Strategy Sets October 29 Date For Its Next Major Bitcoin Treasury Update

TL;DR: Strategy will report third-quarter 2026 results after US markets close on October 29 and hold a live webinar at 5 p.m. Eastern Time. The update will give investors the next full financial snapshot of the world’s largest corporate Bitcoin treasury.

The most closely watched corporate Bitcoin balance sheet has a date for its next full update.

Strategy said Thursday that it will report third-quarter 2026 financial results after US markets close on October 29, followed by a live video webinar at 5 p.m. Eastern Time.

Ordinarily, an earnings date is routine corporate housekeeping.

Strategy is no longer an ordinary corporate earnings story.

The company has built its identity around holding and financing Bitcoin at a scale no other listed operating company has matched. Its quarterly results now function as a window into how the corporate Bitcoin treasury model behaves through different market conditions.

Investors will be watching several things.

The obvious one is the size and value of Strategy‘s BTC position at the end of the quarter.

But the more important questions increasingly sit around the financing machinery used to build that position.

Strategy has used common equity, convertible debt and several classes of preferred securities to raise capital for Bitcoin purchases. That means its results are as much about capital structure as they are about the price of BTC.

The company has also promoted metrics intended to show whether its Bitcoin holdings are growing faster than the dilution required to finance them.

Those measures have become a central part of management’s argument that Strategy is not simply a passive holding vehicle.

October’s results will therefore give investors a chance to assess how the model performed during a quarter in which Bitcoin prices, funding conditions and institutional flows all moved considerably.

The call also matters beyond Strategy shareholders.

A growing number of public companies have copied parts of the Bitcoin treasury approach, often with much smaller balance sheets and less access to capital.

Strategy remains the benchmark against which those businesses are compared.

When its premium to underlying Bitcoin holdings expands, the company can often raise capital more efficiently. When that premium contracts, the economics become more challenging.

That feedback loop is one reason the quarterly balance sheet matters so much.

Michael Saylor‘s company has spent years arguing that Bitcoin can be used as the primary treasury reserve asset of a public corporation.

The market has largely moved past debating whether Strategy itself is committed to that idea.

The question is how the financial structure performs over time.

October 29 will provide the next detailed answer.

Strategy said a replay of the webinar will be available through its investor relations site shortly after the event.

For Bitcoin investors, it will be one of the few corporate earnings calls where the underlying cryptocurrency is likely to matter as much as the operating business.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/pokuBKT

BNY Expands Regulated Crypto Custody Across The European Union Under MiCA

TL;DR: BNY has expanded its Digital Asset Custody platform to selected institutional clients across the European Union under MiCA. The move follows the addition of its European banking entity to the ESMA MiCA register and gives one of the world’s largest custody banks a regulated route to hold and administer crypto assets in the region.

One of the world’s biggest traditional custody banks is extending its digital asset business deeper into Europe.

BNY announced Thursday that its Digital Asset Custody platform is now being expanded to selected institutional clients in the European Union under the Markets in Crypto-Assets framework.

The move follows the addition of The Bank of New York Mellon SA/NV, BNY’s European banking entity, to the MiCA register earlier this year.

That registration allows the bank to provide custody, administration and transfer services for crypto assets on behalf of eligible clients in the EU.

The significance is less about another bank adding a crypto feature and more about which bank is doing it.

BNY sits at the center of global asset servicing. The company reported $62.6 trillion in assets under custody or administration as of the end of June, alongside $2.2 trillion in assets under management.

When an institution of that scale adds regulated crypto custody to an existing servicing network, digital assets move closer to being handled through the same operational infrastructure as conventional securities.

BNY first launched its digital asset custody platform in 2022.

The European expansion places that system inside a much clearer regulatory framework.

MiCA has given banks and crypto companies a common set of rules for operating across participating EU markets, replacing a patchwork in which licensing and permitted services differed significantly between countries.

For large asset managers and financial institutions, that consistency matters.

A fund looking to hold Bitcoin, Ether or tokenized assets does not only need a wallet. It needs audit trails, segregation of client assets, operational controls, reporting, governance and a regulated entity responsible for the custody relationship.

Those are areas where traditional global custodians already have decades of experience.

BNY says institutional demand is moving beyond simply holding crypto.

