Hyperliquid has stepped up its push in Washington as lawmakers debate how to regulate onchain derivatives. Co-founder Jeff Yan recently met with U.S. policymakers to argue that blockchain-based derivatives markets should be incorporated into the country's emerging regulatory framework, with discussions largely focused on the CLARITY Act. According to people familiar with the meetings, conversations zeroed in on the technical realities of how onchain trading functions, positioning the outreach as a policy education effort for legislators. The company also recently expanded its policy footprint in the capital. Hyperliquid launched the Hyperliquid Policy Center in Washington on February 18, led by Jake Chervinsky, who previously served as chief policy officer at the Blockchain Association. The group is intended to do more than hold congressional meetings, aiming to act as a conduit between DeFi trading markets and the traditional regulatory system. The CLARITY Act has emerged as the centerpiece of these exchanges. Hyperliquid's team believes there is an active window for integrating onchain derivatives into the U.S. regulatory structure. A key part of the Policy Center's work will be responding to criticism from established derivatives venues. Incumbents such as CME and ICE have raised concerns about risks posed by unregulated crypto trading platforms. Hyperliquid argues that onchain markets can deliver stronger transparency than traditional counterparts, since every trade, order, and liquidation on a blockchain-based system is publicly verifiable.

Hyperliquid (HYPE) surged more than 20% over the past 24 hours, lifting the token back into the top 10 cryptocurrencies by market capitalization as it rallied to around $47. The move helped HYPE claw back most of the losses posted over the last month. Market data show a sharp pickup in derivatives activity. Coinglass reported HYPE futures open interest climbed 26% to $1.96 billion. Blockchain analytics firm Lookonchain also pointed to an increase in leveraged long positioning among large traders. Wallet 0x535e opened a 10x long on 145,310 HYPE valued at about $6.78 million, with liquidation near $44.53. Wallet 0xc77b initiated a separate 10x long involving 100,000 HYPE worth roughly $4.66 million, with liquidation around $42.58. A third wallet, 0xe7ec, established a 5x long on 92,015 HYPE, valued at about $4.3 million, with liquidation near $36.94. The rally also coincided with a Coinbase announcement expanding support for USD Coin (USDC) on Hyperliquid DEX. Coinbase said it will serve as the official treasury deployer under Hyperliquid's Aligned Quote Asset (AQA) framework, aiming to strengthen USDC's position as a primary stablecoin in on-chain capital markets. The exchange said concentrating liquidity around USDC could improve market efficiency, reduce conversion friction, and enable faster capital movement across trading venues. Users will continue to access USDC through Coinbase's fiat infrastructure and its global payments network. The AQA framework was initially introduced by Native Markets to build a stablecoin ecosystem for Hyperliquid users. With HYPE's market cap rising to about $11.75 billion, the token re-entered the top 10, edging past Cardano. Technical analysts urged caution after the sharp move. Ali Martinez said the TD Sequential indicator, which previously flagged HYPE's rebound from around $22 to $44, is now flashing a sell signal. He cited potential downside targets at $36 and $33 as profit-taking risk builds. Crypto Patel also maintained a bearish short-term view, pointing to a wedge formation and the possibility of rejection near the $46 area. He said $46 is acting as daily resistance, with $33 marked as the first major reaction zone and $30 highlighted as a stronger area of interest if downside pressure persists.

