BitMart Research Institute Weekly Insights: Fed Hawkish Expectations Heat Up, Crypto Market Continues to Face Pressure, RWA Sector Defies Trend and Breaks Out

marsbitPublicado a 2026-06-23Actualizado a 2026-06-23

Resumen

**BitMart Research Weekly: Fed Hawkishness Weighs on Crypto, RWA Sector Shows Strength** In traditional markets, US equities were mixed as weakening macro data signaled slowing growth. The Federal Reserve held rates at 3.75%, with half of its officials projecting at least one rate hike this year, adopting a more hawkish stance. The crypto market faced sustained pressure. BTC fell 3.7%, underperforming ETH, which dropped 1.2%. Overall market sentiment remained in "Extreme Fear." US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw net outflows of approximately $226.8 million for the week, indicating a lack of sustained institutional buying. Despite the bearish backdrop, the Real World Assets (RWA) narrative gained traction. XLM surged 12.2%, driven by Stellar's RWA tokenization roadmap. Stablecoin market capitalization stabilized near $315.3B, showing structural shifts towards compliant and institutional cash management tools like USDG and BUIDL. A notable stress point emerged as Strategy's STRC traded below its $100 face value for a fifth consecutive week, pressuring its dividend model and raising questions about its Bitcoin treasury management strategy.

I. Macro Economy and Traditional Financial Markets

1. High Divergence in US Stocks: Signals of Slowing Growth Intertwined with Middle East Uncertainties

US stock markets showed high divergence last week. The S&P 500 fell slightly by 0.22%, the Nasdaq rose by 0.27%, and the Dow Jones increased by 0.39%. Macro data continued to weaken: the New York Empire State Manufacturing Index plummeted from 19.6 to 5.7, housing starts dropped sharply to 1.177 million units, and May retail sales grew by 0.4% month-on-month. Overall, this indicates that the high-interest-rate environment is gradually suppressing aggregate demand.

The labor market remains resilient, with initial jobless claims at 226,000. The four-week moving average rose slightly to 223,250, providing some support for overall consumption. The coexistence of consumer resilience with weakening real estate and manufacturing sectors creates a structural divergence, making the Federal Reserve's policy path more complex. The pace of economic cooling is insufficient to drive inflation down rapidly.

2. Fed Holds Rates Steady, Half of Officials Project Rate Hikes This Year, Wash Changes Style

The Federal Reserve maintained the policy rate at 3.75% with a 12:0 vote. Among the 18 officials, 9 project at least one rate hike this year, with 6 projecting more than one hike. Only 1 projects a rate cut this year, and 1 official did not submit Summary of Economic Projections. The Philadelphia Fed's "prices paid" index rose from 47.9 to 53.2, further strengthening the tightening stance.

New Chairman Wash adopted a communication style different from his predecessor, frequently mentioning "first principles," "alternative frameworks," and "mandate range." He was the only official to refuse to submit future interest rate projections in this dot plot, emphasizing that the Fed's core task is achieving price stability. This FOMC statement was almost completely rewritten, significantly shorter in length, increasing market uncertainty about the Fed's future communication and policy path.

II. Crypto Market

1. Market Performance: BTC Underperforms ETH, Market Sentiment Remains in Extreme Fear

Last week, BTC fell 3.7%, fluctuating within the $62,000–$65,000 range; ETH fell 1.2%, remaining around $1,700. As BTC performed significantly weaker than ETH, the BTC/ETH ratio fell 1.6%. The total crypto market cap fell 3.1%; excluding BTC and ETH, the market cap fell 2.3%; the altcoin market excluding the top 10 tokens fell 3.0%, showing a clear broad-based decline pattern.

The top 30 crypto assets fell by an average of 2.5%. Only XLM recorded a significant gain, rising 12.2%, driven by Stellar's roadmap for RWA tokenization, payments, and corporate settlements. Market sentiment remained in the "Extreme Fear" zone, with the Fear & Greed Index at 20. Additionally, jaredfromsubway.eth, one of the largest MEV sandwich bots on Ethereum, suffered a reverse attack, losing approximately $7.5 million, bringing on-chain security risks back into market focus.

2. ETF Flows: BTC Net Outflow of $226.8M, Institutional Buying Has Not Resumed Sustained Inflows

Last week, US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw a net outflow of approximately $226.8 million, while spot Ethereum ETFs had a net outflow of approximately $10 million. Split by trading day, BTC ETFs saw a net outflow of about $64.09 million on June 15, a small net inflow of about $10.06 million on June 16, net outflows of about $82.16 million and $90.66 million on June 17 and 18 respectively. The US market was closed on June 19 for the Juneteenth holiday.

