SEC Plans Blockchain Update to Decades-Old Transfer Agent Rules

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on September 1 proposed an overhaul of rules and forms for registered transfer agents that would account for electronic communications and blockchain technology in securities offerings and share transfers. The proposal would be the agency’s first substantive update to the framework since the rules were adopted in the late 1970s and early 1980s, according to the SEC.

The immediate next step is public consultation: comments on the proposal will be accepted for 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.

Blockchain recordkeeping enters the transfer-agent framework

Transfer agents perform securities-recordkeeping functions, making their rules relevant to how ownership and transfers are administered. Under the proposal, the SEC would revise its framework to recognize electronic and blockchain-based recordkeeping, as well as uncertificated securities.

The change would formally bring those methods into rules drafted long before blockchain-based systems featured in securities infrastructure. The SEC’s fact sheet describes the revisions as part of a broader modernization of transfer-agent regulation rather than a standalone rule for digital assets.

Operating controls accompany modernization

The proposed changes would also add requirements on turnaround times, risk management, inactive securityholders, compliance and restrictive legends. Those elements indicate that the SEC’s initiative extends beyond recognizing new recordkeeping technology.

Restrictive legends are notices associated with limits on the transfer of a security. The SEC has not adopted the proposal, and its final form could change after the comment process.

Tokenized securities and the comment period

The proposal arrives as transfer agents increasingly support tokenized securities and blockchain-based systems, according to The Block, which reported on the SEC’s 421-page rule change.

Interested parties can submit comments for 60 days following Federal Register publication, according to the SEC’s rulemaking notice.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Frogbet Launches Crypto Casino With 70 In- House Original Games, Instant Withdrawals and a $10,000 Weekly Race

Garabito, Costa Rica, September 1st, 2026, Chainwire

Frogbet, a new cryptocurrency casino and sportsbook, has officially launched at frogbet.com, debuting a catalog of 70 original games developed entirely in-house alongside more than 7,000 titles from providers including Pragmatic Play, Hacksaw Gaming and BGaming.

Every Frogbet original is provably fair, allowing players to cryptographically verify the outcome of any bet at any time. The proprietary catalog spans in-house slots, eight blackjack variants, poker, and a full range of instant games including Mines, Dice, Plinko, Crash, Limbo and Keno — none of which areavailable on any other platform. According to the team, Frogbet's proprietary slots are the first original games in the industry to ship with built-in bonus buys, letting players purchase direct entry into feature rounds.

The originals suite is built around a high-volume betting engine. Players can place up to 100,000 instant bets in a single click, with all rounds settled immediately, and a built-in strategy builder lets players define their own rules and automate their play hands-free.

"Original games are usually a side menu at crypto casinos — at Frogbet they are the product. We built all 70 games ourselves, made every one of them verifiable, and then built the tools serious players actually want: bonus buys on originals, six-figure batch betting, and a strategy builder. And when you win, the money is in your wallet in seconds, not days, " said a Frogbet spokesperson.

Withdrawals are processed instantly, 24 hours a day, with payouts typically reaching players' wallets within seconds of the request. The platform is fully crypto-native, supporting deposits and withdrawals in more than 50 cryptocurrencies including BTC, ETH, USDT and SOL, and pairs the casino with a complete sportsbook offering live in-play betting.

New players receive a 150% deposit match plus 100 free spins on their first deposit. Ongoing promotions at launch include a $10,000 Weekly Race, a $500 Daily Raffle and a Weekly Jackpot Lottery. Frogbet's six-tier VIP program runs from Bronze to Elite with weekly cashback of up to 25%, and rakeback that accrues on every bet and can be claimed every 15 minutes.

Through the platform'sVIP Transfer program, players who hold VIP status at another casino can wager $500, share their current level with support via live chat, and be upgraded to the matching Frogbet tier instantly.

"The crypto gambling audience has become the most sophisticated betting audience in the world. They check the seeds, they hunt bonus buys, they automate strategies. Frogbet is built for exactly that player," the spokesperson added.

Frogbet's originals lobby, sportsbook and full game catalog are live now at frogbet.com.

About FrogbetZ

Frogbet is a crypto-native online casino and sportsbook offering 70 provably fair original games built in-house, more than 7,000 titles from leading providers, a full sports betting product, and instant cryptocurrency withdrawals, 24/7. Frogbet is intended for players aged 18 and over. Players are encouraged to gamble responsibly. Learn more at frogbet.com, or follow Frogbet on X at x.com/frogbetcom and on Telegram at t.me/frogbetcom.

ContactTom LiFrogbetpr@frogbet.com

Disclaimer: This is a sponsored press release and is for informational purposes only. It does not reflect the views of Crypto Daily, nor is it intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, or financial advice.

* This article was originally published here

Bitcoin Holds $77K Support After Dip: More Consolidation Or Breakout Ahead?

With the market still nervously processing Fed Chair Warsh’s rather hawkish Jackson Hole speech on Friday, the Bitcoin price moved lower. Currently rebounding to $78K, is the $BTC price in for more consolidation as the market continues to digest its huge move up from the bottom?

$BTC price funnels into the end of the triangle - up or down?

Source: TradingView

The 4-hour chart shows that huge move up from $63K to $79,500 in the space of only five days. That was simply a monster move, and therefore the $BTC price needed to follow a sideways trajectory in order for the market to digest such a rally. 

So how long would the price be expected to go sideways before the next decisive move? As a rule of thumb, however high the rally goes, the sideways consolidation would go a similar distance, so if we took the height of the rally from the bottom and then laid that sideways, we would probably be at or near the end of this current period of consolidation. Obviously this is only a rough estimation, and where the price goes from here will either bear this thesis out or not.

Looking at the price action during this consolidation it can be seen that the $BTC price has possibly just avoided a head and shoulders pattern with this latest little move up. The price is being funnelled into the end of a triangle pattern and is holding the ascending trendline beneath. If the price pops out of the pattern to the upside, the $78,500 horizontal resistance is likely to become support, leaving the path relatively open for the $BTC price to potentially make a higher high and make a first contact with the key overhead resistance at $82K. If it’s to the downside,  support levels at $76K or $73K await.

Tough resistance and bearish divergence

Source: TradingView

The daily chart provides a very interesting view of what is happening in this medium to high term time frame. If we just look at the current price action we can see the towering green rally (the flagpole) and now what looks like a developing flag at its top. This is a bullish continuation pattern and would be expected to break to the upside.

However, if we extend the bottom trendline of the last bear flag right out, this runs just across the top of the most recent high and will act as resistance. Add to this the key horizontal resistance at $82K and above, and we are looking at a tough obstacle for the $BTC price to surmount. As things stand, unless the price can get up to and past this resistance, yet another lower high could be formed.

At the bottom of the chart, two key indicators may be trying to tell us something. The MACD and the RSI have both continued to trend up since May, whereas the price action may be following the bear market trend down. This is bearish divergence, and could really throw a spanner in the works for the bulls.

Therefore, it must be fully realised just how important it is for the $BTC price to get above $82,825. Failure to do so will probably lead to another more substantial dip.

Shooting star candle opposes RSI breakout

Source: TradingView

Zooming out into the weekly time frame could there be more reason for optimism? Possibly, but just as in the daily time frame, everything really hangs on whether the $BTC price can overcome the key resistance. 

The bearish factors for concern here are 1: that the price is still not able to hold above the $78,500 resistance level, and 2: a shooting star candle for last week gives notice of the top of a rally unless proved otherwise.

The two indicators previously mentioned do look better in this higher time frame. The MACD looks to be continuing a strong upward trend with the blue MACD line nicely above the red signal line. In the RSI, the breakout of the indicator line above the downtrend line has taken place. It now remains to be seen if the indicator line will confirm this break and trend change at the end of this week.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Crypto vs Traditional Sportsbooks: How Sign-Up, KYC and Deposits Compare

Opening a sportsbook account used to follow a familiar sequence: enter personal details, verify identity, choose a payment method, deposit money, and start betting. Crypto sportsbooks have introduced a different onboarding model.

Some crypto betting platforms still use conventional accounts and identity checks. There are also casinos with WalletConnect that allow registration through a crypto wallet and may let players deposit and bet without completing KYC upfront. Traditional regulated sportsbooks generally require considerably more information because their licenses impose identity, age, location, and anti-money-laundering controls.