Banks and broker-dealers are expanding digital asset and stablecoin services, while asset managers and corporate treasurers are increasingly exploring tokenized securities, digital payments and blockchain-based settlement.

Custody is the foundation beneath all of those products.

Without a regulated institution capable of safeguarding the underlying assets, many larger firms cannot participate regardless of how attractive the technology looks.

BNY’s move also increases competitive pressure on crypto-native custodians.

Specialist firms built much of the early institutional market because conventional banks were slow to support digital assets. MiCA now makes it easier for established financial institutions to enter with regulatory clarity and enormous existing client bases.

That does not mean the specialists disappear.

It does mean the dividing line between traditional custody and crypto custody is becoming less useful.

For BNY’s European clients, digital assets are increasingly being offered as another asset class inside an infrastructure relationship they already understand.

That may be a less dramatic story than a new token launch.

For institutional adoption, it is probably more important.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/GKpyiUh

Bitcoin ETFs Bleed $484.9 Million As BlackRock Leads A Broad Day Of Outflows

TL;DR: US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $484.9 million in net outflows on October 7, according to Farside Investors. BlackRock’s IBIT led the withdrawals with $207.7 million leaving the fund, while Fidelity and ARK also posted nine-figure outflows.

A day after Bitcoin ETF inflows appeared to recover, institutional money moved sharply in the other direction.

US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds recorded $484.9 million in combined net outflows on October 7, according to updated data from Farside Investors.

The redemptions were broad rather than concentrated in one legacy product.

BlackRock‘s IBIT, normally the strongest source of positive flow in the group, lost $207.7 million.

Fidelity’s FBTC recorded another $105.1 million of net outflows, while ARK’s ARKB lost $101.7 million.

Bitwise’s BITB posted $27.6 million of outflows, Grayscale‘s GBTC lost $39.3 million and VanEck’s HODL shed $3.5 million.

The scale of the reversal stands out because the group had recorded $118.8 million of net inflows just one session earlier.

BlackRock itself had taken in $122 million on October 6 before becoming the biggest source of redemptions the following day.

That is a useful reminder of how quickly ETF flows can change.

Large creations and redemptions do not necessarily represent a permanent institutional view on Bitcoin. Funds are used for tactical trades, portfolio rebalancing, arbitrage and longer-term exposure, all of which can produce significant daily swings.

Still, nearly half a billion dollars leaving the products in one session is difficult to ignore.

The composition matters.

GBTC was once routinely responsible for most of the sector’s negative flow as investors exited the higher-fee legacy trust after its conversion to an ETF.

October 7 looked different.

The largest withdrawals came from products run by BlackRock, Fidelity and ARK, indicating that the selling pressure reached funds that have historically attracted substantial new capital.

Bitcoin was trading in a more difficult macro environment at the same time, with risk assets under pressure and investors watching interest rates, energy prices and geopolitical developments.

ETF flows cannot prove why a market moved, but they offer a direct view into how one of Bitcoin’s largest regulated investment channels is behaving.

That channel has become increasingly important since spot products opened the market to investors who do not want to hold BTC directly.

One bad session does not break that structural story.

But October 7 was not a marginal pullback either.

For the first time in several sessions, the strongest message from the ETF market was not accumulation.

It was risk coming off.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/hdETnYH

Polygon Opens Its Money Stack To TRON’s $94 Billion USDT Market

TL;DR: Polygon Open Money Stack now supports TRON, giving payment and fintech businesses a single infrastructure layer for bank transfers, wallets, cross-chain routing and payouts involving TRC-20 USDT. Polygon says more than $94 billion of USDT currently circulates on TRON.

Polygon has spent much of 2026 trying to turn its Open Money Stack into infrastructure for moving real money rather than just crypto between wallets.

Its latest integration goes straight to one of the largest pools of stablecoin liquidity in the world.

Polygon Labs announced Thursday that Open Money Stack now supports TRON, allowing businesses to accept, hold, route and pay out USDT on the network while connecting those flows to fiat banking rails and other blockchains.

The attraction is obvious.

Polygon says TRON carries more than $94 billion in circulating USDT, representing more than half of the stablecoin’s supply across supported chains.

