Fidelity Investments told the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on Friday that it should continue to develop the regulatory framework for broker-dealers to offer, custody and trade crypto assets on alternative trading systems (ATS).
The letter from the US’ third-largest asset manager was in reply to a call for comments earlier this month by the regulator’s Crypto Task Force.
Fidelity said it is “critical” for the SEC to develop a comprehensive regulatory framework and clear rules of the road for tokenized securities trading, including rules for trading tokenized securities issued by third parties.
Fidelity Investments’ letter to the SEC requesting more information on alternative trading system rules. Source: Fidelity Investments
Tokenized instruments have different issuance structures, legalities, and valuation models, the letter said. For example, tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) span entirely different asset classes like equities, real estate, bonds, or private credit.
“Tokenization models vary significantly in structure and in the rights afforded to holders,” the letter said. The company explained:
“In some models, the crypto asset represents a holder’s indirect interest in the underlying security through a securities entitlement, while in others, the crypto asset may constitute a securities‑based swap, which may be offered only to eligible contract participants.”
Fidelity also urged the SEC to bridge the regulatory gap between centralized and decentralized trading systems to “consider how intermediated and disintermediated trading venues can evolve and coexist,” the company’s general counsel, Roberto Braceras, wrote.
Differences between centralized and decentralized crypto exchanges. Source: Cointelegraph
This includes overhauling existing reporting rules to reflect that decentralized finance (DeFi) trading platforms and other “disintermediated” systems cannot produce the detailed financial reporting required by the SEC because there is no central authority.
Additionally, Fidelity recommended that the SEC issue guidance permitting broker‑dealers to use distributed ledger technology for ATS and other recordkeeping purposes.
Overhauling reporting requirements to reflect this technological reality removes “undue burden” from decentralized systems, the letter said.
The Securities and Exchange Commission, under the leadership of Chairman Paul Atkins, has repeatedly signaled support for 24/7 capital markets and has given the regulatory approval for financial companies to experiment with tokenized trading.
Related: SEC interpretation on crypto laws ‘a beginning, not an end,’ says Atkins
US regulators say tokenized securities are subject to the same capital rules as underlying assets
Tokenized securities, which include equities, debt instruments, real estate investment trusts (REITs) and other securitized assets, are subject to the same banking capital requirements as the underlying assets they hold.
This view was shared in a joint policy statement published in March from the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).
“The technologies used to issue and transact in a security do not generally impact its capital treatment,” according to the agencies.
Magazine: When privacy and AML laws conflict: Crypto projects’ impossible choice
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
The first couple of months of 2026 have forced the Ethereum community into a kind of introspection—one that goes beyond price, beyond technical upgrades, and into the question of what the network is actually trying to be.
Even before this year, there has been a sense among builders and executives that Ethereum was on the verge of another growth phase—this time driven not by crypto-native users but by institutions and technology. Neobanks, as some argued, would quietly onboard millions by abstracting away the complexity of wallets and gas fees. Ethereum, in this framing, wouldn’t need to win users directly. It would sit beneath the interface, powering a new financial stack that, on the surface, looked nothing like crypto.
It was a continuation of a long-running thesis: that Ethereum’s success would come from invisibility.
That vision has been shaped in part by years of previous upgrades aimed at improving user experience and reducing costs. Changes like “proto-danksharding”, introduced in the Dencun upgrade, significantly lowered fees for layer 2 networks by increasing data downloads for transactions, while ongoing improvements to the base layer have made transactions more efficient.
While the price of the network’s ether (ETH) token has been determined by market forces, these upgrades have, together, helped move Ethereum closer to a model where users interact with applications without needing to understand the underlying infrastructure.
But that narrative began to change a few weeks into the year, refocusing on the core roadmap.
The L2 debate
Earlier this year, the co-founder of the network, Vitalik Buterin, delivered a sharp reality check to the broader ecosystem: “You are not scaling Ethereum.”
The comment cut through what had, until then, been a largely celebratory conversation around rollups. These types of networks, also known as layer-2 (L2) networks, process transactions off Ethereum and then bundle them back onto the main chain to make it faster and cheaper. Layer-2 networks have exploded over the last few years, transaction fees have come down, and activity has spread—but the deeper question was whether any of this amounted to coherent scaling.
