How does the GENIUS Act work?

Imagine a simple scenario.

You have $1,000,000,000. You buy stablecoins and swap them for BTC. BTC drops fast 📉

You panic 😬

You sell back into stablecoins, but now you only have $780,000,000. Meanwhile, $220,000,000 is still sitting in the bank. And this is where it gets interesting.

Who does that money belong to now? 🤔

What is tokenomics really like? 🧠

You could describe it as “an economy.” But then it becomes just an academic concept – dry, abstract, lifeless.

Now imagine it as the economy of a small country. Suddenly it makes sense. You see capital flows, small “factories”, treasury reserves, and internal incentives. You see movement.

Picture that country 🏙

It has its own central bank. And only one real lever is the interest rate. Lower it, and the economy wakes up: cheap credit, new jobs, mortgages, businesses expanding. Raise it, and everything slows down: assets get sold, cash moves to deposits, plans get postponed.

Tokenomics works the same way. It’s not a spreadsheet. It’s a network of interdependencies, where one decision triggers a chain reaction.

Tokenomics is structure. And when that structure is out of balance, the whole “economy” starts to glitch 🤷‍♂️

💥 Pump.fun tries to revive trading volumes: traders promised cashback

Chart: Monthly fee revenue for Pump.fun since March 2024. Source: DeFiLlama

With profits declining and “memecoin season is dead” narratives getting louder, the new mechanism looks like an attempt to bring activity back. In January, platform fees came in at $31.8M versus $148M a year earlier, marking a drop of more than 75%.

For a long time, Pump.fun was criticized for favoring token creators. Deployers received 0.3% in fees, while actual demand was driven by traders and influencers.

⚖️ Now, when launching a token, the creator has to choose: keep the Creator Fees or enable a Trader Cashback model. The decision is made upfront and cannot be changed later.

💸 If the developer keeps the fees, traders may simply ignore the token. If cashback is enabled, participants earn rewards on every trade.

So far, the update hasn’t sparked much excitement 😬

Volumes remain low, and at current activity levels, the potential cashback is unlikely to become a meaningful incentive.

Pump.fun is essentially reshuffling the internal economics of its ecosystem. And the question here is whether that’s enough to bring the memecoin market back to life.

🏦 If a bank goes bankrupt, whose risk is it?

Stablecoins are moving further away from crypto and especially from altcoins. The US, EU, UAE, Singapore and others have already introduced clear regulatory frameworks.

The rules are clear:
🫥who can issue coins and under what rules,
🫥how and with what they are backed,
🫥how the peg is maintained,
🫥where and in which assets the reserves are held.

It feels structured, predictable, and safe. But what happens if the reserve suddenly disappears?

A bank declares bankruptcy. A government defaults on its bonds, and “liquid” assets lose value overnight. A financial crisis unfolds 🌪

And in that moment, everything comes down to one question: whose risk is it?

The dollar is still one dollar, but what is the stablecoin worth now? 🤔

💶 The digital euro is getting closer. But is the system ready?

The European Central Bank is moving toward a pilot launch of the digital euro. In early 2026, it plans to begin selecting licensed payment providers, with a 12-month testing phase expected to start in the second half of 2027.

🎯One thing is important to understand: a CBDC isn’t just another stablecoin.

A digital euro would require its own dedicated digital infrastructure, deep integration with the banking system, and strict regulatory compliance.

And here’s where it gets complicated.

Given the current state of EU banking infrastructure, those timelines look ambitious.

For comparison, China spent around seven years developing the digital yuan before moving into large-scale pilot programs.

The digital euro is shifting from concept to execution.

⭕️But will the banking system be able to keep up?

😎From Lightning credit lines to lobbying in Congress

Crypto is moving deeper into the fiat world.

💸 Voltage launched a USD credit line directly tied to Bitcoin and Lightning. Businesses get instant settlement while keeping their accounting in dollars. No trade-off between crypto rails and traditional finance.

🤑 US exchanges are accelerating too. CME is preparing for 24/7 crypto derivatives trading, upgrading its infrastructure even before final SEC decisions land. At the same time, capital is shifting. Some deposits are moving from regional banks to Coinbase. Money is steadily flowing into the crypto ecosystem.

⚖️ On the regulatory front, tensions are rising. Kalshi lost its dispute with the state of Nevada. Hyperliquid launched a DeFi lobbying hub in the US. The industry is forming a working group around prediction markets.

📌 The takeaway this week is simple:

crypto looks less like a parallel system and more like infrastructure wiring itself directly into traditional finance and political architecture.

#CryptoWeekly

Do stablecoins free you from the system or keep you in it? 🤔

🫥Back in 2017, crypto’s loudest voices were talking about new money, the end of the dollar, the collapse of banks.
🫥In 2020, the narrative shifted to cleaning crypto up, pushing for ETFs, and bringing institutional money into the space.
🫥By 2026, the mood changes again. Now it’s about privacy, disappearing into DeFi, and stepping outside the system.