A last-minute Senate agreement has moved the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act a step closer to a full floor vote, after lawmakers rewrote key provisions on crypto oversight and banking rules. The Senate Banking Committee advanced the measure on May 14 by a 15–9 bipartisan vote, following hours of closed-door talks and multiple eleventh-hour edits to the draft. Crypto in America reported that the breakthrough came shortly after the hearing began, when senators resolved several disputed issues behind the scenes. Democratic Sens. Angela Alsobrooks and Ruben Gallego joined Republicans in backing the bill, helping secure passage out of committee. Negotiations had been under strain the night before the hearing, according to people familiar with the talks. While both parties made headway on ethics guardrails for government officials, the talks stalled late Wednesday over the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act — specifically, protections for noncustodial software developers. Republicans pushed back on Democratic revisions tied to money transmitter rules, leaving the final language unsettled heading into Thursday's hearing. Discussions continued Thursday morning as several pro-crypto Democrats met privately to weigh concessions. A Banking Committee staffer told Crypto in America that members were still negotiating as late as 10:29 a.m. Shortly after Chairman Tim Scott opened the hearing, Sens. Cynthia Lummis, Thom Tillis, Alsobrooks, and Gallego met in a committee anteroom to iron out remaining disputes while the public session continued. The final compromise adjusted amendments related to banking requirements, tokenization, insider trading, and consumer protections. Lawmakers also removed language tied to the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act from one section of the bill. Those changes helped win support from Gallego and Alsobrooks, though both emphasized that further negotiations are expected before a floor vote. "I want to be clear: my vote here does not guarantee a vote on the floor," Gallego said, citing unresolved issues. Democrats are still pressing for tougher ethics rules governing elected officials and crypto holdings. Gallego later described the talks as close to completion but not finished. Next, the bill is expected to be combined with language from the Senate Agriculture Committee before it reaches the Senate floor, as lawmakers work through remaining differences. Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses resulting from the use of any content, products, or services referenced. Readers should exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.

Intesa Sanpaolo has more than doubled its cryptocurrency exposure, raising holdings from roughly $100 million at the end of 2025 to about $235 million as of March 31, 2026, CoinDesk reported. The Italian banking group has broadened its positioning beyond bitcoin, adding regulated ETF and trust-based exposure to Ethereum and XRP in a move seen as another sign that parts of Europe's banking sector are warming to crypto after years of caution and regulatory scrutiny. A key change is the bank's first sizeable allocation to Ethereum. Intesa has bought more than 3.1 million shares of BlackRock's iShares Staked ETH Trust, which provides ETH exposure while passing through staking participation. The purchase suggests the bank is treating Ethereum not only as a price-risk asset, but also as an on-chain network with an embedded yield mechanism. The bank also initiated an XRP position through the Grayscale XRP Trust, holding more than 712,000 shares. The stake was initially valued at around $18 million and is now worth roughly $26 million after XRP's recent rally. Bitcoin remains the portfolio's anchor. Intesa increased positions in spot bitcoin ETF products, including BlackRock's IBIT and the ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF. It also added bitcoin call options for the first time, pointing to a more sophisticated approach combining hedging and directional exposure. At the same time, Solana appears to be fading in the strategy. Intesa has nearly exited the Bitwise Solana Staking ETF, cutting the position from more than 266,000 shares to 2,817 shares. The shift underscores a preference among large investors for more liquid and more heavily regulated vehicles tied to bitcoin and ether over higher-risk altcoins. Intesa said the crypto positions are held for proprietary purposes and are not linked to products offered to retail customers. The expansion comes as major European lenders post strong results and continue investing in digital platforms. Unicredit reported first-quarter profit of €2.8 billion, its highest on record, while Banco Santander has invested more than €5.7 billion in technology infrastructure from 2022 to 2026 and said its digital platform Isybank has more than 1.1 million users. The developments suggest crypto exposure is increasingly being folded into broader digitalization and revenue diversification plans at Europe's largest banks.

Ethereum ETF demand from institutions showed a clear loss of momentum over the past week, with no trading session recording fresh inflows, CoinDesk reported. Data from SosoValue show Ethereum ETFs logged a weekly net outflow of $65.65 million, the largest weekly redemption since January. Price action in Ether was mixed, suggesting short-lived rebounds were more likely driven by sentiment than by sustained investor buying—especially from institutional allocators. Redemptions accelerated during the week, pointing to a cautious stance among institutions and limited appetite to commit capital to Ethereum-based products. Outflows hit their high-water mark on Tuesday, May 12, when net withdrawals reached $130.62 million in 24 hours amid negative market mood. BlackRock continued to dominate the Ethereum ETF landscape. Its ETHA fund recorded the largest daily outflows on each day of the week. Even with weak overall momentum and zero inflows, BlackRock remains a central player in the Ethereum ETF market.

