SKILLS 2026 survey shows Harvey gaining ground on specialist tools like Kira in contract review, signaling potential consolidation in legal AI market.
Law firms are increasingly running a two-layer technology stack—broad AI platforms for cross-practice work paired with specialist tools for complex workflows—according to the 2026 SKILLS Legal AI Survey results released this week.
The findings highlight a brewing showdown between horizontal platforms like Harvey and entrenched point solutions. Harvey now appears across eight to twelve use-case categories, while specialists like Kira, Relativity, and SimplyAgree maintain deep installed bases in one or two areas each.
“The interesting pressure point is what happens when the horizontal platforms get good enough in those specialist areas,” said Oz Benamram, founder of SKILLS.law, in a Q&A discussing the results.
Contract Review: The Convergence Battleground
Kira currently leads contract review with 44 law firms live on the platform, but Harvey trails closely at 41—despite Harvey’s much broader category reach. Benamram noted Kira has actually lost several firms since last year’s survey, even while maintaining its category leadership.
“That convergence is worth watching, because it forces firms to revisit earlier ‘point solution vs platform’ assumptions,” Benamram said.
The “Consider” numbers tell the forward-looking story. Growing interest in horizontal platforms within categories previously dominated by specialists suggests the specialist moat may be narrowing.
Partnership Signals Ahead of Potential M&A
One development not captured in the survey data: legaltech providers are beginning to form partnerships where each plays to their strengths. Benamram suggested some of these arrangements could lead to future acquisitions.
For firms navigating vendor selection, Benamram offered pointed advice: map which workflows genuinely require deep specialization versus which ones simply reflect habit. “Once you see that map, the consolidation decisions become much clearer, and it’s much easier to negotiate with vendors from a position of strategy rather than inertia.”
The SKILLS Annual Report draws from respondents at AmLaw 100 and AmLaw 200 firms. The organization hosts weekly seminars and product demos, with its 2026 Showcase scheduled to feature sessions on operationalizing AI and custom workflows. Previous SKILLS events have included presentations from DLA Piper, Weil Gotshal, and Ballard Spahr on their generative AI implementations.
Firms betting on point solutions should watch those “Consider” metrics closely. The specialist vendors aren’t dead—but the platform players are clearly coming for their territory.
Bitcoin (BTC) aimed for five-week highs at Thursday’s Wall Street open as US inflation trends stayed on track.
Key points:
US inflation data keeps crypto and stocks higher as BTC price action tests $74,000 again.
Bitcoin traders diverge over the future of the move, with a “bearish retest” risking a new price collapse.
BTC/USD finally recrosses its 50-day moving average trend line.
PCE inflation emboldens Bitcoin bulls
Data from TradingView confirmed new local BTC price highs near $74,000 following the January print of the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Index.
Known as the Federal Reserve’s “preferred” inflation gauge, January PCE matched market expectations, coming in at 0.3% month-on-month and 3.1% year-on-year, per data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
While still at its highest levels since late 2023, the result appeared to soothe risk assets, with US stocks up around 0.5% at the time of writing.
In doing so, both risk assets and crypto began to diverge from a positive correlation to oil seen over the week. WTI crude was down 2% on the day at around $95 per barrel.
CFDs on WTI crude oil one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView
BTC price forecast: $79,000 or “bearish retest?”
Commenting on Bitcoin, crypto trader Michaël van de Poppe was cautiously upbeat on the outlook.
“Resistance zone for me is between $76-79K for Bitcoin. I don’t expect a fast breakout in one-go, but I would assume that we’re going to see some extra momentum occur on the altcoin markets in that window,” he wrote in a post on X.
“In the meantime; if Bitcoin gets there, it provides a monthly engulfing candle and therefore, it erases the entire correction of February.”
BTC/USDT 12-hour chart. Source: Michaël van de Poppe/X
Others stayed on edge, with trader Daan Crypto Trades warning of a “large drop” if the current trading zone collapsed.
Trader Roman, already bearish, described the ongoing shift higher on BTC/USD as a “bearish retest.”