But here’s the uncomfortable question. Can anyone really step outside?

You can stack privacy tools. You can route through layers. You can encrypt everything. And still, sooner or later, stablecoins show up.

They are the main gateway in and out. The narrow passage most of Web3 flows through.

The crypto dollar is still tied to the same financial infrastructure many claim to be escaping. And until there is a real alternative to fiat and everything built on top of it, every “exit” still leaves a trace. Not because crypto failed, but because the foundation never changed.

😎 Memento Research reveals where crypto capital is starting to concentrate

The study by Memento Research shows that in 2025, Web3 investment is gradually shifting from tokens to equities.

Out of 118 token launches in 2025, 84.7% are trading below their TGE price. The average FDV decline stands at –71.1%, while average market cap is down –66.8%.

Against this backdrop, the equities segment is showing the opposite trend: crypto company IPO volume has increased 48x, reaching $14.6 billion, while M&A deals totaled $42.5 billion.

The conclusion is clear: investors remain interested in the Web3 market, but tokens are no longer the preferred vehicle for exposure.

🔃 Going forward, the market will likely favor only those tokens that are directly tied to a business’s financial performance. The rest risk simply failing to capture investor attention.

🔮 Hyperliquid’s Outcome Trading could change the prediction market

In February 2026, Hyperliquid announced HIP-4 — support for outcome trading on HyperCore. Outcomes are fully collateralized contracts that settle within a fixed range. They represent a general-purpose primitive useful for applications such as prediction markets and bounded, options-like instruments.

And the context here matters 👇

Seven years ago, the founder of Hyperliquid participated in Binance Labs with a project called Deaux, which aimed to launch a prediction market. At the time, the idea was premature — the market simply wasn’t ready.

😎 Today, things are different. Prediction markets are growing rapidly, but most players only have a platform. Hyperliquid, on the other hand, has its own L1, liquidity, EVM integration, portfolio margin, USDH, and strong tokenomics powered by HYPE.

This is no longer just another prediction market. It’s an attempt to embed prediction tools into a full-fledged derivatives infrastructure. And if the sector continues to develop, Hyperliquid has everything it needs to become its foundational infrastructure.

😎 ESMA warns: perpetual futures may fall under EU CFD rules

A CFD (Contract for Difference) is a derivative allowing traders speculate on price movements without owning the underlying asset and with no expiration date. In practice, many perpetual futures work in a very similar way — the difference is often more about naming than mechanics.

🤔 If regulators treat perps as CFDs, they would automatically fall under existing restrictions. In some jurisdictions, CFDs are banned (e.g. in the US), which could create risks for both Perp DEXs and centralized exchanges.

⚖️ FDMC vs CMC: What should you consider before buying a token?

Many investors compare crypto projects by market cap but not everyone understands the difference between two key metrics – FDMC and CMC.

🫥FDMC (Fully Diluted Market Cap) = price × all tokens that will ever be issued.
🫥CMC (Circulating Market Cap) = price × tokens currently in circulation.

The difference between them represents future inflation. Tokens are almost always released gradually through vesting schedules. As a result, CMC increases over time even if the price remains unchanged, while FDMC changes only when the token price moves.

A simple example:

A project plans to issue 1,000 tokens at $0.1. In the first year, 100 tokens are unlocked. In the second year, another 200 tokens are unlocked.

If the token price remains constant:
Year 1: FDMC = $100, CMC = $10
Year 2: FDMC = $100, CMC = $30
The price didn’t change but the circulating supply tripled.

So how do you use this in practice? 🤔

If the gap between FDMC and CMC is large (for example, like $HYPE), it means significant unlocks are ahead creating potential selling pressure. It can also signal that the token is priced “in advance” of its actual circulating value.

If FDMC ≈ CMC (like $BNB), most tokens are already in circulation. No major unlocks are expected, which reduces structural selling pressure and makes the supply more stable.

The takeaway is simple: FDMC shows what the project is worth “in theory.” CMC shows how much capital is actually at work right now. Ignoring the gap between them means ignoring future inflation.

🥇 $UNI +15% in 24 hours. The reason is token economics.

Chart: $UNI price over the past 24 hours. CoinDesk.

Uniswap has updated $UNI’s economic model through a governance proposal. The initiative includes activating protocol fees across 8 additional chains and automating fee capture across all v3 pools. The potential impact is up to $27 million in annual revenue.

Considering current buyback and burn spending (~$34 million per year), the total annual budget could reach $61 million. The market reacted predictably: $UNI jumped about 15% in 24 hours.

🎯 But the key point isn’t the numbers — it’s the structure. Demand for Uniswap’s products now directly feeds into the token’s economics.

🤔 This is another confirmation of the 2026 trend: a token must reflect the value of the underlying business.

😎 8Blocks on stage at Blockchain Forum 2026 😎

Looking forward to Blockchain Forum 2026? You should 😎 Because we’ll be speaking on the AI Future Stage with a topic many prefer not to say out loud:

“The Token Market Is Dying: Why Demand for Utility Tokens Is Falling and What a Token Must Look Like in 2026 to Attract Investment.”