Buterin’s argument went further than a general critique of progress. In his view, many of today’s layer 2 designs are drifting away from Ethereum’s core model: relying on centralized components and siloed environments that don’t fully inherit the guarantees of the base chain. The concern wasn’t that L2s exist, but that in their current form, they may not be delivering the kind of scaling Ethereum was meant to achieve.
His critique highlighted a growing unease.
Fragmentation across L2s, inconsistent security assumptions, and reliance on centralized components were beginning to look less like temporary trade-offs and more like structural risks. Ethereum, in trying to scale outward, risked losing the very properties that made it valuable in the first place—its strong security, decentralization, and role as a shared, neutral settlement layer where applications and liquidity can seamlessly interoperate.
L2 teams, for their part, didn’t push back so much as recalibrate. Some acknowledged the critique and leaned into a future where rollups differentiate through specialization: privacy, consumer apps, or unique execution environments, rather than simply acting as cheaper Ethereum. Others defended their role more forcefully, arguing that high-throughput environments are still essential.
Ethereum’s base layer, meanwhile, has made incremental progress on its own. Recent upgrades, such as December’s Fusaka hard fork, increased data capacity and efficiency on the main network, allowing more transactions to be processed while lowering costs. Although that spike in transactions came under scrutiny recently, with some calling them ‘address poisoning’ scams.
Ethereum’s daily transaction spike (Etherscan.io)
What this tense episode established for Ethereum is that the path forward needs a delicate balance between the base layer’s structural upgrades and a new breed of specialized rollups that can grow the ecosystem without breaking its foundational security.
This could also lead to consolidation among the layer 2 networks, according to 21shares. “The year ahead is likely to mark Ethereum’s L2 consolidation: a leaner, more resilient layer anchored by ETH-aligned, exchange-backed, and high-performance networks,” the firm said in a research report.
The quantum threat
At the same time, another issue—long discussed but rarely urgent—suddenly moved up the priority list: Quantum Computing.
The Ethereum Foundation signaled a shift in posture, elevating efforts like ‘LeanVM’ and post-quantum signature schemes. What had once been treated as a distant, almost academic concern was now being folded into near-term planning.
The implication was hard to ignore: the network is no longer just building for the next cycle, but for threats that could fundamentally break its cryptographic assumptions. The foundation has signaled it is taking that risk seriously, establishing dedicated research efforts focused specifically on post-quantum security.
Vitalik Buterin also outlined a roadmap to protect the blockchain from the long-term risks posed by quantum computers
The internal shuffle
If scaling exposed cracks in Ethereum’s present, quantum risk cast a shadow over its future, and it seemed that the network was taking the threat seriously.
Then came changes from within.
The departure of Tomasz Stańczak as co-executive director of the Ethereum Foundation marked more than a leadership reshuffle. At a moment when the network is facing technical, strategic, and philosophical reevaluations all at once, even subtle shifts at the top can signal a broader recalibration.
The move also came as something of a surprise.
The foundation is not known for abrupt shifts, and Stańczak had only stepped into the role about a year earlier, following the long-standing tenure of Aya Miyaguchi. In an ecosystem that tends to favor continuity, the rapid turnover hinted at a deeper internal recalibration underway, as the foundation reassesses its priorities amid growing demands for scaling, security, and Ethereum’s potential role in new frontiers such as artificial intelligence (AI).
‘Trust layer’
And AI, a topic that has become impossible to ignore, not just for crypto but for every industry, began to shape a separate line of thinking for the network.
Buterin outlined how Ethereum could play a foundational role in the future of artificial intelligence. The vision extends beyond payments or DeFi—into a world where Ethereum acts as a coordination layer for decentralized AI systems, enabling verifiable outputs, trust-minimized data sharing, and machine-to-machine economic activity.
That push didn’t emerge overnight.
Early last year, the foundation spun up a dedicated decentralized AI research unit (dAI) exploring how the network could support autonomous agents and machine-to-machine economies. What felt experimental at the time has since accelerated into something more deliberate in 2026, with the foundation increasingly framing Ethereum as a potential “trust layer” for AI: a system for verifying outputs, coordinating agents, and anchoring a rapidly evolving ecosystem that, until now, has been largely controlled by centralized players.
All of this is an ambitious expansion of scope, placing Ethereum at the intersection of two of the most consequential technologies today.
But overall, the first three months of the year suggest that Ethereum no longer has the luxury of tackling these questions in isolation; rather, they are converging.