For ETH ETFs, there were small net inflows on June 15 and 16, but flows turned net negative again from June 17 to 18, resulting in a week overall close to a small outflow. Overall, compared to the large outflows of the previous week, pressure eased somewhat, but institutional funds have not resumed sustained buying.

3. On-Chain Data: Stablecoin Total Supply Stabilizes, Structure Shows Divergence

DeFiLlama data shows that as of June 22, the total stablecoin market cap was approximately $315.3 billion, increasing by about $287 million in 7 days, a rise of about 0.09%. USDT's market share is about 59.05%. USDT saw a slight 7-day decrease of about 0.12%, USDC grew slightly by about 0.06%, indicating overall stability in mainstream settlement funds. USDS decreased by about 3.47% over 7 days, continuing the trend where ecosystem-focused stablecoins are more prone to contraction in volatile environments.

USD1 and USDG grew by about 9.27% and 6.74% respectively, reflecting expansion in compliance-oriented stablecoins and channel-based distribution networks. USDe remained largely flat over 7 days, with the expansion pace of yield-generating stablecoins slowing but no significant redemptions. BUIDL and USYC maintained slight growth, indicating continued resilience in institutional on-chain cash management demand. Overall, the stablecoin market shifted from total supply contraction in the previous week to supply stabilization with structural divergence, but funds still favor high-certainty dollar instruments.

4. Industry Narratives: STRC Trades Below Par for Fifth Consecutive Week, Strategy's Funding Flywheel Under Pressure

STRC has traded below its $100 par value for the fifth consecutive week. Its price once fell to around $82 before recovering to about $88, but its weekly trading volume still reached $1.6 billion. The nominal dividend yield has risen to 11.5%, with market discussion on whether to raise it further to 11.75% or 12%. Notably, Strategy, which once claimed it would "never sell Bitcoin," sold 32 BTC for the first time in late May this year, raising approximately $2.5 million to pay for preferred share distributions.

Strategy currently faces three potential response paths: raising the STRC dividend yield (each 0.5% increase would bring about $52.45 million in additional annual dividend costs); selling Bitcoin holdings to pay dividends, which would weaken the core narrative; or issuing new STRC shares below par value, which would structurally increase the long-term dividend burden. Last week, STRC accounted for 76.2% of the total trading volume of Bitcoin Treasury preferred securities, down from 80% the previous week. The second most traded asset was Strive's SATA, accounting for 15.8%.

This article is for market analysis only and does not constitute any investment advice. Investment risks are high. Please fully assess your own risk tolerance and implement strict risk control before trading.

Preguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, what were the main macroeconomic factors influencing the cryptocurrency market last week?

AThe main factors were a highly divided US stock market with slowing growth signals, a Federal Reserve that maintained interest rates while its 'dot plot' showed a majority of officials expecting at least one rate hike this year, and Fed Chair Warsh's communication shift creating market uncertainty. Weak macroeconomic data, such as a sharp drop in the New York Empire State Manufacturing Index and housing starts, indicated high interest rates are dampening demand.

QHow did the performance of Bitcoin compare to Ethereum last week, and what was the market sentiment?

ABitcoin underperformed Ethereum, falling 3.7% compared to Ethereum's 1.2% decline. Consequently, the BTC/ETH ratio fell by 1.6%. Overall market sentiment remained in the 'Extreme Fear' zone, with the Fear and Greed Index at 20.

QWhat was the trend for US spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF fund flows last week?

AUS spot Bitcoin ETFs saw a net outflow of approximately $226.8 million for the week. US spot Ethereum ETFs experienced a smaller net outflow of around $10 million. While the outflows moderated compared to the previous week, institutional capital had not yet resumed sustained buying.

QWhat is the current situation with STRC, and what challenges does its issuer, Strategy, face according to the article?

ASTRC has traded below its par value for five consecutive weeks, with its price dipping to around $82 before recovering to about $88. Its nominal dividend yield has risen to 11.5%. Strategy faces three main challenges: 1) Raising the STRC dividend rate, which would significantly increase annual costs; 2) Selling Bitcoin holdings to pay dividends, which weakens its core narrative; and 3) Issuing new STRC shares below par value, which would structurally increase long-term dividend burdens.

