hodler

5 May 2026, 16:03

Bitcoin Open Interest just hit one of the highest levels on record

Bitcoin ( BTC ) Open Interest (OI) – a measure of the amount of money invested in its derivatives at any given time – has surged to the highest level in 109 days on May 5. The Bitcoin OI has spiked by more than $10 billion over the past five days, reaching $64.7 billion at press time, according to CoinGlass data analyzed by Finbold. Notably, the BTC’s derivatives market has gradually recovered since hitting its 2026 low of approximately $43.04 billion on March 2. Bitcoin OI on all exchanges. Source: CoinGlass Over the past 24 hours, Bitcoin OI surged by nearly 11% from $60.98 billion. As of press time, Binance controlled the lion’s share of BTC’s OI at about $11.89 billion, up 13.48% in 24 hours. MEXC exchange recorded the largest daily uptick, at roughly 21%, reaching around $6.95 billion at the time of publication. What’s next for Bitcoin price amid renewed interest via OI Following the notable rise in Bitcoin OI, the BTC price rose 2.46% over the past 24 hours, reaching $81,550 at the time of publication. As such, the flagship coin’s market capitalization climbed to $1.6 trillion. BTC/USD 24-hour chart. Source: Finbold However, the majority of Bitcoin traders are betting on a near-term reversal. For instance, its Funding Rate – a fee set to balance perpetual contract price to underlying asset price – dropped to the lowest level since April 23, based on updates from CoinGlass . BTC OI-weighted funding rate. Source: CoinGlass With rising BTC OI, a sharp uptick in negative funding rates suggests more derivative traders have shifted to bearish positions. Bitcoin daily net realized profit and loss. Source: CryptoQuant Meanwhile, the recent Bitcoin price uptick, potentially fueled by a short squeeze as Finbold explained , has seen more spot traders accelerate profit-taking. After BTC price surged above $80,000, holders realized their highest daily profit since December 10, 2025, as per data from CryptoQuant . The post Bitcoin Open Interest just hit one of the highest levels on record appeared first on Finbold .

5 May 2026, 15:01

DSJEX team freezes $41.5M after alleged $150M crypto Ponzi crash

A crypto Ponzi scheme operating under the names DSJ Exchange (DSJEX) and BG Wealth Sharing collapsed last week. ZachXBT revealed that he was part of the team responsible for coordinating an effort between Tether, the security team at Binance, OKX, and American law enforcement agencies to freeze assets worth $41.5 million. This was a scam that started way back in 2025 and offered its investors a return of between 1.3% and 2.6% daily, apart from referral and ranking bonuses. Crypto scheme used a fictitious CEO and rotating infrastructure DSJ was a dummy trading platform, while BG was an investment firm related to it. There was a dummy CEO called Stephen Beard who was the face of the scam to the public, and there was a constant change of domain names and hot wallets. There was a push for recruiting members and fake trade signals in a group in BonChat, a messaging app that originated from Hong Kong. The fact that the fraudulent entity created a fake identity for the leader, used a rotating network of infrastructure, and recruited via social media made the scam hard to trace. 1/ The $150M+ DSJ Exchange (DSJEX) / BG Wealth Sharing Ponzi scheme collapsed last week. From April 27 – May 3, illicit actors laundered $92M+ across chains to obscure the trail. I helped lead an initiative with @Tether_to, @Binance Security Team, @OKX , & US law enforcement that… pic.twitter.com/h85hQ5IeRD — ZachXBT (@zachxbt) May 5, 2026 A total of thirteen regulators in five continents had issued public warnings against DSJ and BG prior to the collapse. The US authorities had also seized one of the sites, bgwealthsharing[.]com, used by the scammers on April 23, 2026. Even after this seizure, the scam operated for some time until the withdrawal function was completely blocked. On May 2, 2026, a video purporting to be filmed with Stephen Beard was uploaded, saying DSJ will launch its initial public offering and would require 12% of the users’ account balances in taxes as per regulations. At this point, withdrawal of money from the platform had stopped functioning. $92 million laundered across chains in 7 days Between April 27 and May 3, 2026, illegal parties conducted over $92 million worth of transactions from DSJ and BG hot wallets on multiple chains and exchanges. The illicit laundering techniques used include token swap on Tokenlon, bridging through Bridgers, Butter Network, and USDT0, USDD wrap and unwrap, and consolidating transactions on multiple wallet addresses. ZachXBT identified the transfer of more than $93 million in funds from the consolidations on multiple deposit addresses in the seven-day period. The biggest amount was deposited into the Cobo platform, totaling $63 million throughout the week. According to ZachXBT, he learned about the incident while investigating the contract flows of USDD for another matter. He did a timing analysis to identify withdrawal patterns and located Solana and Tron deposits to Binance with matching Tron withdrawals. That information was shared with relevant parties, and on May 4, 2026, Tether froze $38.4 million based on the findings. An additional $3.1 million was frozen at various services and exchanges, bringing the total frozen to $41.5 million. Crypto fraud targeted retail investors ZachXBT called DSJ and BG as part of a category of Chinese investment frauds that are obvious to most experienced observers but deliberately designed to target retail investors through social media channels. He also noted that many users still appeared to be in denial about having been scammed. The $150 million figure cited across coverage of the scheme is described as a floor rather than a ceiling. The operation ran since 2025 and involved thousands of victim exchange withdrawals. ZachXBT credited early coverage of the investment fraud to researchers at dehek and BehindMLM. If you want a calmer entry point into DeFi crypto without the usual hype, start with this free video.

