hodler

11 May 2026, 15:15

Silver Hits Two-Month High as US-Iran Tensions Fuel Safe-Haven Surge

BitcoinWorld Silver Hits Two-Month High as US-Iran Tensions Fuel Safe-Haven Surge Silver prices climbed to their highest level in two months on Monday, driven by a surge in safe-haven buying as geopolitical tensions between the United States and Iran escalated. The precious metal breached key resistance levels, reflecting growing investor anxiety over potential disruptions in the Middle East. Geopolitical Catalyst Behind the Rally The latest leg of the rally was triggered by heightened rhetoric and military posturing between Washington and Tehran. Reports of increased naval deployments in the Persian Gulf and failed diplomatic talks over Iran’s nuclear program have amplified risk aversion across global markets. Investors traditionally turn to precious metals like silver and gold during periods of geopolitical instability, viewing them as stores of value uncorrelated with equities or currencies. Silver’s dual role as both an industrial metal and a monetary asset has added to its appeal. While industrial demand from solar panel manufacturing and electronics remains robust, the current price action is overwhelmingly driven by its safe-haven characteristics. Analysts note that silver often lags gold in the early stages of a risk-off move but tends to catch up quickly as momentum builds. Market Reaction and Price Levels Spot silver rose approximately 2.5% on the day, touching intraday highs not seen since early January. The rally pushed prices above the psychologically important $24 per ounce mark, a level that had acted as resistance in recent weeks. Trading volumes were significantly above average, suggesting institutional participation rather than retail speculation alone. Gold also advanced, gaining over 1% to trade near $2,050 per ounce, further confirming the broad-based flight to safety. The gold-to-silver ratio, a measure of how many ounces of silver it takes to buy one ounce of gold, narrowed slightly, indicating silver is outperforming gold in this phase of the rally. Implications for Investors and the Broader Economy For retail and institutional investors, the silver rally underscores the importance of portfolio diversification in an environment where traditional risk assets like equities remain vulnerable to geopolitical shocks. The rally also has implications for industrial users of silver, including electronics manufacturers and the renewable energy sector, which may face higher input costs if the trend continues. From a macroeconomic perspective, the surge in precious metals is a signal that markets are pricing in a higher probability of a prolonged conflict or supply disruption. This could weigh on consumer confidence and delay investment decisions in the real economy. Central banks, particularly in emerging markets, have been net buyers of gold in recent months, and a similar trend may emerge for silver as a reserve asset. Conclusion Silver’s rise to a two-month high is a textbook response to escalating geopolitical risk, with US-Iran tensions serving as the primary catalyst. While the rally is justified by current events, its sustainability will depend on diplomatic developments and broader risk appetite. Investors should monitor the situation closely, as any de-escalation could trigger a sharp pullback, while further deterioration may drive prices even higher. FAQs Q1: Why is silver considered a safe-haven asset? Silver, like gold, is a tangible asset with intrinsic value that tends to retain purchasing power during times of geopolitical or economic uncertainty. It is not tied to the performance of any single government or corporation, making it a hedge against systemic risk. Q2: How do US-Iran tensions specifically affect silver prices? Escalating tensions increase the risk of supply disruptions in energy markets, which can lead to higher inflation and slower economic growth. This uncertainty drives investors toward safe-haven assets. Additionally, military conflict in the Middle East could disrupt industrial supply chains, affecting silver’s industrial demand side while boosting its monetary demand. Q3: Should I buy silver now? This article does not provide financial advice. Investors should consider their own risk tolerance, investment horizon, and portfolio allocation. Silver can be volatile, and geopolitical rallies can reverse quickly. Consulting a financial advisor is recommended before making any investment decisions. This post Silver Hits Two-Month High as US-Iran Tensions Fuel Safe-Haven Surge first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

11 May 2026, 15:14

Ronin returns to Ethereum as gaming chain cuts RON inflation by 95%

RON gained ahead of Ronin’s Ethereum migration as traders assessed the network’s major tokenomics overhaul and new Layer 2 infrastructure.