“RSI bear divs, bear price action (volume down + price up), & complete reset of MACD,” he summarized, referring to the relative strength index (RSI) and moving average convergence/divergence (MACD) price indicators on daily time frames.
BTC/USD one-day chart with RSI, MACD data. Source: Roman/X
In fresh updates on his Telegram channel on the day, meanwhile, independent analyst Filbfilb focused on open interest (OI).
Market observers, he said, should watch for OI to “ditch” — an event that would precede the end of the push higher.
Exchange Bitcoin OI (screenshot). Source: CoinGlass
“No sign yet,” he acknowledged, noting that price was now interacting with its 50-day simple moving average (SMA).
As Cointelegraph reported, this was a key overhead resistance zone of interest during previous breakout attempts.
BTC/USD one-day chart with 50 SMA. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView
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 Bank of England’s (BOE) position on stablecoins is evolving to a more friendly stance, but according to the bank’s deputy governor, constructive dialogue with the industry is still lacking.
The UK’s central bank launched a consultation on stablecoins in November last year. Some of the proposed requirements drew the ire of crypto industry representatives, who claimed they could stifle innovation.
Over the past few months, the bank has been working with industry groups to develop its stance on stablecoins. These include revising backing requirements and rethinking account limits.
Some industry observers believe that the bank is coming around on stablecoins, but there is still work to be done.
Bank of England open to feedback on stablecoin risk
On Nov. 10, 2025, the BOE released a document outlining its vision for a stablecoin regulatory regime. This came two years after an initial discussion paper which, according to the bank, included the perspectives of “banks, non-bank payment service providers, payment system operators, trade associations, academia, and individuals.”
At the time, industry observers told Cointelegraph that BOE was overstating the perceived risks that stablecoins pose to the UK economy. Tom Rhodes, chief legal officer at UK-based stablecoin issuer Agant, said at the time that the bank was “disproportionately cautious and restrictive.”
One of the more controversial measures was stablecoin holdings limits, namely 20,000 pounds for individuals and 10 million pounds for businesses that accept it as a form of payment.
Now, it appears that the bank is coming around. Speaking before the House of Lords Financial Services Regulation Committee on Wednesday, BOE Deputy Governor Sarah Breeden told MPs that it is open to reconsidering those limits.
Breeden speaks before the House of Lords. Source: Parliament
Breeden said that the proposed limits were to mitigate the risk of a large migration of deposits to stablecoins, which has the potential to destabilize banks.
“We proposed holding limits as a way of managing that risk. We are open to feedback on other ways of achieving it,” she said.
However, feedback itself also seems to be an issue, at least according to Breeden. She said, “The pressure from the industry to do it in a different way is very real. What we’ve been a bit disappointed with, is nobody said, ‘Why not do it this way?’”
“I don’t think we’ve yet had constructive engagement on a different way to solve the problem that I might have hoped for. Instead, what we’ve had is ‘don’t do this,’ and ‘I understand why you want to do something’ as opposed to filling the gap.”
Rhodes told Cointelegraph on Thursday that this isn’t necessarily the case. “Over the past two years we have reviewed thousands of pages of consultations from the FCA and the Bank, attended numerous roundtable meetings, and submitted hundreds of pages of input both ourselves and as part of trade associations.”
He said that the main challenge for the industry and regulators is that they are making a “comprehensive regulatory regime for a market that has yet to develop.”
Rhodes explained:
“It’s not possible to provide concrete data in the circumstances, which is why lighter touch principles-based regimes are appropriate at this nascent stage.”
Nick Jones, the founder and CEO of UK-based digital assets platform Zumo, said, “Industry groups have been working hard, and to tight deadlines, to make tangible recommendations.”
He said the feedback could be more constructive if the bank followed the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) Spring model. These time-boxed workshops focus on practical applications of the technology to answer regulators’ questions.
The ‘multi-moneyverse’ and what’s next for stablecoins in the UK
Breeden opened her remarks with assurances that at the bank, “we do want to see tokenized money issued by non-banks.”
“We can have what I call a ‘multi-moneyverse’ with greater choice and competition today.”