5 May 2026, 15:00

David Schwartz Says Ripple Stock Is His Real Bet, Not XRP

Ripple’s former CTO David Schwartz pushed back against the idea that he is a committed long-term XRP holder, saying in a series of X posts that Ripple stock, not XRP, now represents his main exposure to the crypto sector. The comments matter because Schwartz remains one of the most closely watched figures in the XRP community. His remarks cut directly into a recurring tension around Ripple, XRP and the difference between exposure to the company’s business and exposure to the asset associated with the XRP Ledger. The exchange began after users revisited Schwartz’s past decision to sell ETH at $1.05. Responding to a post that framed the sale as a missed opportunity, Schwartz said he did not view the upside probability as obvious at the time. “If I had thought there was a 1% chance of it hitting $2,368, I would not have sold it for $1.05,” he wrote. “I’m still not sure the odds of that happening really were more than 1% at the time.” That admission set off a broader discussion about Schwartz’s current XRP exposure. When asked whether he was still holding XRP, he replied that he no longer had “that much left anymore” and had tried to move most of his assets away from crypto risk, with one major exception: Ripple stock. “I fully recognize that crypto may be a once-in-a-generation chance to get rich that we have not missed yet and that may mean that I miss a lot of it,” Schwartz wrote. “I’m okay with that and hope my Ripple stock gives me enough exposure. I sleep better at night that way.” Ripple Stock As The Core Exposure Schwartz framed the decision as a question of risk tolerance rather than a direct call on XRP’s future price. He said he does “not really like risk,” even though many of the risks he has taken have worked out well for him. In another post, he made the point more bluntly. “I’m not the diamond hands guy. That’s not me. I’m the smart, sensible investment guy who might miss the big opportunities. And I’m okay with that.” For XRP holders, the more consequential part of the exchange was not simply that Schwartz said he holds less XRP. It was his explanation that Ripple stock already gives him enough exposure to the same broad ecosystem. When asked whether he would view XRP differently if he had less stock, Schwartz said he probably would. “Yeah. I think I would hold more XRP (and probably more of other cryptos as well) if I had less exposure to the crypto space through my Ripple stock. I kind of feel like that’s enough risk just there and almost everything else should be fairly conservative.” That distinction is important. Schwartz did not say XRP and Ripple stock are the same trade. In fact, he argued the opposite when asked about whether Ripple could ever create an “XRP for equity” scheme that would give long-term XRP holders priority access to shares if Ripple were to go public. He said information he has on secondary-market trading of Ripple shares is covered by non-disclosure agreements, though he pointed users toward platforms such as Notice.co and Hiive for public-facing data. But he was skeptical of tying XRP holders more directly to Ripple’s equity story. “I’m personally not a fan of Ripple trying to do something like that,” Schwartz wrote. “If people want exposure to Ripple’s gains and losses, they should buy Ripple stock on the secondary market. I don’t think it’s good for XRP for its value to become more entangled with Ripple’s success or failure than it absolutely needs to be.” The Legal Line Between XRP And Equity Schwartz also rejected the idea that the firm could simply open stock access to XRP holders. When one user argued that the company should let the community buy Ripple stock directly, he said there was “no practical way” to do that under current law. “Ripple stock is, without doubt, a security,” he wrote. “If you want direct exposure to Ripple’s success or failure, you can buy Ripple stock on the secondary market if you qualify under US law. But you probably shouldn’t.” He also described any future Ripple public listing as speculative, citing uncertainty around the regulatory environment. A less favorable SEC in the future, he argued, could become a major issue if Ripple were to go public in the United States . The discussion later turned to Schwartz’s own XRP allocation. Asked why he had only 26 million XRP while other early Ripple- linked figures received far larger amounts , he declined to revisit the full history but said he ended up with “quite a bit of Ripple stock.” In another reply, he clarified that the 26 million XRP was not a gift, saying it was XRP he had traded bitcoin for. “Once XRP hit 10 cents, I had millions of dollars at risk,” he wrote. “I very much did not like that at the time.” At press time, XRP traded at $1.4071.

