Today's Cryptocurrency Prices by Market Caps
The global cryptocurrency market cap today i $2.39T
Market Cap
$2.39T
24h Trading Volume
$51.42B
BTC Dominance
56.33%
|
#
|
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
Tesla Q1 Delivery Miss Drops Shares 5.4% — Crypto Traders Brace for Musk-Driven Volatility
Tesla shares slid 5.4% Thursday after the EV maker reported Q1 2026 deliveries that missed Wall Street expectations and exposed fresh demand worries — a development crypto traders used to Musk-driven volatility will want to watch. Key figures - Deliveries: 358,023 vehicles (Street consensus ~365,645) — about 7,600 units below estimates. - Production: 408,386 vehicles, leaving an inventory surplus of more than 50,000 units. - Energy storage deployments: 8.8 GWh, down 38% from Q4 2025’s record 14.2 GWh. Why it matters The shortfall appears driven by demand, not manufacturing. The expiration of the $7,500 federal EV tax credit at the end of 2025 pushed many buyers into Q4, leaving Q1 to absorb the chill. Executives also quietly wound down Model S and X production during the quarter, converting those lines to build Optimus robots — a move that helped free up capacity but may have trimmed higher-margin vehicle output. Analysts have also flagged CEO Elon Musk’s increasingly polarizing public presence as a factor weighing on sales in some Western markets. Street reaction Goldman Sachs’ Mark Delaney cut his price target to $375 from $405 but kept a Hold rating, noting the tax-credit pull-forward as the main reason for weaker U.S. year-over-year sales while adding some Model S/X demand held up near the end of their runs. Truist also trimmed its target; Truist Securities’ William Stein bluntly said deliveries and energy storage deployments “lagged the Street’s and Truist’s estimates,” and that the company offered no fresh updates on its higher-profile AI projects or new vehicles. Why AI and FSD now matter more Stein and other analysts argue investors should focus less on the headline auto numbers and more on Tesla’s AI roadmap — especially Full Self-Driving (FSD). For many on Wall Street, Tesla’s AI initiatives are the real lever for long-term cash generation and share-performance upside, not quarterly vehicle counts. Where the Street stands Among 31 analysts covering Tesla, 13 remain bullish, 11 are neutral, and 7 recommend selling. The average price target sits at $394.34 — roughly 9.4% above Thursday’s close — suggesting modest upside but no stampede to buy. What’s next Tesla’s Q1 earnings on April 22 will be the next inflection point. Expect delivery figures to be discussed, but many investors will be watching for substantive updates on FSD, other AI projects, and product roadmaps — the items analysts say will steer Tesla’s long-term trajectory, and by extension, the market ripples that sometimes spill into crypto and broader risk assets. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Saylor: Bitcoin's Halving Cycle Is Dead — Institutional Capital, Not Miners, Now Drives Price
Michael Saylor says the Bitcoin four-year halving cycle is over Michael Saylor, longtime Bitcoin advocate and MicroStrategy CEO, says the familiar four-year rhythm tied to halving events no longer dictates Bitcoin’s price trajectory. In his view, the market has moved into a new phase where capital flows, institutional demand and credit structures — not miner reward cuts — are the primary drivers of price. For years traders and analysts linked Bitcoin’s boom-and-bust cycles to scheduled halvings, which reduce miner rewards and were widely seen as the supply-side catalyst for rallies. Saylor argues that framework “is dead,” and that Bitcoin’s next chapter will be shaped by how money enters the asset class through banks, funds and other financial institutions. “Price is now driven by capital flows,” he wrote, adding that bank and digital credit systems will play a growing role in Bitcoin’s evolution. That perspective shifts attention away from pure supply shocks toward broader financial access and institutional adoption — including how corporations and funds use Bitcoin for treasury and reserves management. Saylor’s comments come as major firms continue to roll out Bitcoin-focused products and services and as regulated avenues for institutional participation expand. Those developments, he says, have changed Bitcoin’s role on the world stage and weakened the predictive power of halving-based cycle models. The discussion also spotlighted MicroStrategy’s strategy. Market commentator Adam Livingston argued that Saylor and MicroStrategy have effectively “won the game” of institutional Bitcoin adoption through early and aggressive accumulation — a view reflecting the company’s large holdings and long-running treasury approach. Saylor’s remarks add fuel to an ongoing debate across the crypto world: will Bitcoin’s price be governed more by institutional capital and credit dynamics than by the old halving-driven cycle? As institutional channels deepen, that question is likely to remain central to market analysis. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Satoshi’s Alleged "Birthday" Turns 51 — Bitcoin Community Notes April 5, 1975
