Bitcoin’s derivatives signal caution, with the options skew hitting 20% as traders fear another wave of fund liquidations.
Bitcoin price recovered some of its Thursday losses, but it still struggles to match the gains of gold or tech stocks amid low leverage demand.
Bitcoin (BTC) has gained 17% since the $60,150 low on Friday, but derivatives metrics suggest caution as demand for upside price exposure near $70,000 remains constrained. Traders fear that the liquidations of $1.8 billion of leveraged bullish futures contracts in five days indicate that major hedge funds or market makers may have blown up.
Aggregate liquidations in Bitcoin futures contracts, USD. Source: CoinGlass
Unlike the Oct. 10, 2025, market collapse that culminated with a record $4.65 billion liquidation of Bitcoin futures, the recent price weakness has been marked by three consecutive weeks of downside pressure. Bulls have been adding positions from $70,000 to $90,000, as aggregate futures open interest increased despite forceful contract liquidations due to insufficient margins.
Bitcoin futures aggregate open interest, BTC. Source: CoinGlass
The aggregated Bitcoin futures open interest on major exchanges totaled 527,850 BTC on Friday, virtually flat from the prior week. Although the notional value of those contracts dropped to $35.8 billion from $44.3 billion, the 20% change perfectly reflects the 21% Bitcoin price decline in the seven-day period. Data indicates that bulls have been adding positions despite the steady price decline.
To better understand if whales and market makers have turned bullish, one should assess the BTC futures basis rate, which measures the price difference relative to regular spot contracts. Under neutral circumstances, the premium should range from 5% to 10% annualized to compensate for the longer settlement period.
The BTC futures basis rate dropped to 2% on Friday, the lowest level in more than a year. The lack of demand for bullish leverage is somewhat expected, but bulls will take longer than users to regain confidence even as Bitcoin price breaks above $70,000, especially considering that BTC is still 44% below its all-time high.
Bitcoin derivatives metrics signal extreme fear
Traders’ lack of conviction in Bitcoin is also evident in the BTC options markets. Excessive demand for put (sell) options is a strong indicator of bearishness, pushing the skew metric above 6%. Conversely, when fear of missing out kicks in, traders will pay a premium for call (buy) options, causing the skew metric to flip negative.
BTC two-month options skew (put-call) at Deribit. Source: laevitas.ch
The BTC options skew metric reached 20% on Friday, a level that rarely persists and typically represents market panic. For comparison, the skew indicator stood at 11% on Nov. 21, 2025, following a 28% price correction to $80,620 from the $111,177 peak reached 20 days earlier. Since there is no specific catalyst for the current downturn, fear and uncertainty have naturally intensified.
Traders are likely to continue speculating that a major market maker, exchange or hedge fund may have gone bankrupt, and this sentiment erodes conviction and implies a high probability of further price downside. Consequently, the odds of sustained bullish momentum remain low while BTC derivatives metrics continue to signal extreme fear.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision. While we strive to provide accurate and timely information, Cointelegraph does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information in this article. This article may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Cointelegraph will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your reliance on this information.
Political action committees (PACs) representing the interests of the crypto industry have already secured millions of dollars in funding as the US heads toward its midterm elections.
Super PACs are the uber-rich, no-limits, non-disclosure counterparts to crypto PACs. Last year, the industry spent at least $245 million in campaign contributions alone.
The main super PAC funded by the cryptocurrency industry, Fairshake, raised some $133 million in 2025, bringing its total cash on hand up to over $190 million. Venture capital firm a16z contributed an initial $24 million, while Coinbase and Ripple each donated $25 million.
This influx of cash has alarmed activist and election reform groups. Saurav Ghosh, director of the Campaign Legal Center — a legal center concentrated on voting rights, fair districting and campaign finance reform — told Cointelegraph:
“This kind of influence buying ultimately undermines the democratic process by marginalizing everyday Americans, ensuring that their voices and interests take a backseat to the crypto industry’s deregulatory desires.”
Bipartisan support ensures crypto lobby’s success
The US crypto industry’s main goal is to pass a large framework law, the CLARITY Act, which passed in the House of Representatives this summer and moved on to the Senate. The bill still hasn’t managed to satisfy the crypto industry, particularly Coinbase, nor the ethics and oversight concerns of Senate Democrats.
Now, the CLARITY Act is in limbo, and Congress is shifting its attention to the 2026 midterm elections. For nearly 80 years, the president’s party has almost always lost the midterms, the federal elections in the off-year between presidential elections. This is particularly important for the crypto industry, which enjoys more full-throated support among the Republican Party. Take, for example, the roll call for the Senate’s vote on the GENIUS Act: Nearly twice as many Democrats voted against the motion compared to those in support of it.