5 May 2026, 15:00

Qualified custody: the pre-TGE decision that unlocks institutional capital

Most protocols don’t think hard about custody until an institutional fund asks who their qualified custodian is. By the time the answer is “we’re in a multisig,” the damage is done. Qualified custody isn’t an administrative checkbox. It decides who can invest in you, how cleanly your unlocks run, and what you can actually do with your treasury. Get it right before TGE, not after. Qualified custody vs. multisig determines your investors Most protocol teams have some version of custody in place. The question is whether it’s the right kind. A multisig wallet, like Gnosis Safe, Squads, or similar, is a legitimate tool for managing protocol assets. It distributes key control across multiple signers and reduces single-point-of-failure risk. For early-stage operations, it’s often the right starting point. But a multisig is not qualified custody. And the difference matters enormously once institutional capital is involved. Qualified custody is a legal and regulatory designation. In the United States, it refers to institutions (banks, trust companies, broker-dealers, and certain state-chartered entities) that meet specific regulatory requirements for safeguarding client assets. The SEC’s Custody Rule (Rule 206(4)-2 under the Investment Advisers Act) mandates that registered investment advisers maintaining client funds must hold those assets with a qualified custodian. This matters for protocols because it determines who can invest in your project. Many institutional investors, including funds, RIAs, asset managers, and pensions, are bound by regulation or internal mandates to allocate only to assets held with qualified custodians. Without it, they often cannot invest at all, regardless of how compelling your protocol is. The institutional wave is moving. The question is whether your custody setup is positioned to receive it. 7 things qualified custody unlocks for your protocol 1. It determines who can invest in your protocol This is the most immediate and painful reason protocols discover qualified custody too late. Under the SEC’s Investment Advisers Act, RIAs managing client assets in crypto are required by Rule 206(4)-2 to use qualified custodians. Institutional funds with LP agreements frequently carry the same requirements. Without qualified custody in place, protocols are effectively excluded from a significant portion of available institutional capital. Not because investors don’t want in, but because their compliance frameworks won’t allow it. The same applies to ETF and ETP pathways. Tokenized products and crypto-native investment vehicles increasingly require qualified custody for their underlying assets as a baseline condition for participation. Protocols without it are shut out of these structures entirely. Qualified custody doesn’t just protect your assets. It expands your investor universe. 2. It protects your treasury in ways a multisig cannot Protocol treasuries typically hold a complex mix of native tokens, stablecoin reserves, investor allocations, and ecosystem funds. Managing this through a multisig exposes the protocol to risks that are easy to underestimate. Until they aren’t. Multisigs carry obvious key-person risk: if a signer leaves or is compromised, treasury operations stall. The less visible risks are equally serious. No enforced governance. No system-level controls. No regulatory protection in insolvency. Qualified custody fixes all three. Segregated accounts keep each client’s assets separate, and MPC technology distributes key generation and signing across multiple parties to remove single points of failure. Critically, qualified custodians (particularly those operating under SPDI charters) maintain assets on a bankruptcy-remote basis. Client assets are segregated from the custodian’s own balance sheet and cannot be claimed by creditors in the event of institutional failure. This is the protection institutional investors expect as a baseline. It is one a multisig structurally cannot provide. Beyond protection, qualified custody is also what makes active treasury management possible: generating yield, accessing financing, and managing concentration risk without moving assets out of a regulated environment. We’ll come back to this. 3. It brings structure to token lifecycle and unlock management Post-TGE, protocols