Headline: Bitcoin community notes Satoshi Nakamoto’s “birthday” — 51 years since April 5, 1975 listing Each April 5 the crypto world takes a moment to note a small, persistent mystery: the date listed on the P2P Foundation profile for Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. That profile gives a birthdate of April 5, 1975 — meaning Satoshi would turn 51 on April 5, 2026 — but there is no public proof this reflects an actual birthday. Satoshi Nakamoto is the name attached to the person or group that authored Bitcoin’s white paper, released its original software, and launched the network. Despite Bitcoin’s global reach, verified facts about its founder remain scarce, so even a single date on an old profile draws attention and debate each year. The April 5 entry has attracted extra scrutiny because some community members see possible symbolism in the choice. April 5 coincides with the anniversary of Executive Order 6102 (the 1933 U.S. order that restricted private gold ownership), and the listed birth year, 1975, falls around the time when private gold ownership became legal again in the United States. That overlap has led some to speculate the date might be intentional symbolism rather than a literal birthday — but there is no direct evidence to confirm that. Satoshi’s public silence only deepens the intrigue. The last known public forum post was on Dec. 13, 2010, and the final known private messages to Bitcoin developers came in 2011, when Satoshi wrote that Bitcoin was in “good hands.” Since then, no verified public communication has surfaced. Whether April 5, 1975 is a genuine birthdate or a symbolic nod, the annual recognition underscores the enduring mystery and influence of the figure — or figures — behind Bitcoin’s creation. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Anthropic Launches AnthroPAC Amid Pentagon Clash and $5B Compute Buildout - A Web3 Red Flag
Anthropic is moving from research lab to political player — and it’s doing so as its clash with the Pentagon and a major computing buildout intensify. What happened - On April 3 Anthropic filed a statement of organization with the Federal Election Commission to create “AnthroPAC,” an employee-funded political action committee set up as a “separate segregated fund.” - The PAC is expected to support candidates from both major parties. Contributions will come from voluntary employee donations and are subject to federal disclosure rules and contribution limits. - Anthropic has already channeled political influence this cycle through a $20 million contribution to Public First Action, a group that backs AI safety initiatives. Why it matters - AnthroPAC gives Anthropic a direct, transparent vehicle to influence lawmakers shaping AI policy at a moment when Washington is racing to define regulation and oversight for advanced models. - The timing links political engagement to a broader corporate strategy: Anthropic is simultaneously fighting a high-profile legal battle with the U.S. Department of Defense and scaling up its compute footprint. Ongoing legal dispute - Anthropic says the Pentagon labeled it a “supply chain risk” after the company opposed using its systems for autonomous weapons and mass surveillance. In late March, a federal judge in California temporarily blocked that Pentagon action; the Trump administration has appealed to the Ninth Circuit. Infrastructure expansion - At the same time, reports say Google will help finance a Texas data center project for Anthropic being developed with Nexus Data Centers. The first phase could top $5 billion, underscoring surging demand for AI compute capacity. Implications for crypto and web3 audiences - The story highlights two trends relevant to crypto and decentralized-tech communities: (1) technology companies are increasingly participating directly in politics to shape rules that will affect model development, surveillance, and defense uses; (2) AI’s compute hunger is driving massive centralized infrastructure investments with major cloud providers and data-center partners at the center. - For crypto projects that prize decentralization, these dynamics raise questions about who controls the hardware, the rules, and the policy levers for tomorrow’s AI-enabled services — and how coordinated industry advocacy (through PACs or coalitions) could influence those outcomes. Bottom line Anthropic’s AnthroPAC signals the company’s intent to be a louder voice in the policy fight around AI at the same time it defends its technology choices in court and builds out large-scale compute capacity. For observers in crypto and beyond, it’s a reminder that debates over governance, infrastructure centralization, and industry influence are converging as AI moves deeper into public policy and commercial deployment. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Bitcoin Stalls at $66K as Untested Liquidity Below Raises Risk of Slow Slide