Such a system, she said in a September speech, is “characterised by choice across different forms of money and payment; with technology driving faster, cheaper, and more innovative payments for the benefit of business, households, and users of financial markets; and — critically — with the whole system underpinned by trust in money itself.”
Inter-monetary competition and its purported benefits have been a core argument from the crypto industry. Rhodes said, “Stablecoins being part of a competitive multi-moneyverse represents a substantial and positive evolution in the Bank’s thinking.”
However, Rhodes noted that this was in “sharp contrast” to BOE Governor Andrew Bailey’s statements, where “he doesn’t see stablecoins as a substitute for commercial bank money.”
Jones said, “Over time, we’ve seen the Bank of England’s scepticism towards digital assets start to dissipate.” It’s “encouraging” that the central bank is more receptive to competing forms of money and that pound sterling-backed stablecoins can co-exist with fiat money.
“It’s clear that different emerging types will fit different use cases — for example, large institutional capital is more comfortable with tokenised deposits while smaller retail payments companies can tap into the network effect of stablecoins,” he said.
The next step, per Rhodes, is a final policy position from the BOE, but revisions are still possible.
The bank expects final rules by the second half of 2026. Source: BOE
The industry is still pushing to remove the holding caps and scrap bank-like capital rules for issuers. Jones said that the latter “are inappropriate for fully-backed issuers, and should be replaced with oversight focused on reserve quality and transparency.”
They also want a reconsideration of reserves. So far, BOE requires issuers to hold 40% of reserve assets in unremunerated Bank of England deposits and up to 60% in high-quality, short-term UK government debt.
This is based on past runs like the Silicon Valley Bank collapse in 2023 which resulted in the USDC stablecoin losing its peg. Breeden told Reuters, “Those numbers are broadly in line with that. That’s why we’re proposing 40% rather than a smaller number.”
“Regulators should perhaps consider remunerating a portion of the 40% held at the Bank of England to help maintain commercial viability,” said Jones.
“The UK can be one of the leaders in stablecoins, but only if regulation is proportionate and competitive.”
Cointelegraph Features publishes long-form journalism, analysis, and narrative reporting produced by Cointelegraph’s in-house editorial team with subject-matter expertise. All articles are edited and reviewed by Cointelegraph editors in line with our editorial standards. Research or perspective in this article does not reflect the views of Cointelegraph as a company unless explicitly stated. Content published in Features 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. This content is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy.
XRP’s (XRP) price was up 3% on Friday to trade above $1.40 as several technical and onchain indicators suggested it was due for a “significant” upward breakout.
Key takeaways:
XRP’s Bollinger Bands indicator now sees the potential for a massive price breakout.
XRP’s falling wedge pattern targets $2.55.
Declining exchange balances and persistent outflows indicate XRP accumulation.
XRP Bollinger Bands point at “significant” breakout
Bollinger Bands, a technical indicator used by traders to assess price momentum and volatility within a certain range, have reached their tightest point in eight months, signaling that volatility should be expected soon.
Another analyst called this a preparation for a “significant breakout.”
XRP’s price continues to “consolidate within a symmetrical triangle structure with tightening Bollinger Bands and a stabilizing RSI,” fellow analyst XRP Update said, adding:
“This volatility compression suggests the market may be preparing for a significant breakout.”
XRP analyst Arthur said, with the Bollinger Bands tightening, a daily candlestick close above $1.50 “would confirm momentum.”
XRP/USD daily chart. Source: X/Arthur
XRP falling wedge pattern targets $2.55
XRP price action is forming a falling wedge pattern on the weekly chart, a structure typically associated with bullish reversals after a prolonged downtrend.
The price has been compressing between two descending trendlines since July 2025, with the lower boundary now acting as key support near the $1.30 psychological level.
Meanwhile, the relative strength index (RSI), on the weekly chart, is rebounding from oversold territory, indicating fading selling momentum.
Historically, similar RSI conditions have preceded strong rebounds in XRP. For example, XRP rallied as much as 85% between July and September 2022 following the RSI’s recovery from oversold conditions.
A confirmed breakout above the wedge’s upper trendline could open the way for a run toward the bullish target of the prevailing chart pattern at $2.55, 78.5% above the current price.