CoinDesk reports that Friday marks the deadline for institutional investment managers to file first-quarter holdings disclosures with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, offering a window into how sovereign funds, universities and banks are positioning in crypto ETFs. Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund Mubadala boosted its exposure to BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT). As of March 31, its stake rose to 14,721,917 shares from 12,702,323, worth nearly $660 million at current prices. Mubadala subsidiary Abu Dhabi Investment Committee (ADIC) reported an unchanged IBIT position of 8,218,712 shares valued at $315.8 million as of March 31, the same share count previously reported by another subsidiary, Al Warda Investments, at year-end. The roughly $92 million value drop was attributed to IBIT's quarterly price decline rather than sales. The filing also shifted which entity reports the position: after Al Warda filed independently for three quarters, the company said Friday that the holdings will now be reported through ADIC, with the beneficial owner unchanged. University endowments largely held steady. Dartmouth College reported 201,531 IBIT shares worth just over $9 million, unchanged from the prior quarter. Dartmouth also rotated its ether ETF exposure, moving from the Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust to Grayscale's Ethereum Staking ETF while keeping a 178,148-share position, and disclosed a new stake of 304,803 shares in the Bitwise Solana Staking ETF valued at nearly $3.67 million. The move is among early signs that institutional endowments are exploring allocations beyond Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH). Brown University maintained 212,500 IBIT shares. Emory University streamlined its bitcoin ETF exposure, selling its entire 4,450-share IBIT position and increasing its stake in the Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust to 1,354,148 shares from slightly more than 1 million. Harvard University, which drew attention in late 2025 after revealing a large IBIT position, continued to cut back in the first quarter. Its endowment reportedly held 3,044,612 IBIT shares as of March 31, valued around $117 million, down 43% from 5.35 million shares at the end of 2025, following a 21% reduction in the fourth quarter. Harvard also fully liquidated its $86.8 million position in BlackRock's spot Ethereum ETF, which launched just last quarter. IBIT is no longer Harvard's largest disclosed holding; TSMC now tops its 13F portfolio, while Alphabet, Microsoft and the SPDR Gold Trust also rank above TSMC. Banks and brokers also adjusted exposures and hedges. Royal Bank of Canada increased its direct IBIT holdings and expanded its use of put and call options. Scotiabank, after exiting prior holdings in U.S. bitcoin stocks tied to Trump, added 214,370 IBIT shares. Barclays reported a layered IBIT footprint, including about 4.46 million shares of the spot ETF alongside sizable put and call option positions. Some investors reduced risk after crypto-market weakness in the first quarter. Hong Kong's Laurore, an offshore entity that surfaced earlier this year as one of the largest IBIT holders, cut its stake to 6,846,279 shares from 8,786,279, according to filings.

Claims that Bhutan's state-backed investment firm, Druk Holding and Investments (DHI), has been selling Bitcoin have triggered scrutiny after officials offered limited clarification. Onchain tracking by Arkham Intelligence suggests that about $1 billion in Bitcoin has been withdrawn since July 2025 from wallets Arkham attributes to Bhutan, while DHI management said it does not recall making any sales. Bhutan, a Himalayan nation, is widely viewed as the second country after El Salvador to officially mine Bitcoin and hold it as reserves. Arkham's data also indicates that roughly $207 million worth of BTC has been transferred so far this year from wallets believed to belong to DHI to exchanges and trading firms. Arkham estimates Bhutan-linked wallets held about 13,000 BTC in October 2024, falling to around 3,100 BTC as of Friday. If that pace continues, Arkham projects Bhutan could have sold all of its Bitcoin by October 2026. DHI CEO Ujjwal Deep Dahal said, "I don't remember the last time we sold BTC." Asked about the wallet activity flagged by Arkham, the firm added only: "Our statement remains valid; we have nothing further to add." Bhutan has not directly challenged Arkham's wallet attribution, but it has not disclosed how much Bitcoin it holds. Arkham says Bhutan has been mining Bitcoin since at least 2019 and that the government finances at least four mining facilities. Its analysts noted that transfers to centralized exchanges or OTC trading firms typically signal intent to sell, but added that onchain data cannot conclusively prove sales because exchange order books are not visible onchain. A source familiar with one trading firm that buys BTC from Bhutan-linked wallets said there have been no recent sales, raising the possibility that the transfers reflect custody movements, collateral or credit activity, or OTC transactions rather than direct spot selling. In December, Bhutan's government said it would allocate up to 10,000 BTC to support development of Gelephu Mindfulness City, a planned economic zone in the country's south. The pledge, valued at about $860 million at the time, appears difficult to reconcile with the smaller holdings implied by current onchain estimates. Dahal also said unusually steady rainfall this year has boosted hydropower generation, keeping mining operations active. He added that Bhutan's mining runs on renewable energy and that the country is upgrading to next-generation equipment to stay competitive. This is not investment advice.

