and settlements - Legal fallout from FTX’s collapse continues. In May, law firm Fenwick & West agreed to pay $54 million to settle claims by former FTX customers alleging it helped structure arrangements that allowed transfers of customer funds without adequate safeguards. Fenwick denied wrongdoing; the settlement requires court approval. - Multiple lawsuits involving former executives, advisers and counterparties remain active. Sam Bankman‑Fried status and clemency push - Former CEO Sam Bankman‑Fried is serving a 25‑year sentence after a jury convicted him on fraud and conspiracy charges tied to FTX’s collapse. - In June a federal appeals court upheld his conviction and sentence, rejecting arguments about evidence restrictions at trial. - Bankman‑Fried has sought a presidential pardon, but momentum for clemency has waned: the U.S. Senate unanimously adopted a nonbinding resolution opposing a pardon. The resolution cannot block a presidential pardon, but it publicly records Senate opposition. Bottom line The $900 million July distribution keeps the long, complex repayment process moving forward nearly four years after FTX’s collapse. Creditors who qualify for this round must ensure their claims are approved and that they’ve completed verification through an approved provider to receive funds. Meanwhile, asset sales, settlements and ongoing litigation continue to shape the estate’s recovery and how much creditors ultimately recover. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Robinhood Defends Trading, Helps Run US 'Trump Accounts' and Expands into Prediction Markets
Headline: Robinhood doubles down on investing—not “gambling”—as it helps run U.S. “Trump Accounts” and pushes into prediction markets and tokenization Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev is defending trading as a form of market participation—not mere gambling—while steering the firm into new territory with a U.S. government partnership and an expanding product slate that reaches into crypto and tokenized assets. What’s new: government-backed kids’ accounts - Robinhood is working with the U.S. government to operate the newly announced “Trump Accounts,” tax-deferred investment accounts for children born between 2025 and 2028. Each eligible child can receive a $1,000 government contribution, and families can make additional deposits once accounts are activated. The company helped build the app that will manage the program, pitching it as a way to introduce younger people to long-term investing (NYT). Tenev on trading vs. gambling - In an interview with The New York Times, Tenev pushed back on critics who label Robinhood’s products as encouraging gambling among younger investors. He argued that speculation is inherent to markets—buyers and sellers are making predictions about future prices when allocating capital—and that trading should not be conflated automatically with betting. Why it matters for crypto and prediction markets - The debate has intensified as Robinhood expands into prediction markets and tokenized assets. Research cited by crypto.news (Bernstein) forecasts prediction-market revenue jumping to about $586 million in 2026 from roughly $150 million in 2025, highlighting how quickly that business could scale—and why regulators and observers are scrutinizing the line between regulated trading, event contracts, and betting. A broader strategy: beyond commission-free trading - Robinhood is clearly aiming to move past its meme-stock reputation from the 2021 GameStop era and build a broader financial platform. Recent moves include: - Launching Robinhood Chain on July 1, an Ethereum layer-2 focused on tokenized real-world assets. - Gaining approval for Robinhood Securities to act as an IPO underwriter. These steps give the firm roles in trading, blockchain infrastructure and capital markets as it pursues a wider product ecosystem. Tenev’s stake and insider sales - Tenev told NYT that more than 90% of his personal net worth remains invested in Robinhood shares, underscoring his long-term commitment. Public filings show he sold 375,000 shares on July 6 under a Rule 10b5-1 plan adopted in September 2025, and still holds more than 48.2 million Class B shares. Bottom line - Robinhood is pivoting from a pandemic-era retail-trading darling into a diversified financial platform that mixes retail brokerage, prediction markets, tokenization and even government-backed savings accounts. That growth path promises new revenue streams but also raises fresh regulatory and reputational questions—especially as the company courts younger investors and expands into areas where the line between trading and betting can blur. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
France Orders ISPs to Block Polymarket, Labels Crypto Prediction Platform Illegal