11 May 2026, 15:04

IBIT: 35% Crypto Crash Ahead On Clarity Act Setback

Summary Bitcoin and correlated assets like IBIT are rallying on misplaced optimism over the CLARITY Act. Deep stakeholder deadlock—ABA, Treasury, crypto community—makes passage of the CLARITY Act highly improbable, risking an imminent 35%+ crypto drawdown. Even if stakeholders reach a compromise, there may simply not be enough legislative runway left for the bill to clear all procedural hurdles and become law. The Trump administration’s crypto-friendly posture is unlikely to stop institutions from carefully weighing the regulatory, operational, and reputational risks associated with deeper crypto adoption. Short-term traders may consider SBIT to benefit from this drawdown, while completely eliminating exposure to IBIT and similar ETFs. Bitcoin’s ( BTC-USD ) recovery to its current trading value of approximately $81,000, since the February crash that I forecasted weeks before , seems to be purely speculative. To be more precise, BTC and instruments with 1:1 correlation to it, such as the iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF ( IBIT ), have rallied due to irrational optimism around the CLARITY Act. Even now, the odds of the bill passing on Polymarket are between 60 and 70 percent , when it should be close to zero based on my judgement. I claim so despite recent and purportedly positive developments on the stablecoin yields conflict. Therefore, in my opinion, as and when retail investors do realize that the bill is effectively dead, a correction of 35% across all major cryptos may follow. Haze Beats CLARITY One of the primary reasons for my assertion is the stalemate among the key stakeholders - the American Bankers Association (ABA), the United States Department of the Treasury, and the crypto community - with stablecoin yields as the primary point of contention. To elaborate, the ABA believes that if crypto exchanges offer stablecoin yields/rewards, they will outcompete traditional banks, leading to a $6.6 trillion deposits flight. To be specific, the ABA sent a letter to the Senate: The letter warns that without stronger legislative clarity, up to $6.6 trillion in deposits could be at risk, threatening the availability of credit for households and businesses nationwide. A detailed state-by-state analysis of potential deposit outflows and lost lending accompanies the letter. Estimates from the Federal Reserve support that claim by stating that there could be a $1.26 trillion reduction in local lending if stablecoin yields are not abolished. (Please read under section titled 3.1 Balance Sheet Capacity and Asset Allocation Adjustments) The crypto community, on the other hand, believes that if they don’t offer such high yields, a major incentive to invest in stablecoins would be eliminated, stifling both adoption and innovation. That was why Brian Armstrong withdrew support for the bill in January 2026. An overlooked player in this game, the U.S. Treasury, would also be on the losing side if stablecoin adoption decelerates. That is because stablecoins have become a major buyer of U.S. Government Bonds in the past few years. Tether ( USDT-USD ), for instance, in and of itself, holds more than $135 billion in Treasuries. To put things into context, that is more than what Germany or South Korea holds. In addition to the obvious impact that limited stablecoin adoption will have on treasury purchases, effectively eliminating a huge source of funds for the government, there are also concerns that capital may instead flow to rivals such as China, the EU, or the UK that do (or would) pay interest on their respective digital sovereign currencies. Such a stalemate, that too among heavyweight stakeholders, puts the Senate in a difficult situation to say the least. Stated another way, they cannot move forward without severely compromising the interests of at least one stakeholder. On the other hand, maintaining the status quo, which has already led to a crypto market cap of ~$2.5 trillion , keeps everyone as content as they were before the CLARITY Act. I, therefore, believe that Congress may choose to just let the bill die and continue with “haze” instead of “clarity.” The 6.6 Trillion Dollar Question My conclusion in the previous section would fall flat if the ABA’s $6.6 trillion number is inaccurate. Stated differently, if that number is imprecise, the Senate would disregard it and move to pass the bill without eliminating stablecoin yields. In my opinion, judging whether that number is correct is really a matter of common sense rather than financial modelling. Especially because different financial models and assumptions used therein will lead to materially different numbers. A report published by the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) at the White House serves as a great example. Precisely speaking, the CEA concluded that banning yield payments