Some in the crypto space have taken this to mean they need to take a partisan stance. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, founders of the crypto exchange Gemini, have poured millions into the conservative PAC Digital Freedom Fund, which aims to boost pro-crypto and pro-Trump candidates.
Representative Sam Liccardo, a crypto-friendly Democrat, told Politico in October 2025, “I don’t think anybody in this town would recommend that an industry put their eggs in one party’s basket.”
One major lobby, Fairshake, has shown it’s more than willing to support Democrats, so long as they are sufficiently pro-crypto. The Super PAC actually spent more money in support of Democrats than it did Republicans from 2023 to 2024, according to Open Secrets.
Whether it be among Republicans or Democrats, the crypto industry’s political strategy has changed significantly both in how much and where it spends its dollars.
How did we get here?
Crypto made headlines in 2024 for donating nearly a quarter of a billion dollars to different political campaigns and super PACs — the largest contribution of any single industry.
But this wasn’t crypto’s first step in the political arena. During the crypto bull run of 2020-2021, crypto companies made massive ad buys. Celebrities like Matt Damon were advertising crypto investment platforms. Now-convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried slapped the name of his now-defunct crypto exchange, FTX, onto the home of the Miami Heat basketball team.
At the same time, crypto increased its lobbying efforts in Washington. Major platforms like Coinbase and fintech developers like Ripple padded their budgets as the industry gained visibility.
Coinbase raised spending from $1.5 million in 2020 to $3.9 million in 2021. Ripple more than tripled the amount it spent on lobbying over the same period, spending $330,000 in 2020 and more than $1.1 million in 2021.
One major donor from the crypto space was Bankman-Fried. He made more than $100 million in political campaign contributions in the 2022 midterms. “He leveraged this influence, in turn, to lobby Congress and regulatory agencies to support legislation and regulation he believed would make it easier for FTX to continue to accept customer deposits and grow,” federal prosecutors said in a later indictment.
By Bankman-Fried’s own admission, he supported campaigns on both sides of the aisle, though he found Republicans “far more reasonable” on crypto.
The crypto market crashed soon after. FTX went bust, the Terra stablecoin system collapsed, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the US’ main finance regulator under then-Chair Gary Gensler, opened enforcement actions against many crypto companies operating in the US.
American Airlines Arena was renamed FTX Arena in 2021 and has since been changed to Kaseya Center. Source: RoofLogos
In 2023, the presidential election cycle began. Trump ran against ex-Vice President Kamala Harris. Crypto, for the first time, was on the presidential platform. Trump visited a Bitcoin (BTC) conference and made promises of ending “regulation by enforcement.
Crypto poured money into the race through PACs and super PACs. For the 2024 selections, these were namely:
Fairshake raised a whopping $260 million from 2023 to 2024, at least $92 million of which came from Coinbase. It made $126 million in independent expenditures and transfers to affiliated committees.
Independent expenditures are expenditures “for a communication that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate and which is not made in coordination with any candidate or their campaign or political party,” per the FEC.
According to Follow the Crypto, the two other single-issue crypto PACs are affiliated with Fairshake, despite one being liberal and the other conservative. Defend American Jobs made $57 million in independent expenditures, and Protect Progress made $34.5 million over the same 2023-2024 period.
This vast amount of money entering PACs reflects a broader shift in how companies seek political influence.
“Super PACs are increasingly becoming in vogue for special interests who want to make their presence known in Washington,” Michael Beckel, research director of Issue One — a bipartisan political reform organization watching big money in politics — told Cointelegraph.
“Industry-aligned super PACs with huge bank accounts have made a huge splash and helped thwart new regulations on their business interests.”
Just a few years ago, “corporate influence operations focused more on lobbying and direct campaign contributions,” Beckel explained. “Now we’re seeing sector-specific super PACs with massive bank accounts.”
And it’s changing how laws are made in Washington.
Crypto lobby affects policy as Trump seeks to “nationalize” elections
Blockchain bigwigs now regularly visit Washington to meet with lawmakers and advise policymakers on how to regulate the industry.
Issue One vice president of advocacy Alix Fraser said, “The Trump administration is packed with tech industry insiders who have acted in the interest of their own companies — not the American people — to rig policy for their own profit.”
The degree to which the crypto industry is involved in the legislative process is no more apparent than with the market structure bill making its way through the Senate. Work on the bill stalled in mid-January after Coinbase withdrew its support.
The main point of contention is a provision that would outlaw one of Coinbase’s products: stablecoin yields for consumers. Banks are pushing to outlaw the practice, saying a flight of deposits from insured lenders could threaten financial stability. The crypto industry and Coinbase argue that the ban stifles innovation and is anti-competitive.
