Comparatively, NeoSoul completed a pre-A round of financing of $11 million and received support from MH Ventures, Amber Group, ArkStream Capital, 0G Foundation, Kirin Capital, CatcherVC, and New Oak International.
According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a wallet suspected to be linked to the Amber Group (0xB3B... 221D) extracted 200,000 HYPES from Hyperliquid 5 minutes ago, worth $13.83 million.
In comparison, according to on-chain analyst Ember Monitor, an address suspected to be linked to Amber Group (0x2a79... 51b) withdrew multiple tokens worth $9.97 million from Binance 5 hours ago, including 38.89 million ENA worth $3.58 million; 28,262 AAVE worth $2.52 million; 1,140 ETH worth $2.18 million; 2017 BNB worth $1.2 million; 59,202 LINK, It's worth $49 million.
From the Asia-Pacific region and emerging markets to global corporate needs, the compliant digital dollar has quietly entered an era of consolidation where “distribution is king”. By Farmer Frank about corporate stablecoins, the market has been discussing a “about to happen” story for the past few years. There are many versions of this story, but the core context is largely the same: traditional financial institutions are entering the market, compliant stablecoins will become the underlying infrastructure for cross-border payments, and corporate treasury management will also undergo a paradigm shift as a result, and carrying all of this will be a number of new stablecoins involving banks, payment institutions, and technology platforms. Few people question this narrative. In fact, it is precisely because it is so reasonable that the market has given it such high attention and expectations. After all, institutions and enterprises do need a digital dollar that can both enjoy blockchain efficiency and be accepted by finance, compliance, and risk departments. However, most of the past discussions were limited to the future: which institutions are ready to enter the market, what products are about to be launched, and what payment and settlement scenarios are expected to migrate to the chain. Until recently, two clues worth watching have appeared in the market at the same time: On June 30, Open Standard officially announced Open USD (OUSD), bringing together more than 140 financial, payment, technology and crypto companies such as Visa, Mastercard, Stripe, BlackRock, BNY, Google, Coinbase, etc., and plans to officially launch in late 2026; on July 20, press DeFilLama In terms of statistics, USDGO, another enterprise-grade stablecoin, surpassed 1 billion US dollars in circulation, and became the largest dollar-compliant stablecoin operated by Asian stablecoin operators; in a sense, OUSD intends to elevate the demand for corporate stablecoins to a kind of global industry consensus, and USDGO's 1 billion US dollars also provides a realistic sample of this set of consensus with prior reference value. Enterprise stablecoins seem to have entered a new phase of “distribution is king.” 1. I already have USDT and USDC, why do we need “OUSD”? Why does the market need another US dollar stablecoin when USDT and USDC have established huge liquidity networks? This is a cliché topic, and it is also the first threshold that no enterprise stablecoin can bypass. Many discussions in the past have reduced the opportunities for corporate stablecoins to two structural pain points of traditional payment systems: the first is the cost of compliance. Compliance reviews of cross-border capital flows are not one-off, but are embedded in every transaction. The link between anti-money laundering reviews, sanctions list screening, and cross-border reporting and rules between different jurisdictions means more uncertainty; the second is settlement efficiency. A cross-border B2B payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars often requires multiple steps such as message transmission, intermediary banking, foreign exchange, and final payment. The resulting processing fees, foreign exchange spreads, and capital usage costs are often superimposed, and the settlement cycle usually takes several working days; however, in reality, corporate stablecoin opportunities have never only come from existing stablecoins being “not compliant enough” or traditional payment systems “not fast enough”. The deeper reason is that the way and standards for enterprises use capital are fundamentally different from how crypto users use stablecoins. You need to know that in the crypto market, stablecoins are first and foremost a type of liquid asset. Among them, exchanges are responsible for providing transaction entrances, wallets and blockchains to handle transfers, and DeFi protocols provide borrowing, market making, and revenue scenarios. This also means that as long as a stablecoin has sufficient trading pairs and on-chain liquidity, users will naturally choose it. However, a multinational enterprise will not migrate supplier payments, merchant settlement, and treasury management to the chain simply because certain stablecoin transfers are faster; it also needs to handle issuer risk, subscription and redemption, fiat currency exchange, technology integration, accounting processing, liquidity management, and regulatory requirements in different markets. To put it bluntly, what companies are really concerned about is a whole set of issues, such as who is the issuer in the legal sense of the word? Who manages reserve assets? Can large subscriptions and redemptions be successfully completed? How to exchange fiat and stablecoins? Can financial costs be optimized? How to connect to the original financial system? How to complete customer identification, anti-money laundering, sanctions screening, and accounting processing? In addition to this, from the perspective of economic benefits, the traditional stablecoin model formed for the crypto trading market may not necessarily be replicated unchanged in the field of corporate payments. In the past model, Tether/Circ...