As Cointelegraph reported, bulls must break and sustain the XRP price above the $1.73-$2 supply zone to signal a long-term trend shift.
Declining supply on exchanges backs XRP’s upside
XRP supply on exchanges, or the total amount of coins held on exchange addresses, continues to fall, reflecting accumulation and long-term investor confidence.
The XRP balance on exchanges dropped to 12.8 billion on Friday, levels last seen in May 2021.
XRP reserve on exchanges. Source: Glassnode
A reducing balance means fewer XRP tokens are available for sale, reducing sell-side pressure.
Such outflows typically indicate strong accumulation by large holders, who move funds to cold storage, reducing immediate sell-side pressure and increasing the chances of XRP’s short-term rebound.
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.
While specific analyst predictions from major KOLs are currently limited, recent analysis from January 2026 provides some context for AAVE’s trajectory. According to earlier forecasts, analysts like Rebeca Moen projected “AAVE price prediction shows bullish reversal potential with targets at $185-195 over next 3-4 weeks, supported by oversold RSI recovery and positive MACD momentum.”
Caroline Bishop’s January analysis suggested “AAVE price prediction shows potential rally to $190-$195 range by February 2026, driven by oversold RSI recovery and analyst targets up to $213.” However, these projections were made when AAVE was trading significantly higher than current levels.
On-chain data from platforms like Glassnode and CryptoQuant suggests mixed signals for Aave’s DeFi ecosystem, with total value locked (TVL) metrics showing resilience despite the recent price correction.
AAVE Technical Analysis Breakdown
AAVE’s current technical setup presents a mixed but cautiously optimistic picture. Trading at $115.05, the token sits above its 7-day SMA ($109.97) and just above the 20-day SMA ($113.30), indicating short-term momentum recovery.
The RSI reading of 49.01 places AAVE in neutral territory, suggesting neither overbought nor oversold conditions. This neutral positioning often precedes directional moves, making the next few trading sessions critical for trend determination.
However, the MACD histogram at 0.0000 with a negative MACD value of -3.4111 signals bearish momentum persistence. The Stochastic indicators show %K at 48.53 and %D at 38.82, suggesting potential upward momentum building.
AAVE’s position within the Bollinger Bands at 0.61 indicates the price is trading in the upper portion of the recent range, with the upper band at $121.20 serving as immediate resistance.
Aave Price Targets: Bull vs Bear Case
Bullish Scenario
If AAVE can break above the immediate resistance at $118.37, the next target becomes the strong resistance at $121.68. A sustained break above this level could trigger an Aave forecast targeting the $125-135 range within 2-4 weeks.
The bullish case requires:
– RSI moving above 55-60 range
– MACD histogram turning positive
– Volume confirmation above $20 million daily
– Break above the upper Bollinger Band ($121.20)
Bearish Scenario
Failure to hold the immediate support at $109.37 could see AAVE testing the strong support at $103.68. A break below this level might trigger further downside toward the $95-100 zone.
Based on current technical levels, potential entry strategies include:
Conservative Entry: Wait for a pullback to $109-111 range, near the 20-day SMA support, with a stop-loss at $105.
Aggressive Entry: Current levels around $115 with a break above $118.37 as confirmation, stop-loss at $109.
DCA Approach: Scale into positions between $109-115 range to average down cost basis.
Risk management remains crucial given the Daily ATR of $7.82, indicating significant volatility. Position sizing should account for potential 6-8% daily moves.
Conclusion
The AAVE price prediction for the coming weeks suggests a cautiously optimistic outlook, with targets of $125-135 representing realistic upside potential if technical resistance levels are cleared. While the neutral RSI provides room for upward movement, the bearish MACD signals warrant careful risk management.
This Aave forecast carries moderate confidence given the mixed technical signals and recent analyst projections suggesting higher long-term targets. Traders should monitor the critical $118.37 resistance level for confirmation of the bullish scenario.
Disclaimer: Cryptocurrency price predictions are speculative and should not be considered financial advice. Always conduct your own research and consider your risk tolerance before investing.