Earlier this week, the White House scheduled a closed-door summit for leaders from the crypto and banking industries to hash out their differences, but according to Reuters, no deal was made.
According to reporter Eleanor Terrett, Senate Democrats said that the talks were “constructive” and were optimistic about the chances of passing a bill. Reporter Sander Lutz said that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is “desperate” to get the bill finished, as Fairshake alone now has $193 million in its coffers.
“These payments help explain the crypto industry’s success in curtailing efforts to meaningfully regulate their business model, which is consistent with a well-established practice of wealthy corporate special interests using lobbying and political contributions to influence policy decisions,” Ghosh told Cointelegraph.
“This kind of influence buying ultimately undermines the democratic process by marginalizing everyday Americans, ensuring that their voices and interests take a backseat to the crypto industry’s deregulatory desires.”
Rick Claypool, research director at consumer rights advocacy group Public Citizen, told Cointelegraph that big money from lobbies like crypto pushes out the priorities of most voters from the agenda.
“This feeds cynicism — the sense that our elected officials prioritize the interests of wealthy donors over all other constituents — and erodes faith in our democratic institutions.”
The increased influence of monied interests in Washington comes at a time when election integrity itself is under threat. Trump has recently said Republicans should “nationalize” the midterm elections.
“The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over. We should take over the voting, the voting in at least many — 15 places … the Republicans ought to nationalize the voting,’” he said.
He added that he will only accept the results if they are “honest,” while claiming that there was widespread voter fraud in many American cities. Election experts have refuted the claims. House Speaker Mike Johnson has admitted that he himself has no evidence of his own claims of voter fraud.
Marc Elias, a partner at Elias Law Group, said that Trump “is not interested in following the Constitution. As we have seen before, he prefers to act by force.”
Crypto is set to increase its influence in Washington as the very elections themselves are at risk of tampering and interference from the highest levels of government.
Cointelegraph Features and Cointelegraph Magazine publish long-form journalism, analysis and narrative reporting produced by Cointelegraph’s in-house editorial team and selected external contributors with subject-matter expertise. All articles are edited and reviewed by Cointelegraph editors in line with our editorial standards. Contributions from external writers are commissioned for their experience, research or perspective and do not reflect the views of Cointelegraph as a company unless explicitly stated. Content published in Features and Magazine does not constitute financial, legal or investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals where appropriate. Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
Bitcoin Core developer Gloria Zhao has stepped down as a maintainer and revoked her Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) signing key, ending about six years as one of the project’s gatekeepers.
On Thursday, Zhao submitted her last pull request to the Bitcoin GitHub repository, removing her key from the trusted keys and withdrawing herself as one of the few maintainers able to update Bitcoin’s software.
Becoming the first known female maintainer in 2022, she focused on mempool policy and transaction relay: the rules and peer‑to‑peer logic that decide which transactions get into nodes’ waiting rooms and how quickly they propagate across the network.
She helped design and implement package relay (BIP 331) and TRUC (Topologically Restricted Until Confirmation, BIP 431), along with upgrades to replace‑by‑fee (RBF) and broader P2P behavior, making fee bumping more reliable and reducing censorship.
Zhao’s work was funded through Brink, where she became the organization’s first fellow in 2021, with her fellowship backed by the Human Rights Foundation’s Bitcoin Development Fund and Jack Dorsey’s Spiral (formerly Square Crypto), placing her among a small cohort of publicly supported, full‑time open‑source Bitcoin protocol engineers.
Beyond her technical contributions, Zhao mentored new contributors and co‑ran the Bitcoin Core PR Review Club, helping junior developers learn how to review complex changes and navigate Core’s conservative review culture.
Her resignation comes after more than a year of public disputes between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Knots, and the removal of OP_RETURN limits, a fight over whether Bitcoin’s default node software should make it harder to use block space for non‑monetary data.
In 2025, Zhao deleted her X account amid personal attacks during the OP_RETURN war, after a livestream in which a core developer questioned her credentials.
While some Bitcoin Core critics celebrated Zhao’s departure, others took a more somber tone.
“They bullied her and made her life as miserable as possible until she rage quit, and quite frankly, I think what they did to her was tragic,” said pseudonymous Bitcoiner Pledditor.
Pledditor added that it set a “terrible precedent” and called it, “sad and pathetic.
“Congratulations you finally did it. You bullied one of Bitcoin Core’s most prolific and consistently excellent maintainers until she gave up,” said Chris Seedor, co-founder and CEO at Bitcoin wallet backup company Seedor.
