做市商 · 2823

Crypto exchange trading revenue share declined, and Coinbase and others increased stablecoin and prediction markets

Comparative news: In the second quarter, the trading revenue of the three listed crypto exchanges Coinbase, Bullish, and Gemini declined sequentially. The gap between transactional and non-transactional revenue of all three platforms narrowed, and Coinbase reduced the difference from around $132 million to $44 million in one year. Coinbase expanded the layout of products such as stablecoins and prediction markets, and the average USDC holdings increased 44% year over year to $20 billion in the third quarter. Gemini tripled the number of market makers in the forecast market at the beginning of the year. Bullish launched a new rewards program to support the trading business, and adjusted transaction revenue fell 21% month-on-month to $29.9 million in the second quarter, but increased 24% year-over-year. Gemini's trading volume fell 66% year over year to $3.8 billion, and transaction revenue fell 38%.

11h ago

STS Digital CEO: Crypto prices are still in the cold winter, and institutional adoption is already in the middle of summer

Comparative news, according to The Block, Maxime Seiler, CEO of crypto options market maker STS Digital, said that there is a divergence between crypto asset prices and institutional adoption. He said, “From the price point of view, we are still in the crypto winter, but from the institutional side, we are already in the middle of summer.” Seiler said that institutions are using more underlying technology, and capital does not necessarily flow into tokens, so technology adoption is not fully reflected in currency prices. He also pointed out that the Bitcoin futures base has converged from an annualized 20% to 30% of the 2021 cycle to close to risk-free interest rates, and is more stable than the previous cycle, partly due to the fact that the dollar has a deeper channel into and out of the crypto market.

1d ago

If it's just tokenized assets and doesn't connect to DeFi, what's left of RWA?

Author: Jesus Rodriguez, co-founder of Sentora Compiled by: Luffy, Foresight News Original title: Does RWA still make sense without DeFi? Discussions in the RWA industry often begin with a simple vision: take a treasury bill, fund share, stock, invoice, megawatt hour, or GPU for one hour, then mint a token representing it. Is it useful? It's really useful. But can it be called transformative? It's far from there. This is like putting a bar code on a container and claiming that a global trade problem has been solved. Barcodes make containers recognizable and machine-readable, but they don't create ports, cranes, customs, insurance, financing, shipping routes out of thin air, or bring in buyers from afar. A token is simply an addressable token of interest, and DeFi is a marketplace operating system. The question really worth discussing is not how many types of assets can go on the chain, but how many assets can complete valuation, financing, hedging, transaction monetization, and loss disposal in a stressful environment, and there is no need for offline meetings and coordination every time a transaction occurs. Tokenization completes the representation of equity; what DeFi brings is actual utility. Tokenization is just a bar code, and a similar scene has happened in the history of the supply chain finance market. The reason why mortgages can be scaled up is not as simple as turning a paper document into an electronic record. To actually achieve large-scale expansion, a complete set of operating mechanisms was created around this type of asset: credit review, post-loan services, securitization, credit rating, warehousing and financing, repurchases, hedging, clearing and settlement, and loss allocation rules. RWA also needed to go through the exact same evolutionary process. An asset that can be adapted to DeFi requires six levels: legally enforceable rights, reliable data sources, clear transfer and redemption rules, enforceable secondary market liquidity, collateral parameters that match actual behavior, and a credible settlement and loss disposal path. Most tokenization projects, on the other hand, tend to stop at the top five levels. There is a simple test that can be used to test the maturity of an asset. It only requires answering three questions: How much is this asset currently worth? Can the agreement complete withdrawal and monetization at this point? If the first two judgments are all wrong, who bears the loss? When smart contracts can definitively answer the above three questions, RWA can truly become a basic component of finance. Before that, it was mostly just a digital packaging shell. The deepest technical contradiction of RWA's quadruple time clock is that RWA runs under multiple sets of different time clocks at the same time. The blockchain can complete settlement in seconds and operate uninterrupted for 7 x 24 hours; oracles may update prices every hour or every day; underlying traditional exchanges are closed at night and on weekends; custodians follow bank working days; and the asset redemption process may take 1 day, 5 days, or even 30 days. If you use such a slow-paced RWA asset to support fast-maturing DeFi liabilities, such as stablecoin loans. This is the term shift, and it is also the core model that banks have relied on for hundreds of years: using short-term debt to fund long-term slow assets. This model has practical value, but the risk must be reasonably priced. Imagine a scenario: At 2 a.m. on Sunday, assets hit the liquidation threshold. Smart contracts can seize tokens immediately, but the underlying real-world market won't open until Monday, and the issuer's redemption business will not be processed until Tuesday. On-chain liquidation has been completed, and real-world asset disposal has only just begun. This creates a clearing gap. DeFi requires immediate withdrawal for monetization, but the real world does not allow it. The time difference between the two. This gap has counterintuitive consequences. Even treasury bonds with very low volatility are riskier than native crypto assets that are more volatile when used as collateral. The price of ETH fluctuates drastically, but it can be traded around the clock; the price of RWA assets appears to be stable, and it may only be up to a dozen hours without a new price tag. A flat price sometimes represents safety, and sometimes it's just a disguise of stale data. Liquidity is an exit channel, not TVL. The digital public also has common misunderstandings about liquidity. Liquidity is not equal to TVL, does not equal the existence of a trading pair, nor does it mean that the issuer promises to eventually redeem it according to net worth. Liquidity refers to the ability to convert a position into the settlement asset you need at an acceptable discount within the time window allowed by your debt. Take a crowded theater for example: the size of the hall cannot determine whether it is safe in the event of a fire; what really matters is the width of the exit channel. One copy of RWA to...

