The United Kingdom is considering new restrictions that could bar children under 16 from using mainstream social media platforms.
The discussion builds on the Online Safety Act, which already requires services with minimum age limits to explain how they enforce them and to use “highly effective” age assurance measures where children are at risk of harmful content.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he is monitoring how Australia’s under‑16 ban works in practice and is “open” to an Australian‑style approach, despite previously expressing personal reservations about a blanket ban for teenagers.
Conservative Party Member of Parliament David Davis said in a post on X that banning social media for children was “the right move,” and added that “mobile phones don’t belong in schools either.”
Conservative MP argues for banning social media for children. Source: David Davis
The debate comes as UK ministers and regulators are already in conflict with Elon Musk’s X platform over compliance with the Online Safety Act (OSA) and takedown obligations for illegal or harmful content.
Ofcom, the UK’s online safety regulator, is preparing enforcement powers that include large fines and potential access restrictions for services that fail to meet their child safety and illegal content duties.
Critics have warned that aggressive enforcement could have implications for freedom of expression, and Musk’s platform has said the OSA is at risk of “seriously infringing” on free speech.
Aleksandr Litreev, CEO of Sentinel, whose decentralized virtual private network (dVPN) provides censorship-resistant internet access, told Cointelegraph that the UK’s moves on digital freedoms were “concerning,” and echoed the “same failed route as China, Russia and Iran.”
He said that denying youth access to social media and the internet “stifles their ability to learn digital literacy and develop critical thinking,” leaving them “less prepared for adulthood in a connected world.”
Similar moves are underway in other countries. Australia’s eSafety commissioner registered an industry code requiring major search engines to implement age assurance technologies for logged‑in users, with the rules taking effect on Dec. 27, 2025.
Providers such as Google and Microsoft now have to verify users’ ages using methods ranging from government IDs and biometrics to credit card checks, and apply the highest default safety filters to accounts identified as likely under 18.
Ireland, meanwhile, plans to use its upcoming presidency of the Council of the European Union in the second half of 2026 to push for identity-verified social media accounts across the bloc.
In the UK, these developments coincided this week with a government decision to abandon plans for a single centralized digital ID system for right‑to‑work checks, which would have become mandatory in 2029.
Crypto exchanges and trading apps remain subject to existing Know Your Customer (KYC) and biometric verification rules, including checks that typically involve government ID uploads and live selfies or facial scans to verify users’ identities.
Policymakers’ focus on age and identity assurance in social media, search, and other consumer services suggests that similar verification technologies are increasingly being explored and deployed outside financial use cases.
Litreev commented, “If a government sells you something ‘for the sake of safety,’ it’s sure as hell not about safety in any way or form.”
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
ETF flows reveal real institutional demand beyond short-term price moves.
Bitcoin treasury stocks can turn BTC exposure into an equity risk shaped by index rules.
Low fees are reviving questions about how Bitcoin may pay for its long-term security.
Scaling now means choosing between Lightning, L2 designs and protocol upgrades.
Everyone’s watching Bitcoin’s (BTC) price, but in 2026, it’s often not the most informative signal.
That’s why it helps to understand what analysts look at when the chart isn’t explaining why the market is moving or where it may move next.
The focus shifts to factors that can quietly reshape Bitcoin’s demand, liquidity and long-term narrative: Who’s buying through exchange-traded funds (ETFs), how “Bitcoin treasury” stocks are treated by indexes, whether miners are earning enough to secure the network, what scaling actually looks like today and how regulation is shaping mainstream access.
Here are five Bitcoin narratives worth watching beyond price in 2026.
1. Reading institutional demand through ETFs
ETF flows may be one of the clearest institutional signals of demand because they reflect real allocation decisions by wealth platforms, registered investment advisors (RIAs) and discretionary desks, not just leverage bouncing around on crypto exchanges.
This idea comes straight from mainstream market reporting and flow data. Reuters framed Bitcoin’s mid-2025 breakout as being “fuelled by strong flows into Bitcoin ETFs” and said the rally looked “more stable and lasting” than earlier, speculation-heavy runs.
Reuters also quoted Aether Holdings’ Nicolas Lin on why this matters for the longer term: “It’s the start of crypto becoming a permanent fixture in diversified portfolios.”
The flip side is also worth noting. Bloomberg highlighted how quickly sentiment can turn when the ETF pipeline reverses, with investors “yanking nearly $1 billion” in a single session, one of the largest daily outflows on record for the group.
Did you know? In February 2021, the Canadian Purpose Investments Bitcoin ETF (BTCC) became the world’s first physically settled Bitcoin ETF, allowing investors to gain direct BTC exposure through a regulated stock exchange, nearly three years before US spot Bitcoin ETFs were approved.
2. BTC as equity products
A growing group of public companies is effectively saying this: Instead of buying Bitcoin directly, buy our stock, and we will hold the BTC on the balance sheet for you.
Naturally, Strategy has been the poster child since 2020. The 2026 narrative, however, is that these types of products are moving into the crosshairs of index providers.
Reuters describes these “digital asset treasury companies” (DATCOs) as companies that “began holding crypto tokens such as Bitcoin and ether as their main treasury assets,” giving investors “a proxy for direct exposure.” The problem is straightforward: If a company is mostly a pile of BTC in a corporate shell, is it an operating business or something closer to an investment vehicle?
That question became a real market risk in early January 2026, when MSCI backed off a plan that could have pushed some of these firms out of major indexes. MSCI said investors were concerned that some DATCOs “share characteristics with investment funds” and that separating true operating companies from “companies that hold non-operating assets… rather than for investment purposes requires further research.”
Barron’s noted that JPMorgan estimated potential selling pressure could have reached about $2.8 billion if MSCI had gone ahead and more if other index providers followed.