Crypto vs Traditional Sportsbooks at a Glance

 

Crypto sportsbook

Traditional regulated sportsbook

Typical registration

Email, Telegram, or crypto wallet, depending on operator

Personal information plus account credentials

KYC

Varies from no routine KYC to verification at certain stages

Normally mandatory

Geolocation

Depends on operator and jurisdiction

Common in locally regulated markets

Deposits

Cryptocurrency transfer

Cards, bank transfers, e-wallets and local payment services

Deposit settlement

Determined largely by blockchain/network processing

Determined by payment provider and sportsbook

Withdrawals

Usually sent to a crypto wallet

Bank, card or supported payment service

Currencies

BTC, stablecoins and other crypto assets

Primarily fiat currencies

Privacy

Can require substantially less personal information

Account tied to verified identity

These are broad models rather than universal rules. A sportsbook accepting Bitcoin is not automatically a no-KYC sportsbook, while a crypto sportsbook can still request identity documents under its compliance procedures.

1. Sign-Up: Wallet Connection vs Personal Account

The first difference appears before any money reaches the sportsbook.

Traditional regulated sportsbooks generally create an account around a verified individual. DraftKings, FanDuel and BetMGM, for example, require personal information and identity verification as part of operating in regulated US markets. Geolocation controls are then used to determine whether the bettor is physically present in a jurisdiction where wagering is permitted.

A conventional registration can therefore involve a name, date of birth, residential details, email address, phone number and other information required by the operator or regulator.

Crypto sportsbooks can take a lighter approach.

Dexsport provides a useful example. Users can register with an email or Telegram account, or connect through supported Web3 options such as MetaMask and Trust Wallet. The platform does not require routine KYC for registration, so a bettor can move from creating an account to accessing the sportsbook without submitting identity documents.

This reflects one of the clearest differences between the two models. A traditional sportsbook account is generally built around a verified identity. A crypto-native sportsbook can build access around an account or blockchain wallet instead.

2. KYC: When Does the Sportsbook Ask Who You Are?

KYC, or Know Your Customer, is the process through which a gambling operator verifies a customer's identity.

At a regulated traditional sportsbook, KYC is generally part of the standard onboarding and compliance framework. Operators may verify details against databases or request documents such as government-issued identification. Additional checks can occur later if transactions or account activity require further review.

For example, the traditional sportsbooks in this comparison operate under regulated frameworks in which anonymous betting is not permitted. DraftKings and FanDuel require identity and age verification, while regulated US operators also use geolocation to determine whether a bettor is inside an eligible jurisdiction.

There are broadly three approaches in the sector:

1. KYC during registration. The sportsbook accepts cryptocurrency but still verifies users before they can fully use the account.

2. Conditional KYC. Registration and deposits may be available without verification, while checks can be triggered by withdrawals, account limits, unusual activity or compliance reviews.

3. No routine KYC. The platform allows normal betting activity without making identity verification part of the standard account flow.

Dexsport falls into the third category according to the platform information reviewed for this article. Registration is available through email, Telegram or a supported DeFi wallet without routine identity verification or personal-data submission.

The distinction is important when evaluating a sportsbook advertised as "crypto." Crypto describes the payment technology. It does not tell a bettor what the operator's KYC policy is.

Stake, for example, supports numerous cryptocurrencies while still applying identity verification requirements. Other crypto-oriented sportsbooks may allow initial betting without KYC but reserve the right to request verification later.

Users should therefore read the verification and withdrawal rules rather than treating "Bitcoin sportsbook," "Web3 sportsbook," and "no-KYC sportsbook" as interchangeable terms.

3. Deposits: Bank Payment vs Blockchain Transaction

Once the account is ready, the payment experience separates the two models further.

A traditional sportsbook normally provides payment methods familiar from online commerce and banking. Depending on the country, these can include debit cards, bank transfers, PayPal, online banking, prepaid services and digital wallets.

The bettor selects an amount and authorizes the transaction. The sportsbook and its payment processor handle most of the technical work.

A crypto deposit works differently.

The user chooses an asset and, critically, the blockchain network on which it will be transferred. The sportsbook provides a deposit address or wallet connection, and the bettor sends funds from a personal wallet or exchange.

With Dexsport, the available payment infrastructure is considerably broader than Bitcoin alone. The supplied platform data lists support for dozens of cryptocurrencies across 20 blockchain networks, including BTC, ETH, USDT, BNB and TRON.

That creates flexibility, but it also moves some responsibility to the user.

A bettor depositing USDT, for example, must pay attention to the network selected by both the sending wallet and sportsbook. Sending a token through an unsupported or incorrect network can cause problems that do not normally arise when depositing euros through a bank or payment service.

4. What Actually Determines Deposit Speed?

"Instant crypto deposit" needs some qualification.

A cryptocurrency transfer has to reach the sportsbook through a blockchain network. The time required depends on the chain, current network conditions, the transaction fee and the number of confirmations the receiving platform requires.

Different assets can therefore produce very different experiences.

Stablecoins transferred over a relatively fast network can reach a betting account quickly. Bitcoin deposits may require blockchain confirmations before the sportsbook credits the balance. Network congestion can increase the wait.

Traditional deposits have their own processing variables. Card and e-wallet deposits can appear quickly, while bank transfers may take longer. Payment providers can also decline transactions or impose their own limits.

The core difference is where the payment infrastructure sits.

With fiat betting, banks and payment processors provide the rails between the bettor and sportsbook. With crypto betting, blockchain networks provide much of that infrastructure.

5. Depositing Crypto Introduces Network Fees

Payment cost also works differently.

A blockchain transaction can require a network fee paid to validators or miners. That fee is separate from any charge imposed by the sportsbook.

The amount depends heavily on the network. An Ethereum transaction during periods of high activity can cost considerably more than a transfer on a lower-fee chain. Bitcoin fees also fluctuate with demand for block space.

This makes network support a practical factor when comparing crypto sportsbooks.

Dexsport's multi-chain model gives bettors several possible routes for moving supported assets. A user holding a stablecoin can therefore consider the supported network as well as the token itself when preparing a deposit.

Traditional sportsbooks replace blockchain fees with a different cost structure. Deposits may be free from the sportsbook's side, but banks, payment services, currency conversion or withdrawal methods can introduce charges.

In both cases, "no deposit fee" does not necessarily mean that moving money is completely free.

6. Crypto Deposits Require More Attention to Currency

Traditional sportsbook balances are relatively straightforward. Deposit €100 into a euro-denominated account and the balance remains €100 until it is wagered, withdrawn or otherwise changed.

Crypto introduces price exposure.

A bettor who deposits BTC or ETH holds an asset whose fiat value can move while it sits in the betting account. A €500-equivalent Bitcoin balance can be worth more or less in euro terms before a single wager is settled.

Stablecoins change that equation. Assets such as USDT are designed to track a reference currency, generally the US dollar, making the betting balance easier to interpret in fiat terms.

For bettors primarily interested in wagering rather than holding a volatile crypto asset, stablecoins can therefore simplify bankroll accounting.

7. Withdrawals Reverse the Same Payment Logic

The difference continues when money leaves the sportsbook.

Traditional operators generally return funds through approved fiat payment channels. The available method may depend on how the account was funded, local regulation and the operator's withdrawal policies.

Processing can involve both sportsbook approval and the external financial institution.

A crypto sportsbook typically sends the withdrawal to a blockchain address. Once the operator has approved and broadcast the transaction, settlement depends on the relevant blockchain.

That can remove several intermediaries from the payment path, but it does not guarantee that every crypto withdrawal will be immediate. Internal sportsbook reviews, withdrawal rules, network congestion and compliance checks can still affect processing time.

KYC policy becomes particularly relevant here.

Some crypto sportsbooks allow registration and betting without verification but reserve identity checks for withdrawals. Others can request documents when specified compliance conditions are triggered. The fact that a sportsbook accepted a deposit without KYC does not by itself guarantee that every subsequent withdrawal will be processed without verification.

Bettors should check this policy before depositing rather than discovering it when they want to cash out.

Dexsport as an Example of the Crypto-Native Model

Dexsport illustrates how far the crypto onboarding model can differ from a conventional regulated sportsbook.

According to the platform information reviewed for this article, Dexsport launched in 2022 and operates under a license issued by the Government of the Autonomous Island of Anjouan, Union of Comoros. Its smart-contract infrastructure has undergone audits by CertiK and Pessimistic.

Its account and payment structure is particularly relevant to this comparison. Users can register through email, Telegram or supported Web3 wallet connections without routine KYC. The platform supports dozens of cryptocurrencies across 20 networks.

Once funded, the same account provides access to the sportsbook and a casino library containing more than 10,000 games. The sportsbook includes more than 100 betting options on some matches, esports coverage and in-play betting.

The practical difference becomes clear when the process is placed next to a conventional regulated operator:

Traditional sportsbook: create account → provide personal information → verify identity and age → pass applicable location checks → choose fiat payment method → deposit → bet.

Dexsport: create or connect account → select cryptocurrency and network → transfer crypto → bet.