1d agoForesight News#DeFi #RWA

A giant whale transferred 7.72 million LINK to OTC market makers, worth about $8.91 million to be sold

According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a giant whale address transferred 772.47 million LINK to Galaxy Digital and Cumberland, with a total value of about US$8.91 million, and is suspected to be seeking off-market sales. Of these, approximately 620,000 LINK (approximately US$6.94 million) were transferred to Galaxy Digital, and approximately 170,700 LINK (approximately US$1.97 million) were transferred to Cumberland.

1d ago

Research: Hyperliquid may enter the US compliance market through a licensed HIP-3 DEX

Comparing news, Blockworks research indicates that Hyperliquid is seeking a compliance path for the US market through regulatory advocacy and technical adjustments. According to the report, Hyperliquid's modular architecture (HyperCore is responsible for transactions and clearing, Deployer is responsible for market creation, and Builder is responsible for user access) naturally corresponds to the division of functions of DCM, DCO, and FCM in traditional finance, but it is implemented on-chain. Hyperliquid is currently blocked due to a conflict with the US Market Structure Act. According to the report, permissioned HIP-3 deployment (DEX for whitelisted users only) is the key to the compliance path. Registered entities can assume KYC and compliance obligations while bridging liquidity through whitelisted market makers. Trump's recent announcement that the CFTC Chairman intends to include Hyperliquid in the US regulatory framework was seen as a positive sign. The Hyperliquid Policy Center has submitted recommendations to the CFTC and SEC to allow registrars to use HyperCore with compliance responsibilities.

1d ago

Millions of dollars are rushing into the market, but some are in a hurry to exit: Pharos's high-interest treasury causes a “view of time” collision