Comparatively, the AI native live streaming prediction market K25.ai announced the completion of Series A financing and received strategic support from Amber Group. The post-investment valuation reached $200 million, doubling the valuation in less than 60 days. This round of investment will accelerate K25.ai's product development, global expansion, institutional liquidity infrastructure, and creator ecosystem construction. Amber Group will support K25.ai in the areas of market infrastructure, liquidity strategies, ecosystem development, and digital assets. K25.ai combines AI with live streaming content to allow users to predict trends in sports, e-sports, entertainment and other scenarios in real time, and realizes real-time market generation, content monitoring, and result ruling through self-developed AI infrastructure. Previously, its Pre-A round was led by Nasdaq-listed company NewgenIVF Group.
Comparatively, RootData has integrated stock perpetual contract related data into the API Professional subscription system, covering core data such as stock perpetual contract trading pairs, quotes, and liquidity. Currently, the RootData API has served over 220 institutional customers, covering not only mainstream trading platforms such as Binance, OKX, Bitget, and Gate, but is also widely used by market makers, quantitative institutions and professional research teams such as Amber Group and Presto Research. With continuously expanding data dimensions and stable real-time data service capabilities, RootData is gradually becoming an important provider of organization-level encrypted data infrastructure. This article is sponsored by GENG, Build Your Fortune on GENG (https://geng.one)
In comparison, the AI healthcare project Savior of Health announced the completion of a $4 million strategic financing with participation from Amber Group, Basics Capital, Animoca Brands, Candaq, TBV, Everwood Capital, Olaris Capital, MangoLabs, and Credit Scend. This round of funding will be used to advance AI-driven medical and health management, build next-generation medical infrastructure, support AI scientific research through health questionnaires and surveys, and expand its global healthcare ecosystem.
Podcast Source: Fintech Blueprint Podcast Summary: BitPushNews Foreword In this episode, Fintech Blueprint spoke with B2C2 Americas CEO Cactus Raazi. B2C2 is one of the earliest and largest institutional market makers in the digital asset sector, serving around 1,500 institutions and making quotes on more than 440 exchanges around the world. The podcast discusses market makers' business logic, how balance sheets and signal generation support B2C2's daily stablecoin flow, and why the two extremes of the cryptocurrency market — “risk-free principal aggregation” and “proprietary alpha strategy” — produce vastly different customer outcomes that are often difficult for buyers to understand. Additionally, they explore why the US capital market provides little structured funding for true risk-taking companies, and whether the current combination of size, speed, and complexity makes this the toughest investment environment Wall Street has ever faced. Guest Background Cactus Raazi worked on Wall Street for nearly three decades before becoming B2C2 America's CEO in 2024. He began his career in 1998 with Goldman Sachs's money market issuance department — which oversees the issuance of commercial paper — before moving to the credit sales department at the end of 2000, where he was responsible for covering hedge funds engaged in convertible bond arbitrage, credit derivatives, structured credit, and mortgage derivatives. He has been with Goldman Sachs for 13 years and holds Goldman Sachs's record for the highest annual credit sales performance ever. After Goldman Sachs, he worked as managing director at Nomura Securities (2011—2012) and Tradeweb (2013—2015), where he designed OTC (OTC) trading platforms. In 2015, he co-founded Elefant, an algorithmic market-making platform for corporate bonds. He operated the platform for over six years before being acquired by Exos and was a partner after the acquisition. Since then, Cactus has led Amber Group's US operations as CEO and