A crypto user has lost millions during a crypto swap on the decentralized finance protocol Aave, with a Maximal Extractable Value, or MEV, bot also front-running the transaction to make almost $10 million.
A recently funded wallet from Binance containing $50.4 million USDt (USDT) executed a swap via decentralized exchange aggregator CoW Protocol and the SushiSwap DEX on Thursday, aiming to convert the full amount into the Aave (AAVE) token.
However, the wallet only received 327 AAVE tokens valued at approximately $36,000, according to Etherscan.
The result was an almost total loss as the user paid around $154,000 per AAVE, compared to its market price of around $114.
Adding to the loss was a MEV bot that did a “sandwich attack” on the user. MEV bots scan pending blockchain transactions, and in this case, targeted the large incoming AAVE order to inflate the price of the token ahead of the order to profit.
The bot front-ran the transaction by flash-borrowing $29 million wrapped Ether (ETH) tokens from Morpho to drive up the price of AAVE ahead of the user’s transaction with a purchase on Bancor. It then sold the inflated tokens on SushiSwap for a $9.9 million profit.
A blockchain transaction showing aEthUSDT swapped to aEthAAVE on March 12. Source: Etherscan
User ignored slippage warnings: Aave
Automated market makers, such as SushiSwap, use an automated pricing formula that adjusts slippage, the intended and actual price of a trade, depending on the size of the trading pool and impending trades.
Aave founder Stani Kulechov posted to X that the protocol interface warned the user about the “extraordinary slippage” due to the “unusually large size of the single order.”
“The user confirmed the warning on their mobile device and proceeded with the swap, accepting the high slippage,” he said.
CoW DAO said on X that “despite clear warnings that showed the user they would lose nearly all of the value of their transaction, and despite needing to explicitly opt into the trade after seeing the warning, the user chose to proceed with their swap.”
“No DEX, DEX aggregator, public liquidity pool, or private liquidity pool (or combination thereof) would have been able to fill this trade at anywhere near a reasonable price.”
CoW DAO said that trades like this “show that DeFi UX still isn’t where it needs to be to protect all users,” adding that it would refund any protocol fees associated with the transaction.
Kulechov said Aave sympathized with the user and would attempt to contact them to return $600,000 in fees it collected from the transaction.
“The key takeaway is that while DeFi should remain open and permissionless, allowing users to perform transactions freely, there are additional guardrails the industry can build to better protect users.”
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’s (BTC) long-term price trend against gold shows a bullish shift after retracing to a level previously seen in 2017, 2022, and 2023. The potential trend change appears alongside what analysts describe as an “opportunity within risk.”
BTC–gold ratio shows bullish divergence
MN Capital founder Michaël van de Poppe noted that the Bitcoin-to-gold ratio is showing strength after forming a bullish divergence with the relative strength index (RSI) on the daily chart.
BTCUSD/Gold ratio on a daily chart. Source: X
A bullish divergence occurs when the price forms lower lows while momentum indicators such as the RSI form higher lows. The setup signals fading selling pressure.
In February, the ratio retraced to a key support level near 12-13 that previously acted as resistance in 2017 before turning into support in 2022 and 2023. As a result, the current level may serve as a potential bottom for Bitcoin’s long-term trend against gold.
The holdings measured in native units show another divergence. The 30-day change in Bitcoin ETF balances has improved to 12,909 BTC from -34,197 BTC, while gold ETF holdings dropped to roughly 606,850 ounces from 1.4 million ounces on Feb. 13.
Macro creates an opportunity window for Bitcoin
According to Binance Research, the current macro volatility may present an “opportunity within risk” for Bitcoin. The report noted that BTC has moved similarly to macro assets like oil and US equities amid the US-Israel and Iran war, reflecting how global events are currently driving the price action.
Edit the caption here or remove the text
But capital is starting to return to BTC despite the volatility. The share of Bitcoin trading volume from US spot ETFs has increased recently, signaling rising institutional activity.
Yet ETFs still represent only around 9% of total BTC spot trading volume, well below the 30–40% ETF-to-total equity trading volume in US equity markets, suggesting significant room for institutional expansion.