Article: Sanqing, Foresight NewsSharos Network joined forces with Vault infrastructure agreement R25 and credit asset management agency Axil to launch Axil Prime Credit Vault (APC), an institutional consumer credit RWA wealth management product issued by Pharos on July 15. The products were launched simultaneously with Binance Wallet, TopNod, OKX Wallet, Bitget Wallet, and KuCoin Wallet, with a total fundraising limit of 100 million USDC, with a target annualization of about 14.3%. As of the closing of the deposit window, a total of $45.39 million had been deposited. This year, there have been frequent security explosions in Web3 on-chain strategies. User funds are looking for new stable income sources, and project parties are also there. Binance Wallet is now offering an additional $300,000 PROS as an incentive to explore RWA Vault's market space, causing the Vault to generate a lot of discussion in the market. The launch time coincided with the redemption period of the Pharos TGE pre-deposit campaign. The previous treasury required the submission of a redemption application about half a month before the end of the lockdown period, stop accruing interest on July 20, and complete the redemption within 7 days. Users accustomed to DeFi T+0 looked back and found that they couldn't help but missed the redemption period and began to question the redemption time and asset safety. R25 and Axil then held an AMA at Binance Square. Well-known KOLs such as Haotian and Tianqing participated in discussions, detailing the differences between RWA assets and DeFi Vault, the role of fund managers (Curators), why consumer credit is worth allocating, and risk management methods from pre-investment to post-investment. In complex asset logic and mixed social media discussions, some users put in one million funds on the last day, while others sought early redemptions from the project party. On July 23, Pharos issued an announcement: Users who submitted applications on time in the previous issue have received all principal and interest, breaking the “financial security” concerns; funds that missed the window will automatically be carried forward to the next three-month cycle according to the treasury's preset rules, and interest will continue to be accrued at 14% USDC per annum. The controversy revealed more important issues than the redemption itself. Although the RWA TVL has exceeded $38 billion, non-institutional chain users are clearly dissatisfied when investing in RWA products. Institution-driven, stable, and high interest rates, but often require longer lockdown periods and complex understanding costs. From DeFi to RWA, is the market really ready? High yield, low threshold, and high liquidity. BlackRock's “impossible triangle” of RWA's BUIDL threshold is $5 million. It is only open to qualified buyers, yet it can be redeemed almost instantly through the stablecoin channel; the APC threshold is so low that ordinary users can buy it at will; instead, it must be locked for three months. Liquidity has never been determined by how high or low the threshold is, but rather how quickly the underlying assets can be realized. The bottom layer of BUIDL is US treasury bonds, and the world's deepest secondary market can take over at any time; the bottom layer of APC is hundreds of thousands of emerging market consumer loans, and few people are ready to buy large amounts of capital at any time. This has formed a triangle that RWA cannot bypass at this stage: high yield, low threshold, and high liquidity; the three can only take two. For example, Franklin Templeton's BENJI starts at $20 (low threshold) and supports daily redemption (high liquidity), and the annualization is only 3% to 5%; if you want double-digit returns, you have to accept non-standard assets and a lock-up period. This is the liquidity premium. A significant portion of the excess income is the consideration for abandoning liquidity. APC, on the other hand, is a combination of high returns and a low threshold, and the cost is liquidity. There is nothing wrong with this trade-off itself; it also explains the full source of this controversy. Retail investors have obtained assets that were originally only open to institutions, and they have also taken over the agency's time rules that focus on long-term matching. The period of use of institutional funds is scheduled before investment, and the lockdown period is a predictable cost; private equity credit and closed-end funds already have redemption restrictions. However, most ordinary users on the chain are not the same; most of the latter's first appeal is to go in and out. So the current “retail” RWA is mostly just distribution-side retailing, to be precise. Web3 wallets and low initial investment amounts have contributed to a low threshold, but the liquidity structure is still designed according to institutional logic. Having understood this triangle, the remaining questions became specific: why must the liquidity side be sacrificed, a high income of 14.3%...

2d agoForesight News#WEB3

The Ministry of Finance took steps to reduce long-term interest rates, and gold and Bitcoin rose sharply in response