That shorter flow is one reason no-KYC and wallet-based sportsbooks appeal to crypto users. It also means bettors need to understand wallet security, blockchain networks and transaction finality themselves.

Is No-KYC Betting the Same as Anonymous Betting?

The terms are often used loosely.

No-KYC generally means the sportsbook does not require the standard identity-verification process during ordinary account use. It does not necessarily mean that absolutely no information can be associated with a user.

Blockchain transactions are normally recorded on public ledgers. A sportsbook may also collect technical information according to its privacy policy, while an exchange used to acquire cryptocurrency may already have verified the customer's identity.

Crypto betting can therefore reduce the amount of personal information submitted directly to a sportsbook without making every part of the transaction chain invisible.

Privacy-conscious bettors should distinguish between no identity verification at the sportsbook and complete anonymity across the entire payment process.

Which Model Is Easier for a New Bettor?

For someone already using cryptocurrency, a crypto sportsbook can have the shorter onboarding process. Connecting a wallet or creating an account, sending crypto and placing a wager may involve fewer steps than completing conventional identity and payment checks.

For someone who has never used a crypto wallet, the calculation changes.

Buying cryptocurrency, selecting the correct network, copying addresses and managing wallet credentials introduce tasks that do not exist when depositing with a familiar bank or payment service.

Traditional sportsbooks handle more of the infrastructure for the bettor. Crypto sportsbooks can give the bettor greater control over the payment process, which also gives the bettor more responsibility for executing transactions correctly.

What to Check Before Depositing

Regardless of which model a bettor chooses, the important terms should be checked before money is transferred:

• Whether KYC is required at registration, withdrawal or after reaching specified thresholds

• Which countries or jurisdictions the sportsbook accepts

• Supported currencies, cryptocurrencies and blockchain networks

• Minimum and maximum deposits and withdrawals

• Sportsbook withdrawal fees and applicable blockchain fees

• Bonus wagering requirements and restrictions

• Whether withdrawals must use the same method or wallet used for deposits

For crypto users, the network deserves particular attention. "USDT accepted" is incomplete information unless the sportsbook also specifies which USDT networks it supports.

Crypto vs Traditional Sportsbooks: The Main Difference

The largest practical difference appears before the first bet.

Traditional regulated sportsbooks generally identify the customer first and then connect that verified account to conventional payment infrastructure. This model supports the compliance requirements imposed by regulated gambling markets, but creates a longer registration process and requires the bettor to disclose personal information.

Crypto sportsbooks can reverse the emphasis. Platforms such as Dexsport allow users to establish access quickly, fund an account through blockchain networks and begin betting without routine KYC.

Neither "crypto" nor "traditional" describes every sportsbook perfectly. Some crypto operators require full verification, while others apply conditional KYC. Traditional operators also differ significantly by jurisdiction.

For bettors comparing the two, the useful questions are specific: What information must I provide? When can KYC be requested? Which deposit networks are supported? What fees can arise? What happens when I withdraw?

Those answers provide a much clearer picture of the actual betting experience than the payment label alone.

 

 

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Nothing here is guidance on avoiding verification, reporting or tax obligations, all of which apply regardless of the asset used. Exchange listings, platform coin support, and regulations change frequently, so confirm current details before transferring. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

* This article was originally published here

From BTC to DASH: 5 Crypto Casinos with the Widest Network Support

Bitcoin remains the default cryptocurrency at most crypto casinos, but payment support has expanded far beyond BTC. Players can now bet with stablecoins such as USDT and USDC, established altcoins including Litecoin and Dogecoin, faster networks such as Solana and TRON, and less commonly supported assets such as DASH.

The number of coins alone does not tell the whole story. USDT, for example, can exist on Ethereum, TRON, BNB Smart Chain, Solana and several other networks. A casino that accepts USDT on one chain gives the player fewer options than one supporting the same token across several chains.

For this comparison, we looked for casinos combining broad cryptocurrency support with multiple blockchain networks and usable casino libraries. Dexsport leads the list with over 40 cryptocurrencies across 20 networks, followed by several established crypto gambling platforms with substantial altcoin coverage.

Casino

Crypto support

Examples

Casino offering

Dexsport

38 cryptocurrencies, 20 networks

BTC, ETH, USDT, BNB, TRX, DASH

10,000+ games

BC.Game

Large, changing multi-asset selection

BTC, ETH, USDT, SOL, XRP, DASH, ADA

10,000+ games

Cloudbet

30+ cryptocurrencies

BTC, ETH, USDT, SOL, XRP, LTC, DASH

3,000+ games

Mega Dice

15+ cryptocurrencies

BTC, ETH, USDT, USDC, ADA, XRP, TRX

5,000+ games

FortuneJack

11+ cryptocurrencies

BTC, ETH, USDT, SOL, TRX, DASH

Around 3,000 games

Crypto and network availability can change and may depend on the player's location. Always check the casino cashier before transferring funds.

1. Dexsport: Cryptocurrencies Across 20 Networks

Best for: Multi-chain deposits and Web3 wallet users

Dexsport has one of the broadest payment setups among crypto casinos in this comparison. The platform supports over 40 cryptocurrencies across 20 blockchain networks, according to its current platform information. Its payment selection covers major assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT, BNB and TRON, while current external listings also include DASH, DAI, USDC, XRP, Solana, TON, Litecoin and a selection of smaller tokens.

The network count is particularly useful for stablecoin users. Choosing between several supported chains can avoid the need to bridge or swap tokens before depositing. A player holding USDT on TRON, for example, does not necessarily want to move those funds to Ethereum simply because a casino supports USDT only as an ERC-20 token.

Dexsport also supports direct Web3 access. Accounts can be created through email or Telegram, while MetaMask, Trust Wallet and WalletConnect provide alternatives for players who already manage funds through a self-custody wallet.

Crypto payments feed into a casino containing more than 10,000 games. The library includes slots, live dealer tables, roulette, crash games and other titles from providers including Pragmatic Play, Evolution Gaming, NetEnt, Play'n GO and PG Soft. Dexsport also operates a sportsbook, allowing the same crypto balance to be used across casino games and sports betting.

Another distinction is its blockchain-oriented betting infrastructure. Dexsport provides a public betting desk where bets and outcomes can be viewed, while its smart-contract infrastructure has been audited by CertiK and Pessimistic.

For players holding several cryptocurrencies across different wallets and networks, this combination of asset selection and multi-chain support reduces the amount of conversion required before gambling.

Key crypto options: BTC, ETH, USDT, USDC, BNB, TRX, SOL, XRP, DASH, DAI and others.

2. BC.Game: Broad Support for Major Coins and Long-Tail Assets

Best for: Players holding less common altcoins

BC.Game takes a different approach to crypto banking. Instead of concentrating primarily on Bitcoin, Ethereum and stablecoins, its payment ecosystem extends into a long list of altcoins and ecosystem tokens.

Current 2026 payment information lists assets including BTC, ETH, USDT, LTC, XRP, DOGE, TRX, UNI, USDC, BNB, SOL, ADA, DOT, BCH, XLM, EOS and AVAX. DASH has also appeared among supported balances on the platform. The exact list is dynamic, so available coins and networks should be confirmed in the cashier before depositing.

This makes BC.Game relevant to players who already hold assets outside the usual BTC, ETH and USDT combination. Converting an existing altcoin balance through an exchange adds another transaction, potentially another trading fee and another withdrawal fee before the funds even reach the casino.

BC.Game also has a very large casino catalogue. Its crypto-oriented model covers slots, live casino games and proprietary titles, giving players somewhere to use the broader payment selection rather than treating crypto purely as an alternative deposit method.

The main consideration is that support for a token does not automatically mean every possible blockchain version of that token is accepted. Players using stablecoins or bridged assets should verify the network shown on the deposit screen before sending funds.

3. Cloudbet: 30+ Cryptocurrencies with Strong Stablecoin Network Choice

Best for: Stablecoins and established altcoins

Cloudbet has operated as a crypto gambling platform since 2013 and currently advertises support for more than 30 cryptocurrencies. Its selection includes Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, USDT, XRP, Litecoin and BNB. DASH is supported as well.

The network implementation is where Cloudbet becomes particularly interesting. Current payment information indicates that USDT is available across several networks, including Ethereum, BNB Smart Chain, Avalanche, Solana, Polygon, TRON and TON. USDC is similarly available through several chains.

That flexibility addresses a common problem with stablecoin casino deposits. Two players may both hold $100 in USDT, while one has ERC-20 USDT and another has TRC-20 USDT. If a casino supports only one network, one of them needs to move or convert the funds first. Multi-chain stablecoin support removes that extra step.