BTC returns 1-year before and after the midterm elections. Source: Binance Research
Historically, periods of geopolitical turmoil have also preceded strong recoveries. For instance, US midterm election years often have market drawdowns with the S&P 500 averaging a 16% peak-to-trough decline. While Bitcoin has historically fallen around 56% during those cycles.
However, the 12 months following midterm elections have never produced a negative S&P 500 return since 1939, averaging gains of 19%, and Bitcoin has rallied an average of 54% in all three post-midterm years on record.
As Cointelegraph reported, the $78,000 level is now key to a potential broader trend change in the BTC market.
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.
New research examines how investor behavior, wallet architectures, and operational security practices determine what genuine self-custody requires in 2026.
The foundational promise of cryptocurrency is decentralized, sovereign ownership. But this promise has run into a far more sobering reality, as a lot of funds held on centralized exchanges have been lost over the years. Users have learned the same lesson in different forms: Not your keys, not your coins.
Cointelegraph Research’s latest report, produced in collaboration with Trezor, the original hardware wallet, and titled “The Future of Self-Custody: Turning Ownership Into Security,” examines how this realization has reshaped investor behavior. Drawing on survey responses, post-mortem analyses of exchange failures, and a breakdown of modern wallet architectures, the report explains why self-custody should be a defining topic for crypto security in 2026.
Survey data shows a decisive erosion of trust in centralized exchanges. A majority of respondents now trust exchanges less than they did a year earlier, with the memory of the FTX collapse remaining a key psychological driver. Even regulatory frameworks such as MiCA, which improve custodial oversight, do not alter the underlying dynamic. Users increasingly recognize that custodial access can be restricted or withdrawn by decisions outside of their control. Migration into self-custody has therefore become a form of risk management.
Once assets move into self-custody, security no longer depends on institutional controls but on the user’s operational discipline. The survey shows that most users converge on a simple architecture, yet many still misunderstand that while hardware wallets meaningfully reduce the risk of remote compromise, they do not eliminate losses caused by the user.
As a result, the report shifts the focus from device choice to behavior: how transactions are verified, how recovery material is stored, and how users model real-world threats.
The central conclusion is that turning ownership into security is not achieved through regulation, branding, or devices alone. It is a behavioral practice that depends on disciplined use of devices and an accurate understanding of what custody does and does not protect against.
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. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as, legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph. Cointelegraph does not endorse the content of this article nor any product mentioned herein. Readers should do their own research before taking any action related to any product or company mentioned and carry full responsibility for their decisions. 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.
A new report from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) warns that crypto service providers operating offshore pose risks of money laundering, sanctions evasion and other illicit financial activity.
In the report, titled “Understanding and Mitigating the Risks of Offshore Virtual Asset Service Providers (oVASPs),” the FATF said some offshore firms exploit gaps and differences in regulatory and supervisory coverage, making it harder for authorities to monitor activity and enforce Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter-Terrorist Financing rules.
“As a result, effective international co-operation may not be possible, including with the relevant oVASP supervisor, thereby limiting the effectiveness of domestic risk-mitigation measures,” the report said.
The watchdog said the issue is particularly challenging because many offshore crypto firms operate across multiple jurisdictions. A company may be incorporated in one country, host infrastructure in another and serve customers worldwide through online platforms, leaving regulators uncertain about which authority has responsibility.
The FATF also said some countries struggle to identify offshore platforms providing services to local users. Without a local legal presence, authorities may have limited visibility into these businesses or the transactions they process.
To address the problem, FATF urged countries to strengthen oversight of crypto firms serving their markets, even if those companies are based abroad.
FATF survey found that 83% of jurisdictions require licensed or registered crypto service providers. Source: FATF
The organization recommended that governments require offshore VASPs to register or obtain licenses when offering services to domestic users. It also called for stronger cooperation between regulators and law enforcement agencies across borders.
The warning follows a separate FATF report last week on stablecoins and unhosted wallets, which said peer-to-peer transfers can weaken AML oversight when transactions occur without regulated intermediaries such as exchanges or custodians.