Reuters quoted Clear Street’s Owen Lau, who called MSCI’s delay the removal of a “material near-term technical risk” for these stocks that act as “proxies for Bitcoin/crypto exposure.”
Mike O’Rourke of JonesTrading was blunter. Exclusion may simply be “postponed until later in the year.”
If ETF flows are the clean spot-demand story, treasury stocks are the messier cousin. They can amplify Bitcoin through equity mechanics, index rules and balance-sheet optics, even when the BTC chart looks boring.
Did you know? Index providers are companies that decide what stocks qualify for inclusion in major stock market indexes and how those stocks are classified.
3. The security budget question is back
After the 2024 halving, it has become more apparent that Bitcoin’s long-term security story is increasingly linked to transaction fees.
Galaxy put it plainly, “Bitcoin fee pressure has collapsed.” It estimated that “as of August 2025, ~15% of daily blocks are ‘free blocks,’” with the mempool often being empty.
That’s great for users who want cheap transfers. For cryptocurrency miners, it reopens the big question: What pays for security as the subsidy keeps shrinking?
CoinShares made the same point from the mining side, saying transaction fees “have fallen to historic lows,” sitting at “less than 1% of total block rewards” during parts of 2025.
By early January 2026, JPMorgan-linked reporting flagged real stress. Monthly average hashrate fell 3% in December, while “daily block reward revenue” dropped 7% month-on-month and 32% year-on-year, reaching “the lowest on record.”
VanEck also described “a tough structural squeeze” for miners as subsidy cuts collide with rising competition.
With this in mind, analysts are increasingly watching the fee share of miner revenue, hash price and profitability, and whether onchain demand can return without relying on a hype cycle to push fees higher.
4. Lightning, Bitcoin L2s and upgrade politics
Analysts are now watching the full stack when it comes to scaling.
First, Lightning Network remains a primary payments-focused layer, and capacity is rising again. In mid-December 2025, Lightning capacity was reported at a new high of 5,637 BTC. More important than the headline number is who is adding liquidity. Amboss framed it this way: “It’s not just one company … it’s across the board.”
Second, the “Bitcoin L2 / BTCFi” push is receiving institutional research attention. Galaxy counts Bitcoin L2 projects rising “over sevenfold from 10 to 75” since 2021 and argues that meaningful BTC liquidity could move into layer-2 (L2) environments over time. It estimates that “over $47bn of BTC could be bridged into Bitcoin L2s by 2030.” Whether that happens remains the central debate.
Third, Bitcoin’s upgrade debate is back on the table as L2 builders push for better base-layer primitives. OP_CAT “was disabled in 2010” and is now “frequently proposed… using a soft fork.”
Galaxy’s view is that proposals such as OP_CAT and OP_CTV matter because they could support features like “trustless bridges” and “improvements to the Lightning Network.” Ecosystem commentary is now putting timelines on these ideas. Hiro says there is “a good chance” of a covenant-related soft fork “as early as 2026.”
In short, analysts are watching three things: Lightning capacity and liquidity trends, whether Bitcoin L2s attract real BTC rather than incentive-driven capital and whether the soft-fork conversation turns into an actual activation plan.
5. Regulation is deciding who gets access
In 2026, regulation will increasingly shape who gets access to Bitcoin, through which products and on what terms.
In the US, a change in tone is visible at the top. A federal executive order states, “It is the policy of the United States to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.”
It also says that government BTC in that reserve “shall not be sold.” This language frames Bitcoin as a strategic asset in policy terms.
Stablecoin rules are also key because they shape the infrastructure around crypto markets.
A legal breakdown of the GENIUS Act calls it “the first major crypto legislation” in the United States and noted that it creates licensing requirements for payment stablecoin issuers.
Meanwhile, large asset managers are already warning about second-order effects. Amundi’s chief investment officer said mass stablecoin uptake could turn them into “quasi-banks” and “potentially destabilise the global payment system.”
In the EU, Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) acts as a portcullis. Regulators said, “Only firms authorised … are allowed to provide crypto-asset services in the EU,” with a transition window in some countries running until July 1, 2026.
When it comes to regulation, it is important to watch authorization lists and deadlines in the EU, enforcement posture and whether “strategic reserve” language turns into durable policy in the US.
Did you know? One of the biggest crypto rules many are still waiting on in 2026 is a US market-structure law that would finally spell out who regulates what, ending years of overlap between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and setting clear rules for exchanges and brokers.
Where to look when the chart goes quiet
Bitcoin in 2026 appears less driven by hype cycles alone. Instead, attention is shifting to a few pipes and pressure points:
ETF flows show who is allocating and how sticky that demand might be.
Treasury-heavy public companies reveal how Bitcoin exposure is being repackaged for equity markets and how index rules can suddenly matter as much as onchain data.
The security budget debate reminds us that network health depends on incentives.
Scaling discussions have moved from abstract arguments to concrete trade-offs between Lightning, L2 designs and protocol upgrades.
Regulation now determines which doors are open and which stay shut for mainstream capital.
None of these forces moves in a straight line, and none shows up cleanly on a price chart. Taken together, they explain why Bitcoin can look quiet on the surface while something important is changing underneath. For analysts, that is where the data increasingly lives.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
ETF flows reveal real institutional demand beyond short-term price moves.
Bitcoin treasury stocks can turn BTC exposure into an equity risk shaped by index rules.
Low fees are reviving questions about how Bitcoin may pay for its long-term security.
Scaling now means choosing between Lightning, L2 designs and protocol upgrades.
Everyone’s watching Bitcoin’s (BTC) price, but in 2026, it’s often not the most informative signal.
That’s why it helps to understand what analysts look at when the chart isn’t explaining why the market is moving or where it may move next.