must coordinate vesting schedules for teams and investors, manage investor unlocks, and execute distribution events (often simultaneously, often under market scrutiny). Without qualified custody, this coordination typically happens across fragmented systems: spreadsheets, wallet tracking, manual multisig signings, and Slack threads that become increasingly difficult to manage as the number of stakeholders grows. As we covered in Post 2, poorly coordinated unlocks are one of the most reliable drivers of post-TGE price volatility. And they almost always trace back to infrastructure that wasn’t designed for the load. Qualified custody brings programmatic control to this process. Tokens can remain securely held until unlock conditions are met. Role-based approvals enforce timelines at the system level rather than depending on manual coordination. And when a VC’s LP agreement requires that vested tokens be held in qualified custody during a lockup period (an increasingly common requirement) that infrastructure needs to be in place before the tokens are issued, not after. 4. It makes your protocol auditable and compliance-ready As protocols mature, the reporting bar rises. Investors expect quarterly statements. Regulators increasingly expect audit trails. Foundations need verifiable proof of holdings for governance and legal purposes. A multisig can show you a wallet balance. It cannot produce a SOC 2 Type II-level audit trail, monthly vault statements organized by asset type, or on-chain verifiable proof-of-reserves documentation. Qualified custody provides all of this: monthly combined statements with detailed insights into digital asset and fiat account holdings, organized by vault and asset type, giving protocols the reporting infrastructure their investors and compliance teams require. This matters before TGE as well. Listing, custody, and operational requirements handled up front (including KYB/KYC alignment, custody structure, and reporting setup) significantly reduce friction at the moment of launch. 5. It scales with your protocol’s operational complexity In the early stages, a small team managing a multisig is workable. As a protocol grows, with more stakeholders interacting with treasury, more capital deployed across staking, grants, and liquidity strategies, and more jurisdictions involved, manual processes become structural bottlenecks. Qualified custody standardizes workflows at the system level. Role-based access controls define exactly who can initiate, approve, and execute transactions. Multi-approval workflows are enforced programmatically rather than coordinated through Slack. As the organization grows, new team members and stakeholders can be onboarded into the custody framework without rebuilding the underlying controls. 6. Custody is the foundation for everything else Regulated custody is about more than simply where your assets sit. It’s the control layer that determines what you can do with them. Once assets are custodied with an integrated provider, a protocol can: Move capital directly into staking without transferring to an external provider Execute treasury trades and OTC transactions without moving assets off-platform Access lending and financing by pledging custodied assets as collateral Coordinate liquidity strategies across spot, derivatives, and OTC markets Manage token distributions and vesting events without fragmented coordination All with reduced operational risk and latency because the assets never leave the custody environment. 7. It enables active treasury management Most protocol treasuries sit 100% in native token by default. They’re fully exposed to price, not generating income. Custody changes what’s operationally possible with an integrated stack. Assets in a regulated custody environment can be staked for rewards, pledged as collateral for financing, or used to execute hedging strategies, all without leaving the custody perimeter. For foundations and founders sitting on concentrated positions, this is the difference between a treasury that’s a liability in a drawdown and one that’s actively generating income. The custody decision framework: what to evaluate before you choose Not all regulated custody is equivalent. The regulatory designation is a floor, not a ceiling, and what sits above that floor varies significantly between providers. Here are the questions that matter most: Regulatory