Cloudbet complements its payment system with more than 3,000 casino games plus sportsbook and esports sections. The platform therefore suits players who want a broad cryptocurrency wallet without moving between separate casino and sports betting accounts.

Key crypto options: BTC, ETH, USDT, USDC, SOL, XRP, LTC, BCH, DOGE, BNB, ADA, DOT, TRX, DASH and others.

4. Mega Dice: Good Coverage Beyond BTC and Ethereum

Best for: Mainstream altcoins and stablecoins

Mega Dice provides another relatively broad crypto cashier, with support extending well beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Its selection includes BTC, ETH, USDT, USDC, Cardano, XRP, TRON, Shiba Inu, Bitcoin Cash, Dogecoin and Litecoin, alongside additional cryptocurrencies. That mix covers several distinct use cases: BTC for users who already keep their bankroll in Bitcoin, stablecoins for avoiding short-term crypto volatility, and faster alternative networks for users concerned about transfer costs.

The presence of both USDT and USDC is useful because stablecoin support varies considerably between crypto casinos. USDT dominates gambling payment menus, while USDC can be harder to find.

Mega Dice combines its payment options with a casino containing thousands of games and an integrated sportsbook. It is therefore closer to an all-purpose crypto gambling platform than a Bitcoin casino that has gradually added a handful of alternative coins.

Players should still inspect individual network options before depositing. A long list of accepted currencies does not necessarily mean the operator supports every native and tokenized network associated with those currencies.

5. FortuneJack: Smaller Coin List, but DASH Is Directly Supported

Best for: DASH users who also use major cryptocurrencies

FortuneJack has a smaller cryptocurrency menu than Dexsport, BC.Game or Cloudbet, but it makes this list because its selection includes several networks that are increasingly difficult to find together.

Its current payment page lists Bitcoin, Ethereum, Polygon, Litecoin, BNB, USDC, USDT, Dogecoin, DASH, TRON and Solana. The platform also accepts EUR through third-party payment providers.

The casino has around 3,000 games from dozens of providers. Slots, live dealer tables and proprietary provably fair games sit alongside a sportsbook, making the platform suitable for players who want to use the same cryptocurrency for several types of gambling.

FortuneJack's eleven-coin selection cannot compete with the largest multi-chain casinos by raw numbers. Its advantage is the composition of that selection. BTC, ETH and USDT are accompanied by SOL, TRX, Polygon and DASH, covering several substantially different blockchain ecosystems.

Why Network Support Can Matter More Than Coin Count

A casino might advertise 30 cryptocurrencies while providing only one deposit network for each. Another might support fewer assets but allow USDT and USDC transfers over several chains. For a player moving funds regularly, the second arrangement can be more practical.

Three factors are worth checking before choosing a payment method:

1. The exact blockchain. USDT on Ethereum and USDT on TRON are the same dollar-pegged asset issued on different networks. Sending tokens to an unsupported network can result in lost funds.

2. Deposit and withdrawal support. A coin available for deposits is not necessarily available for withdrawals under identical conditions.

3. Minimums and network fees. The cheapest network for a $50 deposit may differ from the best option for a much larger transfer.

Network choice becomes particularly relevant for stablecoins because the same asset can circulate across numerous blockchains.

Which Crypto Casino Has the Widest Network Support?

Among the five platforms compared here, Dexsport offers the strongest combination of cryptocurrency and blockchain coverage, with 38 cryptocurrencies across 20 networks. That makes it particularly suitable for players managing funds across several chains rather than keeping their entire gambling balance in BTC or one version of USDT.

Cloudbet follows with more than 30 cryptocurrencies and particularly strong multi-network stablecoin support. BC.Game stands out for the breadth of its altcoin selection, while Mega Dice provides a substantial middle ground between mainstream coins and alternative assets. FortuneJack has the smallest list in this comparison but directly supports DASH alongside Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, TRON, Polygon and major stablecoins.

The best choice ultimately depends on the asset already sitting in the player's wallet. Someone holding BTC has almost universal access. Someone holding DASH, USDC on a specific network or a smaller altcoin has far fewer options, making the casino's actual network configuration more important than a generic "crypto accepted" label.

FAQ

Which crypto casino supports the most networks?

Dexsport supports 38 cryptocurrencies across 20 blockchain networks according to current platform information. This includes major assets and stablecoins as well as less common cryptocurrencies.

Which crypto casinos accept DASH?

Dexsport, Cloudbet and FortuneJack are among the platforms currently identified as supporting DASH. DASH availability remains less widespread than BTC, ETH or USDT.

Is DASH faster than Bitcoin for casino deposits?

DASH is designed for fast payments and typically has low transaction fees. Actual casino deposit time also depends on how many confirmations the operator requires and how quickly its payment system credits the transaction.

What is the best cryptocurrency for online casino deposits?

There is no universal option. BTC has the broadest acceptance, while stablecoins such as USDT and USDC avoid cryptocurrency price volatility. Networks such as TRON and Solana can provide inexpensive transfers. The available casino networks, withdrawal rules and the assets already held by the player should determine the choice.

Can I send USDT over any network to a crypto casino?

No. The casino must explicitly support the network being used. For example, a TRC-20 USDT deposit must be sent to a TRON deposit address. Always select the cryptocurrency and blockchain in the casino cashier before initiating the transaction.

 

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Nothing here is guidance on avoiding verification, reporting or tax obligations, all of which apply regardless of the asset used. Exchange listings, platform coin support, and regulations change frequently, so confirm current details before transferring. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

* This article was originally published here

5 Crypto Casinos Compared on Game Catalogue Breadth

Game count is the most misleading number in casino marketing. A platform advertising 5,000 titles has usually licensed a dozen studio catalogues wholesale, and those catalogues contain hundreds of near-identical releases: the same mechanic with a different theme, shipped four times a year for a decade.

What that headline figure measures is how many licensing agreements a casino has signed. It does not measure how much genuinely different content is there to play. This compares five crypto casinos on the metrics that do.

The Comparison

Five platforms across the dimensions that indicate real variety instead of catalogue inflation.

 

Providers

Live content

Arcade/crash

In-house originals

Dexsport

Around 23 named studios

Three studios

Yes, licensed

No

BC.Game

Large multi-studio roster

Multiple studios

Yes

Yes

Stake

Large multi-studio roster

Multiple studios

Yes

Yes

Mega Dice

Around 50 providers

Present

Yes

No

Vave

Mid-sized roster

Present

Limited

No

Provider Count Beats Title Count

The reason is straightforward once stated.

Studios have house styles. Hacksaw builds high-variance modern slots; NetEnt built the clean classics; Red Tiger runs drop jackpots; BGaming is crypto-native. Each one you add brings a genuinely different design philosophy into the lobby.

Adding another 200 titles from a studio you already carry brings almost nothing, because those titles share the mechanics, the maths and the feel of what is already there. 

A lobby with 23 providers across four categories offers more real choice than one with 5,000 titles drawn from twelve.

So the useful question is not how many games a casino has. It is how many distinct sources those games come from, and who actually supplies them.

Category Coverage Is the Second Metric

Breadth across categories matters more than depth within one.

A casino with 3,000 slots and no live dealer section is narrow, whatever its total says. One with slots, live tables, game shows and a crash arcade covers four genuinely different kinds of play, and a player's interests rarely sit in a single category for an entire session.

The four to check are slots, live dealer, game shows and quick-round arcade titles. Most crypto casinos cover the first and third; fewer cover all four with real depth, and headline catalogue figures obscure exactly this.

What Dexsport's Roster Actually Contains

Taking one platform as a worked example, since a provider list is more informative than a total.

Dexsport draws its live content from Evolution, Playtech and Ezugi. 

Its slot catalogue runs across:

• Pragmatic Play, 

• NetEnt, 

• Play'n GO, 

• Hacksaw Gaming, 

• Nolimit City, 

• BGaming, 

• Playson, 

• Yggdrasil, 

• Red Tiger, 

• Endorphina, 

• Spinomenal, 

• 3 Oaks, 

• PG Soft, 

• Novomatic and 

• Big Time Gaming

The arcade section adds Spribe, TaDa Gaming and Turbo Games among others.

Read that list by what it spans, not by its length. It covers the classics, the modern high-variance studios, a crypto-native developer, the Megaways originator and multiple live providers. That is breadth in the sense that matters.

One honest limitation: there is no in-house originals suite. Every title is licensed, so the catalogue overlaps with any competitor carrying the same studios, and the platform cannot offer anything exclusive. The trade is that its arcade and live sections come from established names instead of an internal team.

Duplicates and Regional Variants Inflate Totals

A final reason to distrust the headline number.

Catalogues frequently count regional variants of the same title separately, and aggregators sometimes list a game under multiple categories. A slot appearing in "slots," "new releases" and "popular" can be counted three times in a total that is presented as distinct content.