would only increase total bank lending by $2.1 billion. The ABA responded to the study by stating that it focuses on the wrong topic: lending as opposed to deposits. Moreover, CEA assumes a stablecoin market size as it stands today at roughly $300 billion, as opposed to what it would be in the future with increased adoption. It is, therefore, better to arrive at our own conclusions, which is simpler than it sounds. If a fully and financially regulated entity were to offer you roughly 4 percent on deposits, along with the usability of a regular bank account, such as the ability to pay bills, use a debit card, etc., would you continue to hold money at your bank? It would be fair to say that a large percentage of the population would answer that question with an unequivocal and resounding ‘no.’ With that in mind, I believe that the ABA’s and the Fed’s concerns about capital flight are warranted, and my conclusion that Congress cannot pass the bill without severely compromising the interests of one of the stakeholders remains valid. Lost In The Crowd Now, for a discussion on the most recent and crucial development: connecting rewards/yields with activity. In essence, the crypto industry recently agreed to compromise on the issue of rewards/yields if determined by usage. Definitely a non-trivial development because it brought back Brian Armstrong ’s support for the bill. But there is a problem. The bill, according to the aforementioned Yahoo! Finance link, states that “cryptocurrency firms would be banned from offering rewards that are economically or functionally equivalent to deposit interest.” What is the definition of "activity"? And what qualifies as "economically or functionally equivalent"? There are many ways to circumvent that restriction. For instance, Coinbase can offer rewards for only one payment per month, or for moving funds to and from its other offerings, such as Coinbase Asset Management . American banks are acutely aware of this flaw, which is why they recently said that this compromise “falls short” . I believe that this is going to the primary point of contention during the executive session of the Senate Banking Committee on May 14 . Please note that this is not a Senate voting session, only a markup session. The bill still has to go through the Senate to become a law. And I think those who assume that will happen are being too optimistic because the Senate has not touched the bill since September 18, 2025 . Odds that the Senate will consider the bill diminish further when you realize that they are in session for only ten working days in May 2026. Moreover, in those ten days, they need to commence preparations for budget appropriations and defense authorizations. In fact, if you look at the meetings that the Senate has decided on for May, you can observe that their focus has already shifted towards those two topics. And as many would know, once May is over, focus will completely shift to budget approvals. Given that the Congress has passed budgets before the October 1 deadline only three times since 1980 (please read under the section titled How is a CR different from a budget? ) it is reasonable to say that they won’t really have time for a non-essential bill like the CLARITY Act. Even if the Senate were to discuss the bill and mark it up, it would then have to survive the 60-vote Senate floor filibuster threshold. Surviving the filibuster would be a very difficult feat because democrats are not really pro-crypto, as demonstrated by their actions during the Biden Era, such as Operation Chokepoint 2.0 . Then the bill has to reconcile with the Senate Agriculture Committee’s version, reconcile again with the House-passed CLARITY Act, and finally receive a presidential signature. With all that in mind, I do not think it is speculative to say that the bill is already dead just because there is not enough time. Trump Cannot Save The Day A major risk to my thesis stems from the fact that President Trump is crypto-friendly . To be more specific, my thesis could be wrong not because the CLARITY Act may still have a chance, but because Trump’s actions can cause future crypto rallies. His favorable attitude towards crypto has indeed led to supportive second-order effects, such as the appointment of Paul Atkins as the SEC chairman, who then launched the pro-crypto initiative called Project Crypto . Even the current commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, favors crypto innovation . While such a pro-crypto administration is beneficial for innovation and advancement in the field, it cannot establish new laws. That is to say, even if the SEC provides friendly directives, it cannot change the fact that any new law cannot come into existence unless Congress deems it so. This is why the SEC could issue only an interpretation on how the federal securities laws apply to certain crypto assets and transactions involving crypto