What emerges is a network being pulled in multiple directions, each one with its own sense of urgency, and a balancing act is becoming harder to ignore. And unlike previous cycles, where narratives could shift as quickly as prices, the issues now feel deeper, less about momentum, and more about structure.
These tensions are unlikely to be resolved anytime soon and will continue to shape Ethereum’s trajectory in the months ahead.
In the immediate term, however, the focus remains on scaling the base layer, with the upcoming Glamsterdam upgrade, slated for this year, expected to accelerate that effort. The upgrade will likely become a litmus test for the network’s ability to solve issues that can successfully shift Ethereum into a robust, quantum-secure “trust layer” capable of anchoring the global AI economy.
Read more: Ethereum’s ‘Glamsterdam’ upgrade aims to fix MEV fairness
Shin Hung-song has left his Bank for International Settlements role.
South Korean tech firms await green light to launch stablecoins.
Shin has warned South Korean stablecoins may spark capital outflow.
South Korea’s incoming central bank chief is a crypto-sceptic who could derail industry leaders’ and lawmakers’ hopes of launching won-pegged stablecoins.
So say media outlets in the East Asian nation, after President Lee Jae-myung nominated the Bank for International Settlements’ Monetary Economy Bureau chief Shin Hung-song for the governorship of the Bank of Korea on March 22.
“Won-denominated stablecoins are a shortcut to effectively neutralising existing foreign exchange regulations,” Shin said in August, South Korean news agency Yonhap reported. “By exchanging stablecoins for dollar-denominated cryptocurrencies on blockchain protocols, [South Korea] could open a channel for capital outflow.”
Some of South Korea’s biggest, stablecoin-keen firms have been left in the lurch for months as government officials talk up imminent stablecoin legislative developments.
Pre-election promises
Shin “will step back from his duties with immediate effect” following his selection as BOK nominee, the BIS wrote in a statement.
Observers are waiting to see if Shin will change his tune on stablecoins after taking the helm at the BOK, Yonhap wrote.
Lee made won-pegged stablecoin issuance a key manifesto issue ahead of his election last year. But so far, the BOK has resolutely stood in the way of his governing party’s attempts to launch legislation.
Unnamed industry insiders said it was “a matter of great interest” to see what stance he would take on stablecoins.
A BIS report, published last year, warned that “stablecoins do not fulfil the role of stable currency.”
“Due to a lack of regulation, they could pose risks to financial stability and monetary sovereignty,” the report’s authors wrote.
South Korea’s top tech firms want to issue won-denominated coins to help them boost cross-border trade.
But the BOK says that allowing them to do so could undermine its efforts to control fiscal policy.
Crypto market movers
Bitcoin is trading at $68,306 on Sunday, down by over 3% in the past 24 hours.
Ethereum prices have fallen to $2,073 in the past day, a 24-hour drop of almost 4%.
What we’re reading
Tim Alper is a News Correspondent at DL News. Got a tip? Email him at tdalper@dlnews.com.
Strategy (MSTR), the leading corporate holder of bitcoin, has described the launch of its Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock (STRC) as the firm’s “iPhone moment,” and despite its support in BTC accumulation, risks remain.
Before digging into these risks, it’s worth noting that while the focus is on STRC, specifically over its larger liquidity and adoption, they also apply to similar preferred offerings, including another bitcoin treasury company, Strive’s preferred offering, SATA.
These instruments are “not well understood through the lens of traditional credit or equity,” and instead require a different analytical framework, said NYDIG’s Global Head of Research Greg Cipolaro in a note.
By design, STRC targets a steady $100 share price, using a variable monthly dividend to keep trading near that level. The approach has already supported multi-billion dollar issuance and the acquisition of more than 50,000 bitcoin, according to STRC.live data.
At its core, STRC works by adjusting yield to steer price. If shares trade above $100, the company can trim the dividend to cool demand. If shares fall below that level, it can raise dividends to attract buyers. Keeping the price anchored lets the firm issue new shares near par, bringing in capital that is then deployed to buy bitcoin.
The novel financial instrument has been a success so far. Not only has it allowed Strategy to buy more than $3.5 billion worth of bitcoin, but it has also attracted institutions that have added STRC to their balance sheets.
In practice, the product resembles a money market fund with a floating yield of 11.5%, far above U.S. Treasuries. The appeal hinges on the steady $100 price tag coupled with high yields.
