Menu

Equities & Markets

Metaplanet clears shareholder vote to merge with Super League for US Bitcoin treasury

Metaplanet clears shareholder vote to merge with Super League for US Bitcoin treasury

, , , , , , ,

Metaplanet has cleared a major regulatory hurdle toward establishing a US-listed Bitcoin treasury platform by merging with Nasdaq-listed Super League Enterprise. The shareholder vote removes uncertainty around a deal that would give the Japanese firm control of American capital markets access for Bitcoin accumulation and fundraising.

  • Super League shareholders approved issuing up to 435.9 million common shares to Metaplanet and Evo Fund on October 16 (Friday).
  • Metaplanet will contribute 2,100 BTC and $2.5 million cash for 44.86 million shares priced at $3 each, valued at roughly $170 million as of the vote date.
  • The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2026, pending remaining Nasdaq filings and regulatory approvals.
  • 2,100 BTC Metaplanet’s Bitcoin contribution to the merger, unchanged despite value appreciation
  • 93.7% Estimated ownership stake Metaplanet will hold at deal closing
  • $170M Bitcoin contribution value on October 16, up from $132.1 million in August
  • $3.38B Potential capital from warrant exercises at initial strike prices

CryptoSlate reported that an October 19 SEC filing confirmed Super League shareholders approved all proposals at the October 16 annual meeting, clearing a critical condition for Metaplanet’s planned acquisition. The official filing showed the principal issuance proposal received 1.06 million votes in favor against 25,314 opposed. The deal will transform Super League into Superplanet, which will trade under ticker SUPA and function as Metaplanet’s US-listed Bitcoin treasury platform while maintaining the company’s existing Japanese operations.

Shareholders back 435.9 million share issuance for Metaplanet’s Bitcoin contribution

The vote approves the issuance of up to 435.9 million common shares under subscription agreements with both Metaplanet and investment firm Evo Fund, executed on August 18 (Tuesday). Under the Metaplanet agreement, the Japanese Bitcoin firm will contribute 2,100 BTC and $2.5 million in cash in exchange for 44.86 million newly issued common shares at $3 per share. The number of shares Metaplanet receives remains fixed despite Bitcoin’s price movement between August and October, meaning Metaplanet captures no additional shares as the value of its Bitcoin contribution rose from approximately $132.1 million to $170 million.

Dylan LeClair, Metaplanet’s Director of Bitcoin Strategy, estimated the company will own approximately 93.7 percent of Superplanet at deal closing based on Super League’s share count as of September 29.

Charter amendments expand Metaplanet’s control and fundraising toolkit

Shareholders also approved amendments to increase authorized preferred shares tenfold, from 10 million to 100 million. The preferred share expansion enables Superplanet to issue senior, non-convertible perpetual preferred securities to outside investors seeking income while directing capital toward Bitcoin accumulation. Unlike debt, perpetual preferred stock carries no fixed repayment date but creates recurring dividend obligations that must be funded through operating cash flow or subsequent fundraising.

Metaplanet will receive 100 shares of convertible Strategic Alliance Preferred Stock carrying special governance rights and approval authority over major corporate decisions including mergers, charter amendments and changes of control. The Japanese firm will designate five of Superplanet’s nine board members, securing control over capital-allocation strategy. The deal also grants Metaplanet ten-year warrants to acquire 381 million additional common shares through four tranches, beginning with 210 million shares at $3 each, followed by 100 million at $10, 50 million at $21, and 21 million at $33.50. Full exercise would generate approximately $3.38 billion in capital, though higher strike prices require substantial stock appreciation to make exercises economically attractive.

Metaplanet will separately retain a 24-month right to invest up to $210 million through Junior Liquidity Support Preferred Stock, which would rank behind senior preferred securities and carry dividends at three-month SOFR plus four percentage points. This structure allows Metaplanet to provide subordinated capital that could strengthen Superplanet’s balance sheet and help attract senior preferred investors.

Deal completion hinges on Nasdaq approval in fourth quarter

The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2026, contingent on remaining requirements including Nasdaq-related filings. Metaplanet CEO Simon Gerovich said the expansion would advance the company’s ambition to become a global Bitcoin-native financial platform, with complementary operations in the US and Japan supporting international fundraising, capital allocation and Bitcoin-related financial products.

Super League’s existing advertising and media operations will continue under Chief Executive Officer Matt Edelman.

The structure introduces potential share dilution from warrant exercises, while senior preferred issuance would create additional dividend obligations Superplanet must service. The company separately disclosed that it purchased two BTC for approximately $162,890 on October 16 as it explores holding Bitcoin alongside cash reserves. No timeline or specific capital target for that independent Bitcoin accumulation strategy was disclosed.

The BlockWest read. Superplanet’s founding structure gives Metaplanet upside optionality through warrants while locking in founding shareholding through fixed-share issuance. The perpetual preferred framework depends entirely on investor appetite for yield subordinated to a volatile Bitcoin-backing asset. How deeply outside institutional capital will actually subscribe to senior perpetual preferred, and at what dividend cost to the balance sheet, will determine whether this financing model accelerates or constrains Bitcoin accumulation.

Nasdaq must approve the listing and related matters before closing. Metaplanet’s next critical step is filing any remaining Nasdaq documentation and navigating final approval, with the deal targeted for completion by the end of 2026.