That liquidity is already heavily used in remittances, exchange transfers and dollar-based payments in markets where access to traditional banking can be expensive or slow.

Open Money Stack is designed to sit around that activity.

A business can give a customer a persistent TRON deposit address, accept USDT, hold the balance through an appropriate wallet model, route assets to other chains when required and eventually pay money out to a bank account, card, cash pickup location or another wallet.

The important part is that the customer does not necessarily have to see any of the cross-chain plumbing.

Polygon Trails can route assets between TRON and EVM networks so, for example, one side of a transaction can begin with USDT on TRON and the other can settle in a different supported stablecoin elsewhere.

That is very different from asking the user to find a bridge and move the funds themselves.

The integration also says something about Polygon’s strategy.

Rather than insisting that payment activity must happen on Polygon’s own chain, Open Money Stack is increasingly being presented as an orchestration layer that can work around whichever network customers already use.

TRON is a particularly strong test of that approach because many users are not choosing it for ideological reasons. They use it because USDT liquidity and payment habits already exist there.

For a remittance business, forcing those customers to migrate to another blockchain would add friction for little benefit.

Polygon’s answer is to let TRON remain the balance layer while its own software handles the surrounding services.

That could make the Open Money Stack business more valuable even when the end user never knows Polygon is involved.

Stablecoin competition is therefore moving beyond which network has the most supply.

The next battle is over the infrastructure connecting those balances to bank accounts, businesses and other chains.

TRON already has the dollars.

Polygon now wants to provide more of the machinery around them.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/hk1K0FN

Winklevoss Zcash ETF Filing Brings Privacy Coin Exposure To Nasdaq

TL;DR: Winklevoss Asset Services has filed an S-1 with the SEC for the Winklevoss Zcash ETF, a proposed Nasdaq-listed product designed to hold ZEC directly. The preliminary prospectus sets a 0.25% sponsor fee, while Winklevoss Capital has indicated nonbinding interest in purchasing up to $100 million of shares.

Zcash has entered the US crypto ETF race.

A new registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission proposes the launch of the Winklevoss Zcash ETF, an exchange-traded product designed to give investors exposure to ZEC held directly by the trust.

The shares are expected to trade on Nasdaq under the ticker WINK if the product clears the regulatory process and becomes effective.

The filing immediately makes the proposed fund one of the more unusual additions to the widening US crypto ETF market.

Bitcoin and Ethereum established the first major spot products, but issuers have increasingly pushed into individual altcoins and staking assets.

Zcash brings a different regulatory conversation with it because privacy sits at the center of the network’s design.

According to the prospectus, the trust’s objective is straightforward: hold ZEC and provide exposure to its price, minus the fund’s operating expenses and other liabilities.

The proposed sponsor fee is 0.25% annually.

The document also discloses a potentially substantial source of early demand.

Winklevoss Capital Fund, through one or more affiliates, has indicated an interest in purchasing as much as $100 million worth of shares.

That indication is explicitly nonbinding.

The fund could ultimately buy more, less or nothing at all, so it should not be treated as committed seed capital. But its inclusion gives some idea of the scale at which the sponsors may be thinking about the product.

The filing also makes clear that SEC registration is not the same thing as approval.

The preliminary prospectus can be amended, and the securities cannot be sold until the registration statement becomes effective.

Still, the filing matters for Zcash.

An exchange-traded vehicle would place direct ZEC exposure inside the same brokerage infrastructure increasingly used for other digital assets.

It would also force regulators and market infrastructure providers to engage more directly with the practical questions surrounding a privacy-focused cryptocurrency inside a regulated investment product.

That may ultimately be the more significant part of the application.

The crypto ETF market is no longer only expanding by adding more assets.

It is beginning to test how far the traditional fund structure can stretch across very different kinds of blockchain networks.

Zcash is now part of that test.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/RtwrLeN

Ethereum ETFs Lose $201.9 Million As Bitcoin Funds Return To Inflows

TL;DR: US spot Ethereum ETFs recorded $201.9 million in net outflows on October 6, according to Farside Investors. Bitcoin ETFs moved the other way with roughly $118.8 million of net inflows, creating a sharp one-day divergence between institutional flows into the two largest crypto assets.