standing. Is the custodian a regulated custodian under applicable law? The regulatory designation, charter type, and jurisdiction all affect what institutional investors can accept. A state-chartered trust company, a federally chartered bank, and a broker-dealer custodian all carry different regulatory profiles. Asset segregation and bankruptcy remoteness. Are client assets held separately from the custodian’s own balance sheet? Can they be claimed by creditors in insolvency? The answer should be clearly no on both counts and your legal team should verify this structurally, not just take it on a provider’s word. Operational flexibility. Does regulated custody restrict your ability to stake, participate in governance, manage distributions, or execute treasury strategies? It shouldn’t. Look for programmatic frameworks that enable these functions without compromising custody integrity. Integration with downstream services. Does your custodian connect to the trading, OTC, staking, and distribution infrastructure you’ll need post-launch? Or does it require external transfers every time you want to act on custodied assets? Every external transfer is a coordination dependency, and as Part 2 of our series established, coordination dependencies are where things break. Reporting and auditability. Can the custodian produce the monthly statements, audit trails, and on-chain verification that your investors and regulators will eventually require? Ask to see the reporting format before you sign, not after. Scale readiness. Is the custody infrastructure designed for where your protocol is going, not just where it is today? Your custody needs at TGE will not be your custody needs 18 months post-launch. What protocols get by custodying with Kraken Kraken Financial is not a general-purpose custodian that added crypto support. It was built specifically for digital assets and its regulatory foundation reflects that. In 2020, Kraken was the first digital asset company in the world to receive a Wyoming Special Purpose Depository Institution (SPDI) charter, establishing a new standard for digital asset custody that combines technological innovation with stringent regulatory compliance. The SPDI charter provides protections that go beyond standard regulated custody. By law, Kraken Financial is a separate legal entity from the Kraken exchange, with its own governance structure and dedicated board of directors. SPDIs operate on a full-reserve basis, holding unencumbered liquid assets valued at not less than 100% of client deposits, and are prohibited from making loans. In a sector where custodial failures have historically traced back to commingling and overleveraging, this structural separation is material. The technology stack is institutional-grade: MPC technology distributes key generation and signing across multiple parties, eliminating single-point-of-failure risk HSM-backed key storage means keys never leave secure hardware Segregated on-chain vaults ensure no commingling of assets, with cryptographically verifiable ownership that clients can independently verify Robust firewalls, intrusion detection, and state-of-the-art data encryption provide comprehensive protection against external threats Mandatory two-factor authentication enforced across all accounts The integration layer reduces fragmentation. This is where Kraken Financial’s position within the broader Kraken 360 infrastructure becomes materially different from a standalone custodian. Assets custodied with Kraken Financial connect directly to: Kraken exchange and OTC desk for treasury execution without external transfers Institutional staking infrastructure for earning yield directly from custody Financing and collateral options for capital efficiency without selling tokens Token distribution and vesting workflows via Magna, now part of the Kraken ecosystem Exchange coordination and listing readiness as part of the broader TGE lifecycle The result is a custody environment where assets don’t just sit securely; they work. The coordination overhead that comes with managing separate providers for each of these functions is eliminated by design. Treasury monetization and risk management become real capabilities. Most foundations and crypto founders hold treasuries that are 100% in their own native token. No hedging, no yield, just price exposure. That’s a problem most teams know about