JPMorgan projects bitcoin to return 10% annually over the next decade, topping stocks and bonds.

JPMorgan projects bitcoin to return 10% annually over the next decade, topping stocks and bonds.

, , , , , , ,

JPMorgan has put numbers on bitcoin’s next decade for the first time, and its base case beats every traditional asset class it tracks. For allocators weighing digital assets, the bank’s caution about volatility and correlations matters as much as the headline return.

  • JPMorgan’s base case has bitcoin returning 10% annually over ten years, ahead of stocks, bonds and gold.
  • The bear case is a 9.7% annual loss, while the bull case is a 17% annual gain.
  • JPMorgan still calls bitcoin speculative, citing volatility and unstable correlations as obstacles to widespread portfolio inclusion.
  • 10% JPMorgan’s base-case annual bitcoin return, versus 7.7% for U.S. small caps
  • -9.7% Bear-case annual bitcoin return, set against a 17% bull-case gain
  • 17% Bull-case annual bitcoin return, against 10% in the base case
  • 5.5% Projected annual gold return, below the 5.6%-6.6% forecast for U.S. bonds

JPMorgan expects bitcoin to return 10% a year over the next decade in its base case, ahead of its forecasts for U.S. stocks, bonds and gold, CoinDesk reported. The bank published the figures on Tuesday (October 20) in its 2027 Long-Term Capital Market Assumptions report. It is the first time JPMorgan has put a range on bitcoin returns in its research.

JPMorgan’s 10% base case tops U.S. equities, bonds and gold

JPMorgan projects U.S. large-cap equities at 7.5% a year and small caps at 7.7%. Bitcoin’s 10% base case sits 2.3 percentage points above the better of those two. U.S. bonds are forecast at 5.6% to 6.6%.

Gold is forecast at 5.5%, which leaves bitcoin’s base case 4.5 percentage points ahead. The bear case of a 9.7% annual loss and the bull case of a 17% gain sit 26.7 points apart.

Shah and Cristallo call bitcoin a speculative hedge against monetary easing

The bank kept a cautious tone. It said bitcoin’s “volatility and unstable correlation to other asset classes…remain an obstacle to [its] widespread inclusion in portfolios.”

JPMorgan does not make a case for bitcoin as a diversifier. Portfolio manager Dr Sheena Shah and head of digital asset strategy Dennis Cristallo call it a “speculative asset and a hedge against monetary easing.” They added a further point on its role in a portfolio.

It lacks a strategic role in portfolios other than as a bet on fiat currency expansion or future asset trading on blockchains.

Dr Sheena Shah, portfolio manager, and Dennis Cristallo, head of digital asset strategy, JPMorgan

The authors wrote that bitcoin “mostly trades like a high beta risk asset that tracks global money supply growth, but it is sometimes treated as ‘digital gold.'” Unstable correlations with other assets present a modeling hurdle.

Forecasting is harder still, they said, because bitcoin’s fundamentals are not cash flows. Its economics may be as much about adoption, regulation and liquidity as technology.

Dimon’s 2017 “fraud” call is the backdrop to JPMorgan’s first bitcoin range

The New York-based bank has a complicated history with cryptocurrency, largely because of CEO Jamie Dimon’s widely publicized views. Dimon described the world’s largest crypto as a “fraud” in 2017. He has reiterated that skepticism in somewhat softer language in recent years.

The reporting carries no comment from Dimon on the new forecasts, and no bitcoin advocates are quoted. The only voices represented are the bank’s own authors.

The BlockWest read. We read the forecast as a sizing guide, not an endorsement. A 10% base case, a 9.7% annual loss in the bear case and a bank that sees no strategic role beyond a bet on money expansion all point to small, tactical positions. Allocators benchmarked to equities at 7.7% are offered a 2.3-point premium for absorbing a 26.7-point range of outcomes.

The open question is whether bitcoin’s correlations settle enough to move it from a speculative bet to a portfolio holding. Shah and Cristallo name unstable correlations as a core obstacle to widespread inclusion. Until that changes, JPMorgan’s 10% base case sits beside a stated reluctance to treat the asset as a strategic allocation.

BlackRock’s IBIT drove spot bitcoin ETF inflows to largest daily total in a month

BlackRock’s IBIT drove spot bitcoin ETF inflows to largest daily total in a month

, , , , , , , ,

Spot bitcoin ETF flows are the clearest daily read on US institutional demand, and Monday’s total came from a single issuer. BlackRock’s IBIT took in more than the whole category’s net figure, which matters for readers judging how broad the bid really is.

  • U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs took in $526.6 million on Monday, their largest daily net inflow in nearly a month.
  • BlackRock’s IBIT drew $665.2 million while Fidelity’s FBTC lost $83.6 million and Grayscale’s GBTC shed $54.9 million.
  • Ether funds lost $103.3 million, and bitcoin funds remain about $90.5 million negative for October despite the rebound.
  • $526.6M Monday net inflow into U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs, biggest in nearly a month
  • $665.2M IBIT inflow, its largest single day since October 7 last year
  • $714.7M combined bitcoin ETF inflow on September 22, the last larger day
  • $103.3M ether fund outflow Monday, a fourth straight session of withdrawals

U.S. spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds took in a net $526.6 million on Monday (October 19), the largest daily inflow in nearly a month, CoinDesk reported. BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) accounted for all of it. The data arrived Tuesday (October 20), with bitcoin holding near $82,000 as the Nasdaq rebounded more than 1%, according to CoinDesk’s market coverage.