assets. By definition, an interpretation does not mean a law and thus can be challenged in court. More importantly, it can be modified and completely revoked if the next administration is not crypto-friendly. You may refute the possibility of detrimental effects of an unfriendly future regime as irrelevant because regulations, and thus innovations, would have advanced significantly by the time Trump’s term is over, especially because the SEC is not really waiting for Congress to take action. I, however, believe that all these developments are inconsequential because the lack of complete regulatory clarity is an impediment to adoption among institutional investors. That is because institutions care about legal certainty and compliance risk as much as they care about potential returns. In other words, the lack of clarity creates more “unknown unknowns,” leading to a decelerated institutional adoption scenario. IBIT can be used as an example to indicate why institutions may shy away from crypto adoption if clear and specific laws are not put in place. If you were to go through IBIT’s SEC filings (page 2), you would notice that Coinbase is IBIT’s primary Bitcoin custodian. The SEC dismissed its case against Coinbase in 2025 , right after Trump came into office, but that does not mean that Coinbase will not be subject to scrutiny ever again. As a matter of fact, the risk of crypto exchanges coming under the SEC’s jurisdiction will only increase in the coming years because of the tokenization of stocks and the possibility that these tokenized assets may fail the Howey Test . That kind of uncertainty, and many others that may crop up without a legal framework, may compel institutional investors to shy away from crypto investments. That in turn will cause a pricing out of optimism around institutional adoption and a crash from current levels. Portfolio Positioning As the title of this article suggests, I expect at least a 35 percent drop in the coming days. Specifically, I expect the BTC to break its previous support level of $60,000, but find support at $49,000. For IBIT, the corresponding lowest value possible could be $28. BTC's Next Support Level At $49,000 (TradingView) I expect Ethereum ( ETH-USD ) and Ripple ( XRP-USD ) to crash harder because they are more connected to innovations around payment rails, stablecoins, and DeFi – topics that form the core of the CLARITY Act. Numerically speaking, ETH will probably drop to $1350, and XRP may fall back to its pre-Trump-era value of 50 cents per coin. If you want to take advantage of these drawdowns, it would be prudent to invest in a reverse crypto play. Previously, I had recommended the YieldMax MSTR Short Option Income Strategy ETF ( WNTR ). But it has performed horribly over the long run due to the fact that WNTR is a reverse-ETF on Strategy ( MSTR ), which is now trading at a level higher than the January crash. A highly illogical occurrence because BTC is the primary determinant of MSTR’s value, and is trading at prices lower than the January crash. That said, WNTR did experience substantial short-term gains in January-February. An even better performer, though, was the ProShares UltraShort Bitcoin ETF ( SBIT ), which almost doubled in value after the last crash. Unfortunately, that ETF has also lost most of its value since. With all that data under consideration, I recommended that readers buy SBIT as a short-term trading instrument only and completely ignore WNTR. Closing Thoughts I have been racking my brain to figure out the best time to enter this trade, but I am still not completely certain. The most likely date, at present, seems to be May 14 because on that date we may learn that the ABA is unwilling to accept the bill in its current form for reasons I have already explained. In other words, the ABA, as a lobbying group, will most likely pressure the committee to oppose advancing the bill unless revisions are made. And as concluded earlier, since there is already not enough time for the bill to pass through all stages of Congress, it could effectively be considered dead. But it is also possible that the crash may commence when the Senate’s complete schedule is revealed for May and if the CLARITY Act is not mentioned anywhere; or the plunge may commence when all sessions end on May 22; or it could be that the crash happens at any other time if another negative catalyst, such as military escalation with Iran, comes into play. Due to this ambiguity around timing, I recommend inexperienced traders to sit this one out. As for those interested in investing in BTC, ETH, or any other crypto-related instrument for the long-haul, I remain committed to my price target of BTC at $30,000 , and ETH at $996 by the end of this crypto winter. I also have a pretty good idea of what will cause BTC and ETH to drop to those levels after this CLARITY Act crash, and I will write about it in a future article.