When conditions are favorable, NYDIG’s Cipolaro wrote, the mechanism creates a powerful feedback loop. The loop, in which STRC trades near par, enables the firm to raise capital, deploy proceeds to buy more bitcoin, expand the asset base, and sustain investor confidence. That confidence sustains additional issuance.
“As long as preferreds remain anchored near par, equity trades above the NAV, and capital markets stay open, the flywheel drives ongoing bitcoin demand,” Cipolaro wrote in the note.
Still, not everything’s rosy.
BitMEX Research has written in a note titled “A bit of Stretch” that it sees the risks related to the product as “substantially greater than those related to short duration U.S. treasuries.”
Where the risks actually sit
Bullish investors often point out that STRC is well-capitalized and could easily cover dividend payments, given Strategy’s massive 761,068 BTC war chest and more than $2.2 billion in cash reserves. That’s around 50 years of covered dividend payments, while the company can still lower STRC’s dividend over time to further the coverage. On top of that, there are monetization options for the company’s massive bitcoin stash, which could further dividend payments.
The risks, however, aren’t based on dividend coverage at all, according to NYDIG’s Cipolaro.
“The appropriate way to assess risk in STRC and SATA is through the lens of governance and subordination rather than focusing solely on payment risk,” he wrote.
The mechanism STRC uses also creates a stress path. If bitcoin drops and confidence in Strategy’s balance sheet weakens, STRC could slip below par.
To defend the price, the company would need to raise the dividend. Higher payouts increase cash obligations, which can, in turn, worry investors and push the price lower. That feedback loop is a familiar one in credit markets.
In a standard corporate setting, that cycle can end in forced asset sales. Companies may have to sell core holdings to meet rising obligations, locking in losses at the worst time. For Strategy, that would mean selling BTC into a falling market. However, Strategy’s Michael Saylor has repeatedly said he won’t sell the company’s bitcoin stack.
The STRC terms, however, give the company another option. The target price is not a binding promise. If conditions turn, Strategy can reduce the dividend rather than increase it.
According to BitMEX Research’s reading of the SEC filings related to STRC, Strategy can “at its absolute discretion, lower the dividend rate by up to 25 bps a month, no matter what else is happening.”
Unpaid dividends can, in addition, accrue without triggering default or forcing asset sales. As BitMEX Research put it, instruments like these were “written by the company for the company.”
Read more: Strategy’s latest massive bitcoin purchase offers insight into its evolving funding model
Built to bend, not break
That flexibility shifts what would happen to STRC in cases of a crisis.
Instead of a company caught in a squeeze, the pressure moves to the security holders. If the dividend is reduced, the yield becomes less attractive, and the market price can fall to reflect the new reality.
NYDIG’s Cipolaro made it clear in his note that the structure “can remain solvent while still delivering suboptimal outcomes for preferred holders due to the loss of confidence and funding access.” The risk isn’t a default on its dividend, but rather the loss of its attractiveness.
Strategy’s legacy software business does not cover those payments on its own. The model depends on continued issuance or balance sheet management tied to its bitcoin holdings.
The binding constraint is not income generation, but the combination of continued access to capital markets and sufficient asset coverage,” NYDIG’s Cipolaro wrote. The setup invites comparisons to structures that rely on new inflows to support payouts.
The difference here is that payouts are not fixed. If demand slows, the company can lower the dividend instead of maintaining a rate it cannot sustain. That feature helps protect the issuer but weakens the claim for investors seeking stability and income.
“When the music stops, if things become challenging for MSTR, instead of selling bitcoin, MSTR could just abandon the narrative that STRC is targeting stability,” BitMEX Research wrote. “This feels very favourable for MSTR and the dividend payments are therefore quite sustainable and affordable, in our view.”
Breaking the mechanism
Market impact will depend on how long the $100 anchor holds.
As long as demand for yield products remains strong and bitcoin sentiment is supportive, STRC can keep channeling funds into the company’s treasury strategy.
That, in turn, reinforces Strategy’s position as a major public holder of bitcoin. NYDIG has shown that bitcoin’s price stability is what enables the economic viability of at-the-market issuance of these products.
STRC and Striv’es SATA have seen their prices drop below par during periods of sharp bitcoin price declines, the firm’s research found. When that happens, “issuance becomes uneconomic, limiting the ability to raise capital and slowing the flywheel.”