Author: Cookie Original title: Bond Market Fright, How Can a Buyback Detonate Gold and Bitcoin? On August 18, the US 30-year Treasury yield hit 5.337% intraday, a new high since April 2007. The last time this number appeared on the screen, the iPhone had just been launched, and Lehman Brothers was still a Wall Street giant. In less than 24 hours, the Ministry of Finance was in action. On August 19, the US Treasury Department announced that it would at least double the scale of liquidity-supported repurchase operations for long-term nominal treasury bonds, raising the upper limit of a single operation from 2 billion US dollars to no less than 4 billion US dollars, covering the two ranges of 10 to 20 years and 20 to 30 years, effective September 9 and continuing until November 4. Within minutes of the news, the 30-year yield plummeted from around 5.337% to 5.192%, a drop of about 15 basis points. Gold surged more than $125 to $4,487 per ounce in a single day, a new high since June 4. Bitcoin pulled up 8.7% from an intraday low of $64,112 to $69,700, approaching the $70,000 mark for the first time in two months. Ethereum rose nearly 19%, and the crypto market liquidated more than $20 billion in 24 hours, of which $1.44 billion was liquidated by bears. How did a buyback cause a huge shock in the global market? What is a buyback? Treasury buybacks and the Federal Reserve's QE are two different things. QE is when the central bank prints money to buy bonds, directly injecting new liquidity into the market. However, the Ministry of Finance buybacks up old bonds that the Ministry of Finance uses money from its own accounts to buy back those “old and no one wants to trade”. The purpose is to renew liquidity to the market so that market makers are not “priceless” in the long-term treasury bond market. For example, there is a used car market in your neighborhood, but recently no one is buying used cars. Car dealers have stocked up a bunch of used cars and can't sell them, and the price of new cars is being dragged down. At this point, the property came forward and said, “Used cars will be purchased uniformly by the property; at least this much will be collected. As a result, car dealers had cash in their hands, and the liquidity in the new car market also slowed down. The Ministry of Finance is doing this “property” job. It is buying back “off-the-run” bonds, that is, old securities that are no longer the latest issue and have a scarce trading volume. After institutions that sell old coupons get cash, they can reallocate them to new coupons with better liquidity. As a result, the trading price spread in the entire long-term market narrows, and transaction friction is reduced. The Ministry of Finance did not create money out of thin air. The source of funds for the repurchase was the Ministry of Finance's General Account (TGA), and the TGA money came from taxes and newly issued short-term treasury notes. This means that while long-term supply is declining, short-term supply is increasing, and the total amount of debt has not changed; only the term structure has changed. Why are yields out of control? To understand the urgency of this repurchase, we need to go back to what the bond market has experienced in the past five months. The war in Iran was the trigger. After the US-Iran conflict broke out in late February, passage through the Strait of Hormuz was blocked, and Brent crude oil climbed all the way from the pre-war range of $70 to $91 recently. The sharp rise in energy prices directly boosted inflation expectations, while the Federal Reserve kept interest rates unchanged (3.5% to 3.75% range) at the July interest rate meeting. Three members of the committee even voted against raising interest rates, and the market began to set prices “higher for longer.” But the rise in yield was not only driven by inflation. Fiscal deficits are a deeper structural strain. The monthly deficit in July reached US$432.3 billion, the largest monthly gap since March 2021. The annual deficit is likely to be over $2 trillion, accounting for about 6.4% of GDP. The total national debt is close to $40 trillion, and the public holdings are about to reach 100% of GDP. More importantly, over the next 12 months, $10 trillion of treasury bonds will need to be rolled over. This means that the Ministry of Finance must continue issuing a large number of new bonds in an already indigested market. The long-term market began to show signs of a “buyers' strike” in late June. The winning bid yield for both auctions set new records for more than ten years: the 10-year auction interest rate is 4.683%, and the 30-year auction interest rate is 5.216%. When the yield hit 5.337% on August 18, US Treasury Secretary Bezent's window of choice was already very narrow. The biggest significance of this repurchase of Bezent's undercard is probably to let the market see Bezent's bottom card. On the face of it, the Ministry of Finance said, “Market participants have given a large number of high-quality offers, so expand the scale of operations to provide better liquidity support.” But the city...

2d agoburnking#Bitcoin #gold

Linera announces $LNRA public offering to target Hyperliquid's minute-level forecasting market

In comparison, blockchain infrastructure Linera published an article stating that with the $LNRA sale announcement, it will showcase Linera Originals, a badge system, and a specialty market that can be opened, operated, and settled within a minute. Linera said that becoming the “next Hyperliquid” means a dedicated chain, a focus on consumer-grade products, small teams, real revenue and user priority, rather than simple replication. The goal is to predict the market in real time. There is no one in this segment yet, which is difficult for GM to support. Linera uses a parallel microchain architecture, verified by the same set of validators. The user and market each run on an independent microchain. Most blocks are finally confirmed in less than one second, and throughput can be expanded by increasing the microchain. The design stems from research by the CEO's former Meta (Libra/Diem) researcher, and inherits low-latency settlement efforts such as FastPay. The app app.linera.xyz has been launched on this architecture. All predictions are on-chain transactions, and badges measure real participation. The platform markets are all pure player-to-player (PvP). The pool of shared funds is distributed according to the winners, there are no bookmakers or market makers, and the results rely on verifiable price oracles. The core team consists of about five people. $LNRA is a network token, and full sales details will be announced separately; badge recipients can obtain exclusive pool access during sales by using the product.

2d ago

Centrifuge connects to Symbiotic Liquidity Network to provide instant USDC liquidity to $1.6 billion tokenized fund

Comparatively, according to Cointelegraph, asset tokenization platform Centrifuge announced that it will connect to the Liquid Lane liquidity network launched by Symbiotic to provide on-chain liquidity support for its three tokenized funds, covering fund products with an asset management scale of about 1.6 billion US dollars. The consolidation involves Janus Henderson's JAAA (AAA Mortgage Bond Strategy Fund), JTRSY (Short-Term US Treasury Bond Strategy Fund), and HYB (US High Yield Corporate Bond Fund) under New York Life Investment Management (NYLIM). Through Symbiotic Liquid Lane, eligible fund holders can exchange fund tokens for USDC through the on-chain request for quotation (RFQ) marketplace to achieve instant liquidity. The mechanism allows market makers to obtain funds from liquid vaults to meet investors' redemption needs, and then redeem fund tokens through issuers or sell them in other RFQ transactions. Centrifuge said the solution separates investors' instant access to USDC liquidity from traditional fund redemption processes, making tokenized funds more adaptable to the transaction needs of the on-chain financial market. This article is sponsored by GENG, Build Your Fortune on GENG (https://geng.one)