IBIT’s $665.2 million inflow is its biggest since October 7 last year

IBIT pulled in $665.2 million, its largest daily inflow since Oct. 7 last year, according to SoSoValue data. That single-fund figure is larger than the category’s $526.6 million net total, because other products lost money.

Fidelity’s FBTC lost $83.6 million, and Grayscale’s GBTC shed $54.9 million. Every other fund in the category recorded zero net flow.

The CoinDesk report includes no comment from BlackRock, Fidelity or Grayscale. The motives behind Monday’s split are therefore not documented.

September 22 remains the last day to top Monday, at $714.7 million

The combined bitcoin funds last drew more on Sept. 22, when they added $714.7 million. Monday’s total sat about $188.1 million below that mark, so the day was large for recent weeks but not a record for the period.

The inflow more than erased last week’s $228.5 million of withdrawals, which covered October 12 to 16. Even so, the funds remain about $90.5 million in the red for October, according to CoinDesk calculations using SoSoValue’s figures.

Ether funds shed $103.3 million, and Tuesday’s session will test both trends

Ether products moved the other way, losing $103.3 million in their fourth consecutive session of outflows. BlackRock’s ETHA accounted for $95.4 million of the withdrawals, according to SoSoValue. That is more than 90% of the category’s total.

The same issuer therefore led buying in bitcoin and selling in ether on Monday. Neither flow has been explained by BlackRock in the reporting available.

The BlockWest read. We read Monday as an IBIT story more than a category story. With FBTC and GBTC in outflow and the remaining funds flat, the $526.6 million headline measures one product’s pull, not broad appetite. Allocators weighing the data should watch whether other issuers post inflows before treating the rebound as a category-wide shift in demand for bitcoin exposure.

The next SoSoValue print, covering Tuesday (October 20) trading, will show whether IBIT’s inflow repeats and whether ETHA’s outflows stretch to a fifth session.

JPMorgan expands JPM Coin to public Ethereum for institutional users

JPMorgan expands JPM Coin to public Ethereum for institutional users

, , , , , , ,

JPMorgan is extending its bank-issued deposit token to public Ethereum, putting a Wall Street payments product on infrastructure long associated with crypto-native finance. For BlockWest readers, the question is who is allowed to move money on it, and under whose rules.

  • JPMorgan is expanding access to JPM Coin on public Ethereum for institutional users.
  • JPM Coin represents bank deposits rather than an independently issued stablecoin, and participation remains restricted.
  • Watch whether banks and tokenization platforms use Ethereum for collateral transfers and settlement against tokenized assets.
  • 24/7 Settlement hours on Ethereum, versus conventional banking cut-offs that delay cash legs
  • 2 Public networks carrying JPM Coin, Ethereum now added to earlier Base launch

JPMorgan is bringing JPM Coin, its bank-issued deposit token, to Ethereum, NewsBTC reported. The expansion is aimed at institutional users, and participation stays restricted. The bank had previously introduced the token on Base.

The development is news now because Ethereum becomes the second public network to carry the token after Base.

JPM Coin is a claim on JPMorgan deposits, not a stablecoin

JPM Coin gives eligible customers a tokenized claim on dollars deposited with JPMorgan. A holder of a dollar stablecoin generally has a claim governed by the issuer’s redemption arrangements and reserve assets. JPM Coin is bank money represented in token form.

It is not being offered as a freely transferable dollar for ordinary Ethereum users.

Round-the-clock settlement targets the gap between asset and cash legs

On Ethereum, institutions can send funds and settle transactions at any hour, while still operating inside the bank’s permissioning framework. Potential uses include moving collateral and settling transactions against tokenized assets. In those trades, a conventional banking cut-off can create delay between the asset leg and the cash leg.

A public blockchain does not automatically make the system open to everyone. The bank continues to control institutional access and compliance.

Which institutions and platforms will coordinate payments on Ethereum is still open

Ethereum gives financial institutions and tokenization platforms another venue where payments can be coordinated alongside Base. The development is better understood as traditional finance adopting a public settlement network without abandoning its existing customer controls.

For Ethereum, that may be the bigger story. A major bank is choosing its infrastructure for business that depends on predictable dollar settlement, rather than simply issuing another experiment.

The source reporting does not quote JPMorgan executives or Ethereum developers, so neither side’s own account of the rollout is represented here.

The BlockWest read. We read this as a bet on settlement plumbing rather than a crypto product. For treasurers and collateral managers, the test is whether deposits on a shared ledger shorten the wait between asset and cash legs. Ethereum gains usage from a bank that wants predictable dollars, while JPMorgan keeps the customer relationship and the access controls. That split of roles is the template other banks would copy.

The open question is which institutions and tokenization platforms actually settle on JPM Coin over Ethereum. The NewsBTC report names none, and JPMorgan has not been quoted on the rollout.

Crypto exchanges liquidate $51.6 million in chip-stock bets during U.S. market closure

Crypto exchanges liquidate $51.6 million in chip-stock bets during U.S. market closure

, , , , ,

Crypto venues now let traders take leveraged positions on chip stocks at any hour, and a Saturday liquidation cascade showed what happens when no real share price exists to anchor them. The episode gives BlockWest readers a live test of how weekend equity perpetuals behave against the underlying market.