(NYDIG)
The risk shows up when conditions change. A prolonged drop in BTC’s price or a shift in rates could test the price mechanism. If the dividend is cut to preserve cash, STRC could trade well below par. Losses would be borne by investors who treated the shares as a near-cash substitute.
“It resembles being short a put on bitcoin asset coverage, earning yield in exchange for bearing downside risk if bitcoin declines and erodes the asset cushion,” NYDIG offered as a frame for institutional investors. “Unlike a standard option, however, there is no fixed strike or maturity, and outcomes are path-dependent and shaped by management discretion.”
The broader significance is the template itself.
STRC blends equity features with bond-like behavior and a built-in adjustment lever. It offers a new path for companies to raise capital tied to volatile assets without locking in fixed obligations.
For now, these instruments have done their job: attract capital and support further bitcoin accumulation. The open question is how it behaves under stress and who absorbs the cost when the trade no longer looks stable.
The interpretation of that scenario isn’t great, but not for MSTR, “it’s the investors who may feel somewhat aggrieved when the music stops,” BitMEX concluded.
Read more: Strategy’s credit risk falls as preferred equity value surpasses convertible debt
Resolv Labs moved Sunday to reassure users after an exploit hit the issuance mechanics of its USR stablecoin, knocking the token off its dollar peg and prompting decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols with exposure to move quickly to contain any fallout.
Cointelegraph reported earlier Sunday that an attacker exploited USR’s minting mechanics, creating tens of millions of unbacked tokens and dumping them through DeFi pools, which broke the stablecoin’s peg and prompted Resolv to pause protocol functions as it assessed the damage.
The token dropped as low as $0.14 (86% below its intended $1 price) after the exploit before rebounding to $0.42 at the time of writing, according to data from CoinGecko.
In a recent statement on X, the Resolv team said that the collateral pool “remains fully intact,” and that the problem appears “isolated to USR issuance mechanics.” Containment and impact assessment remain ongoing.
Onchain data from Arkham, corroborated by Web3 security firm Cyvers, showed that the attacker had converted most of the minted USR into Ether (ETH), selling part of the haul for about 11,400 ETH (around $24 million). Independent analysts also noted that the remaining 36.74 million USR was “still being continuously dumped.”
USR dropped 86% off its peg. Source. CoinGecko
Michael Pearl, vice president GTM and strategy at Cyvers, told Cointelegraph that since the supply had inflated faster than the market could absorb and the token had immediately depegged, the value of the remaining tokens was significantly impaired.
Decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols with exposure to Resolv raced to clarify their positions. Liquid staking provider Lido said that Lido Earn user funds were safe. Morpho cofounder Merlin Egalite emphasized that the lending protocol’s own contracts were unaffected and that only certain vaults had exposure, and Aave’s founder, Stani Kulechov, said that the platform had no direct USR exposure and that Resolv was repaying its outstanding debt.
The X account “yieldsandmore” pointed to potential losses in Resolv’s junior RLP tranche, highlighting possible knock-on effects for yield platforms such as Stream and yoUSD that used RLP as collateral.
Pearl told Cointelegraph that, based on available data, the exposure appeared to be “relatively concentrated” in lending markets and leverage loops “rather than system-wide,” and primarily in protocols that integrated USR, wstUSR, or RLP into lending, leverage or yield strategies.
Related:Hacked crypto tokens drop 61% on average and rarely recover, Immunefi report says
He said that several protocols, such as Euler, Venus, Lista and Fluid, had taken precautionary actions such as pausing markets or isolating vaults, while others had declared no exposure at all. “It is more accurate to describe the risk as concentrated with localized spillover, rather than widespread contagion,” he said.
Ledger chief technical officer Charles Guillemet also assessed the fallout on X, stating that, due to the relatively small size of USR, “this is not a Terra Luna-type event.”
Questions around limitations of security audits
Resolv’s smart contracts have undergone multiple audits since 2024, but Pearl said that, while audits were “necessary,” they were also “inherently static and scoped.” Real-time, artificial intelligence-powered monitoring to “continuously analyze protocol activity” was needed, he argued, to detect anomalies as they emerge.