3d agoburnking

Wall Street Q2 holdings revealed: as institutions fall and buy more, ETH outperforms BTC across the board

Source: ChainCatcher Author: Zhou Original title: Q2 Wall Street Institutional Crypto Positions: Most institutions bucked the trend, and ETH exposure completely outperformed BTC in the second quarter. ETF capital flows and institutional behavior were decoupled, and the institutionalization of crypto assets deepened; at the same time, institutional differences over crypto-related stock targets are also getting bigger. August 14 is the legal deadline for the US SEC to require institutional investors to submit Q2 13F forms. After the centralized disclosure of documents, Wall Street's crypto holdings were once again spread out on the table. There was a clear contrast between institutional movements and currency price trends this season. The price of Bitcoin fell by about 14.2%, while crypto holdings declared by institutions increased. According to Bitcoin Strategy's calculation of 13F data, institutional Bitcoin holdings increased 7.5% from about 498,000 to about 536,000, up 7.5% month-on-month, while total ETF holdings fell from about 1.297,000 to about 1,211,000 during the same period. According to SosoValue data, the US spot Bitcoin ETF continued to make net redemptions in the second quarter, with net outflows of about 2.4 billion and 4.5 billion US dollars in a single month in May and June, respectively. Among them, June set the worst monthly record since listing. The Ethereum ETF also had a cumulative net outflow of around $700 million over the same period. At the same time, the chips are concentrated on the head. The number of institutions declaring Bitcoin holdings dropped from about 2,000 to about 1,900. According to Bloomberg data, as of August 13, the number of institutional holders of an IBIT product reached about 1,500, with a net worth of about US$47.35 billion. The growth rate of Ethereum on the bank side completely outperformed Bitcoin. Previously, ChainCatcher wrote in the first quarter position review: Institutional interest in Ethereum's allocation is increasing, and Jane Street, Wells Fargo, and J.P. Morgan Chase all added Ethereum ETFs during the outflow phase. In the second quarter, this sign was confirmed on the bank side. According to DWF Labs estimates, in terms of the number of corresponding crypto assets, Morgan Stanley's exposure to BTC increased 3.7% month-on-month and ETH exposure increased 18.6% in the second quarter. J.P. Morgan's BTC exposure increased 12.2%, and ETH exposure increased 67.3%. Both banks are growing at a significantly higher rate of ETH than BTC. The individual level is more intuitive. Morgan Stanley's ETHA increased by about 202% to 4.6 million shares, J.P. Morgan's ETHA increased by about 338% to nearly 1.17 million shares, and Bank of America ETHA increased from about 67,500 shares to about 1.98 million shares, about 29 times the previous one. But in fact, there was an overall net outflow of Ethereum spot ETFs in the second quarter. According to SosoValue data, there was still a net inflow of about 356 million US dollars in April, net outflows of about 541 million and 529 million US dollars in May and June respectively, and a total net outflow of about 714 million US dollars in the second quarter. Jane Street bought it back. Hedge funds moved their positions into options. Last season, Jane Street cut IBIT holdings by about 71%. The market once speculated that it was bearish on Bitcoin. This quarter, it reversed IBIT and added back about 24.9 million shares, a sharp increase of about 324% over the previous quarter, making it one of the biggest buyers of the quarter. Its current spot Bitcoin ETF exposure is approximately $9.9 billion, of which approximately $828 million is in IBIT. As an authorized participant and market maker, its end-of-quarter inventory is related to redemptions and hedging, and a large amount on spot is not equal to a directional bet. It is worth noting that 13F only reported a long spot volume at the end of the quarter. If options were added, the image of several institutions would also reverse. Global macro hedge fund Brevan Howard cut spot IBIT from 24.3 million shares to 7.21 million shares in the second quarter, reducing its holdings by about 70.4%. But it also holds a call option corresponding to approximately 7.23 million IBIT shares and a put option of 5.27 million shares. Graham Capital reduced its current IBIT from about 926,000 shares to 259,000 shares, reducing its holdings by about 72%, while holding down options corresponding to about 1.74 million IBIT shares, with a declared value of about $57.94 million. Multi-strategy giant Millennium reduced current IBIT from about 19.29 million shares to 9.69 million shares, reducing holdings by about...

3d ago22#Wall Street #Bitcoin