France has escalated its crackdown on Polymarket, ordering internet service providers to block access to the crypto-native prediction market after finding users had bypassed earlier restrictions. What happened - On July 16, France’s gambling regulator, the Autorité nationale des jeux (ANJ), directed ISPs to block Polymarket, saying the platform’s prediction markets amount to gambling services that are not authorized under French law. The ANJ has been monitoring Polymarket since November 2024. - The regulator said Polymarket’s homepage continued to show live odds and that French traffic to the site kept rising despite previous geoblocking. In June 2026 the ANJ logged 578,751 visits and 205,057 unique visitors from France. - The ANJ previously used administrative powers to block 1,290 URLs in 2025, but now has moved from restricting transactions to ordering full access blocks after users circumvented the earlier measures. Why the ANJ acted - Under French law the ANJ considers prediction market websites to be illegal gambling services when they operate without authorization. The regulator warned that promoting an unauthorized gambling platform — or publicly sharing odds/payout ratios to advertise it — can draw fines of up to €100,000. - The ANJ also flagged operational and integrity concerns: some event markets “appeared to be rigged” and weather sensors used to settle certain markets “may have been hacked.” Those findings prompted French prosecutors to open a cybercrime investigation on May 4, assigned to the Office for Combating Cybercrime. - Regulators said Polymarket’s services available to French and EU users lacked adequate user identification and location checks, and that stronger identity/location verification would be needed to stop access by people in France. Wider regulatory and academic pressure - France is not alone. The Czech Republic recently ordered ISPs to block Polymarket after classifying it as an unauthorized gambling service. - European regulators are split on how to treat prediction markets: some view them as gambling, others are evaluating whether certain contracts qualify as securities or derivatives. The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has indicated that some event-based contracts could be financial instruments under MiFID II, which would expose them to additional rules and, potentially, existing restrictions on binary options offered to retail traders. - Academic work has also raised integrity questions. A Stanford-led study examined five-minute Bitcoin prediction markets and found potential incentives for settlement-price manipulation, estimating roughly $1.28 million shifted from regular traders to more sophisticated participants. Legal and security headaches beyond Europe - In the United States Polymarket and other prediction market operators have faced legal challenges: Kentucky sued several platforms, including Polymarket and Kalshi, accusing them of offering sports betting without state licenses. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) later challenged state-level intervention — suing Kentucky in a broader fight over who has authority to regulate event contracts. - Polymarket has also dealt with security incidents. A frontend phishing attack resulted in about $3.1 million in losses across 11 wallets; affected users were slated to receive refunds. What’s next - The ANJ said it will continue monitoring Polymarket and any measures the platform introduces to verify user identities and locations. The move to block access in France underscores a growing and uneven regulatory landscape for prediction markets: operators now face a mix of gambling rules, financial regulation, criminal probes and security scrutiny across jurisdictions. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Spreadefi Appears Legit: Public Records Show Transparency, But DeFi Risks Remain
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only. This content is provided by a third party. Neither crypto.news nor the author of this article endorses any product mentioned on this page. Users should conduct their own research before taking any action related to the company. As DeFi matures, investors have grown increasingly wary. After a string of high-profile collapses and scams, new projects get extra scrutiny: is this team building real infrastructure, or just chasing deposits? Spreadefi, a platform that offers staking in liquidity pools and a suite of DeFi services, is one of the projects currently under the microscope. Here’s a clear-eyed look at what the public record shows — and what it doesn’t. What Spreadefi does Spreadefi positions itself as a liquidity-focused DeFi platform. Users deposit crypto assets into pooled contracts that provide liquidity to decentralized exchanges, and participants earn rewards drawn from fees and protocol mechanics. The platform also offers an in-ecosystem swap service, enabling direct token exchanges, and is developing APIs to let third parties integrate its infrastructure. Spreadefi emphasizes automated operations, cross-chain support, and risk management tools designed to welcome both experienced DeFi users and newcomers. Signs that point toward legitimacy Several factors support the case that Spreadefi is more than a throwaway project: - Legal transparency: The company reportedly operates through an officially registered U.S. entity, a detail that can be checked via public registries. While registration alone isn’t a guarantee of safety, many outright fraudulent schemes avoid providing verifiable corporate information. - Product breadth: Spreadefi is building an ecosystem — liquidity pools, a swap service, and developer-facing APIs — rather than relying on a single revenue source. Expanding product lines and tooling often indicate a long-term development focus. - Ongoing development and communication: The team publishes regular updates on its official blog, participates in industry events, and has announced improvements to liquidity allocation algorithms, mobile UX, platform performance, and internal security architecture. Sustained public visibility and product updates are typically inconsistent with projects that steal funds and vanish. What critics and searches turn up A targeted search for red flags — looking through publications, reviews, and online discussions — did not unearth credible, confirmed accusations of fraud against Spreadefi. There are ordinary user questions and healthy skepticism