  • About $51.6 million in chip-linked positions were force-closed between 21:22 and 21:32 UTC on Saturday, per CoinGlass data.
  • SOXL liquidations reached about $12.7 million, while SanDisk and SK Hynix contracts each saw about $10.8 million closed.
  • U.S. markets reopen Monday, when outside stock quotes return and reveal how far weekend contract prices strayed.
  • $51.6M chip-linked positions force-closed in 10 minutes, according to CoinGlass data
  • $38M of liquidations came from long bets, roughly 74% of the total
  • $12.7M SOXL liquidations, largest single contract, ahead of $10.8M for SanDisk
  • $21.9M Binance SanDisk trading in the first minute versus $3.1M on Trade XYZ

Nearly $52 million in leveraged crypto bets on chip stocks was wiped out in 10 minutes on Saturday, CoinDesk reported. Wall Street was closed, so the shares themselves sat idle.

The bets were perpetual futures, contracts that track a stock’s price and trade around the clock on crypto exchanges. That lets traders buy and sell chip stocks on a Saturday night. A trader who borrows to enlarge a position is closed out automatically when losses eat through the deposit, and the forced selling can push prices lower for the next trader in line.

The checkpoint is Monday, when U.S. markets reopen.

SOXL takes the biggest hit at $12.7 million as long bets bear the brunt

CoinGlass data put the total at about $51.6 million in positions tied to chip stocks and semiconductor funds, all closed by force between 21:22 and 21:32 UTC. About $38 million came from traders betting on higher prices, roughly 74% of the total.

SOXL, a fund that triples the daily moves in chip shares, took the biggest hit at about $12.7 million. SanDisk and SK Hynix contracts followed at about $10.8 million each.

Binance sell orders at 21:21:59 UTC reached Hyperliquid in under a second

The selling started on Binance, according to a review of the trades by David Jeong, chief executive of trading firm Tread.fi. Jeong placed the first large SanDisk and Micron sell orders on Binance at 21:21:59 UTC. Less than a second later, orders hit Hyperliquid, a crypto exchange where Trade XYZ lists stock-tracking contracts.

Roughly 10 addresses opened bets against six chip-linked contracts within 1.8 seconds. Binance handled about $21.9 million of SanDisk trading in that first minute, against $3.1 million on Trade XYZ, or about seven times as much.

Memory-chip shares were already coming off a rough week as investors weighed new competition from Chinese chipmaker CXMT. The reporting does not include comment from Binance, Hyperliquid, Trade XYZ or CXMT, so their positions are not represented.

Trade XYZ sets its own reference prices until Monday’s stock quotes return

With the stock market shut, there was no real share price for these contracts to follow, so traders were reacting only to each other. Trade XYZ’s rules let trading on the platform set its own reference prices until outside stock quotes come back. Those quotes return when U.S. markets open Monday, showing how far Saturday’s prices strayed from where the shares actually trade.

The BlockWest read. We read the episode as a stress test of venue design rather than of chip stocks. Binance carried about seven times Trade XYZ’s SanDisk volume in the first minute, so the deepest pool of flow set the tone in a market with no reference price. Allocators using weekend contracts as a signal should treat Saturday prints as crypto-venue prices, and Monday’s quotes will set the discount.

The $52 million in liquidations was priced by crypto traders alone, with no stock quote to check it against. Trade XYZ’s own trading set the reference prices in the meantime. The test comes when U.S. markets open Monday, and the size of the gap to actual share prices is still unknown.

MSCI finalizes rules to remove bitcoin-holding companies from global indexes

MSCI finalizes rules to remove bitcoin-holding companies from global indexes

, , , , , , ,

MSCI’s new index rules could strip bitcoin-holding companies like Strategy and Metaplanet of passive capital flows worth billions. For allocators tracking these stocks through index funds, forced selling would hit share prices without touching the underlying bitcoin treasuries these firms accumulate.

  • MSCI finalized rules that could remove Strategy, Metaplanet and other asset-heavy companies from global equity indexes effective November 30.
  • JPMorgan analysts estimate Strategy’s exclusion could trigger roughly $2.8 billion in stock outflows, though index funds would sell shares, not bitcoin.
  • Strategy holds 848,250 BTC worth approximately $69.67 billion, funding purchases via preferred share issuance; weaker equity demand could impair this funding channel.
  • $2.8B Estimated stock outflows from Strategy if excluded from MSCI indexes
  • 848,250 Bitcoin holdings by Strategy, the largest public bitcoin holder
  • Nov 30 Effective date when MSCI index changes take effect after trading closes
  • 72% Decline in Strategy’s share price from November 2024 peak to Thursday close

CoinDesk reported that MSCI, one of the world’s largest stock index providers, finalized rules on Thursday that could remove shares of Strategy and Metaplanet from its Global Investable Market Indexes. The new criteria, originally proposed in August, target companies whose assets consist mainly of investments rather than operations tied to an actual business. The definitive roster of affected firms will be announced on November 11, with the removal taking effect at the close of November 30.

Strategy and Metaplanet face removal under new investment-heavy company rules

Under MSCI’s framework, companies that operate primarily as investment vehicles become ineligible for inclusion. The rules force index funds that track MSCI benchmarks to sell holdings when a member company is removed. Unlike active managers who can choose whether to hold, these passive funds operate mechanically: when a stock is removed, they must sell, irrespective of their own assessment of the company’s prospects.