The focus shifts to factors that can quietly reshape Bitcoin’s demand, liquidity and long-term narrative: Who’s buying through exchange-traded funds (ETFs), how “Bitcoin treasury” stocks are treated by indexes, whether miners are earning enough to secure the network, what scaling actually looks like today and how regulation is shaping mainstream access.
Here are five Bitcoin narratives worth watching beyond price in 2026.
1. Reading institutional demand through ETFs
ETF flows may be one of the clearest institutional signals of demand because they reflect real allocation decisions by wealth platforms, registered investment advisors (RIAs) and discretionary desks, not just leverage bouncing around on crypto exchanges.
This idea comes straight from mainstream market reporting and flow data. Reuters framed Bitcoin’s mid-2025 breakout as being “fuelled by strong flows into Bitcoin ETFs” and said the rally looked “more stable and lasting” than earlier, speculation-heavy runs.
Reuters also quoted Aether Holdings’ Nicolas Lin on why this matters for the longer term: “It’s the start of crypto becoming a permanent fixture in diversified portfolios.”
The flip side is also worth noting. Bloomberg highlighted how quickly sentiment can turn when the ETF pipeline reverses, with investors “yanking nearly $1 billion” in a single session, one of the largest daily outflows on record for the group.
Did you know? In February 2021, the Canadian Purpose Investments Bitcoin ETF (BTCC) became the world’s first physically settled Bitcoin ETF, allowing investors to gain direct BTC exposure through a regulated stock exchange, nearly three years before US spot Bitcoin ETFs were approved.
2. BTC as equity products
A growing group of public companies is effectively saying this: Instead of buying Bitcoin directly, buy our stock, and we will hold the BTC on the balance sheet for you.
Naturally, Strategy has been the poster child since 2020. The 2026 narrative, however, is that these types of products are moving into the crosshairs of index providers.
Reuters describes these “digital asset treasury companies” (DATCOs) as companies that “began holding crypto tokens such as Bitcoin and ether as their main treasury assets,” giving investors “a proxy for direct exposure.” The problem is straightforward: If a company is mostly a pile of BTC in a corporate shell, is it an operating business or something closer to an investment vehicle?
That question became a real market risk in early January 2026, when MSCI backed off a plan that could have pushed some of these firms out of major indexes. MSCI said investors were concerned that some DATCOs “share characteristics with investment funds” and that separating true operating companies from “companies that hold non-operating assets… rather than for investment purposes requires further research.”
Barron’s noted that JPMorgan estimated potential selling pressure could have reached about $2.8 billion if MSCI had gone ahead and more if other index providers followed.
Reuters quoted Clear Street’s Owen Lau, who called MSCI’s delay the removal of a “material near-term technical risk” for these stocks that act as “proxies for Bitcoin/crypto exposure.”
Mike O’Rourke of JonesTrading was blunter. Exclusion may simply be “postponed until later in the year.”
If ETF flows are the clean spot-demand story, treasury stocks are the messier cousin. They can amplify Bitcoin through equity mechanics, index rules and balance-sheet optics, even when the BTC chart looks boring.
Did you know? Index providers are companies that decide what stocks qualify for inclusion in major stock market indexes and how those stocks are classified.
3. The security budget question is back
After the 2024 halving, it has become more apparent that Bitcoin’s long-term security story is increasingly linked to transaction fees.
Galaxy put it plainly, “Bitcoin fee pressure has collapsed.” It estimated that “as of August 2025, ~15% of daily blocks are ‘free blocks,’” with the mempool often being empty.
That’s great for users who want cheap transfers. For cryptocurrency miners, it reopens the big question: What pays for security as the subsidy keeps shrinking?
CoinShares made the same point from the mining side, saying transaction fees “have fallen to historic lows,” sitting at “less than 1% of total block rewards” during parts of 2025.
By early January 2026, JPMorgan-linked reporting flagged real stress. Monthly average hashrate fell 3% in December, while “daily block reward revenue” dropped 7% month-on-month and 32% year-on-year, reaching “the lowest on record.”
VanEck also described “a tough structural squeeze” for miners as subsidy cuts collide with rising competition.
With this in mind, analysts are increasingly watching the fee share of miner revenue, hash price and profitability, and whether onchain demand can return without relying on a hype cycle to push fees higher.
4. Lightning, Bitcoin L2s and upgrade politics
Analysts are now watching the full stack when it comes to scaling.
First, Lightning Network remains a primary payments-focused layer, and capacity is rising again. In mid-December 2025, Lightning capacity was reported at a new high of 5,637 BTC. More important than the headline number is who is adding liquidity. Amboss framed it this way: “It’s not just one company … it’s across the board.”
Second, the “Bitcoin L2 / BTCFi” push is receiving institutional research attention. Galaxy counts Bitcoin L2 projects rising “over sevenfold from 10 to 75” since 2021 and argues that meaningful BTC liquidity could move into layer-2 (L2) environments over time. It estimates that “over $47bn of BTC could be bridged into Bitcoin L2s by 2030.” Whether that happens remains the central debate.
Third, Bitcoin’s upgrade debate is back on the table as L2 builders push for better base-layer primitives. OP_CAT “was disabled in 2010” and is now “frequently proposed… using a soft fork.”
Galaxy’s view is that proposals such as OP_CAT and OP_CTV matter because they could support features like “trustless bridges” and “improvements to the Lightning Network.” Ecosystem commentary is now putting timelines on these ideas. Hiro says there is “a good chance” of a covenant-related soft fork “as early as 2026.”
In short, analysts are watching three things: Lightning capacity and liquidity trends, whether Bitcoin L2s attract real BTC rather than incentive-driven capital and whether the soft-fork conversation turns into an actual activation plan.