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
Privacy coins are just a step in a broader laundering pipeline after hacks. They serve as a temporary black box to disrupt traceability.
Hackers typically move funds through consolidation, obfuscation and chain hopping and only then introduce privacy layers before attempting to cash out.
Privacy coins are most useful immediately after a hack because they reduce onchain visibility, delay blacklisting and help break attribution links.
Enforcement actions against mixers and other laundering tools often shift illicit flows toward alternative routes, including privacy coins.
After crypto hacks occur, scammers often move stolen funds through privacy-focused cryptocurrencies. While this has created a perception of hackers preferring privacy coins, these assets function as a specialized “black box” within a larger laundering pipeline. To understand why privacy coins show up after hacks, you need to take into account the process of crypto laundering.
This article explores how funds move post-hack and what makes privacy coins so useful for scammers. It examines emerging laundering methods, limitations of privacy coins like Monero (XMR) and Zcash (ZEC) as laundering tools, legitimate uses of privacy technologies and why regulators need to balance innovation with the need to curb laundering.
How funds flow after a hack
Following a hack, scammers don’t usually send stolen assets directly to an exchange for immediate liquidation; instead, they follow a deliberate, multi-stage process to obscure the trail and slow down the inquiry:
Consolidation: Funds from multiple victim addresses are transferred to a smaller number of wallets.
Obfuscation: Assets are shuffled through chains of intermediary crypto wallets, often with the help of crypto mixers.
Chain-hopping: Funds are bridged or swapped to different blockchains, breaking continuity within any single network’s tracking tools.
Privacy layer: A portion of funds is converted into privacy-focused assets or routed through privacy-preserving protocols.
Cash-out: Assets are eventually exchanged for more liquid cryptocurrencies or fiat through centralized exchanges, over-the-counter (OTC) desks or peer-to-peer (P2P) channels.
Privacy coins usually enter the stage in steps four or five, blurring the traceability of lost funds even more after earlier steps have already complicated the onchain history.
Why privacy coins are attractive for scammers right after a hack
Privacy coins offer specific advantages right at the time when scammers are most vulnerable, immediately after the theft.
Reduced onchain visibility
Unlike transparent blockchains, where the sender and receiver and transaction amounts remain fully auditable, privacy-focused systems deliberately hide these details. Once funds move into such networks, standard blockchain analytics lose much of their efficacy.
In the aftermath of the theft, scammers try to delay identification or evade automated address blacklisting by exchanges and services. The sudden drop in visibility is particularly valuable in the critical days after theft when monitoring is most intense.
Breaking attribution chains
Scammers tend not to move directly from hacked assets into privacy coins. They typically use multiple techniques, swaps, cross-chain bridges and intermediary wallets before introducing a privacy layer.
This multi-step approach makes it significantly harder to connect the final output back to the original hack. Privacy coins act more as a strategic firebreak in the attribution process than as a standalone laundering tool.
Negotiating power in OTC and P2P markets
Many laundering paths involve informal OTC brokers or P2P traders who operate outside extensively regulated exchanges.
Using privacy-enhanced assets reduces the information counterparties have about the funds’ origin. This can simplify negotiations, lower the perceived risk of mid-transaction freezes and improve the attacker’s leverage in less transparent markets.
Did you know? Several early ransomware groups originally demanded payment in Bitcoin (BTC) but later switched to privacy coins only after exchanges began cooperating more closely with law enforcement on address blacklisting.
The mixer squeeze and evolving methods of laundering
One reason privacy coins appear more frequently in specific time frames is enforcement pressure on other laundering tools. When law enforcement targets particular mixers, bridges or high-risk exchanges, illicit funds simply move to other channels. This shift results in the diversification of laundering routes across various blockchains, swapping platforms and privacy-focused networks.
When scammers perceive one laundering route as risky, alternative routes experience higher volumes. Privacy coins gain from this dynamic, as they offer inherent transaction obfuscation, independent of third-party services.
Limitations of privacy coins as a laundering tool
Privacy features notwithstanding, most large-scale hacks still involve extensive use of BTC, Ether (ETH) and stablecoins at later stages. The reason is straightforward: Liquidity and exit options are important.
Privacy coins generally exhibit:
These factors complicate the conversion of substantial amounts of crypto to fiat currency without drawing scrutiny. Therefore, scammers use privacy coins briefly before reverting to more liquid assets prior to final withdrawal.
Successful laundering involves integration of privacy-enhancing tools with high-liquidity assets, tailored to each phase of the process.
Did you know? Some darknet marketplaces now list prices in Monero by default, even if they still accept Bitcoin, because vendors prefer not to reveal their income patterns or customer volume.