For stablecoin systems specifically, he said that meant monitoring mint and burn flows against expected behavior in real time, continuously validating supply against reserves and backing assets, and detecting anomalies in oracle inputs, pricing and liquidity conditions.
Security firm Pashov, which audited Resolv’s staking module in July 2025, told Cointelegraph that Resolv’s design was “good,” and that the root cause was “not the design so much as the private key compromise,” which was likely an operational security flaw. “We have to understand how that happens,” he said.
Cointelegraph reached out to Resolv Labs for comment but had not received a response by publication.
AI Eye: IronClaw rivals OpenClaw, Olas launches bots for Polymarket
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
Gold is approaching a technical bear market, down nearly 20% from its January all time high. Traditionally viewed as a store of value and hedge against geopolitical uncertainty, gold’s recent performance challenges that narrative. Despite escalating tensions in the Middle East, prices have fallen around 10%, since the war started at the end of February.
Markets have also repriced the interest rate outlook, with cuts now largely pushed out and policy expected to remain restrictive through December 2026. At the same time, rising oil prices, driven by geopolitical risk, are adding upward pressure on inflation, reinforcing the higher for longer rate environment, a key headwind for gold.
While adjusting for M2 money supply, which includes cash, deposits, and other liquid forms of money, gold is trading near levels seen at major historical peaks in 1974 and 2011, when it was $200 and $1,800 per ounce, respectively. On this basis, gold appears to be consolidating at elevated levels, potentially forming a cyclical floor relative to global liquidity.
In contrast, bitcoin relative to M2 remains in a consolidation phase similar to 2024, while retesting its 2021 highs on a liquidity adjusted basis. Historically, each cycle has seen bitcoin move above prior peaks when adjusted for money supply. With bitcoin still about 40% below its October high, this may represent a typical consolidation range before further upside.
Gold has traded alongside bitcoin tick for tick since it broke down from $5,000 on Wednesday, showing elements of positive correlation after diverging from the crypto markets prior.
In recent months, rising geopolitical instability has led European policymakers, central banks, and market participants to increasingly view payment networks as critical infrastructure that must be managed locally. As some European officials openly advocate for the preferential treatment of homegrown or national solutions, Kelly Devine, president of Mastercard Europe, has formally set out the company’s position on the sovereignty debate.
Kelly Devine, president, Europe at Mastercard
Devine stated that regardless of where one stands in the debate, the facts should be clear: a European payment network already exists today operating for Europe’s benefit, and that network is Mastercard.
“We are not an external provider, but a local partner with a distinctly global reach and scale,” Devine asserted, noting the company’s long history in the region, from its roots running Eurocard to pioneering chip-and-PIN technology. Today, Mastercard employs thousands of people across the continent, including nearly 2,000 staff at its Dublin technology hub and a dedicated European Cyber Resilience Centre at its Waterloo, Belgium headquarters.
To solidify this stance, Mastercard has outlined five core principles that currently guide its approach to the continent:
1. Stability: We connect, you control Acknowledging that payments are critical infrastructure where stability is non-negotiable, Mastercard highlighted the €3 trillion in cardholder activity processed on its branded cards in Europe last year. To bolster local resilience, the firm recently announced a €250million investment in new data centres in France. In the second half of 2026, more European payments will be authorised locally through these new facilities, marking a significant step towards reinforcing Europe’s ability to rely on always-on, local infrastructure.
2. Standards: We uphold, you govern With over 980 million Mastercard-branded cards circulating in Europe, the company emphasized its commitment to the continent’s stringent regulatory frameworks regarding consumer protection, competition, AI governance, and data privacy. As a designated Systemically Important Payment System in the EU, Mastercard pledged to challenge in court any unwarranted attempts to disrupt the security, confidentiality, and integrity of its payments ecosystem.
3. Security: We protect, you prosper Mastercard stated that fraud prevention, cyber resilience, and data protection are built into its network by design. The firm is currently pioneering AI-powered cybersecurity technologies, noting that one of its solutions has successfully prevented nearly €9 billion in fraud across Europe to date.
4. Seamlessness: We innovate, you engage Recognising the open nature of Europe’s economy, Devine noted that payments must support Europeans who travel extensively and trade across borders daily. The company highlighted its role in the region’s digital transition, noting that Europe is currently leading globally in the shift away from manual online card entry, while almost nine in ten in-person transactions across the continent are now fully contactless.