None of this is fraudulent, and none of it is disclosed either. It simply means a total is a marketing figure and not an inventory, and comparing two casinos on their totals compares two marketing figures.

Count Sources, Not Titles

If you want to judge a catalogue before depositing, ignore the headline and do three things instead.

Open the provider list and count the studios whose games you actually enjoy. Check whether all four content categories are present with more than a token selection. Then look for in-house originals, which tell you whether anything in the lobby is unavailable elsewhere.

Those three checks take two minutes and tell you more than any five-figure total will.

Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply.

Responsible gambling deserves a mention precisely because breadth is the point of this article: a lobby with thousands of options is designed so that something always looks worth trying next.

 

 

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Provider rosters and catalogue sizes change frequently, so confirm current details before depositing. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

* This article was originally published here

I made $1 million on Cashcat. Here’s how to play the next leg

* This article was originally published here

Cryptocurrency Trading Explained: Spot, Futures, Leverage, Fees and Risk

Crypto trading means buying and selling cryptocurrencies in a spot market, or trading contracts whose value is linked to a cryptocurrency’s price. In spot trading, the underlying asset changes hands. In futures trading, the trader takes contractual price exposure and may never receive the cryptocurrency itself.

That distinction affects nearly every part of a trade: whether a person needs to manage custody, whether they can take a short position, how much capital is required, and how quickly losses can develop. Both routes also carry the broader risks of volatile markets, thin liquidity and platform failures.

Spot trading: buying the cryptocurrency itself

A spot transaction is a cash-market purchase or sale of the underlying cryptocurrency. Someone who buys bitcoin on spot, for example, has bought bitcoin rather than a derivative contract based on its price. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission describes virtual-currency spot trading as buying or selling the underlying asset in the cash market.

After a spot purchase, the asset may remain with the trading platform or be transferred to an external wallet, subject to that platform’s custody and settlement arrangements. Those are materially different practical outcomes. Keeping assets on a platform leaves the platform responsible for the custody process; moving them to a wallet introduces responsibility for the wallet and its access credentials.

Spot trading is usually the more direct route for a buyer seeking to own and potentially transfer an asset, without requiring a futures margin account or creating a contract expiry date. The trade-off is that direct ownership does not eliminate market risk; if the cryptocurrency’s price falls, the value of the holding falls as well.

Nor does spot ownership guarantee an easy exit. FINRA cautions that crypto assets can be subject to extreme and unpredictable volatility and limited liquidity, which can make it difficult to sell at an expected price. Fraud, hacking, manipulation, and platform or custody failures are additional risks cited by the regulator.

Futures: price exposure without necessarily receiving crypto

A futures contract is a standardized agreement to buy or sell a specified quantity of an underlying asset at a specified price and date. The contract’s terms, rather than an immediate transfer of coins, define the position.

Crypto futures can be cash-settled. In that arrangement, settlement is based on the contract’s terms and price outcome rather than delivery of cryptocurrency. A trader can therefore gain exposure to a price move without needing to receive, store or transfer bitcoin or another token.

Conventional futures have a specified date. Traders who still want exposure as that date approaches may close the position, or move to another contract where their venue and product rules allow. The key point is that dated futures are not simply a spot purchase with a different fee schedule: they are contracts with their own settlement and margin framework.

Perpetual futures, often called perpetuals or perps, take a different approach. They do not have a traditional expiration date. Instead, they use periodic payments between traders holding long and short positions—known as funding—to help keep the contract price aligned with the spot price.

According to Coinbase’s funding-rate explanation, positive funding generally means longs pay shorts, while negative funding generally means shorts pay longs. Funding is therefore a continuing cost or receipt that belongs in the economics of a perpetual position, not a one-off charge that can be ignored after entry.

Margin and leverage: less capital, larger exposure

Futures are commonly traded on margin. Margin is collateral, sometimes described as a performance bond, that represents only a fraction of a contract’s notional value. That lets a trader control a larger position than the collateral posted, which is the source of leverage.

The trade-off is symmetrical in principle but not necessarily in experience: leverage magnifies gains when prices move in the trader’s favour and magnifies losses when they do not. A small change in the underlying cryptocurrency can produce a much larger percentage change relative to the margin committed.

A CME illustration shows why notional value and required margin should be kept separate. On July 7, 2026, CME displayed estimated notional exposure of $6,334 and estimated margin of $1,435 for one Micro Bitcoin futures contract. That is an example of capital efficiency, not a fixed benchmark: CME notes that actual requirements can change and clearing firms may require more.

In practical terms, a trader should first identify the size of the exposure, then the collateral requirement, and then assess how a price move would affect the account. Treating the margin figure as though it were the full economic size of the position obscures the risk being taken.

How a leveraged crypto futures trade can fail

Consider a trader who opens a leveraged long futures position. If the cryptocurrency price rises, the position may gain value. If it falls, losses are calculated against the larger contract exposure, not merely against the intuition that the trader put up a relatively small deposit.

As losses accumulate, the account may no longer meet its margin requirements. The trader may be required to add margin or close the position. Depending on the product and account rules, the CFTC warns that losses can exceed the initial amount deposited.

This is why “I can only lose my margin” is not a safe universal assumption. Product design, account terms and the manner in which a position is closed all matter. Traders should understand their venue’s margin, liquidation and deficit procedures before opening a leveraged trade, rather than assuming every crypto product handles a shortfall in the same way.

Execution conditions can add pressure during fast markets. FINRA notes that volatility and limited liquidity can make it difficult to exit at an expected price. A position that appears manageable at one quoted price may be closed or sold at a less favourable level if available liquidity is limited when the trader needs to act.

Funding, spreads and fees change the cost of a trade

The displayed trading fee is only one part of the cost of trading crypto. Costs can include maker or taker fees, the bid-ask spread, slippage, withdrawal or network fees, and financing or funding costs. Which of these applies depends on the asset, order type, product and platform.

Maker and taker describe how an order interacts with the order book. A maker order adds liquidity by resting in the book; a taker order executes immediately against liquidity that is already available. Coinbase’s fee documentation says fee schedules commonly vary by trading volume and product, so an advertised rate should not be assumed to apply to every account or market.

The spread is the gap between available buy and sell prices. Slippage is the difference between an expected execution price and the price actually achieved. Both can matter more when liquidity is limited or an order is large relative to the available orders at nearby prices.

For a spot buyer moving coins out of a platform, withdrawal and network fees can affect the total cost. For a perpetual futures trader, periodic funding can either add to the cost or create a payment received, depending on the funding direction and the trader’s position. A dated futures position has different contract and settlement considerations, but it is not cost-free simply because it does not use perpetual funding.

Choosing spot or futures for a trading objective

Start with the desired outcome: owning the asset or gaining price exposure. Buying cryptocurrency with the possibility of transferring it to a wallet points to spot trading. Seeking exposure to a rise or fall in price without necessarily receiving the asset points to futures.

The next question is direction. Spot selling generally requires an asset to sell. Futures can support either long exposure, which benefits from a price rise, or short exposure, which benefits from a price fall, under the relevant product and account rules. That flexibility comes with contractual obligations and, commonly, margin risk.

Then consider capital and time horizon. Margin can make futures more capital-efficient than paying the full spot value, but it also increases the sensitivity of the account to adverse price movements. Perpetuals add recurring funding considerations, while dated futures have specified contract dates.

Finally, assess the route into and out of the trade. Spot holders face custody choices if assets are left on a platform or transferred to a wallet. Futures traders need to understand margin requirements and the possibility of forced closure. Across both markets, liquidity, spreads, slippage and platform risks can affect whether a position can be exited at the price a trader expects.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does spot trading mean my crypto is in my personal wallet?

No. Spot trading means buying or selling the underlying cryptocurrency. The asset may remain on the platform or be transferred to a wallet, depending on the platform’s custody and settlement practices and the holder’s actions.

Do crypto futures always result in delivery of bitcoin or other coins?

No. A futures contract is an agreement based on specified terms, and crypto futures may be cash-settled rather than settled through delivery of the cryptocurrency.

What is perpetual futures funding?

Funding is a periodic payment between long and short holders of a perpetual contract intended to help align its price with spot. Positive funding generally has longs paying shorts; negative funding generally reverses that flow.

Can I lose more than the margin I post on a futures trade?

It is possible, depending on the product and account rules. An adverse move can require additional margin or lead to closure of the position, and the initial deposit is not an automatic cap on losses.

Which costs matter besides a platform’s trading fee?