The policy carries specific weight for Strategy because it relies on selling preferred shares to fund bitcoin purchases, a strategy it has pursued for years to accumulate more coins.

Strategy, based in Tysons Corner, Virginia, is the largest publicly listed bitcoin holder with 848,250 BTC valued at approximately $69.67 billion according to Bitcoin Treasuries. The company’s shares closed at $151.29 on Thursday, down roughly 72 percent from a record high of $543 reached in November 2024. Tokyo-based Metaplanet, which closed at 277 yen ($1.75) on Friday, peaked at 1,930 yen in June 2025, according to TradingView.

Forced selling of shares would not affect bitcoin holdings but could impair future treasury purchases

JPMorgan analysts have estimated that Strategy’s exclusion from MSCI indexes could prompt approximately $2.8 billion in stock outflows. Critically, these flows would pressure the equity price without directly touching the bitcoin stored in company vaults. Index funds would dump the stock itself, not force Strategy to liquidate its cryptocurrency reserves.

Yet the indirect effect poses a real risk to Strategy’s strategy of accumulating additional bitcoin. A sustained decline in share price and equity demand could tighten the funding window that Strategy relies on to issue preferred shares and convert those proceeds into bitcoin purchases. Decentralized infrastructure network ZEROBASE stated on X that “passive capital has become an important source of demand for these stocks; any sustained reduction in that bid could tighten the equity-issuance window that several of them rely on to fund further purchases.”

The MSCI episode highlights a growing tension between traditional index construction and the rise of companies that treat Bitcoin as a core treasury asset rather than a secondary holding.

ZEROBASE, decentralized infrastructure network

MSCI’s screening process flags three firms; bitcoin-heavy assets temporarily reclassified

MSCI applies two sequential tests to identify ineligible companies. First, it examines whether a company holds substantial operating assets tied to a real business. Those that fail proceed to a second evaluation based on five financial ratios measuring expenses, cash flow, asset value changes and dependence on external financing. A company flagged on four or more of the five ratios is deemed ineligible.

In a test run using May 2026 data, MSCI flagged three companies for possible removal: Strategy, Metaplanet and Yellow Cake, a British uranium investment vehicle.

The index operator is also discontinuing temporary measures it had imposed in October 2025 for companies with digital assets comprising 50 percent or more of total assets. Those measures had frozen increases in share counts used for index weighting and deferred additions or size-segment moves for such firms. From the November review onward, those companies will fall under the new screening rules rather than the temporary framework. Strategy founder Michael Saylor has asserted that the company operates a real business through its software segment and treats its bitcoin treasury as a distinct business line separate from its core operations, pushing back against characterizations that it functions as an investment fund.

The BlockWest read. For allocators, the risk is not that Strategy’s bitcoin disappears but that equity-based funding for future acquisitions dries up. Index exclusion is primarily a capital structure blow, not a credit event. If Strategy can sustain its treasury strategy through alternative financing or retained earnings, it survives. The test is whether passive outflows create enough pricing pressure to force a strategic pivot.

MSCI will announce the final list of companies flagged for removal on November 11, with changes taking effect at market close on November 30. Strategy’s ability to complete additional bitcoin purchases before that date, and the company’s contingency plans for equity financing if index removal narrows its funding channel, will define whether this becomes a temporary price dislocation or a structural constraint on treasury growth.

Hyperliquid founder proposes regulating firms on his blockchain, not the network itself

Hyperliquid founder proposes regulating firms on his blockchain, not the network itself

, , , , , , , ,

Hyperliquid’s founder is proposing a regulatory model that would place oversight on financial firms using his blockchain rather than the blockchain itself, potentially allowing Wall Street to build regulated trading businesses on the network without it becoming a registered exchange. The proposal could reshape how crypto infrastructure navigates U.S. regulation and sets a precedent for similar blockchain platforms seeking mainstream institutional adoption.

  • Hyperliquid founder Jeff Yan proposed that U.S. regulators oversee financial firms on his blockchain rather than the network itself.
  • Payward, Kraken’s parent company, plans to offer U.S. derivatives using Hyperliquid’s technology through a regulated exchange.
  • Yan’s model would allow Wall Street firms to build regulated trading businesses on Hyperliquid without requiring the blockchain to register as an exchange.
  • August Month when President Donald Trump said CFTC was working to bring Hyperliquid into the U.S.
  • 2026 Year Yan outlined his regulatory proposal to Bloomberg, setting framework for institutional adoption.

Hyperliquid founder Jeff Yan on Thursday (October 15) proposed a regulatory framework in which U.S. authorities would oversee financial firms operating on his blockchain rather than regulating the blockchain network itself, according to reporting by CoinDesk. The approach would allow Wall Street institutions to build regulated trading markets on Hyperliquid’s infrastructure without requiring the network to become a registered exchange with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

The regulation sits at the layer where there are controls, and indeed the deployers are the ones that exercise these controls.

Jeff Yan, Hyperliquid founder, in an interview with Bloomberg

Yan drew a parallel to how financial firms use internet infrastructure: companies operating trading markets on Hyperliquid should bear responsibility for meeting regulatory requirements rather than pushing that burden onto the protocol layer. Hyperliquid’s perpetual futures trading platform remains closed to U.S. customers, a restriction that has limited its access to American retail and institutional traders.