Behavioral trends in asset laundering
While tactical specifics vary, blockchain analysts generally identify several high-level “red flags” in illicit fund flows:
Layering and consolidation: Rapid dispersal of assets across a vast network of wallets, followed by strategic reaggregation to simplify the final exit.
Chain hopping: Moving assets across multiple blockchains to break the deterministic link of a single ledger, often sandwiching privacy-enhancing protocols.
Strategic latency: Allowing funds to remain dormant for extended periods to bypass the window of heightened public and regulatory scrutiny.
Direct-to-fiat workarounds: Preferring OTC brokers for the final liquidation to avoid the robust monitoring systems of major exchanges.
Hybrid privacy: Using privacy-centric coins as a specialized tool within a broader laundering strategy, rather than as a total replacement for mainstream assets.
Contours of anonymity: Why traceability persists
Despite the hurdles created by privacy-preserving technologies, investigators continue to secure wins by targeting the edges of the ecosystem. Progress is typically made through:
Regulated gateways: Forcing interactions with exchanges that mandate rigorous identity verification
Human networks: Targeting the physical infrastructure of money-mule syndicates and OTC desks
Off-chain intelligence: Leveraging traditional surveillance, confidential informants and Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs)
Operational friction: Exploiting mistakes made by the perpetrator that link their digital footprint to a real-world identity.
Privacy coins increase the complexity and cost of an investigation, but they cannot fully insulate scammers from the combined pressure of forensic analysis and traditional law enforcement.
Did you know? Blockchain analytics firms often focus less on privacy coins themselves and more on tracing how funds enter and exit them since those boundary points offer the most reliable investigative signals.
Reality of legitimate use for privacy-enhancing technologies
It is essential to distinguish between the technology itself and its potential criminal applications. Privacy-focused financial tools, such as certain cryptocurrencies or mixers, serve valid purposes, including:
Safeguarding the confidentiality of commercial transactions, which includes protecting trade secrets or competitive business dealings
Shielding individuals from surveillance or monitoring in hostile environments
Reducing the risk of targeted theft by limiting public visibility of personal wealth.
Regulatory scrutiny isn’t triggered by the mere existence of privacy features, but when they are used for illicit activity, such as ransomware payments, hacking proceeds, sanctions evasion or darknet marketplaces.
This key distinction makes effective policymaking difficult. Broad prohibitions risk curtailing lawful financial privacy for ordinary users and businesses while often failing to halt criminal networks that shift to alternative methods.
Balancing act of regulators
For cryptocurrency exchanges, the recurring appearance of privacy coins in post-hack laundering flows intensifies the need to:
Enhance transaction monitoring and risk assessment
Reduce exposure to high-risk inflows
Strengthen compliance with cross-border Travel Rule requirements and other jurisdictional standards.
For policymakers, it underscores a persistent challenge: Criminal actors adapt more quickly than rigid regulations can evolve. Efforts to crack down on one tool often displace activity to others, turning money laundering into a dynamic, moving target rather than a problem that can be fully eradicated.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
The global non-fungible token (NFT) sector fell below $1.5 billion in total market capitalization, returning to levels last seen before the sector’s rapid expansion in 2021.
The retracement unfolded alongside a broader crypto market downturn over the past two weeks, CoinGecko data shows. On Jan. 23, total crypto market capitalization stood at about $3.1 trillion, before falling to $2.2 trillion on Friday.
Major assets like Bitcoin (BTC) slid from around $89,000 to about $65,000, while Ether (ETH) fell from $3,000 to near $1,800 throughout the same time frame. Bitcoin and Ethereum are the top two networks for NFTs in terms of 30-day trading volume, according NFT data aggregator CryptoSlam.
The NFT market cap drop follows several high-profile closures and exits, highlighting the sector’s continued contraction.
Total NFT market cap chart. Source: CoinGecko
Rising supply collides with falling demand
The market reset has been compounded by a growing imbalance between NFT supply and buyer demand.
As reported by Cointelegraph on Dec. 31, total NFT supply continued to expand even as sales and prices declined, pushing the sector into a high-volume, low-price structure.
CryptoSlam data showed that the number of NFTs in circulation rose to nearly 1.3 billion in 2025, up by 25% compared to 2024. Total NFT sales fell 37% year-over-year to $5.6 billion, while average sale prices slipped below $100.
The divergence suggests that while minting became cheaper and barriers to issuance fell, buyer participation and spending failed to keep up.
Corporate exits and platform closures add pressure
The drop follows a series of high-profile retreats that mirror the market’s pullback. On Jan. 7, footwear giant Nike quietly offloaded RTFKT, the digital collectibles studio it acquired at the height of the NFT boom.