Look at spreads, slippage, withdrawal or network charges, and any financing or funding costs alongside maker or taker fees. The relevant mix differs between a spot purchase, a dated futures contract and a perpetual position.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Ghana Will Require Local Refining of Artisanal Gold From September 1

Ghana’s GoldBod will require Self-Financing Aggregators and their approved offtakers to refine artisanal gold doré in the country before it can be exported, beginning September 1, 2026. The order puts domestic processing at the centre of a gold export stream that reached 104 metric tons in 2025, according to Reuters via Business Day.

Existing offtake agreements must be amended by August 31. GoldBod said noncompliance could result in sanctions, including the suspension or revocation of licences.

Local refining becomes an export condition

The directive covers Self-Financing Aggregators and their approved offtakers—the parties named in GoldBod’s order. From September 1, those parties must have their artisanal gold doré processed in Ghana before export, rather than shipping it in unrefined form.

The timing creates a short transition window for businesses operating under existing offtake arrangements. Agreements in force need to reflect the new local-refining requirement by the day before the mandate takes effect, Reuters reported.

The measure is more than a preference for domestic processing. By warning that licences may be suspended or revoked, GoldBod has tied compliance to continued participation under the applicable GoldBod framework.

Export clearance process

Refining locally is only one part of the export process described by GoldBod. Export applications will be considered after the board confirms that gold has been refined at an approved or designated local refinery, Onua Online reported.

Applicants must also have paid refining charges and completed assay and regulatory requirements. In effect, a refinery confirmation, fees, assays and the required regulatory steps are all prerequisites before GoldBod considers an export application.

The framework leaves GoldBod with a direct verification role at the point of export clearance. The reported rules do not identify how many refineries may be approved or designated, nor do they state that one facility must handle all eligible material. That distinction matters when assessing the capacity needed to support the mandate.

A 104-tonne artisanal-gold export stream

The affected trade is substantial. GoldBod exported 104 metric tons of artisanal gold during 2025 and was on track to match or exceed that volume in 2026, Reuters reported.

Spread evenly over a full year, 104 metric tons equates to an average of roughly two metric tons a week. Actual volumes may not arrive at refineries evenly, but that annual comparison illustrates the scale of material that could require domestic processing once the new export condition starts.

For aggregators and offtakers, the mandate therefore changes the sequence of a large-volume trade: domestic refining, associated payments and testing must now occur before an export request can move forward. The August 31 contract deadline comes immediately before that shift.

Gold Coast Refinery pilot and capacity

Before issuing the export rule, GoldBod agreed with Gold Coast Refinery on a domestic-refining programme. Under the January 20, 2026 agreement, the programme was set to process one metric ton of gold a week, according to the Ghana Gold Board.

Gold Coast Refinery reported capacity of up to two tons weekly. Against GoldBod’s 104 metric tons of artisanal-gold exports in 2025—an average of about two tons weekly—the initial one-tonne programme represents half that average.

The capacity figures are not a measure of the refinery’s actual throughput, and they do not show that Gold Coast Refinery will be the only approved or designated facility under the September rule.

GoldBod said the export flow could meet or surpass 104 metric tons in the relevant year, making the number and operating capacity of eligible local refineries central to implementation.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

THORChain 3.20 Unlocks Native Monero and Zcash Swaps With Bitcoin, Ethereum and Stablecoins

Privacy coins have become increasingly difficult to move into the wider crypto market without going through a centralized intermediary. THORChain is looking to change that with one of its most significant protocol upgrades yet.

The decentralized exchange announced the launch of THORChain 3.20, introducing native support for Monero (XMR) and Zcash (ZEC) swaps. Users can now swap the privacy-focused cryptocurrencies against assets including Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and stablecoins directly through THORChain.

The important part is what users do not have to do. No wrapped versions of XMR or ZEC involved, no exchange account is required, and users do not have to deposit their assets with a centralized custodian before making a trade.

That gives privacy-coin holders a more direct route into some of the largest and most liquid parts of the crypto market.

A New Route Out of the Privacy-Coin Silo

The integration is particularly notable for Monero. Access to XMR through centralized exchanges has tightened considerably as trading platforms have removed or restricted the cryptocurrency in response to regulatory and compliance concerns.

That has created an awkward problem for an asset built around financial privacy and user control: holders can transact directly on the Monero network, but moving from XMR into assets such as BTC, ETH or dollar-denominated stablecoins has often required relying on the very centralized services that many crypto users are trying to avoid.

THORChain 3.20 provides another option. Instead of sending XMR or ZEC to an exchange, selling it, and then withdrawing another cryptocurrency, users can exchange the native assets directly through THORChain while maintaining self-custody.

It extends the same basic model THORChain already uses for assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum: connecting otherwise separate blockchain networks without relying on wrapped representations of those assets.

That model becomes particularly relevant with privacy coins because decentralized access to them has historically been much more limited than for assets operating on major smart-contract networks.

More Than a Privacy-Coin Upgrade

Monero and Zcash are the headline additions, but version 3.20 also introduces broader changes to THORChain’s liquidity infrastructure.

The upgrade adds a new Stable Reserve, which introduces stablecoin-to-stablecoin swaps without liquidity fees. For users moving between supported stable assets, the system is intended to provide a more efficient execution path within THORChain.

THORChain has also introduced Protocol-Owned Liquidity (POL), giving the protocol additional mechanisms for deploying its own capital across the network rather than relying entirely on external liquidity providers. Version 3.20 also brings renewed support for Solana, Base and BNB, expanding the range of networks available through the protocol alongside its existing cross-chain infrastructure.

Together, the changes point toward THORChain becoming a broader liquidity layer rather than simply a venue for swapping between a handful of major Layer 1 assets.

Privacy Coins Get a More Direct Connection to Crypto

The larger significance of the release is that two of crypto’s best-known privacy assets are gaining a more direct connection to the rest of the digital-asset market.

Decentralized exchanges are now a fundamental part of crypto trading, but most still operate primarily within individual blockchain ecosystems. Moving native assets between separate networks can require bridges, wrapped tokens or centralized platforms. THORChain was built around removing those steps.

Adding XMR and ZEC extends that model into a part of the market where decentralized access has remained comparatively limited. For privacy-coin holders, THORChain 3.20 therefore represents more than another place to trade. It provides a way to move directly between privacy-focused cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin, Ethereum and stablecoins without surrendering custody of the underlying assets along the way.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Is Bitcoin Forming a Bull Flag? $90K Target Coming Into Play

What could be a bull flag is starting to form at the top of the amazing price surge that took place on Wednesday and into Friday of last week. Should this bull flag be confirmed and a breakout happens, $90K could be the eventual target. 

Bull flag forming?

Source: TradingView

Looking at the short-term time frame chart above, it can be seen that the $BTC price hit a local high of $79,500 before falling back quite sharply to $76,700. Since then the bulls have regrouped, and the pattern that is starting to emerge looks very much like a classic bull flag.

This type of pattern usually has the price going sideways and lower within the confines of a flag structure until there is a breakout, which would normally issue from the top of the pattern.

However, for a bull flag to be confirmed there would typically be at least three touches to the top of the flag, and three to the bottom. As can be noted, the price action is lacking in this requirement so far, although with some more sideways and downward chop the pattern can eventually be completed.

Something else to think about is that since the $BTC price hit that top, the retracement has only taken it back as far as the 0.236 Fibonacci level. This is the shallowest of all the Fibonacci levels, and if the price does bounce from here it would be very bullish indeed. That said, a correction to at least the 0.382 would probably be a more healthy one.

Confluence at $69K

Source: TradingView

Moving up into the daily time frame one can only gaze with awe at the size of the price increase once the $BTC price had arrived at the very end of the junction between the bear and bull market trendlines and had exploded upward.

So what happens now? Does a bull flag continue to take shape, or could the price fall all the way back to $69K, where horizontal support awaits, plus the 0.618 Fibonacci level, and also a potential confirmation of the 200-day simple moving average. This is a lot of confluence, and like a magnet, this could draw the price back down for what would be a very healthy correction.

At the bottom of the chart, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) displays its indicator high up in overbought territory. The height attained here is greater than anything seen since the $BTC price first entered into its 8-month long bull flag in February 2024. One excellent result of this climb, as far as the bulls are concerned, is that the huge downward trend stretching back to November 2024 has potentially now been nullified.

Continuation or healthier pullback?

Source: TradingView

The macro time frame of the weekly shows us how important the current resistance at $78,600 is, and also the next resistance after that at one of the bear market highs at $82,750. Can the $BTC price get through this, or is a longer corrective period needed?

One thing is pretty sure in trading - a price cannot go up at such a pace indefinitely. The time comes when the buyers are exhausted, and that’s when the sellers step in.

It may be that the bull flag does continue to play out and there is a renewal of the upward thrust from Bitcoin. However, that may not be a healthy outcome, and if this happens, the correction, when it does come, could be a lot more violent.