Ethereum’s US spot ETFs just suffered their heaviest day of withdrawals in weeks.

Data from Farside Investors shows the group recorded $201.9 million in net outflows on October 6, extending a difficult start to the month for Ether investment products.

The entire daily outflow shown by Farside came from BlackRock’s ETHA, while the other tracked products recorded no net movement for the session.

The size of the withdrawal stands out on its own.

But the contrast with Bitcoin makes the session more notable.

US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded approximately $118.8 million in net inflows on the same day, with BlackRock’s IBIT accounting for $122 million of positive flow before smaller movements elsewhere in the group.

That left the market with a clear divergence: investors were adding money to Bitcoin products while pulling more than $200 million from Ethereum funds.

A single day of ETF flows should not be treated as a referendum on either asset.

Institutional products regularly experience large creations and redemptions for reasons ranging from portfolio rebalancing to short-term trading strategies.

But the October 6 numbers sit inside a broader run of negative Ethereum ETF sessions.

Farside recorded $55.4 million of ETH ETF outflows on October 1, $37.4 million on October 2 and another $50.8 million on October 5 before the much larger October 6 withdrawal.

That makes the latest session harder to dismiss as an isolated print.

ETF flows matter because the products have become one of the cleanest gauges of demand from investors who want crypto exposure through traditional brokerage and asset-management channels.

For Bitcoin, that channel has repeatedly attracted substantial capital.

Ethereum’s products have also accumulated meaningful assets, but their flow profile has at times been less consistent.

The question now is whether the October withdrawals represent a temporary repositioning or the beginning of a more persistent gap between institutional demand for BTC and ETH.

The next few sessions should make that clearer.

For now, however, the message from October 6 is unusually clean.

Bitcoin ETF investors were buying.

Ethereum ETF investors were heading for the exits.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/nlYm72h

Ethereum Tests 200 Million Gas Limit On Sepolia As Glamsterdam Moves Forward

TL;DR: Ethereum’s Sepolia testnet is testing a 200 million block gas limit as part of work around the Glamsterdam upgrade. The experiment is more than three times Sepolia’s previous 60 million target and is intended to show how clients and validators behave under much heavier Layer 1 execution loads.

Ethereum developers have pushed Sepolia into a significantly more aggressive scaling test.

The testnet is now being used to evaluate a 200 million block gas limit alongside work associated with the Glamsterdam upgrade, giving developers a chance to observe how Ethereum’s infrastructure behaves when individual blocks are allowed to carry far more computation.

Sepolia had previously been operating around a 60 million gas target.

Moving to 200 million does not mean Ethereum mainnet is about to receive the same limit.

It is an experiment.

That distinction matters because increasing the gas limit can increase the amount of activity Ethereum processes directly on Layer 1, but it also raises the demands placed on nodes and validators.

Larger blocks can create heavier execution loads, increase state growth and expose bottlenecks that are less visible at lower capacity.

Sepolia gives developers somewhere to find those problems before similar changes are considered for mainnet.

The latest testing is taking place alongside Glamsterdam-related development, including work on Enshrined Proposer-Builder Separation and Block-Level Access Lists.

Both are aimed at deeper changes to how Ethereum constructs and processes blocks.

Block-Level Access Lists, in particular, are designed to make it easier for clients to understand which pieces of state a block will touch. That has implications for parallel execution, where different parts of a block can potentially be processed more efficiently rather than every operation being treated as a strictly sequential workload.

Client software has also had to adapt.

Prysm released an updated version containing validator parameters for the higher Sepolia gas target ahead of the test.

The 200 million figure is therefore best viewed as a stress test rather than a promise.

Ethereum’s recent scaling strategy has increasingly involved improving Layer 1 capacity while continuing to rely on rollups for a large part of user-facing transaction growth.

Those two approaches are not mutually exclusive.

A stronger base layer can give rollups more room to settle activity while also making direct Ethereum transactions less constrained.

What developers need to establish is how far they can push that capacity without compromising network stability or making hardware requirements unreasonable.

Sepolia is now helping answer that question at 200 million gas.

If the network handles the experiment cleanly, it gives Ethereum developers more evidence for how aggressively Layer 1 throughput can be increased in future upgrades.

from NewsBTC https://ift.tt/Sn2BQcd