The FATF said this structure creates gaps in AML oversight as stablecoins expand into payments and cross-border transfers. The watchdog urged countries to assess the risks and introduce safeguards.
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
Ray Dalio argues that Bitcoin cannot replace gold as the world’s primary store of value because gold has thousands of years of history as money and remains deeply embedded in the global financial system.
Gold’s role in central bank reserves gives it institutional legitimacy that Bitcoin currently lacks, making governments more likely to rely on gold during periods of economic uncertainty.
Dalio believes Bitcoin behaves more like a risk asset, often moving alongside technology stocks and other speculative investments rather than acting as a traditional safe-haven during market turmoil.
The size and maturity of the gold market far exceed those of Bitcoin, with gold supported by central banks, sovereign funds, industrial demand and investment markets developed over centuries.
For years, investors and analysts have discussed whether Bitcoin (BTC) could one day take over from gold as the world’s main store of value.
Supporters of Bitcoin often call it “digital gold,” arguing that its fixed supply and decentralized design could make it a modern inflation hedge.
However, billionaire investor Ray Dalio has opposed this view. While Dalio recognizes Bitcoin’s distinct features and its growing presence in financial markets, he believes it cannot replace gold. His arguments are based on gold’s long historical role, its position in global markets, the actions of central banks and its place in the world’s monetary system for centuries.
Dalio’s viewpoint provides a useful framework for investors to think about the continuing debate between established safe-haven assets like gold and digital alternatives like Bitcoin.
This article examines why Ray Dalio believes Bitcoin cannot replace gold as the world’s primary store of value. It highlights concerns about central bank adoption, market behavior, privacy and technological risks, while explaining why he still sees Bitcoin as a complementary asset in diversified portfolios.
Who Ray Dalio is and why his views matter
Ray Dalio is the founder of Bridgewater Associates, one of the leading hedge funds in the world. Over the years, he has earned a reputation as one of the most influential thinkers in macroeconomics and finance.
Dalio is best known for his in-depth study of long-term debt cycles, monetary policy and shifts in global economic power. His analysis of how currencies rise and decline over centuries has influenced the investment decisions of institutions, governments and major asset managers.
Because of his expertise, Dalio’s views on stores of value, particularly during periods of economic uncertainty, receive significant attention.
Dalio’s key view: “There is only one gold”
While expressing his views on Bitcoin’s possible role in the global financial system, Dalio has been clear about the unique position of gold as a monetary asset.
He argues that gold should not be treated as directly comparable to Bitcoin, as if the two were interchangeable. In his view, gold is not just another commodity or speculative asset.
Instead, Dalio describes gold as “the most established form of money” in human history. For thousands of years, the metal has served as a reliable store of value across different civilizations, financial systems and political changes.
Because of this long historical role, Dalio believes no new asset can replace gold, digital or otherwise.
Did you know? Gold has been used as money for more than 4,000 years. Ancient civilizations such as Egypt and Mesopotamia valued it for its rarity, durability and divisibility, making it one of the earliest universally recognized stores of wealth.
How demand by central banks makes gold unique
Dalio highlights that central banks’ demand for gold helps position it as a unique asset. Central banks around the world hold significant amounts of gold as part of their foreign exchange reserves. They use it to diversify their assets and maintain stability during times of financial stress.
The widespread institutional use of gold gives it state legitimacy that Bitcoin has not yet gained.
Dalio is skeptical about central banks accumulating Bitcoin as a reserve asset in the near future. Governments generally prefer assets with long histories, deep and stable liquidity and well-established markets.
Bitcoin, being relatively new, is still evolving both technologically and in terms of regulation. Without adoption by central banks, Dalio argues, Bitcoin is unlikely to achieve the same monetary status as gold.
Bitcoin behaves more like a risk asset
Dalio points to differences in how Bitcoin performs during market cycles.
Gold has often been treated as a safe-haven asset. During periods of market volatility, currency weakness or geopolitical stress, investors have frequently turned to gold as a hedge.
Bitcoin, however, has demonstrated a different pattern.