Payward’s regulated derivatives offering validates the layered approach

Kraken’s parent company Payward is already moving forward with a model aligned to Yan’s framework. The firm plans to launch derivatives products using Hyperliquid’s technology through a regulated exchange available to U.S. investors, even though Hyperliquid’s native perpetual futures market itself remains unavailable domestically. This arrangement would effectively let a Commodity Futures Trading Commission regulated operator build on Hyperliquid’s infrastructure without the network having to navigate federal exchange registration.

Yan stressed that the proposal is not intended to disrupt existing market infrastructure. “We’re not trying to displace anything,” he told Bloomberg. “In fact, I think the technology can benefit everyone who currently operates markets in a more traditional setting.”

Trump administration pressure precedes Yan’s formal proposal

Yan’s regulatory framework comes months after President Donald Trump said in August (2026) that the CFTC was working to bring Hyperliquid into the U.S. under federal regulations. Trump’s statement signaled regulatory momentum that could have forced Hyperliquid to seek exchange status, a path that would have subjected the blockchain itself to stringent oversight. Yan’s proposal now offers an alternative: regulators could supervise individual market operators on the chain without classifying Hyperliquid as an exchange.

Whether the CFTC will adopt Yan’s layered regulatory model or pursue exchange registration for Hyperliquid remains unresolved, with the agency having made no public statement on the framework since Trump’s August comments.

The BlockWest read. Yan’s proposal shifts the regulatory burden away from the protocol layer to individual market operators, a structure that benefits both Hyperliquid and established financial firms seeking blockchain access without triggering full exchange classification. The test case is whether Payward’s CFTC-regulated derivatives platform can scale on Hyperliquid without prompting regulators to demand the blockchain itself register as an exchange.

Federated Hermes to issue tokenized fund shares in early 2027

Federated Hermes to issue tokenized fund shares in early 2027

, , , , , , ,

Federated Hermes, a $911 billion asset manager, is moving beyond third-party tokenization experiments to issue its own blockchain-based fund shares in early 2027. This marks a major institutional commitment to onchain finance and signals accelerating adoption of tokenized securities among Wall Street’s largest players.

  • Federated Hermes plans to launch tokenized fund shares in early 2027, taking direct control rather than relying on third parties.
  • Money market funds are the likely starting point, leveraging the firm’s $911 billion in assets and deep expertise in liquidity management.
  • Prometheum will handle custody, clearing and settlement, making products available through traditional brokerages and financial advisers rather than only blockchain-native channels.
  • $911B Assets under management at Federated Hermes, positioning it among major institutional players.
  • Early 2027 Timeline for launch of first tokenized fund share classes.
  • $5.5T Citi projection for tokenized securities market size by 2030.
  • 15 years Kevin Barr’s tenure at BNY before joining Federated Hermes in May 2026.

CoinDesk reported Tuesday that Federated Hermes, the Pittsburgh-based asset manager, intends to issue tokenized fund shares directly in early 2027. The initiative extends the firm’s prior blockchain experiments, which involved London-based Archax, Goldman Sachs and Singapore-based Conduit Digital tokenizing existing fund products. With this new effort, Federated Hermes will take an operational lead in issuing tokenized share classes itself rather than relying on external platforms to create digital versions of conventional holdings.

Money market funds positioned as the natural entry point

Kevin Barr, director of digital asset products and platform at Federated Hermes, told CoinDesk that money market funds represent the logical starting point given the firm’s substantial liquidity management business. Such funds invest in short-term debt and allow investors to park cash while earning yield, a use case that has already driven tokenization efforts across Wall Street at firms including BlackRock, Franklin Templeton and JPMorgan.

You can have instantaneous movement of those funds. You can have programmability of those funds in a way that is perhaps more difficult or operationally inefficient with traditional infrastructure.

Kevin Barr, director of digital asset products and platform, Federated Hermes

Tokenized money market funds enable 24-hour asset settlement and can serve as collateral for loans or trades, allowing firms to deploy cash reserves without liquidating positions. Citi has projected that the tokenized securities market could reach $5.5 trillion by 2030, underscoring institutional conviction in the technology’s potential to reshape market infrastructure.

Distribution through Prometheum bridges traditional brokerages and blockchain infrastructure

Federated Hermes has partnered with Prometheum, a New York-based digital securities infrastructure provider, to handle regulated brokerage, custody and clearing services. Prometheum’s SEC-registered broker-dealer subsidiaries will provide the operational backbone, while its correspondent clearing platform allows other broker-dealers to offer Federated Hermes’ tokenized products to their clients without requiring system overhauls.

Barr, who previously spent 15 years at BNY Mellon where he led digital cash and innovation initiatives, joined Federated Hermes in May 2026 and emphasized that access, rather than underlying blockchain technology, represents the primary barrier to wider institutional adoption.

By embedding tokenized securities within established distribution channels, Federated Hermes positions the products as a natural extension of its existing franchise rather than as a specialized or experimental offering. This approach differs markedly from earlier tokenization efforts that required investors to access blockchain-native platforms or specialized infrastructure.