A Senate Banking Committee vote on Thursday delivered a fresh political signal on crypto regulation and briefly boosted XRP. The panel advanced the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (CLARITY Act) by a 15-9 vote, one of Washington's most significant proposals to reshape crypto market structure. XRP climbed above $1.50 following the news, rising about 5% over 24 hours and 7.6% for the week. That outpaced bitcoin and ether, each up less than 3% on the week. Why XRP moved more than other tokens XRP has been among the digital assets most exposed to U.S. regulatory uncertainty. The SEC's 2020 lawsuit against Ripple led to years of exchange suspensions, institutional hesitation and debate over whether XRP should be treated as a security. In 2023, Judge Analisa Torres narrowed the SEC's case by finding that secondary-market XRP trading was not subject to securities treatment, yet many institutions have stayed cautious in the absence of a clear federal framework. What the CLARITY Act is designed to do The CLARITY Act seeks to establish that framework. The bill would place more digital assets under a defined market-structure regime and spell out rules around custody, trading, market making and ETF allocation$$the type of guardrails large allocators typically require. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse called the committee vote "the moment," writing on X that the industry should have "the same rules and protections as every other asset class." Next steps in Congress Committee approval is consequential but far from final. The Senate Banking version must be reconciled with a version from the Agriculture Committee, pass the full Senate, navigate House reconciliation and ultimately reach the president. Senator Cynthia Lummis said lawmakers agree on most of the text, while Senator Elizabeth Warren has raised objections to parts of the process. With Congress heading into the Memorial Day recess, supporters face a practical window to maintain momentum. On-chain and institutional tailwinds The regulatory lift arrives as investors point to tangible developments around XRP and Ripple: - Activity on the XRP Ledger has increased, and the network now hosts more than $3 billion in tokenized real-world assets, ranking it among the leading non-Ethereum networks for institutional tokenization. - A pilot involving Ripple, JPMorgan, Mastercard and Ondo Finance reportedly redeemed tokenized U.S. Treasuries in under five seconds, highlighting the potential to link public blockchain rails with traditional interbank settlement. - DeFi activity connected to XRP via bridged representations has grown to about $560 million in total value locked, led by projects including Flare and Doppler Finance. - U.S.-listed spot XRP ETFs took in $25.8 million of net inflows earlier this week, the largest single-day total since January, lifting cumulative inflows to $1.35 billion. - Ripple recently completed a $200 million debt facility for its Ripple Prime brokerage, signaling continued institutional traction. Some industry figures argue these are more than short-term price drivers. Alexis Sirkia, an early Ripple and Ethereum market maker who now leads decentralized clearing firm Yellow Network, told CoinDesk that "the real story of XRP in mid-2026 will not be its consolidating price, but the quiet, almost imperceptible rewiring of global finance," adding that the ledger is becoming "a compliance-grade tokenization and settlement layer" that could appeal to institutional capital. Legal certainty remains the key variable Even with the committee vote and recent business milestones, XRP is still well below its 2025 highs. The $1.50 zone remains a critical level that bulls need to reclaim decisively to sustain momentum. The CLARITY Act provided a near-term catalyst, but many market participants are likely to treat full federal legal clarity$$a durable ruleset passed by Congress and signed into law$$as the condition for a lasting bull run.