The reported sale followed the company’s decision to shut down operations amid an investor lawsuit.
In addition, marketplace shutdowns have accelerated. Nifty Gateway, one of the earliest NFT platforms, said it will close on Feb. 23 and has entered withdrawal-only mode. The Gemini-owned platform cited a prolonged market downturn as it winds down.
On Jan. 28, social NFT platform Rodeo announced it would cease operations after failing to scale sustainably. Rodeo said it would transition to read-only mode before shutting down entirely in March.
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
Small dev team uses PBRFusion AI to convert thousands of legacy textures into modern PBR materials, cutting years off Painkiller RTX remaster timeline.
A small modding team has demonstrated how generative AI can compress years of texture work into weeks, rebuilding the 2004 shooter Painkiller with path-traced visuals across 35 levels using NVIDIA’s RTX Remix toolkit and custom AI models.
The project showcases a production pipeline that processed thousands of legacy textures into modern Physically Based Rendering materials—work that would have been impossible for a small team using traditional methods.
AI Handles 80% of the Grind
McGillacutty, the project’s environment and material lead, puts it bluntly: manually rebuilding thousands of materials across 35 levels with minimal texture reuse wasn’t happening. Enter PBRFusion, an open-source model created by team member NightRaven specifically for RTX Remix workflows.
The model batch-generates base color, normal, roughness, and height maps from legacy textures. Quinn Baddams, team lead and founder of Merry Pencil Studios, estimates AI automation eliminated roughly 80% of repetitive work, freeing the team to focus on the 20% requiring artistic judgment.
“PBRFusion was always intended to be a tool, not a drop-in replacement,” NightRaven explains. The model went through three major iterations and over 1,000 hours of development before reaching the version used in production.
Where AI Falls Short
The team found clear limits to automation. Metallic materials were largely hand-crafted. Glass, transparent surfaces, and skin required custom values and maps—particularly for subsurface scattering effects. Texture atlases, where single images contain multiple unrelated surfaces, confused the AI models entirely.
Roughness maps proved especially tricky. “AI-generated roughness often requires adjustment to achieve physically accurate results,” Baddams notes. “Correct values can be very specific.” The team cross-referenced real-world PBR materials to validate their outputs.
Hero materials received additional treatment using CC0 PBR blending, procedural workflows in InstaMAT Studio, and manual painting. The hybrid approach—AI baseline plus human refinement—became their standard operating procedure.
Path Tracing Exposes Everything
Full-scene path tracing fundamentally changed the material workflow. Properties like roughness, reflectivity, and wetness became far more visible than traditional rendering ever revealed. The original game’s baked shadows, which added contrast in 2004, now created physically impossible lighting responses.
The solution: strip baked lighting from source textures, then reintroduce contrast through roughness variation, stronger normal maps, and controlled self-shadowing. RTX Skin technology enabled subsurface scattering on characters—light genuinely scattering through surfaces rather than simple highlight tricks.
“To my knowledge, this level of ray-traced subsurface scattering hasn’t been available to game developers in a practical, real-time way,” Baddams says. “It was previously limited to offline rendering.”
Implications for the Industry
The project arrives as the broader Painkiller franchise sees renewed activity. 3D Realms announced a modern reimagining in March 2025, targeting an October 2025 release for PlayStation 5, Xbox Series, and PC. The timing creates an interesting parallel: official studio resources versus small-team AI-augmented workflows achieving comparable visual ambitions.
For developers considering similar approaches, the team recommends starting small—capture a single scene, apply basic PBR materials, iterate with path tracing to understand material-light relationships before scaling up.
NightRaven is already finishing the next PBRFusion version. NVIDIA will showcase related RTX neural rendering advances at GDC, where VP John Spitzer will present path tracing and generative AI workflow innovations. The tooling gap between AAA studios and indie teams continues narrowing.
Bitcoin risks a deeper slide as miners and US spot ETFs cut BTC exposure, adding supply pressure during a fragile downtrend.
Bitcoin (BTC) price dropped by more than 22.5% in the past week to $69,000 on Thursday, wiping out 15 months of gains entirely. However, the downtrend may not be over, according to veteran trader Peter Brandt.
Key takeaways:
Brandt says “campaign selling” is pressuring BTC, with miners and ETFs also cutting exposure.
A potential bottom zone is near $54,600–$55,000.
BTC/USD daily chart. Source: TradingView
Bitcoin may drop another 10% as miners, ETFs cut BTC exposure
BTC’s decline left behind a sequence of dailylower highs and lower lows. Simply put, the lack of even modest rebounds suggests few traders are stepping in to buy the dip, at least for now.