5. Regulation is deciding who gets access
In 2026, regulation will increasingly shape who gets access to Bitcoin, through which products and on what terms.
In the US, a change in tone is visible at the top. A federal executive order states, “It is the policy of the United States to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.”
It also says that government BTC in that reserve “shall not be sold.” This language frames Bitcoin as a strategic asset in policy terms.
Stablecoin rules are also key because they shape the infrastructure around crypto markets.
A legal breakdown of the GENIUS Act calls it “the first major crypto legislation” in the United States and noted that it creates licensing requirements for payment stablecoin issuers.
Meanwhile, large asset managers are already warning about second-order effects. Amundi’s chief investment officer said mass stablecoin uptake could turn them into “quasi-banks” and “potentially destabilise the global payment system.”
In the EU, Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) acts as a portcullis. Regulators said, “Only firms authorised … are allowed to provide crypto-asset services in the EU,” with a transition window in some countries running until July 1, 2026.
When it comes to regulation, it is important to watch authorization lists and deadlines in the EU, enforcement posture and whether “strategic reserve” language turns into durable policy in the US.
Did you know? One of the biggest crypto rules many are still waiting on in 2026 is a US market-structure law that would finally spell out who regulates what, ending years of overlap between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and setting clear rules for exchanges and brokers.
Where to look when the chart goes quiet
Bitcoin in 2026 appears less driven by hype cycles alone. Instead, attention is shifting to a few pipes and pressure points:
ETF flows show who is allocating and how sticky that demand might be.
Treasury-heavy public companies reveal how Bitcoin exposure is being repackaged for equity markets and how index rules can suddenly matter as much as onchain data.
The security budget debate reminds us that network health depends on incentives.
Scaling discussions have moved from abstract arguments to concrete trade-offs between Lightning, L2 designs and protocol upgrades.
Regulation now determines which doors are open and which stay shut for mainstream capital.
None of these forces moves in a straight line, and none shows up cleanly on a price chart. Taken together, they explain why Bitcoin can look quiet on the surface while something important is changing underneath. For analysts, that is where the data increasingly lives.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
Global bank messaging network SWIFT has tested Societe Generale’s euro-pegged stablecoin as part of a collaboration aimed at improving interoperability between traditional financial systems and blockchain-based assets.
Societe Generale’s digital asset subsidiary, SG-Forge, on Thursday announced it successfully completed the exchange and settlement of tokenized bonds in both fiat and digital currencies.
“This initiative showed that tokenized bonds can leverage existing payment infrastructures, enabling financial institutions and corporates to benefit from faster settlements and secure, compliant operational processes through the integration of ISO 20022 standards,” SG-Forge said.
“First MiCA-compliant stablecoin for SWIFT’s interoperability”
The joint project demonstrated the feasibility of key market operation use cases, including issuance, delivery-versus-payment settlement, coupon payments and redemption.
As part of the cooperation, SG-Forge provided its open-source standard, called Compliance Architecture for Security Tokens (CAST), including its security token and the EURCV stablecoin.
Notably, SG-Forge referred to its EURCV stablecoin as the first onchain settlement asset that is compliant with Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework and is “natively compatible with Swift’s interoperability capabilities.”
SG-Forge’s post on LinkedIn on Thursday. Source: SG-Forge
“By proving that Swift can orchestrate multi-platform tokenized asset transactions, we’re paving the way for our customers to adopt digital assets with confidence, and at scale,” SWIFT’s tokenized assets product lead, Thomas Dugauquier, said in a joint announcement.
“It’s about creating a bridge between existing finance and emerging technologies,” he added.
SWIFT works with 30 banks on a shared blockchain-based ledger
SWIFT had announced plans to “add blockchain-based ledger to its infrastructure stack” in September 2025.
SG-Forge was one of at least 30 financial institutions worldwide that SWIFT named as partners for its ledger project, which focuses on real-time, 24/7 cross-border payments and began with a conceptual prototype developed by Ethereum software firm Consensys.
SWIFT’s post on LinkedIn in December 2025. Source: SWIFT
SWIFT’s forthcoming system is expected to apply blockchain technology to provide a “secure, real-time log of transactions” shared between financial institutions that will record sequence, validate transactions and enforce rules through smart contracts.
Cointelegraph reached out to SG-Forge and SWIFT for comment on the specific blockchain networks used in the recently completed project, but had not received a response by the time of publication.
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
Bitcoin is showing considerable strength in the short term, opening the gates for a rally to $100,000 and then to $107,500.
Select major altcoins are showing strength, but Monero (XMR) is leading from the front.
After the sharp rally on Tuesday, Bitcoin (BTC) bulls are attempting to extend the gains above $97,000. The strong inflows of $753.8 million in BTC exchange-traded funds on Tuesday, according to Farside Investors data, show that the rally was backed by solid buying from institutional investors.
Crypto sentiment platform Santiment said in a post on X that retail traders may FOMO if BTC begins “teasing $100k in the next few days.”
Another bullish case was presented by crypto analyst Midas, who said in a post on X that BTC’s current structure is following the 2020-2021 cycle. If history repeats, BTC may reach $150,000.
Crypto market data daily view. Source: TradingView
However, not everyone is outright bullish on BTC. Global investment manager VanEck said in its Q1 2026 Outlook that BTC’s four-year cycle broke in 2025, which supports “a more cautious near-term outlook over the next 3-6 months.” Select analysts from the company differed in their view, “remaining more constructive on the immediate cycle,” the report said.
What are the target levels to watch out for in BTC and the major altcoins? Let’s analyze the charts of the top 10 cryptocurrencies to find out.
Bitcoin price prediction
BTC rallied above the $94,789 resistance on Tuesday, but the breakout is facing selling near the $96,846 level.