co-head of the Americas region, then worked on US strategy at Enhanced Digital Group (EDG). He has a bachelor's degree from the University of California Santa Barbara and a master's degree from NYU Stern School of Business. Here's a summary of the podcast: Lex Sokolin: I've always wanted to have you on the show. Let's start with big finance. You've been with Goldman Sachs for a long time. How did you get into Goldman Sachs, and how did you get started? Cactus Raazi: This was probably the most interesting part of my life journey. I first took a “logistics” role at Goldman Sachs, and I got this job largely because of my good fortune before I joined Goldman Sachs. I was living in Los Angeles at the time, and I had been reading The Street (an early financial site), dreaming of going to Wall Street. I had no idea what that meant. Surprisingly, one of my current best friends, a man named Nathaniel Klipper, called the magazine I work for to ask for advertising information. He asked to send the materials to his Goldman Sachs office. I took this as a sign from heaven and followed up with this gentleman. Although the ad I was responsible for in that publication never actually ran, he agreed to see me on my next business trip to New York. That meeting began a friendship, and through talking with him and reading a number of books he recommended, I began to learn more about finance. In 1998, I eventually moved to New York without a job and began interviewing all over the place. After being turned down by around 30 companies, I was offered an interview with Goldman Sachs. It took quite a while just to get an interview, but I was fully prepared for the interview at the time. After many previous failures, I got my first job in '98. It's the money market issuing department, that is, the department responsible for overseeing the planned issuance of commercial paper. This isn't the sexiest place to start. But it was my first step into the industry, and everything began to evolve from there. Lex Sokolin: Which markets did you touch in turn? It sounds like it's mostly fixed income, but you're also shuttling through different departments of the company. Cactus Raazi: Exactly. I started with fixed income, and most of my experience is in the fixed income field...
Comparing news, Sahara AI released an update in response to the SAHARA token price fluctuation incident, stating that it has been confirmed that the team and investor tokens were not sold or transferred, that designated market makers Amber Group and Herring Global operated normally during the incident, and that all token smart contracts were safe and secure. The reason for the incident was a chain reaction of contract leverage bursts: SAHARA contract leveraged long positions continued to accumulate to a record high in the three weeks before June 9, but liquidity was scarce. Selling pressure triggered large-scale automatic liquidation. At its peak, up to $992,000 of SAHARA was liquidated per second. 60% of contract orders were liquidated passively in the first two minutes, the contract price plummeted 64% within 5.5 minutes, and $60 million contract orders were executed within 30 minutes. The contract price was once 27% lower than the spot price, indicating that the clearing speed was faster than the market's absorption capacity. Large on-chain token transfers are pre-arranged Chainlink CCIP cross-chain bridge contract recharges to provide liquidity for the BNB Chain cross-chain bridge. The team is working with the exchange to determine the cause of the initial selling pressure, and will announce the final investigation results and enhanced measures in the future.
In comparison, according to on-chain analyst Ai Ai's monitoring, Fenbushi Capital's associated address (0xAF3... 74446) transferred 11,101 ETH to the Amber Group deposit address 8 hours ago, worth US$21.94 million, and the transfer price was US$1977.24. According to traceability, the address proposed a total of 33,398 ETH from Binance at an average price of $3039.36 between February 2024 and April 2024, with a total value of about US$101 million; based on the current transfer price, if the 11101 ETH were sold, it would lose US$11.79 million.