DeFi's pursuit of outsized yields continues to outpace its appetite for protection, and attackers are profiting from the gap. What began as the idealistic "DeFi Summer" of 2020—a vision of permissionless finance without intermediaries—has grown into an $83 billion ecosystem that still operates with minimal insurance. Uninsured lending protocols have lost an estimated $7.7 billion to exploits since the term DeFi entered the crypto mainstream, according to DeFiLlama. In April 2026 alone, security incidents erased more than $600 million, driven by prominent breaches at Drift and Kelp DAO. Those incidents highlight a structural issue: DeFi insurance remains small and poorly aligned with today's threat landscape. Less than 2% of DeFi's total value locked (TVL) is insured, Nexus Mutual founder Hugh Karp told CoinDesk. DeFiLlama tracks 28 insurance protocols, yet Nexus Mutual accounts for nearly all of the sector's $123.5 million in TVL—about 0.14% of the wider DeFi market. Attack vectors have shifted Early DeFi insurance products largely focused on smart-contract vulnerabilities, risks that can be audited and modeled. Losses are increasingly driven by offchain failures: stolen private keys, phishing, social engineering and flawed bridge mechanics. DeFiLlama's attack-method data shows private-key compromises as the largest category, followed by phishing aimed at multisig wallets. "Many of the largest hacks have originated offchain from operational security failures," Karp said. These scenarios are difficult to underwrite because security practices vary widely and lack standardization. Without clear benchmarks, pricing becomes unreliable and premiums rise beyond what most users will pay. Karp pointed to the Kelp DAO incident as an example. Attackers allegedly manipulated a bridge to seize real assets and then used them as collateral on Aave. He said the underlying "core failure of bridge risk" often falls outside typical DeFi insurance coverage, which in some cases compensates only for downstream effects such as bad debt triggered by frozen oracles. Why coverage remains unpopular User incentives remain a major obstacle. Many DeFi strategies operate on thin margins, and insurance premiums of 2% to 3% can wipe out returns. "Most DeFi users are yield-driven and do not want to give up several percentage points of return for cover," said Dan She, senior audit partner at CertiK. The sector's first wave of decentralized insurers also faced structural fragility. Many shared the same infrastructure risks they aimed to cover, creating circular exposure. DeFi insurance grew rapidly from roughly $3 million in early 2020 to about $1.89 billion by November 2021, led by protocols including Nexus Mutual, Cover Protocol, InsurAce, Tidal Finance and Bridge Mutual. From 2021 to 2024, many of those projects collapsed after hacks, failures or unsustainable token models. Cover Protocol was hacked and unraveled, while Armor.fi, Bridge Mutual and Tidal largely faded from view. Nexus Mutual, operating since 2019, remains one of the few survivors. Karp said Nexus has covered more than $6.5 billion in value and paid out just over $18.5 million—a meaningful figure in isolation, but small compared with the broader market's risk exposure. Critics argue the earlier model was fundamentally flawed. "You were just stacking counterparty risk on top of counterparty risk," said Gaspard Peduzzi, founder of Spectra Finance, describing how DeFi insurance often relied on the same decentralized mechanisms it insured. Matthew Pinnock, COO at Altura, added that capital backing insurance pools was frequently exposed to the same vulnerabilities it was meant to hedge, causing protection to disappear when it was most needed. When coverage is missing, retail users often take the hit. Karp described a typical post-exploit sequence: protocol safety modules absorb the first losses, treasuries are tapped next, and if those buffers fall short, depositors bear the remaining damage. "In practice, when there's no cover, the cost falls disproportionately on the least sophisticated participants," he said. Where DeFi insurance goes from here The market is beginning to adjust. Some projects are integrating insurance directly into DeFi products, making coverage automatic instead of optional. Others advocate narrower, clearly defined policies or greater involvement from traditional insurers to address offchain operational and custody risks. The central problem persists: DeFi's risk profile is complex and evolves quickly, while insurance standards and underwriting tools have not kept pace. Until pricing and coverage catch up with the realities of modern attack methods, the ecosystem is likely to remain exposed, with incentives continuing to push users toward yield-first choices that leave billions at risk. As exploits accumulate and losses grow, pressure is rising to close the protection gap. If insurers, protocols and users cannot align on workable trade-offs between cost and coverage, DeFi's expansion may slow—and future "summers" could come with a far higher price tag for the unprepared.