The upsloping 20-day exponential moving average (EMA) ($91,418) and the relative strength index (RSI) near the overbought zone signal that bulls are in control. A close above the $96,848 level clears the path for a rally to $100,000 and subsequently to $107,500.
The first support on the downside is the breakout level of $94,789 and then the 20-day EMA. Sellers will have to swiftly tug the price below the 50-day simple moving average (SMA) ($89,959) to weaken the bullish momentum.
Ether price prediction
Ether (ETH) broke above the resistance line of the symmetrical triangle pattern on Tuesday, indicating that the bulls have overpowered the bears.
The bears will try to pull the price back inside the triangle, but if the bulls successfully defend the resistance line, the ETH/USDT pair may rally to $3,659 and then to $4,000.
Contrary to this assumption, if the price skids back into the triangle, it is likely to find support at the moving averages. If the price rebounds off the moving averages, the bulls will again attempt to resume the up move. The bears will be back in the driver’s seat on a close below the support line.
XRP price prediction
XRP (XRP) bounced off the moving averages on Tuesday, indicating solid demand at lower levels.
The upsloping 20-day EMA ($2.06) and the RSI in positive territory indicate that the bulls have the upper hand. That increases the possibility of a break above the downtrend line, signaling a potential trend change. The XRP/USDT pair may then rally to $2.70.
This positive view will be invalidated in the near term if the XRP price turns down and breaks below the moving averages. That suggests the pair may remain inside the descending channel for a while longer.
BNB price prediction
BNB (BNB) closed above the $928 level on Tuesday, completing a bullish ascending triangle pattern.
The bears will attempt to trap the aggressive bulls by pulling the BNB price below the moving averages. If they manage to do that, the BNB/USDT pair may drop to the uptrend line and then to the $790 level.
Contrarily, if the price turns up from the $928 level, it suggests that the bulls have flipped the level into support. That increases the likelihood of a rally toward the pattern target of $1,066.
Solana price prediction
Solana (SOL) reached the $147 level on Tuesday, where the bears are expected to pose a strong challenge.
The upsloping 20-day EMA ($135) and the RSI near the overbought zone suggest the path of least resistance is to the upside. If buyers clear the $147 level, the SOL/USDT pair may pick up momentum and soar toward $172.
The moving averages are the crucial support to watch out for on the downside. A break below the moving averages indicates that the bulls have given up. That may keep the Solana price inside the $117 to $147 range for a few more days.
Dogecoin price prediction
Dogecoin (DOGE) turned up from the moving averages on Tuesday, signaling that the bulls are attempting to take charge.
If buyers thrust the price above the $0.16 resistance, the DOGE/USDT pair will complete a bullish inverse head-and-shoulders pattern. The Dogecoin price may then rally toward the target objective of $0.20.
Instead, if the price turns down sharply from the $0.16 level, it suggests that the bears continue to sell on rallies. That may keep the pair range-bound between $0.16 and $0.12 for some time.
Cardano price prediction
Buyers successfully defended the 20-day EMA ($0.39) in Cardano (ADA), indicating a positive sentiment.
There is minor resistance at $0.44, but if the level is crossed, the ADA/USDT pair may rally to the breakdown level of $0.50. The recovery is expected to face significant selling at the $0.50 level, but if the bulls prevail, the Cardano price may ascend to $0.60. Such a move signals a potential trend change in the near term.
Sellers will have to swiftly yank the price below the moving averages if they want to retain the advantage. The pair may then slide to $0.33.
The vertical rally has pushed the RSI above the 87 level, signalling that the XMR/USDT pair is overbought in the near term. That may result in a few days of consolidation or correction in the near term.
Any pullback is expected to find support at the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement level of $607. A shallow correction increases the likelihood of the continuation of the uptrend. The Monero price may then skyrocket toward $915. The bullish momentum is expected to weaken on a close below the 50% retracement level of $571.
Bitcoin Cash price prediction
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is attempting to find support at the moving averages, but the bears continue to exert pressure.
A break and close below the 50-day SMA ($589) suggests that the market rejected the breakout above the $631 level. That may trap the aggressive bulls, pulling the BCH/USDT pair to $563 and later to $518.
On the contrary, the bulls will attempt to resume the uptrend by pushing the Bitcoin Cash price above the $670 level. If they can pull it off, the pair may surge to $720, where the sellers are expected to step in.
Chainlink price prediction
Chainlink (LINK) turned up sharply from the moving averages on Tuesday, indicating that the bulls are trying to form a higher low.
The bulls will attempt to strengthen their position by pushing the Chainlink price above the $14.98 resistance. If they manage to do that, the LINK/USDT pair may rally toward $17.66. That brings the large $10.94 to $27 range into play.
Sellers are likely to have other plans. They will try to halt the recovery at the $14.98 level and pull the price below the moving averages. That may keep the pair stuck inside the $11.61 to $14.98 range for some more time.
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 GENIUS Act was designed to keep stablecoins as payment tools rather than savings products. As a result, it bans issuers from paying interest or yield to stablecoin holders.
Community banks argue that a loophole exists because exchanges and affiliated partners can still offer rewards on stablecoin balances, even if the issuer itself does not pay yield.
Smaller banks are more concerned than large banks because they rely heavily on local deposits. Any outflow of deposits could directly reduce lending to small businesses and households.
Banks also note that reward programs can be funded through platform revenues or affiliate structures, making the ban ineffective in practice if partner incentives continue.
In the US, the GENIUS Act of 2025 was intended to provide a federal framework for payment stablecoins. The law established strict standards for reserves and consumer protection. However, the banking sector soon warned Congress of a potential loophole in the stablecoin rules.
This article examines what the GENIUS Act was designed to achieve and the regulatory gap that bankers are concerned about. It explains why community banks are more affected than larger institutions, outlines counterarguments from the crypto industry and explores the options available to Congress.