11 May 2026, 15:03

Tom Lee’s BitMine Slows Ethereum Buying Pace, Adding $62 Million in ETH

Ethereum treasury firm BitMine Immersion Technologies slowed its ETH purchase pace, adding just $62 million worth last week.

11 May 2026, 15:01

Strategy Expands BTC Stack to 818,869 With 535 Bitcoin Buy

Strategy bought 535 Bitcoin for $43 million between May 4 and May 10. The company now holds 818,869 BTC at an average cost of $75,540 per coin. BTC Yield year-to-date reached 9.44% on the latest purchase. Strategy added 535 Bitcoin to its corporate treasury between May 4 and May 10, paying approximately $43 million at an average price of $80,340 per coin. The acquisition, announced by Executive Chairman Michael Saylor on X, takes the company’s total holdings to 818,869 BTC as of May 10, 2026. The purchase was funded through the company’s ongoing capital raise programs and continues the weekly buying pattern Strategy has held through most of 2026. The latest purchase brings Strategy’s year-to-date BTC Yield to 9.44% and adds to a stack acquired for approximately $61.86 billion in cumulative cost basis. Strategy’s Latest Bitcoin Purchase Adds 535 Coins The 535 BTC purchase is one of the smaller ones Strategy has filed in recent weeks. The transaction was completed at an average price of $80,340 per coin, with the total outlay coming to roughly $42.98 million. The purchase window covered the seven days between May 4 and May 10, with the filing dated May 11. Strategy has held to a weekly cadence of treasury purchases for most of 2026, with the size of each tranche tied to the cash raised by the company. The funds were raised through at-the-market equity programs, preferred stock issuances, and convertible note offerings during the same period. The 535-coin figure follows a much larger 3,273 BTC purchase Strategy filed on April 27, when the company paid roughly $254.99 million at an average price of $77,906 per coin. Before that, the company filed a 34,164 BTC purchase on April 20, the largest single tranche of 2026 to date at approximately $2.54 billion in total cost. Saylor confirmed the purchase in a post on X, writing that the company had acquired 535 BTC for approximately $43.0 million at around $80,340 per coin. They had also achieved a BTC Yield of 9.4% year-to-date. Holdings Cross 818,000 BTC and 3.9% of Total Supply With the latest purchase, Strategy now holds 818,869 BTC across its corporate treasury, equal to 3.899376% of the total fixed supply. The company has been the single largest corporate holder of the asset for several years and stays so by a wide margin. The cumulative cost basis on the stack stands at approximately $61.86 billion, with an average cost of $75,540 per coin. At the current price, the holdings carry a Bitcoin NAV of $66.52 billion , with the unrealized gain on the position running into the low single-digit billions of dollars. Strategy’s metric for treasury performance, known as BTC Yield, came in at 9.44% year-to-date through May 10, with the quarter-to-date figure at 5.80%. The measure tracks the change in Bitcoin held per diluted share, with the gain coming from purchases funded by share and debt issuance during the period. The company’s BTC Gain year-to-date stands at 63,481.99 coins, with a dollar value of approximately $5.16 billion. The quarter-to-date BTC Gain figure sits at 44,193.01 coins, equal to about $3.59 billion in dollar terms. Sats Per Basic Share now stands at 233,176, with Sats Per Diluted Share at 213,391. Bitcoin Buying Pace Through April and May Strategy’s pace of Bitcoin accumulation through April set the tone for the second quarter of 2026. The April 6 filing added 4,871 BTC at $67,718 per coin for $329.85 million. The April 13 filing brought in 13,927 BTC at $71,902 for $1.00 billion. The April 20 filing then took 34,164 BTC at $74,395 for $2.54 billion in a single week, the largest weekly addition of the year so far. The April 27 filing added 3,273 BTC at $77,906 for $254.99 million, with the May 11 filing closing the run at 535 BTC for $42.98 million. The five purchases together added 56,770 BTC to the corporate treasury over five weekly windows, taking holdings from 766,970 BTC at the start of April to 818,869 BTC by the May 10 cut-off. The cost-basis trend across the recent purchases moves with the overall Bitcoin price. Strategy paid $67,718 for the April 6 tranche, with the figure rising to $80,340 by the May 4 through May 10 window. The five-week purchase average came in at approximately $73,335 per coin. Earlier in the year, larger weekly purchases were filed in January and March. The January 20 filing added 22,305 BTC at $95,284 per coin, while the March 16 filing brought in 22,337 BTC at $70,194 and the March 9 filing took 17,994 BTC at $70,946. Several smaller purchases of less than 1,500 BTC were filed across February as Bitcoin prices held in a tighter range before resuming larger purchases in March and April. Stock Performance, NAV, and Debt Position Strategy’s stock, which trades under the ticker MSTR, last closed at $187.59, up 4.31% on the session. The shares have gained 48.8% over the past three months, although the one-year return stays at negative 53.7%. The total return since the company began the Bitcoin treasury strategy in August 2020 stands at positive 1,417.7%. The company’s total market capitalization stood at $65.88 billion at the close of the latest session, with an enterprise value of $85.36 billion. The NAV per basic share figure came in at $189.41, with the EV mNAV at 1.28x. The Bitcoin NAV figure sits close to the company’s market capitalization. This also places the stock close to par with the value of its underlying holdings. On the balance sheet, Strategy had $8.21 billion in total debt outstanding and $13.52 billion in total preferred stock outstanding at the May 10 reporting date, for a combined $21.74 billion in fixed-income capital structure. The Debt-to-Bitcoin NAV ratio stands at 0.12x, with the leverage ratio at 12.4% and the amplification ratio at 32.7%. The size of the debt and preferred stack tracks the funding model Strategy has used to grow its Bitcoin holdings without diluting common shareholders beyond a controlled rate. The company has run a mix of equity, preferred stock, and convertible debt issuances since the start of 2024. Also, the proceeds from each capital event went directly into weekly BTC purchases. Total holdings now top 818,000 coins. Strategy is set to file the next weekly purchase update on or around May 18. The firm’s buying cadence is holding through the May 10 cut-off, and the company is continuing to draw on its capital programs to fund the next tranche.