This structure, according to Brandt, had “fingerprints of campaign selling,” a deliberate, sustained distribution by large institutions, not retail liquidation.
Source: X/ @PeterLBrandt
Onchain data supports Brandt’s outlook. For instance, as of Thursday, the BTC miner net position change metric was showing a clear shift into net distribution throughout January, with miners consistently sending more BTC to the market.
US spot Bitcoin ETFs also reduced their exposure, with net BTC balances falling to 1.27 million BTC as of Wednesday from 1.29 million at the beginning of the year.
This distribution boosted Bitcoin’s chances of reaching its bear flag target of around $63,800, down 10% from current levels, as shown below, based on Brandt’s technical setup.
BTC/USD daily chart. Source: Peter Brandt
Bitcoin may bottom below $55,000
Bitcoin risks a deeper drop toward $54,600 amid continued institutional selling, according to onchain analyst GugaOnChain.
The downside target is aligned with the lower zone (red) highlighted in the BTC DCA Signal Cycle metric below. This zone reflects Bitcoin’s one-week to one-month realized price and helps identify periods when BTC is structurally undervalued.
In 2022, the signal turned bullish as BTC fell below the same red zone near $20,000, forming a bottom around the level, before rallying to over $30,000 a year later.
GugaOnChain said:
“The current price convergence toward the band signaling the start of the accumulation phase, situated around $54.6K, suggests we are in the critical transition between Capitulation and Accumulation.”
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision. While we strive to provide accurate and timely information, Cointelegraph does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information in this article. This article may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Cointelegraph will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your reliance on this information.
The new facility allows institutions to redeem tokenized real-world assets into stablecoins instantly, addressing a key liquidity bottleneck in onchain markets.
Injective (INJ) shows oversold conditions at $3.33 with RSI at 26.78, targeting $4.50 recovery by March 2026 as technical indicators suggest potential bounce from current support levels. INJ Price…
Injective (INJ) shows oversold conditions at $3.33 with RSI at 26.78, targeting $4.50 recovery by March 2026 as technical indicators suggest potential bounce from current support levels.
While specific analyst predictions are limited for the current period, historical forecasts from late January 2026 projected INJ to reach between $5.80 and $6.20 by February 2026. However, the current trading reality shows INJ significantly below these targets at $3.33.
According to on-chain data and technical analysis platforms, Injective’s current price action suggests the token has entered deeply oversold territory, which historically presents potential accumulation opportunities for patient investors. The absence of recent dated predictions from major KOLs indicates market uncertainty, but technical indicators are beginning to show signs of potential reversal.
INJ Technical Analysis Breakdown
Injective’s technical picture presents a compelling oversold scenario. The RSI reading of 26.78 places INJ firmly in oversold territory, typically indicating selling pressure has reached extreme levels. This oversold condition often precedes price bounces as weak hands finish selling and accumulation begins.
The MACD indicator shows bearish momentum with a reading of -0.4045, matching the signal line exactly, resulting in a histogram of 0.0000. This neutral histogram reading suggests the bearish momentum may be stabilizing, potentially setting up for a momentum shift.
Bollinger Bands analysis reveals INJ trading near the lower band with a %B position of 0.0774, indicating the price is hugging support levels. The middle band at $4.25 represents the 20-period SMA and serves as the primary recovery target, while the upper band at $5.32 would signal a strong bullish reversal.
Moving averages paint a bearish picture with INJ trading below all major timeframes. The SMA 7 at $3.60 provides immediate resistance, followed by the SMA 20 at $4.25. The significant gap to the SMA 200 at $9.04 illustrates the extent of the current downtrend.
Injective Price Targets: Bull vs Bear Case
Bullish Scenario
The primary Injective forecast for recovery targets the immediate resistance at $3.55, followed by strong resistance at $3.77. A break above $3.77 would confirm the oversold bounce and target the SMA 7 at $3.60.
The medium-term bullish target aligns with the SMA 20 at $4.25, representing a 27% upside from current levels. Breaking above this level would signal a return to the previous trading range and potentially target the SMA 50 at $4.65.
For this INJ price prediction to materialize, we need to see RSI recovery above 30, indicating oversold conditions are relieving. Additionally, increasing trading volume above the current $6.6 million would confirm renewed buying interest.
Bearish Scenario
The bearish case for this INJ price prediction centers on a break below the immediate support at $3.21. Such a move would target the strong support level at $3.08, representing the lower boundary of the current consolidation range.
A breakdown below $3.08 would be concerning and could signal further downside toward psychological support levels around $3.00. The high volatility, as measured by the ATR of $0.31, suggests significant price swings remain possible in both directions.