What the GENIUS Act was trying to prevent
The GENIUS Act aimed to prevent stablecoins from functioning as savings products. Lawmakers wanted stablecoins to continue operating as payment instruments. For this reason, the law prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest or yield to holders solely for holding the token.
Banks supported restrictions on yield-bearing stablecoins. They argued that if stablecoins could pay yield directly, they could become an alternative to insured savings accounts. This could encourage some depositors to move funds out of traditional bank accounts. Banks also warned that the impact would fall most heavily on smaller community banks, which rely on local deposits to fund lending.
Did you know? Some US states already regulate money transmitters that handle stablecoins. As a result, a single stablecoin platform can face both federal GENIUS Act requirements and dozens of separate state licensing and reporting obligations.
The “loophole” banks are talking about
Community banks say the issue is not what stablecoin issuers do directly. Instead, they argue that the loophole arises through issuers’ distribution partners, including exchanges and other crypto platforms.
In early January 2026, the American Bankers Association’s Community Bankers Council urged the Senate to tighten the GENIUS framework, warning that some stablecoin ecosystems were exploring a perceived “loophole.” According to the group, exchanges and other partners can enable rewards for stablecoin holders even when the issuer itself is not paying interest.
This structural feature of how stablecoins operate has highlighted the regulatory gap. The GENIUS Act restricts issuer-paid yield but does not necessarily prevent third-party platforms from incentivizing customers on deposited stablecoins.
Banks argue that because distribution partners can effectively work around the restriction, the act becomes less effective in practice.
The issuer does not pay a yield.
The platform holding the stablecoin balance pays rewards to the depositor.
From the customer’s perspective, they are earning returns simply by holding stablecoins.
Did you know? Several US stablecoin issuers hold reserves primarily in short-term US Treasury bills. This makes them indirect participants in government debt markets rather than traditional banking systems.
Why community banks care more than large banks
Large banks can diversify funding sources and access wholesale funding markets more easily than smaller lenders. Community banks, on the other hand, are typically more dependent on stable retail deposits.
This is why community bankers frame the loophole debate as a local credit issue. If deposits move from community institutions into stablecoin balances, banks could have less capacity to lend to small businesses, farmers, students and homebuyers.
Banks have attempted to quantify this risk. The Banking Policy Institute (BPI) has argued that incentivizing a shift from deposits and money market funds to stablecoins could raise lending costs and reduce credit availability. The BPI has also warned that these incentives undermine the spirit of the ban on issuer-paid yield for stablecoins.
How rewards can be offered without the issuer paying interest
Banks argue that these programs can be funded through a mix of platform revenues, marketing subsidies, revenue-sharing arrangements or affiliate structures tied to stablecoin issuance and distribution.
While funding mechanics vary by platform and token, the controversy is less about any single program and more about the incentive outcome. Banks are concerned that stablecoins could offer bank customers an alternative venue for holding liquid funds.
Community banks are calling on Congress to close the loophole not only for issuers but also for affiliates, partners and intermediaries that deliver yield in practice.
Did you know? Stablecoin transaction volumes often spike during weekends and holidays, when banks are closed. This highlights how crypto payment rails operate continuously outside normal banking hours.
The crypto industry’s counterargument
Crypto advocacy groups and industry associations have pushed back strongly. The Blockchain Association and the Crypto Council for Innovation argue that Congress intentionally drew a clear line by banning issuer-paid interest while preserving room for platforms to offer lawful rewards and incentives.
Counterarguments from the crypto industry include:
Payment stablecoins are not bank deposits: Stablecoins are primarily payment and settlement tools and should not be regulated as substitutes for deposits.
Stablecoins do not fund loans like banks: Comparing stablecoins to deposit-funded lending is a category error. Industry groups argue that forcing stablecoins to mimic bank economics would suppress competition rather than protect consumers.
Banning third-party rewards could stifle innovation: Treating every incentive program as a prohibited activity could reduce consumer choice and limit experimentation in payments.
What could be the likely policy options?
Based on the public arguments so far, policymakers have several possible paths:
Affiliate and partner prohibition: Extend the GENIUS Act’s yield ban to issuer affiliates and distribution partners.
Disclosure and consumer protection approach: Allow rewards but require clear disclosures. Crypto firms could be required to explain who pays the rewards, what risks are involved and what is not insured. Regulators could also impose stricter marketing rules to prevent rewards from being presented as bank-like interest.
A narrow safe harbor: Permit certain activity-based incentives. For example, the law could allow rewards tied to usage while limiting balance-based incentives that resemble interest.
How Congress resolves this issue will shape whether stablecoins remain payments-first tools or potentially evolve into more bank-like stores of value.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
NVIDIA unveils DLSS 4.5 at CES 2026 with second-gen transformer model, 6x frame generation, and neural shading upgrades for RTX GPUs.
NVIDIA dropped DLSS 4.5 at CES 2026, packing a second-generation transformer model that uses 5x more compute than its predecessor. The upgrade targets the 250+ games already running DLSS 4, with major upcoming titles like PRAGMATA and Resident Evil Requiem queued for integration.
The company’s stock sits at $185.81 as of January 13, with shares up 0.47% over 24 hours and a market cap hovering around $4.51 trillion. This release comes as NVIDIA navigates fresh regulatory developments, with the U.S. recently approving H200 chip exports to China under certain conditions.
What’s Actually New
The second-gen transformer model represents the technical meat here. NVIDIA trained it on an expanded dataset, giving the AI better context awareness for scene analysis and smarter pixel sampling. The practical result? Performance Mode now matches or beats native resolution quality, while Ultra Performance becomes genuinely usable for 4K gaming.