about DeFi risks, but no mass complaints, documented rug pulls, or verified scams tied to the project. That relative calm in the information landscape is notable compared with many new crypto ventures. Risks that remain No online profile is risk-free. Even legitimate DeFi platforms face industry-wide hazards, including: - Smart contract vulnerabilities and bugs - Market volatility and impermanent loss in liquidity pools - Liquidity risk during stress events - Regulatory and compliance uncertainty - Operational risks tied to centralized components or key personnel These are general DeFi risks and do not single out Spreadefi as fraudulent; they do, however, underline why careful due diligence matters. Bottom line Based on currently available public information, there are no objective grounds to label Spreadefi a scam. Evidence such as corporate registration, an expanding product set, public development activity, and a lack of verified accusations all point toward a project operating openly and with longer-term ambitions. That said, DeFi inherently carries market, technical, and regulatory risks — so investors should read the documentation, evaluate the smart contracts and security audits (if available), and do their own research before committing funds. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
U.S. Imposes 25% Tariff Over Pix Dispute; Stablecoins Rise in Brazil
The United States has escalated a trade dispute with Brazil by naming the country’s Pix instant-payment system among practices it calls unfair — and as part of that move, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced a 25% tariff on most Brazilian imports. The tariff, following a year-long Section 301 probe that examined digital trade, electronic payments and related issues, was announced on July 15 and is scheduled to take effect on July 22, with some product exemptions. While the USTR did not slap a tariff directly on Pix, it singled out electronic-payment policies that it says “unfairly disadvantaged” U.S. payment firms and used those practices to justify duties on Brazilian goods. Why Pix matters Launched by Brazil’s central bank in 2020, Pix quickly became the backbone of everyday payments. In 2024 the system processed 63 billion transactions totaling BRL 26.4 trillion, sharply increasing competition with card networks and other payment services. That ubiquity is central to Washington’s complaint: USTR argues Brazil’s policy environment has favored Pix in ways that hurt U.S. electronic-payment providers. Stablecoins and dollar demand At the same time, dollar-backed stablecoins are taking up a large share of Brazil’s crypto activity — creating a real-world split between domestic payment policy and consumer demand for digital dollars. Brazil’s central bank has said stablecoins account for roughly 90% of reported crypto flows, with users frequently turning to dollar-linked tokens for payments and value transfer. The two worlds are already connecting. In June, Tether-backed Oobit added Pix support, enabling users to deposit reais, hold USDT and pay via Pix keys or QR codes — effectively wrapping dollar-pegged stablecoins in a familiar payments interface. Across the region, demand for digital dollars is visible on exchanges too: data reported by crypto.news shows dollar-pegged tokens made up 40% of crypto purchases on Bitso in 2025, outpacing Bitcoin. Regulatory separation: private crypto vs official settlement Brazilian regulators are moving to draw clearer lines between private crypto use and regulated financial plumbing. Resolution BCB No. 561 bars virtual assets from settling payments inside regulated electronic foreign-exchange (eFX) channels. The rule does not ban stablecoins or crypto transfers outright; rather, it prevents supervised eFX providers from using digital assets to settle covered cross-border payments, keeping those flows within approved FX channels. In practice, that separates stablecoin activity — which can still flow through exchanges, wallets and other services — from official foreign-exchange settlement. Geopolitics and payments The U.S. action comes after Brazil promoted alternative settlement ideas during its 2025 BRICS presidency, where officials discussed blockchain payments while denying any plan to create a BRICS common currency to replace the dollar. Washington’s tariff strategy frames Pix within a broader trade case rather than as a narrow crypto issue, but the simultaneous growth of dollar-backed stablecoins shows continued market demand for digital dollars on blockchain rails. What this means - For consumers and fintechs: Pix remains dominant for domestic instant payments, but stablecoins are increasingly used for dollar-denominated transfers and payments, often via interfaces that bridge the two systems. - For regulated providers: Brazil’s rules restrict use of crypto in supervised cross-border FX settlement, pushing official flows back into conventional FX channels. - For trade and geopolitics: The 25% tariff ramps up pressure on Brazil and signals U.S. willingness to treat certain domestic payment policies as trade barriers — potentially complicating fintech partnerships and cross-border payment innovation. The payment landscape in Brazil is therefore moving in multiple directions simultaneously: a powerful domestic instant-pay network, tighter controls on where crypto can touch official FX rails, and growing grassroots demand for dollar-linked stablecoins that keep finding ways to plug into daily payments. The new tariff adds another layer of pressure on this evolving ecosystem. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news