The BlockWest read. Federated Hermes’ shift toward self-issued tokenized funds reflects institutional confidence that blockchain infrastructure can support trillions in mainstream finance. The real competitive pressure, however, lies not in blockchain technology itself but in distribution: Prometheum’s role as a regulatory bridge suggests that custody, clearing and broker-dealer licensing remain the genuine gatekeepers to institutional adoption.

Federated Hermes has not disclosed which specific blockchains will host its tokenized funds or which initial fund products will launch. Watch for those details in coming months as the firm works toward the early 2027 launch window and for any regulatory guidance from the SEC or financial advisers’ compliance teams on distributing blockchain-based share classes through traditional channels.

Evernorth lists on Nasdaq with 473 million XRP despite accounting rule limiting price transparency

Evernorth lists on Nasdaq with 473 million XRP despite accounting rule limiting price transparency

, , , , , , ,

Evernorth’s Nasdaq debut brings nearly half a billion XRP into public markets, but an accounting quirk tied to Ripple’s ongoing relationship may obscure the company’s true financial performance. Investors evaluating the treasury company’s core promise—growing XRP per share through active management—will need to parse reported earnings from unrealized price movements.

  • Evernorth completed its merger with Armada Acquisition Corp. II on October 9 and will trade under ticker XRPN on Monday (October 12).
  • The company holds approximately 473 million XRP and raised roughly $300 million in gross cash proceeds before transaction expenses from backers including Ripple, SBI Group, Pantera Capital, Kraken, and GSR.
  • A related-party accounting rule will force Evernorth to use historical cost accounting for XRP rather than fair-value treatment, creating potential divergence between reported book value and actual treasury market value.
  • 473M XRP tokens held by Evernorth upon Nasdaq listing debut
  • $300M Gross cash proceeds raised before transaction expenses
  • $1.43 Average XRP price used for share calculations at merger close
  • $6.9M Potential impairment from XRP’s July-October low observed on Coinbase

Evernorth Holdings Inc. completed its merger with Armada Acquisition Corp. II on October 9, 2026, according to regulatory filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, bringing one of the largest corporate XRP treasuries to public markets. The company will begin trading on Nasdaq under the ticker XRPN on Monday (October 12), offering stock-market investors direct exposure to crypto assets through a regulated treasury vehicle. CryptoSlate reported that Evernorth holds approximately 473 million XRP and secured roughly $300 million in gross cash proceeds before transaction expenses, backed by investors including Ripple, SBI Group, Pantera Capital, Kraken, and GSR.

Evernorth plans active deployment across XRP ecosystem rather than passive accumulation

Evernorth Chief Executive Officer Asheesh Birla outlined a strategy distinct from traditional crypto treasury companies that accumulate digital assets and rely on price appreciation alone. In an October 9 shareholder letter, Birla described a vision of financial markets transitioning toward blockchain-based infrastructure capable of operating continuously rather than within traditional banking and exchange hours. He argued that tokenization could reshape how securities, credit and other financial assets are traded, settled and used as collateral, with programmable conditions governing interest payments, lending arrangements and transfers potentially reducing delays associated with traditional intermediaries.

Birla identified market liquidity as a critical requirement for these applications to become commercially viable. Evernorth intends to deploy capital on the XRP Ledger to support liquidity and work with developers building financial infrastructure for institutional users. The company plans to pursue institutional and decentralized finance yield opportunities, ecosystem participation, and capital markets activities intended to put its assets to productive use. For shareholders, the stated goal combines cryptocurrency exposure with potential returns from actively managing holdings, aiming to increase XRP per share beyond what market price appreciation alone would deliver.

Related-party accounting rule will exclude unrealized XRP gains from reported earnings

Evernorth’s financial reporting faces an unusual constraint stemming from its relationship with Ripple, which remains a related party following the merger. According to SEC disclosures, Evernorth determined it must continue to account for its XRP holdings at historical cost, reduced by accumulated impairment losses, rather than adopting fair-value treatment available to many other corporate cryptocurrency holders. The Financial Accounting Standards Board introduced fair-value accounting rules for qualifying crypto assets in 2023, requiring them to be valued at prevailing market prices with unrealized gains and losses reflected in reported earnings. However, the standard explicitly excludes certain digital assets created or issued by a reporting company or its related parties.

This distinction creates an asymmetry in how Evernorth’s performance will be measured. When XRP prices decline sufficiently, the company must recognize impairment losses that reduce the carrying value of its holdings. However, subsequent price recoveries cannot reverse those write-downs under the cost-minus-impairment model. For example, if a $100 million XRP position is written down to $70 million, a later recovery to $150 million would not automatically restore its accounting value or produce an $80 million unrealized gain in reported earnings. The merger disclosure itself illustrates the potential consequences: management identified XRP’s lowest observable Coinbase price between July 1 and the October 9 closing as $0.99, a level that would have produced an additional $6.9 million impairment after June 30, though the filing did not confirm whether that amount was ultimately recognized.

Evernorth’s reported earnings may diverge sharply from actual treasury market value

The accounting treatment does not prevent Evernorth from profiting economically from higher XRP prices or recognizing income generated by its investment strategies. However, it could make the company’s reported earnings and book value difficult to compare with crypto treasury businesses eligible for fair-value accounting. That distinction becomes particularly relevant to Evernorth’s core investor promise of growing XRP per share, because changes in token holdings, market valuation, and reported accounting income may tell conflicting stories about performance.