Dynamic Multi Frame Generation is the other headline feature. Rather than locking frame generation at a fixed multiplier, the system now shifts automatically based on scene demands. A 6x mode for RTX 50 Series GPUs arrives this spring through Streamline Plugin updates.
Neural Shading Gets Faster
The RTX Neural Texture Compression SDK hit version 0.9 with some notable benchmarks. Block Compression 7 encoding runs 6x faster than before, while inference speed jumped 20% to 40% compared to version 0.8. Developers can now save up to 7x system memory without tanking frame rates.
RTX Kit update 2026.1 bundles these improvements with bug fixes for the Neural Shaders SDK and adds Vulkan support for RTX Hair rendering.
ACE Expands AI Character Options
NVIDIA’s ACE platform now supports the Nemotron Nano 9B V2 model through an In-game Inferencing SDK plugin. The model handles real-time reasoning for non-scripted NPC interactions. Developers can disable intermediate reasoning traces to speed up responses when precision matters less than snappiness.
Qwen3-8B support expanded to include 4B and 600M variants, giving studios more flexibility when balancing memory usage against response quality.
Developer Timeline
DLSS 4.5 Super Resolution is available now through the Streamline Plugin. The 6x Dynamic Multi Frame Generation mode hits this spring. Nsight Graphics 2025.5 already shipped with dynamic shader editing and RTX Hair visualization in the Ray Tracing Inspector.
For NVIDIA investors watching the gaming segment, adoption velocity matters. DLSS 4 became the company’s fastest-adopted gaming tech ever. Whether 4.5 maintains that momentum—particularly with the 6x mode requiring RTX 50 Series hardware—will show up in developer integration rates over the coming quarters.
FLOKI shows neutral momentum at $0.00005377 with RSI at 59.81. Analysts predict potential 420% upside to $0.000280 within 4 weeks despite current bearish MACD signals.
Recent analyst predictions for FLOKI have converged around a bullish medium-term outlook despite current mixed signals. James Ding noted on January 10, 2026, that “FLOKI shows bullish momentum with RSI at 64.03 and MACD turning positive. Technical analysis suggests a potential 40% upside target of $0.000280 within 4 weeks.”
Tony Kim provided a more cautious assessment on January 12, 2026, stating that “FLOKI trades at $0.00005075 with neutral RSI at 55.43. Technical analysis suggests potential 575% upside to $0.000280 within 4 weeks, though momentum remains bearish.”
Darius Baruo offered additional perspective on January 11, 2026, explaining that “FLOKI shows bullish MACD momentum despite neutral RSI at 58.61. Technical analysis suggests potential recovery to $0.000280-$0.000320 range within 4-6 weeks based on recent analyst forecasts.”
The consensus among these analysts points to a $0.000280 price target, representing approximately 420% upside from current levels.
FLOKI Technical Analysis Breakdown
Current technical indicators present a mixed picture for FLOKI price prediction. The token is trading at approximately $0.00005377 with a modest 4.03% gain over the past 24 hours. Trading volume on Binance spot markets reached $12.82 million, indicating moderate market interest.
The RSI reading of 59.81 places FLOKI in neutral territory, neither overbought nor oversold. This suggests room for movement in either direction without immediate technical constraints. The Bollinger Band position at 0.69 indicates FLOKI is trading closer to the upper band, suggesting some upward momentum within recent price ranges.
However, the MACD histogram shows bearish momentum at 0.0000, creating a divergence with analyst expectations. The Stochastic oscillator presents a mixed signal with %K at 64.46 and %D at 51.57, indicating potential for continued volatility.
Floki Price Targets: Bull vs Bear Case
Bullish Scenario
The bullish case for FLOKI centers around the analyst consensus target of $0.000280. This Floki forecast represents a significant breakout above current resistance levels. For this scenario to materialize, FLOKI would need to break above the immediate resistance level and sustain momentum through increased trading volume.
Key technical confirmation signals include RSI moving above 65, MACD histogram turning positive, and a decisive break above current trading ranges. The convergence of multiple analyst predictions around the $0.000280 level suggests this target has strong technical foundation.
Bearish Scenario
The bearish case considers the current MACD bearish momentum and potential support level breaks. If FLOKI fails to maintain current levels, the next significant support would likely be tested around $0.000051. A break below this level could trigger further downside toward previous consolidation zones.
Risk factors include broader cryptocurrency market volatility, potential regulatory concerns, and the inherent volatility associated with meme-based tokens. The disconnect between current bearish momentum indicators and bullish analyst predictions creates uncertainty that could resolve in either direction.
Should You Buy FLOKI? Entry Strategy
For investors considering FLOKI, the current price level around $0.00005377 presents a potential entry point based on analyst predictions. However, the mixed technical signals suggest a cautious approach may be prudent.
Entry strategy considerations include waiting for confirmation above $0.000061 resistance for bullish positioning, or alternatively, accumulating on any dips toward $0.000051 support levels. Given the significant upside potential suggested by analysts, position sizing should account for the high-risk nature of meme token investments.
Stop-loss levels could be set below $0.000051 to limit downside exposure, while profit-taking zones might be established in stages toward the $0.000280 target.
Conclusion
The FLOKI price prediction landscape presents compelling upside potential based on recent analyst forecasts targeting $0.000280 within 4-6 weeks. Despite current bearish momentum indicators, the convergence of multiple technical analyses around this price target suggests significant probability for substantial gains.
However, investors should approach this Floki forecast with appropriate risk management given the volatile nature of cryptocurrency markets and the mixed technical signals currently present. The 420% upside potential comes with corresponding downside risks that must be carefully considered.
Disclaimer: Cryptocurrency price predictions are inherently speculative and subject to high volatility. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Always conduct your own research and consider your risk tolerance before making investment decisions.