Should You Buy INJ? Entry Strategy
Based on current technical conditions, a dollar-cost averaging approach appears most prudent for this Injective forecast. The oversold RSI suggests accumulation opportunities, but the bearish momentum requires careful timing.
Primary entry consideration would be near the current support at $3.21, with a secondary entry if price tests the strong support at $3.08. Stop-loss placement below $3.00 would limit downside risk while providing room for normal volatility.
For more aggressive traders, a bounce play could be considered if INJ shows signs of RSI divergence or volume increase near current levels. However, position sizing should reflect the high-risk nature of this oversold bounce strategy.
Conclusion
This INJ price prediction suggests a recovery toward $4.25-$4.50 over the next month, supported by extremely oversold technical conditions. The RSI reading of 26.78 represents one of the most oversold levels seen recently, historically providing good risk-reward entry opportunities.
However, investors should note that cryptocurrency price predictions carry significant uncertainty, and the current bearish momentum could extend further before any recovery materializes. Risk management remains crucial, with position sizing and stop-losses essential for navigating INJ’s current volatility.
Disclaimer: This analysis is for educational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry substantial risk, and past performance does not guarantee future results.
CRV price prediction shows potential recovery from extreme oversold conditions at $0.26, targeting $0.30-$0.34 range as Curve battles critical support levels amid bearish momentum.
Recent analyst predictions from late January and early February painted a more optimistic picture for CRV. Felix Pinkston projected on January 30, 2026: “CRV price prediction shows potential 25-44% upside targeting $0.40-$0.46 range over the next 2-4 weeks as Curve battles oversold conditions near $0.32 support levels.”
Tony Kim followed up on February 1, 2026, stating: “CRV price prediction shows potential recovery from oversold levels, with analysts targeting $0.39 short-term and $0.40-$0.46 medium-term as Curve battles current bearish momentum.”
However, CRV has since declined further to $0.26, making these targets appear increasingly optimistic. According to on-chain data and current market conditions, a more conservative approach may be warranted given the intensified selling pressure.
CRV Technical Analysis Breakdown
The technical picture for Curve presents a deeply oversold scenario that could signal a potential bounce, though momentum remains decidedly bearish.
RSI Analysis: At 23.28, CRV’s RSI sits firmly in oversold territory, historically a level where short-term bounces often occur. This extreme reading suggests selling pressure may be reaching exhaustion.
Moving Average Structure: The price action tells a concerning story with CRV trading significantly below all major moving averages:
– 58% below SMA 200 ($0.59)
– 30% below SMA 50 ($0.37)
– 24% below SMA 20 ($0.34)
– 7% below SMA 7 ($0.28)
MACD Signals: The MACD remains bearish at -0.0331, with the histogram at neutral (0.0000), indicating momentum has stalled but hasn’t yet turned positive.
Bollinger Bands: CRV is trading near the lower Bollinger Band at $0.25 with a %B position of 0.058, suggesting the token is testing key technical support levels.
Curve Price Targets: Bull vs Bear Case
Bullish Scenario
In a recovery scenario, CRV faces multiple resistance levels that could cap upside moves:
Immediate resistance: $0.28 (intraday high and SMA 7)
Primary target: $0.30 (psychological level and strong resistance)
Secondary target: $0.34 (SMA 20 and middle Bollinger Band)
A sustained break above $0.34 would signal a potential Curve forecast shift toward the previously predicted $0.40+ targets, though this appears unlikely in the near term given current market structure.
Bearish Scenario
Downside risks remain significant with key support levels under pressure:
Immediate support: $0.25 (lower Bollinger Band)
Critical support: $0.24 (strong support level)
Breakdown target: Sub-$0.20 if critical support fails
The combination of bearish MACD readings and price action well below all moving averages suggests additional downside risk if broader market conditions deteriorate.
Should You Buy CRV? Entry Strategy
For traders considering CRV positions, the current oversold conditions present both opportunity and risk:
The high-risk, high-reward nature of this setup requires careful position sizing and strict risk management protocols.
Conclusion
Our CRV price prediction suggests a potential short-term bounce to $0.28-$0.30 as oversold conditions may provide temporary relief. However, the medium-term Curve forecast remains cautious, with resistance at $0.34 likely to cap meaningful recovery attempts.
While previous analyst targets of $0.40-$0.46 may eventually prove accurate, current technical conditions suggest a more measured recovery timeline. Traders should approach CRV with appropriate risk management, as the token remains vulnerable to broader market sentiment and could test support below $0.25 if selling pressure intensifies.
Disclaimer: This CRV price prediction is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk, and prices can be highly volatile. Always conduct your own research and consider your risk tolerance before making investment decisions.