Dalio observes that Bitcoin frequently moves in line with technology stocks and other risk assets. In times of market stress or liquidity tightening, investors tend to sell Bitcoin along with equities rather than use it as a hedge.
To Dalio, this pattern suggests Bitcoin currently behaves more like a speculative growth asset than a traditional store of value.
The scale and maturity of gold markets
Gold markets are far larger and more mature than Bitcoin markets.
The global gold market has evolved over thousands of years and attracts extensive institutional involvement, including central banks, sovereign wealth funds, jewelry demand, industrial users and investment funds.
This depth provides strong liquidity and greater price stability.
By comparison, Bitcoin’s market, though significant within cryptocurrencies, is much smaller and more vulnerable to shifts in investor sentiment. It remains subject to sharp price volatility, leveraged trading and speculative cycles that heavily influence its value.
Dalio sees this gap in market maturity as another reason gold maintains its leading role as a store of value.
Did you know? Bitcoin’s supply is permanently capped at 21 million coins, a design feature that mimics the scarcity of precious metals. This programmed scarcity is one reason supporters often compare Bitcoin with gold.
Privacy concerns with Bitcoin
Dalio has also pointed to issues around Bitcoin’s transparency.
Because Bitcoin runs on a public blockchain, every transaction is permanently recorded and can be traced using blockchain analysis tools. While users are identified only by wallet addresses, transaction patterns can often be linked and monitored.
In Dalio’s view, this level of visibility may make Bitcoin less appealing to certain institutions or governments as a long-term reserve asset.
Gold, being a physical asset, does not depend on a publicly visible transaction ledger.
The potential threat from quantum computing
Ray Dalio has also highlighted quantum computing as a risk to Bitcoin.
Bitcoin’s security relies on cryptographic algorithms to protect private keys and validate transactions. Future breakthroughs in quantum computing could potentially compromise or break these existing cryptographic systems.
Although quantum computing remains a theoretical concern, Dalio suggests that such technological risks should be factored into any long-term assessment of Bitcoin’s viability as a store of value.
Gold, being a physical asset, does not depend on software or cryptography. It is therefore unaffected by these kinds of technological vulnerabilities.
Did you know? Central banks hold gold in their reserves. Countries maintain these reserves as a hedge against currency instability, geopolitical risk and financial crises.
Dalio’s broader macroeconomic perspective
Dalio’s preference for gold over Bitcoin is also influenced by his broader view of the global economy.
He has cautioned that the world could be entering an era of significant economic and geopolitical disruption, marked by escalating debt burdens, currency instability and shifts in global power dynamics.
In such conditions, Dalio argues that investors should prioritize assets with a proven track record of preserving value during times of financial system stress.
For centuries, gold has consistently served this purpose amid inflation, currency devaluation and geopolitical uncertainty.
This long historical record is a key reason Dalio continues to view gold as a relatively resilient store of wealth.
Bitcoin still has a role in portfolios
While Dalio remains skeptical about Bitcoin ever overtaking gold, he still considers it a viable component of an investment portfolio. He recognizes that Bitcoin’s unique attributes, namely its fixed supply and decentralized nature, mirror some of the strengths associated with gold.
Rather than choosing one over the other, Dalio suggests that both assets serve a similar purpose.
Portfolio allocation: Dalio has recommended that investors might allocate approximately 15% of their portfolio to a combination of gold and Bitcoin.
Hedging strategy: This allocation acts as a safeguard against the loss of purchasing power and general economic instability.
Complementary assets: In his view, Bitcoin does not replace gold. Instead, the two assets can play complementary roles in diversification.
The ongoing debate between Bitcoin and gold
The positions of Bitcoin and gold highlight a significant divide in the financial world. While Bitcoin emphasizes digital portability, scarcity and technological innovation, gold is associated with a multigenerational history, physical tangibility and institutional trust.
Ultimately, this debate centers on how society defines and trusts money. While new technology can create efficient financial tools, the deep-rooted trust required for a global monetary standard is often built over centuries, not years.
Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence. The selection, commissioning and publication of Features and Magazine content are not influenced by advertisers, partners or commercial relationships.