11 May 2026, 15:00

Galaxy and Sharplink Launch $125M DeFi Yield Fund Targeting Institutional-Grade Returns

BitcoinWorld Galaxy and Sharplink Launch $125M DeFi Yield Fund Targeting Institutional-Grade Returns Galaxy Digital, the cryptocurrency financial services firm founded by Mike Novogratz, has partnered with Ethereum treasury management company Sharplink to launch a $125 million decentralized finance (DeFi) yield fund. The initiative, named the Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund, aims to generate returns through active DeFi strategies while maintaining institutional-grade security standards. Fund Structure and Capital Allocation According to the announcement, the fund will be seeded with $100 million from Sharplink’s existing Ethereum treasury, which currently stands at approximately $2.1 billion. Galaxy will contribute an additional $25 million and serve as the sole fund manager. This structure places Galaxy in charge of day-to-day investment decisions, while Sharplink provides the bulk of the capital. Sharplink CEO Joseph Chalom stated that the partnership reflects a strategic shift for the firm. “Our goal is to make our ETH productive beyond simply holding it,” Chalom said, emphasizing that the fund will deploy capital into DeFi protocols that meet rigorous institutional security criteria. Expanding Beyond Passive Staking Sharplink has historically focused on staking its ETH holdings, a relatively low-risk strategy that generates yield by participating in network validation. The new fund represents a move into more active DeFi yield generation methods, including lending and liquidity provision. These strategies involve supplying assets to decentralized lending markets or automated market-making pools, which can offer higher returns but also carry increased risks such as smart contract vulnerabilities and impermanent loss. By partnering with Galaxy, Sharplink gains access to Galaxy’s established infrastructure for institutional DeFi investing, including risk assessment frameworks and protocol due diligence processes. Galaxy, which manages over $6 billion in assets across its various divisions, has been expanding its presence in the DeFi space through products like its Galaxy DeFi Fund launched in 2021. Market Context and Implications The launch comes at a time when institutional interest in DeFi is growing, but remains cautious following several high-profile hacks and exploits in the sector. Total value locked across DeFi protocols has fluctuated between $40 billion and $80 billion over the past year, according to DeFiLlama data, reflecting both opportunity and volatility. For Sharplink, the fund provides a way to put its substantial ETH holdings to work beyond simple appreciation. For Galaxy, it strengthens its position as a bridge between traditional finance and on-chain yield opportunities. The fund’s focus on institutional-grade security standards may also signal a maturation of DeFi as an asset class, potentially attracting more conservative investors. Conclusion The Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund represents a notable collaboration between a major crypto financial services firm and a large Ethereum treasury manager. By combining Sharplink’s capital with Galaxy’s management expertise, the fund aims to generate returns through active DeFi strategies while adhering to institutional security protocols. The success of this initiative could influence how other large ETH holders approach yield generation in the decentralized finance ecosystem. FAQs Q1: What is the Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund? A: It is a $125 million decentralized finance (DeFi) yield fund launched by Galaxy Digital and Sharplink. The fund will invest in active DeFi strategies such as lending and liquidity provision, with Galaxy serving as the sole manager. Q2: How is the fund capitalized? A: Sharplink is contributing $100 million from its Ethereum treasury, and Galaxy is contributing $25 million. The total fund size is $125 million. Q3: Why is this fund significant? A: It represents a shift for Sharplink from passive staking to more active DeFi yield strategies, and it highlights growing institutional interest in DeFi. The fund’s emphasis on institutional-grade security standards may also help legitimize DeFi as an asset class for traditional investors. This post Galaxy and Sharplink Launch $125M DeFi Yield Fund Targeting Institutional-Grade Returns first appeared on BitcoinWorld .