Investors will need to distinguish returns from active treasury management from changes in XRP’s market value when evaluating the company’s ability to finance expansion.

Evernorth’s first post-merger financial statements will test that distinction, showing how much its treasury activities contribute to reported results even as its accounting treatment continues to exclude unrealized XRP price recoveries.

The BlockWest read. Evernorth’s real value to shareholders likely exceeds what its balance sheet will report. The company’s ability to generate yield, support ecosystem liquidity, and accumulate additional tokens could drive substantial economic returns—yet impairment rules will prevent those gains from flowing fully into earnings. Allocators should expect transparent, supplemental reporting on actual treasury performance if this structure is to command institutional capital.

Evernorth begins trading Monday (October 12) under ticker XRPN on Nasdaq. The company’s first quarterly earnings report will reveal whether management quantifies the gap between fair-market XRP value and its historical-cost carrying amount, and whether active treasury strategies generate sufficient income and token accumulation to validate the per-share growth thesis despite the accounting constraints.

Robinhood Chain’s daily transactions drop 42% as engagement falters beyond fees

Robinhood Chain’s daily transactions drop 42% as engagement falters beyond fees

, , , , , , ,

Robinhood Chain’s transaction volume has collapsed by 42% since mid-September, signaling deeper engagement problems beyond the network fee crisis that plagued it weeks earlier. The slowdown tests whether subsidized trading can sustain a blockchain ecosystem that launched with ambitious plans for round-the-clock crypto and tokenized stock trading.

  • Daily transactions fell to 6.2 million in the week of October 2-8, down 42% from 10.8 million in mid-September, per CoinDesk calculations.
  • Spot trading volume dropped 21% to $7.45 billion, while deposits on-chain held steady above $1 billion and perpetual futures volume rose 26%.
  • Robinhood extended its fee subsidy through December 31 for swaps over 50 cents, giving the network three months to revive trading before users must pay transaction costs themselves.
  • 42% Decline in daily transactions from mid-September to early October
  • $65K Daily network fees collected Oct. 2-8, down 39% from prior week
  • 31% Drop in daily active addresses from mid-September baseline
  • 26% Rise in perpetual futures volume over seven-day rolling average

Activity on Robinhood Chain has contracted sharply in recent weeks, marking a reversal from the network’s launch momentum and complicating the brokerage’s strategy to monetize blockchain-based trading. CoinDesk reported that the network averaged 6.2 million daily transactions during the week of October 2-8, down 42% from 10.8 million during September 10-16, according to calculations using Growth the Pie data. Weekly spot trading volume declined 21% to $7.45 billion, with Uniswap handling roughly 77% of all token swaps on the chain. The decline extends across multiple metrics: daily active addresses fell 31% from mid-September to average about 322,000, and daily network fees plunged 39% to roughly $65,000.

Fee subsidy extended as deposits stall trading activity

Robinhood’s push to revive engagement centers on extending a fee-subsidy program originally set to expire September 29. The brokerage will now pay network fees on any token swap worth more than 50 cents made through Robinhood Wallet until December 31, according to a statement posted on X. Robinhood keeps roughly nine-tenths of all network fees collected on the chain, meaning the transaction slowdown directly reduces the revenue it captures from the ecosystem.

The subsidy creates a paradox: money remains abundant while activity withers. Deposits in lending and trading applications rose 2% over the latest week to $1.04 billion, and stablecoin supply held steady at roughly $1.10 billion, suggesting users are holding capital on the network rather than deploying it for trades.

Perpetual futures bucking the decline as spot trading falters

One corner of Robinhood Chain’s ecosystem continues to expand despite the broader slowdown. Perpetual futures volume, which allows traders to bet on price movements without owning underlying tokens, reached approximately $7.35 billion on a rolling seven-day basis as of Saturday (October 10), up 26% from prior levels, according to DefiLlama data. This divergence reflects a shift in user behavior: traders are concentrating on leveraged derivatives rather than direct token purchases and swaps.

The contrast with spot trading’s decline raises questions about whether Robinhood Chain’s user base is consolidating around sophisticated investors using perpetual contracts rather than maintaining broad participation in the ecosystem. The network’s ability to sustain engagement once the fee subsidy expires at year-end will test whether reduced transaction costs alone can anchor user retention on a competitive blockchain.

Robinhood and its partners have deployed additional incentives, including extra reward points on stock-token swaps through Robinhood Wallet starting October 1 to offset the volume decline.

The BlockWest read. The real test is balance-sheet economics: Robinhood absorbs network fees today to preserve optionality on future revenue, but the 42% transaction decline means its per-transaction subsidy cost is rising. If the fee promotion extension merely delays rather than reverses user churn, the brokerage faces a hard choice between extending support further or accepting that Robinhood Chain cannot compete with established networks at full transaction cost.

The outcome hinges on December 31, when the fee subsidy expires. Robinhood has set that deadline explicitly: the network has roughly three months to restore trading momentum before users must pay transaction costs themselves, creating a concrete moment to measure whether the ecosystem can sustain activity on its own economic merits or whether engagement depends on subsidies.

Load More

Back To Top
© BlockWest 2026
BlockWest Media LLC

Equities, AI, and blue-chip crypto, covered as one connected market.

Sections

Company

Legal

Follow

𝕏 ▶ in

© 2026 BlockWest. All rights reserved.