Bitcoin is stalling around $66,000, trading in a tight, choppy range as upward momentum wanes. Every attempt to push higher has produced weaker follow-through, and beneath the surface liquidity appears stacked below current prices — a setup that favors a move lower unless buyers return with conviction. Analyst Columbus, in an update alongside the MMT heatmap, said the market structure hasn’t materially changed: BTC is still chopping around the $66k area. But he flagged a subtle shift — upside reactions are shortening and losing strength — a pattern that often precedes a larger directional expansion once the market decides its next move. Crucially, Columbus notes that liquidity sitting beneath the current price remains untouched. The longer Bitcoin hovers above those zones without clearing them, the greater the risk it will be pulled down to capture that liquidity. While an upside break is still possible, current price action suggests buyers are stepping back and allowing the market to slowly lose ground. Rather than an abrupt crash, Columbus warns the next move could be a gradual drift lower, with Bitcoin sliding into deeper liquidity pockets and setting up a more sustained downside phase. Crypto analyst Cryptomorphic echoes the caution. Over the past day BTC has largely consolidated, hovering inside a narrow range and signaling indecision. While the coin is still holding the lower support of its current structure, repeated tests without strong bounces are showing emerging weakness. If that support breaks, targeting liquidity below could trigger a sharp downside move as momentum accelerates in the absence of robust buying interest. Given how pivotal this area is, how price reacts here will be critical — either a temporary hold or confirmation of a deeper breakdown. Key takeaways: - BTC is stuck around $66,000 with fading upside momentum. - Liquidity sits under current prices and remains untested — a potential magnet for price. - Analysts warn of a slow drift lower into deeper liquidity, though an upside breakout is still possible. - Watch price behavior at the lower support level: a breakdown could spark a faster decline. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Drift: $270M Heist Was Six‑Month North Korean Intelligence Operation Targeting Multisig
Drift says $270M heist was a six‑month North Korean intelligence operation Drift Protocol says the $270 million drain of its vaults on April 1 was the culmination of a six‑month intelligence operation by a North Korea–linked group, according to a detailed incident update published by the team. The report lays out a slow, deliberate campaign of relationship‑building, in‑person meetings, technical infiltration and ultimately the theft of pre‑signed multisig transactions. What happened — timeline at a glance - Fall 2025: Attackers first made contact at a major crypto conference, posing as a quantitative trading firm looking to integrate with Drift. They presented verifiable professional backgrounds, technical fluency and a clear understanding of the protocol. - Fall 2025–Spring 2026: A Telegram group and months of standard onboarding conversations followed, including discussions of trading strategies and vault integrations. - Dec 2025–Jan 2026: The group onboarded an Ecosystem Vault, held multiple working sessions with Drift contributors, deposited more than $1 million of their own capital and established an operational presence inside the ecosystem. - Feb–Mar 2026: Drift contributors met members of the group face‑to‑face at several industry conferences across different countries. - April 1, 2026: Dormant, pre‑signed multisig transactions were executed, enabling a durable‑nonce style exploit that drained $270 million in under a minute. How they breached defenses Drift says the compromise used two main vectors: 1) A TestFlight app the attackers presented as a wallet product. TestFlight distributes pre‑release iOS apps and bypasses App Store review, making it an attractive channel for a convincing malicious client. 2) A repository compromise rooted in a widely‑flagged vulnerability in popular code editors (VSCode and Cursor). The flaw allowed silent arbitrary code execution merely by opening a file or folder in the editor — no prompts, warnings, or user action required. Once devices used by trusted contributors were compromised, attackers were able to obtain the multisig approvals needed to execute the stored transactions. Those pre‑signed transactions had been sitting dormant for more than a week before the April 1 execution that emptied the vaults. Attribution: UNC4736 (AppleJeus / Citrine Sleet) Drift attributes the operation to UNC4736 — a group tracked under names such as AppleJeus and Citrine Sleet — based on on‑chain fund flows that trace back to the Radiant Capital attackers and operational overlaps with known DPRK‑linked personas. Drift notes the people who met contributors in person were not North Korean nationals; high‑level DPRK actors are known to use third‑party intermediaries with fully constructed identities and employment histories to pass due diligence. Why this matters for DeFi security Drift’s update raises uncomfortable questions for an industry that relies heavily on multisig governance: - The attackers invested months and more than $1 million to build trust, meet teams in person, contribute real capital and sit dormant until execution — a model specifically designed to defeat superficial due diligence. - The vector through everyday developer tools and a TestFlight app shows how small user vectors — device compromise, developer IDEs, pre‑release apps — can cascade into catastrophic protocol losses. - Drift urges protocols to audit access controls, treat every device that can sign multisig approvals as a potential target, and re‑examine assumptions about what onboarding and on‑chain signals of legitimacy actually mean. In short: if adversaries are willing to run costly, patient intelligence campaigns that blend real capital, in‑person contact and deep technical subterfuge, DeFi teams must assume trusted access equals a threat vector and harden both human and technical attack surfaces accordingly. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news