Back to the RSI - in this weekly time frame it can be seen that the indicator line has broken through the downtrend. We need to wait until the end of this week to see if it holds above. If it does, stand by for more upside price action.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

How To Trade Crypto Perpetual Futures in 6 MINUTES ($25 Bonus)

* This article was originally published here

BC Token Price Jumps 98% to New All-Time High as BC Engine Reaches Nearly 450,000 Participating Accounts

 

Key Takeaways

• BC Engine reached nearly 450,000 participating accounts four months after launch.

• BC Token ($BC) jumped 98% to a new all-time high following the milestone.

• The rally comes as traders watch whether platform-linked tokens can maintain momentum.

• BC Engine growth has become a key development around the BC ecosystem.

BC Engine Adoption

Earlier this week, BC Engine reached a major milestone, surpassing nearly 450,000 participating accounts four months after launch.

One of the biggest developments is the rapid growth of BC Engine participation, which allows users to engage with the BC ecosystem through staking and reward mechanisms.

The milestone comes as BC.GAME continues expanding its crypto gaming ecosystem.

However, the most important development is the growing role of BC Engine around the $BC token economy.

BC Engine provides additional utility through participation mechanisms connected to the BC ecosystem.

The platform has attracted nearly 450,000 participating accounts since launch.

Shortly after the milestone, BC Token price continued its upward move, reaching a new all-time high.

BC Token All-Time High

With the latest move, BC Token ($BC) jumped 98% from April levels.

The token has moved from around $0.01181 in April to above $0.02345.

The price increase comes alongside the rapid growth of BC Engine participation.

The move puts BC Token at a new all-time high as traders watch the relationship between platform activity and token performance.

The rally has been driven by ecosystem developments rather than broader market momentum.

BC’s price action will now depend on whether the token can establish support after the latest breakout.

Final Thoughts

BC Engine’s growth has added a new development point for the BC ecosystem as BC Token reaches new highs.

However, the rapid price movement also brings increased volatility as traders assess whether momentum can continue.

The next stage will show whether BC Token can consolidate at higher levels as BC Engine adoption continues.

 

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Sportsbooks Compared on European Football Coverage

Most sportsbook comparisons test a platform on the Premier League, which almost every book covers well.

The more revealing question is how far down European football a platform goes: whether it prices the Conference League as seriously as the Champions League, and whether a Belgian or Portuguese fixture gets a full board or a token one.

This compares crypto sportsbooks on breadth across European football, from the big five leagues through the UEFA competitions to the secondary divisions.

Breadth Is a Different Test From Depth

Two measures get confused in platform comparisons, and separating them helps.

Depth is how many markets a book offers on a single fixture. Market breadth is how many competitions a book covers at all, and how evenly. A platform can be deep on the Premier League and absent on the Eredivisie, and for a bettor who follows more than one league, breadth is the constraint that actually bites.

The honest test is to open a fixture from a competition you follow that is not among the marquee names, and see what appears.

The Platforms Ranked on European Breadth

Ordered on coverage across European football as a whole, not on how they price any single league.

1. Dexsport

Dexsport carries football within a board of 30-plus sports, with depth that extends past the headline competitions into the fixtures where thinner books stop.

• More than 100 markets on major matches, covering the secondary lines across European club and league football, and not only the result and goals.

• Self-custody of funds: settled bets return to a wallet the player holds across 50-plus coins and 23 networks, on a cashier adding nothing above the network fee.

• Public on-chain desk: a settled market leaves a record independent of the account screen, while odds are priced off-chain by the operator.

• Cash Out on eligible bets, with two honest limits: an Anjouan licence, lighter than Curacao or Malta, and no live streaming.

2. Cloudbet

An established book operating since 2013 under a named Curacao entity, strongest on the competitions it prices tightly.

• Low margins on featured European fixtures.

• High limits suited to larger stakes.

• Named operating company, identified and not hidden behind a brand.

3. Stake

Wide sports coverage with European football priced across multiple competitions.

• 30-plus sports including broad football coverage.

• Streaming on selected fixtures, useful for midweek European nights.

• Custodial, so settled funds sit in an operator balance until withdrawn.

4. Vave

Deep football pricing that reaches into secondary competitions.

• 300-plus markets on major football matches.

• Player and goals markets past the headline result.

• Broad coin support for funding across chains.

5. Thunderpick

Included with a caveat, because it is a specialist and not an all-rounder.

• Esports coverage priced by a book that concentrates on it.

• Provably-fair casino alongside the sportsbook.

• Thinner traditional football pricing, which is where a competitor genuinely beats it for a European football bettor.

Where Coverage Usually Thins Out

Three parts of the European calendar separate broad books from narrow ones.

The Conference League is the clearest test, since its field spans dozens of associations and includes clubs most models have little data on.

Secondary divisions come next: the English Championship, the second tiers in Germany, Italy and Spain, and the smaller first divisions across the continent. And domestic cup competitions, particularly in early rounds, are frequently priced thinly or skipped altogether.

A platform that handles all three is genuinely broad. One that covers the big five leagues and the Champions League is adequate for most bettors and limiting for some, and the Championship is a useful benchmark precisely because it sits just outside the marquee tier.

Custody and Licensing Cut Across the Ranking

Breadth is not the only axis, and the platforms above differ on two structural questions that a coverage comparison can obscure.

Dexsport is non-custodial, so a settled balance sits in a wallet the player controls, while Cloudbet, Stake and Vave hold player funds between bets.

On licensing the comparison runs the other way: Cloudbet and Stake operate under Curacao licences, a regime with a public register and stronger formal recourse than Anjouan.

Neither factor is settled by coverage breadth, and comparing offshore licensing regimes is worth doing alongside the market comparison, not instead of it.

Choosing on the Competitions You Follow

The practical approach is to list the competitions you actually bet, including the unglamorous ones, and check each platform against that list before opening an account.

A book that covers your leagues thinly will frustrate you every week, however good it looks on a Premier League Saturday. Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply.

Responsible gambling matters more as coverage widens, because a platform pricing forty competitions offers forty times the opportunities to bet past a plan.

 

 

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice, and nothing here is a betting tip or prediction. Coverage, licensing and platform features change over time, so confirm current details before depositing. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.

* This article was originally published here

Bits of Gold Says 200,000 Customers Exposed in Third-Party Data Breach

Bits of Gold said on Aug. 16 it detected and blocked unauthorized access to a third-party data-analysis support system used for support and analytics. In a security update, the Israeli crypto brokerage said certain personal information may have been accessed and that it has notified authorities.

Data potentially accessed versus data confirmed safe

Bits of Gold said the intrusion may have exposed categories of personal information stored in the affected system. It also listed data it says were not exposed.

Potentially accessed:

• Name
• Contact and identification details such as ID number
• Email address and phone number
• IP address
• Bank account details
• Public crypto wallet addresses

Confirmed not exposed:

• Digital assets and funds
• Customers’ private keys
• Full payment card numbers/CVV
• Account passwords
• ID-document photos

The company said the affected environment supported analytics and support functions rather than custody or trading systems.

Breach vector and containment steps

Bits of Gold described the access as part of a wider cyber incident impacting other companies. Upon detection, the firm blocked the connection, disconnected the affected system, and engaged a specialist cyber-incident investigation and response provider. It said it is continuing to monitor its systems while the investigation proceeds.

Who could be affected and scale context

The company has not said how many user records were accessed or the extent of exposure. Its help center states Bits of Gold has over 200,000 registered customers, a figure that indicates possible scale but does not equate to the number affected. The company did not provide a timeline for when its review will conclude.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Monad Offered Early Investors a $60M Exit — Almost Nobody Took It

As of Aug. 18, 2026, a review of Monad’s official announcements and Coinbase’s MON token-sale disclosure shows no public record of a $60 million cash exit or tender offer presented to early investors. Checks of the Monad blog and announcements, the Coinbase/MF Services sale disclosure, and contemporaneous reporting by major crypto outlets including The Block surfaced no such document or reference. In the absence of an official notice, the claim lacks documentary support.

No public record of a $60 million investor exit offer

Crypto Daily examined Monad’s communications archive, the MON public-sale disclosure published by MF Services (BVI), Ltd. on Coinbase, and major coverage around the launch window. Neither the Monad announcements nor the Coinbase filing contain any language describing a company-initiated buyback, tender, or cash exit option for early investors totaling $60 million, and The Block’s coverage provides no corroboration.