Update Jan. 14, 2:20 pm UTC: This article has been updated to add comments from Manta CEO John Patrick Mullin.
Mantra, a blockchain project focused on real-world assets (RWAs), is restructuring its operations after what its leadership described as the most difficult year in the company’s history, marked by a sharp token collapse and prolonged market pressure.
On Wednesday, Manta CEO John Patrick Mullin announced that the company would transition to a leaner and more capital-efficient structure following a period of expansion. The changes include job cuts across multiple teams and a streamlining of operations to better match near-term market conditions.
“I take full accountability for these decisions and for the path that led us here,” Mullin wrote. “I know this is an incredibly challenging situation, particularly for those directly impacted, for their families, and for everyone at MANTRA. I’m especially sorry to those leaving us.”
Mullin said the restructuring was driven primarily by a broader strategic reset rather than a narrow focus on cost reduction.
He told Cointelegraph that while downsizing would lower expenses and extend runway, the core motivation was to sharpen execution and concentrate resources on areas where Matra sees the strongest long-term opportunities.
“This hasn’t changed our core RWA strategy in the slightest. If anything, we are doubling down on it,” Mullin told Cointelegraph, adding that they are prioritizing their layer-1 chain, mantraUSD, and Mantra Finance.
Token collapse and prolonged market pressure
The restructuring follows a steep decline in Mantra’s OM token that began early last year.
According to CoinGecko, the OM token reached an all-time high of $8.99 on Feb. 23, 2025, before collapsing sharply to $0.59 by April 15. It remains around 99% below its previous high before the collapse.
OM token’s one-year price chart. Source: CoinGecko
At the time, Mullin said that the incident was bigger than Mantra and called on exchanges to reassess how leverage is applied to native tokens.
Following the crash, Mantra announced a series of governance and transparency measures, including validator decentralization efforts, the launch of a real-time tokenomics dashboard and the burning of 150 million staked OM tokens to reduce supply.
Despite those measures, the prolonged downturn continued to weigh on the project’s finances. Mullin acknowledged that Mantra’s cost base had become unsustainable given current market conditions, prompting the decision to cut staff and narrow its focus.
The restructuring also comes after months of strained relations between the company and crypto exchange OKX.
On Dec. 8, Mullin urged OM holders to withdraw their tokens from OKX, alleging inaccurate information related to a token migration. OKX disputed the claims, saying it had evidence suggesting coordinated market activity before the April crash.
Mullin said the layoffs disproportionately affected business development, marketing, human resources and other support functions, as the company concentrates resources on core execution.
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
Bitcoin (BTC) consolidated around $95,000 toward Wednesday’s Wall Street open as analysis dismissed macroeconomic threats.
While geopolitical risks and US trade policy uncertainty remain in focus, traders appeared more influenced by liquidity conditions and relative asset performance, with Bitcoin lagging gold and equities before reclaiming $95,000.
Key points:
Bitcoin prepares its next move after a key daily close above the 2025 yearly open.
Gold and stocks at all-time highs contrast the volatility risk from geopolitical tensions and the US Supreme Court tariff ruling.
BTC price action faces multiple hurdles, with $100,000 a turning point.
Bitcoin analysis: Macro risk “already priced in”
Data from TradingView showed cooler BTC price action returning after a run to two-month highs near $96,500.
These came as geopolitical tensions involving the US increased, including fresh potential intervention in Venezuela and Iran, as well as concerns over Greenland.
At the same time, the spat between the government and Federal Reserve took on an increasingly public character, with central banks worldwide rallying in support of Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
S&P 500 futures hit fresh record highs in advance of Tuesday’s US session, while gold built on existing records on the day, reaching $4,639 per ounce.
Among crypto market participants, the anticipation of Bitcoin finally catching up with the global asset bull run was noticeably high.
“Bitcoin has been lagging behind the equity market and precious metal rally, but it has finally pushed through the $95k level that capped rallies since November,” trading resource QCP Capital wrote in its latest Asia Color market update.
QCP added another risk-asset impetus to the mix in the form of Fed economic liquidity injections.
“With potentially further fiat currency debasement in the US, which has been driving precious metals higher, the relative cheapness of Bitcoin relative to precious metals at this point may spur a rotation to digital assets,” it continued.
QCP argued that despite current implied risks to market stability, traders were already one step ahead. Even President Donald Trump’s international trade tariffs being ruled illegal — with potential multitrillion-dollar implications — should not disrupt the overall trend.
“Risks remain, notably the pending Supreme Court decision on tariffs and any escalation in Venezuela or Iran,” the update added.
“For now, the market continues to move higher in the face of these risks, which makes us believe this is already priced in. In the absence of a new unknown unknown, any further escalations should be a buy-the-dip opportunity.”
BTC price faces threat of “liquidity run”
Others also found new reasons for optimism, among them Charles Edwards, founder of quantitative Bitcoin and digital asset fund Capriole Investments.
As Cointelegraph reported, some perspectives argued that this pattern was a relief bounce within a broader downtrend. Trader Roman, who predicted that BTC/USD would target $76,000 once downside reappeared, remained bearish.
“This is text book bearish price action: volume going up – price going down followed by volume going down – price going up/sideways,” he wrote about the weekly chart.
“Maybe we retest 100k area but this is nothing to get excited about. Next time large volume comes in, it’ll likely be a move lower.”
BTC/USDT one-week chart. Source: Roman/X
Trader CrypNeuvo advised caution ahead of a potential resistance battle with Bitcoin’s 50-week exponential moving average (EMA) at $97,650.
“This could be a liquidity run towards the 1W50EMA where price could be rejected from,” he warned about the latest gains.
“Breaking above $100k (4% higher) is my invalidation to this idea.”
BTC/USDT one-day chart. Source: CrypNuevo/X
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.