5. Success: We invest, you grow Finally, Mastercard reaffirmed its commitment to delivering tangible economic outcomes through continuous investment in European technologies, talent, and partnerships. Through established initiatives like Start Path and Mastercard Strive Europe, the firm actively works alongside local banks, fintechs, and SMEs to help them scale and mature their capabilities.
Ultimately, Devine concluded that Europe’s payments future will not be shaped by a single organisation, technology, or policy choice, but rather through shared responsibility and sustained collaboration.
Resolv’s USR stablecoin depegged following an apparent smart contract exploit on Sunday that allowed an attacker to mint 80 million USR tokens and dump them across decentralized exchanges, as noted by onchain analysts Ai Yi (@ai_9684xtpa) and PeckShield.
.@ResolvLabs It seems multiple large amounts of $USR have been minted. Stay alert!
USR was rapidly destabilized, dropping to as low as $0.2 before recovering to around $0.8, according to CoinGecko.
In a statement, Resolv Labs, the core developer of the Resolv Protocol, said they had temporarily halted operations following the exploit. The team is investigating and taking steps to contain the situation.
Resolv has experienced an exploit that allowed the attackers to mint 50mn of unbacked USR.
The team has currently paused all the protocol functions to prevent further malicious actions and is actively working on recovery.
USR is a 1:1 dollar-pegged stablecoin built by Resolv to operate entirely on-chain. Rather than holding fiat reserves, it maintains its value using over-collateralized crypto assets such as ETH, staked Ethereum, and Bitcoin.
RESOLV, the protocol’s native token used for governance and value capture, dropped 6% to $0.054 on the news.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Vivian Nguyen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Resolv Labs halted its decentralized finance ( DeFi) protocol early Sunday morning after an exploit allowed an attacker to mint tens of millions of unbacked USR stablecoins, sending the token sharply off its dollar peg. What Caused the Resolv Labs Hack and USR Depeg? The incident struck the Resolv DeFi platform, which offers yield strategies […]
Global issuer-processor Paymentology has officially partnered with Chikwama Pay to launch Africa’s first WhatsApp-enabled neo-bank.
The strategic collaboration aims to bring secure, seamless, and highly affordable borderless financial services to millions of underserved individuals across the Southern African Development Community (SADC). By delivering banking infrastructure directly through WhatsApp, the initiative bypasses the need for users to download a separate banking application.
While approximately 350 million adults across sub-Saharan Africa currently remain unbanked, a vast majority of them already have WhatsApp installed on their mobile phones. Currently, many of these individuals are paying exorbitant fees of around eight to nine per cent simply to send money across SADC borders. Traditional banking systems were historically not built to accommodate the specific, agile needs of migrant workers, informal traders, or women who frequently move goods and money between countries.
Chikwama Pay focuses specifically on these demographics, providing them with reliable, low-cost access to cross-border financial services. Through this new integration, users can now bank, borrow, insure, save, and transact directly within the familiar messaging interface they already use daily.
Cloud-native issuing and processing
To power this ambitious pan-African operation, Chikwama Pay is heavily leveraging Paymentology’s cloud-first issuing and processing platform. The underlying infrastructure enables the real-time issuance and transaction management of debit cards. Furthermore, Paymentology’s technology allows the neo-bank to expand seamlessly across multiple SADC markets while maintaining strict local compliance and ensuring global scalability. The system also offers advanced payment features, including dynamic spend controls and complex multi-market operations.
Driving pan-African expansion
Kesheni Moodley, regional director Africa at Paymentology
Kesheni Moodley, regional director at Paymentology, expressed excitement about supporting the WhatsApp-enabled banking proposition. She noted that Chikwama Pay’s model clearly demonstrates how familiar digital channels can be effectively utilised to broaden access to crucial financial services, adding that Paymentology looks forward to supporting their ongoing expansion across the SADC region.
Alestair Mawoneke, CEO at Chikwama Pay
Alestair Mawoneke, CEO at Chikwama Pay, emphasized the company’s core mission to completely remove the traditional barriers of geography, cost, and complexity within African finance. Mawoneke stated that with Paymentology’s global expertise and highly secure infrastructure, the neo-bank can now scale faster, expand across borders, and provide truly borderless financial services to millions of people who have long been excluded from the formal economy. The partnership significantly accelerates Chikwama Pay’s ultimate vision to become the leading pan-African neo-bank.