What the MON sale and vesting terms actually say

The binding terms available to public investors are set out in the Coinbase disclosure for MON, issued by MF Services (BVI), Ltd. The document states that the public sale ran Nov. 17–22, 2025 with up to 7.5 billion MON offered at $0.025 per token, implying a $2.5 billion fully diluted valuation (FDV). It lists an initial supply of 100 billion MON and allocates approximately 19.7 billion MON to investors subject to a four‑year lock-up beginning at the token generation event (TGE), featuring a one‑year cliff followed by equal monthly unlocks thereafter. The disclosure can be read in full here: Coinbase token sales – MON disclosure (PDF).

Under those terms, early investor liquidity is restricted until the cliff expires, with subsequent vesting spread linearly. A cash exit for locked investors, if one existed, would typically be formalized as a tender offer, repurchase, or other documented arrangement that overrides or operates alongside the vesting schedule. No such tender or override appears in the public materials cited above.

Timeline around launch and sale

Monad opened its MON airdrop claim portal on Oct. 14, 2025 and kept it live through Nov. 3, 2025, with distribution tied to the token generation event at mainnet launch, according to the project’s announcement here. The public sale on Coinbase followed on Nov. 17–22, 2025, at the terms described above in the official disclosure.

Coverage at the time focused on demand dynamics rather than investor tenders. The Block reported the Coinbase sale “started hot and then fizzled,” flagged undersubscription risk, and later noted potential sell pressure as supply came to market. None of that reporting mentions a company-run $60 million exit offer to early investors.

What would constitute evidence of a tender-style offer

A bona fide investor tender or cash exit would ordinarily be reflected in official project announcements, amendments or supplements to a token-sale disclosure, or detailed coverage from reputable outlets. As of the verification date above, none of those records show a $60 million offer extended to Monad’s early investors.

Unless Monad or participating investors publish documentation, the $60 million-exit claim remains unverified. Under the disclosed vesting, the first investor unlock occurs after the one‑year cliff from TGE, on Nov. 24, 2026.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here

Applied Materials Beats Estimates but Competition Caps the AI Premium

Applied Materials posted record results and raised guidance, confirming that AI demand is still pulling forward equipment spending. Verified fact: the company reported Q2 FY2026 revenue of $7.91 billion, GAAP EPS of $3.51, non-GAAP EPS of $2.86, non-GAAP gross margin around 50.0%, and guided Q3 FY2026 revenue to $8,950 million ± $500 million, per its earnings release on May 14, 2026 (company PDF).

Yet the same AI tide is lifting multiple boats. Verified fact: Lam Research, a direct competitor in etch and deposition, also posted a record June quarter with $6.722 billion in revenue and guided the September quarter to $8.10 billion ± $400 million (Lam Research). Opinion: when several leaders simultaneously beat and guide higher, the market tends to reward the group rather than grant a lasting “AI premium” to a single vendor.

Two additional checks on a runaway premium stand out. Verified fact: Applied’s non-GAAP free cash flow fell to $210 million in Q2 FY2026 from $1,061 million a year earlier, an approximately 80% drop, even as revenue and EPS set records (company PDF). Verified fact: Applied in February 2026 agreed to pay $252.5 million to resolve U.S. Department of Commerce export-control matters; related DOJ and SEC probes were subsequently closed (company press release). Market narrative: strong demand, tighter cash conversion, and a live regulatory backdrop argue for a balanced view on valuation.

What changed in Applied’s setup this quarter

Verified facts:

• Record Q2 FY2026 performance: revenue $7.91 billion; GAAP EPS $3.51; non-GAAP EPS $2.86; non-GAAP gross margin about 50.0% (company PDF).
• Raised outlook: Q3 FY2026 revenue guidance of $8,950 million ± $500 million, consistent with continued AI-driven equipment demand (company PDF).
• Cash conversion caution: non-GAAP free cash flow of $210 million versus $1,061 million in Q2 FY2025 (~80% decline) (company PDF).
• Regulatory overhang clarified: $252.5 million settlement with U.S. Commerce (BIS); DOJ and SEC closed related probes (company press release).

Inference: The operational trajectory is improving on revenue and margins, but cash generation and export controls remain gating items for how much of an AI multiple investors are willing to ascribe.

The strongest evidence from AMAT, a key rival, and the market

Verified facts from primary sources and industry data underpin the thesis that demand is broad and competition is intense:

ItemFigure / GuidanceSource Applied Q2 FY2026 revenue$7.91BApplied Materials Applied Q2 FY2026 GAAP / non-GAAP EPS$3.51 / $2.86Applied Materials Applied non-GAAP gross margin~50.0%Applied Materials Applied Q3 FY2026 revenue guide$8,950M ± $500MApplied Materials Applied non-GAAP free cash flow$210M (Q2 FY2026) vs. $1,061M (Q2 FY2025)Applied Materials Lam Research June-quarter revenue$6.722BLam Research Lam Research September-quarter guide$8.10B ± $400MLam Research SEMI WFE forecast (2026)~$143.9BSEMI SEMI total equipment forecast (2027)~$156BSEMI

Market narrative: SEMI’s larger total addressable market attracts multiple tier-one suppliers. Verified fact: independent research estimates show the “Big Five” equipment makers account for roughly 65–70% of front-end WFE, which means leading chipmakers can dual-source advanced tools and keep pricing in check (Mordor Intelligence).

Why valuation upside meets market-share math

Opinion: Applied’s setup argues for respect rather than exuberance. Revenue and margin execution are tracking ahead of plan, and guidance implies AI orders still have legs. But the same AI wave is allocating revenue across multiple OEMs, as Lam’s beat and guidance underscore. The structural reality that customers can source leading-edge tools from several vendors limits the scope for a single-supplier pricing premium in a rising cycle.

Verified fact: SEMI highlights China, Taiwan and Korea as primary destinations for equipment spending through 2027 and notes continued capacity builds in China, including mature nodes (SEMI). Inference: subsidized local suppliers in China at trailing nodes can pressure pricing on lower-end lines, further capping the blended margin expansion investors might extrapolate from AI-led tools.

Verified fact: Applied resolved a $252.5 million export-control matter with the U.S. Commerce Department in February 2026 (company press release). Market narrative: while closure reduces legal uncertainty, geopolitics remain an operational risk that investors tend to discount when calibrating an AI premium for globally exposed suppliers.

What this cycle means for equipment suppliers and customers

Market narrative: A bigger TAM does not automatically deliver outsized economics to any one OEM. Verified fact: SEMI projects WFE to about $143.9 billion in 2026 and total equipment sales toward ~$156 billion in 2027 (SEMI). Inference: chipmakers will wield that buying power to secure supply, negotiate terms, and maintain multi-vendor optionality across etch, deposition and other front-end steps.

For customers, broad vendor strength is a feature, not a bug. Opinion: in an AI buildout that prizes uptime and fast ramps, dual-sourcing reduces implementation risk and keeps lead times and service quality competitive. That is healthy for the ecosystem, but it also slows the emergence of a persistent winner-take-most valuation within the equipment group.

The strongest counterargument to a capped AI premium

Market narrative: The bull case is that AI demand will outpace industry capacity for longer than expected, allowing leading OEMs to sustain high utilization, attractive mix, and operating leverage. Opinion: if the mix tilts toward the most advanced tools where fewer suppliers qualify, top vendors could command better pricing or priority allocations, keeping multiples elevated.

What would have to be true? Evidence of persistent supply constraints at advanced nodes, visible share gains versus peers in high-value steps, and a clear rebound in free cash flow conversion would all strengthen the case for a durable premium at the company level.

What would confirm or weaken this thesis

• Delivery versus guide: Whether Applied’s Q3 FY2026 revenue lands near the midpoint of $8,950 million ± $500 million, and any commentary on AI-led order visibility (company PDF).
• Cash conversion: Trajectory of non-GAAP free cash flow over the next quarters relative to record revenue levels (company PDF).
• Peer read-throughs: Lam Research’s September-quarter results versus $8.10 billion ± $400 million guidance as a proxy for shared AI demand (Lam Research).
• TAM updates and regional mix: SEMI’s next forecasts for WFE and total equipment, with attention to China, Taiwan and Korea exposure and any shift in China’s mature-node investments (SEMI).
• Regulatory landscape: Any changes in U.S. export controls that affect shipment timing or addressable markets, especially for China.
• Competitive dynamics: Signs of pricing discipline or erosion, win-rate disclosures, and margin commentary from the Big Five; persistent multi-vendor strength would support the “capped premium” view (Mordor Intelligence).

Editorial conclusion: Verified results and guidance show Applied executing well into an AI upcycle. Reasonable inference says that the same upcycle is diversified across top OEMs, while cash conversion and geopolitics restrain how high a single-vendor AI premium can run. The burden of proof now sits with sustained free cash flow, share gains, and evidence that competition cannot blunt pricing at scale.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

* This article was originally published here