Capital is rotating into equities, 80% of new tokens are trading below their TGE price, and investors are increasingly ignoring the concept of “utility for utility.”

Our lead tokenomics expert and co-founder, Anton Efimenko, will explain why this is happening, where token economic models most often break down, and will analyze demand structure along with real-world cases.

🤯 And a reminder: we’re not just speaking – we’re also participating as a Sapphire Sponsor with our own booth SP7. We’ll be happy to meet each of you in person!

🎟 Enjoy a 10% discount on tickets with the promo code 8Blocks.

See you at the AI Future Stage at Blockchain Forum 2026 in Moscow!

🥇 $VVV +20% in 24 hours while the market is falling. Coincidence? No — tokenomics.

Chart: $VVV price over the past 24 hours. CoinDesk.

Venice Token ($VVV) hit a yearly high amid a broader market decline, gaining over 20% in a single day. The reason lies in its token structure.

Venice AI surpassed 2 million users, reduced annual token emissions by 25%, and integrated $VVV into major DeFi protocols: Aerodrome, Morpho, and Plena.

Importantly, $VVV is not just a speculative asset. The token provides API access and eligibility for rewards. Without it, platform usage is either limited or economically inefficient.

🎯 More users ⇒ higher product demand ⇒ stronger token demand.

While the broader market declines, reinforces the 2026 narrative: hype doesn’t win — functional tokenomics does 😉

📉 Crypto prices don’t crash because of sellers: they crash because of buyers

A seller almost always wants to sell at the highest possible price. A buyer, on the other hand, tries to buy as cheaply as possible.

When demand is weak, buyers start waiting for lower prices. They refuse current offers and gradually push the market down. That’s why the key factor behind a token’s price is not the number of sellers, but the quality of demand.

If demand is driven only by marketing, it disappears quickly. As soon as the news flow fades, buyers go back to waiting for a better entry.

🎯 But the situation changes when a token has real utility.

When the token is required to use the product (whether for accessing a service, earning rewards, or participating in the platform’s economy), buyers start purchasing it at the current market price.

🤔 That’s why sustainable tokenomics is built not around marketing, but around utility-driven demand. In other words, a stable price emerges when the token is a necessary element of the product’s economic model.

☠️ Worse than post-FTX: 38% of altcoins near historic lows

Chart: The percentage of altcoins trading at or near all-time lows. Source: CryptoQuant

According to CryptoQuant analyst Darkfost, around 38% of altcoins are currently trading close to their historical lows, a situation even worse than the market conditions seen after the FTX collapse.

One of the key reasons is liquidity rotation. Capital is gradually moving out of altcoins and into equities and commodities, while daily altcoin trading volumes have dropped to around $49 billion.

Analysts also highlight two structural factors putting pressure on the market:
🫥 the oversupply of tokens competing for limited investor capital,
🫥 the launch of Bitcoin ETFs, which has redirected liquidity toward traditional financial instruments.

😎 As a result, altcoins are facing not only market volatility, but also a shift in how capital is allocated across the crypto market.

🚀 Bitcoin mining is going beyond Earth

Starcloud plans to start mining $BTC in orbit. Yep, literally in space. The company intends to install solar-powered ASIC equipment on a satellite.

🤔Founded in early 2024, Starcloud focuses on building space-based data centers as a response to the growing energy demands of the AI industry. Back in November, it sent a satellite into orbit equipped with an NVIDIA H100, one of the most powerful GPUs ever used in space.

Now the next step is bitcoin mining.

According to CEO Philip Johnston, mining $BTC in orbit could be more cost-efficient than doing it on Earth. And the reasoning is surprisingly down to earth: near-constant access to solar energy and natural cooling. That means lower electricity costs and fewer expenses tied to hardware cooling.

😎While the industry keeps searching for new energy sources to power computation, mining may become one of the first real use cases for orbital data centers.

And all of this is happening while $BTC remains under pressure amid ongoing geopolitical uncertainty.

🔮 Prediction markets under pressure: Kalshi loses in Ohio

Prediction market platform Kalshi has lost its court battle against the state of Ohio, despite the fact that the CFTC had previously classified the company’s products as swaps, not sports betting. The court saw it differently.

The judge ruled that Kalshi failed to prove its sports event contracts fall under the CFTC’s “exclusive jurisdiction.”

The opinion and order said:

“Even if this Court were to find that sports-event contracts are swaps subject to the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction, Kalshi has not shown that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) would necessarily preempt Ohio’s sports gambling laws.”

In other words, federal derivatives regulation doesn’t override a state’s authority to regulate gambling.

Kalshi has already announced it disagrees with the ruling and plans to appeal. The timeline for the next stage of the legal battle has not yet been disclosed.

😎 This case is quickly becoming a major precedent for prediction markets in the United States. At stake is a fundamental question: should these contracts be treated as financial instruments or as gambling products?