but haven’t solved; when the token drops 40%, the treasury drops 40%, and runway shrinks right when grants and payroll matter most. Kraken 360 and the integrated stack provide the tools treasuries need to actually do something about it. Staking and structured yield generate income on holdings without selling. Financing against tokens frees up liquidity without triggering a taxable event or signaling a sale to the market. And because everything runs on assets already custodied with Kraken, none of it requires standing up new relationships with separate providers. The reporting infrastructure is built for institutional requirements. Monthly vault statements provide detailed insights into digital asset and fiat account holdings, organized by vault and asset type. Full audit trails cover all transactions and activity. On-chain verifiability allows independent confirmation of holdings at any point. The support infrastructure is genuinely differentiated. Kraken’s account management team offers expert assistance 24/7/365, from account setup through ongoing transaction processing. For protocols navigating regulated custody for the first time, white-glove onboarding isn’t a nice-to-have. It’s the difference between a clean setup and one that creates problems at the worst possible moment. Timing can be tricky Most protocols that get custody wrong don’t make a bad decision. They make a late one. Custody set up reactively (e.g., after an institutional investor raises the question, after a VC’s LP agreement surfaces the requirement, after a compliance review flags the gap) is custody that costs more, takes longer, and creates friction at exactly the moment you need things to move cleanly. The protocols that get this right treat custody as a pre-TGE infrastructure decision, not a post-TGE administrative task. Qualified custody isn’t just storage. It’s the regulatory and operational foundation that unlocks institutional capital, minimizes treasury risk, professionalizes token lifecycle management, and reduces the vendor fragmentation we covered in Part 2 (Also read Part 1, The TGE Checklist and Part 3, The Vendor Sprawl Problem . If your current treasury setup is a multisig and institutional conversations are on the horizon, let us know. We’ll show you what regulated custody actually looks like in practice and what it unlocks from day one. This is the right time to have the custody conversation. Not after your next raise, not after your TGE. Get in touch with the Kraken 360 team OTC services, including spot trading, derivatives, and lending, are offered by Payward Oceanic Ltd., a member of the Kraken Group. These products are available only to eligible clients and may not be offered in all jurisdictions. OTC transactions involve risk and may result in the loss of capital. This communication is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment, legal, or tax advice. Availability is subject to applicable laws and regulatory requirements. Projected annual rate is an estimate based on the average staking rewards accrued over the past period, before commission, and is subject to change. Staking involves risks including no guarantee of rewards, potential loss from slashing or hacks, and depreciation in the value of assets while staked. Please refer to Kraken’s Terms of Service for additional information. Geographic restrictions apply. Custody services are provided by Payward Financial, Inc. or Payward Europe Solutions, Ltd, as applicable. Payward Financial, Inc. d/b/a Kraken Financial is not an FDIC-insured bank and deposits are neither insured by nor subject to the protections of the FDIC. Payward Europe Solutions Limited, trading as Kraken, is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.See Legal Disclosures for each jurisdiction here . The post Qualified custody: the pre-TGE decision that unlocks institutional capital appeared first on Kraken Blog .

5 May 2026, 14:40

Coinbase taps Centrifuge as preferred tokenization backbone, takes equity stake

The partnership includes a strategic investment by Coinbase and is focused on expanding tokenized ETFs, credit, and structured products.

5 May 2026, 14:30

Coinbase makes 'seven-figure' investment in Centrifuge, taps platform as Base's main tokenization partner

Centrifuge will be the go-to platform for launching tokenized assets on Base, the Ethereum blockchain incubated by Coinbase.