QWhich cryptocurrency among the top 30 assets posted a significant gain last week, and what was the reported reason?

AXLM (Stellar) recorded a significant gain of 12.2%. The increase was attributed to the positive market reaction to Stellar's recently released roadmap focusing on Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization, payments, and enterprise settlement solutions.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Claude se volvió 'tonto' en toda la red, y Anthropic aclara el motivo: No es el modelo quien te falla

**Los usuarios de Claude Code se quejaban de que el modelo se volvió más torpe, pero Anthropic aclara: el problema no era el modelo, sino el ajuste de "Esfuerzo".** En marzo, muchos desarrolladores notaron que Claude Code parecía menos competente: omitía leer archivos o ejecutar pruebas. La comunidad criticó fuertemente a Anthropic. La causa real fue un cambio en la configuración predeterminada del nivel de **Esfuerzo (Effort)**, de "alto" a "medio", realizado para reducir la latencia. Este ajuste afectó cuánto trabajo invertía Claude en una tarea, no su conocimiento fundamental. Anthropic explica la diferencia clave entre **Modelo** y **Esfuerzo**: * **Modelo (Sonnet, Opus, Fable):** Representa la "inteligencia" o conocimiento base del modelo (pesos congelados del entrenamiento). Cambiarlo resuelve problemas de "¿puede hacerlo?". * **Esfuerzo (Effort):** Representa la "actitud" o cuánto trabajo está dispuesto a realizar en una tarea específica (leer archivos, ejecutar pruebas, verificar). Un Esfuerzo bajo hace que Claude responda rápido pero pida más contexto; un Esfuerzo alto lo hace investigar y trabajar de forma más autónoma. **Conclusión importante:** Un modelo más pequeño (como Sonnet) con un Esfuerzo alto puede superar a un modelo más grande (como Opus) con un Esfuerzo bajo en muchas tareas. El cambio de marzo demostró que los usuarios a menudo subestimaban el impacto del control de Esfuerzo, culpando erróneamente al modelo. **Marco para solucionar problemas:** 1. Verifica primero el contexto y las instrucciones (prompt). 2. Si Claude se equivoca, pregúntate: **¿Es que "no sabe" o "no se esfuerza lo suficiente"?** * **No se esfuerza (ej., omite pasos):** Aumenta el nivel de Esfuerzo. * **No sabe (ej., errores persistentes a pesar del contexto):** Cambia a un modelo más capaz. La lección es que el uso efectivo de herramientas de IA como Claude Code ya no se trata solo de elegir el modelo más potente, sino de aprender a **gestionar y asignar recursos** (modelo y esfuerzo) de manera inteligente para cada tarea, optimizando tanto el rendimiento como el coste.

marsbitHace 35 min(s)

Claude se volvió 'tonto' en toda la red, y Anthropic aclara el motivo: No es el modelo quien te falla

marsbitHace 35 min(s)

Casi un centenar de jugadores se lanzan al sector de datos embodiment: 44.700 millones de financiación en un año, ¿quién puede ganar dinero realmente "vendiendo datos"?

**Resumen en español europeo:** Más de 90 empresas, incluidas 70 dedicadas a la recopilación, compiten en el emergente campo de los datos de inteligencia encarnada en China. En el último año, 15 proveedores de datos independientes recaudaron aproximadamente 4.470 millones de RMB. El artículo, basado en estadísticas de "Quantum Bit", describe diez aspectos clave del sector: 1. **Métodos de recopilación:** Se dividen en cuatro categorías: teleoperación de robots reales, recopilación sin robot (con captura de movimiento), simulación y destilación de vídeos de internet. La mayoría de las empresas (43%) utilizan múltiples métodos, siendo la teleoperación la ruta única más común (31%). 2. **Perfil de los actores:** Los proveedores de datos independientes son el grupo más numeroso (40%), seguidos por plataformas de datos estatales (26%) y fabricantes de robots (25%). Dos tercios de las empresas son "nativas" del sector. 3. **Capacidad y distribución:** La capacidad anual actual se estima en 1,6-1,8 millones de horas, con el objetivo de multiplicarla por 15-20 en 1-3 años. Las "fábricas de datos" están presentes en 20 provincias, concentrándose en el delta del Yangtsé. 4. **Financiación y etapa:** La financiación del último año para proveedores independientes (44.700 millones RMB) es modesta comparada con la inversión total en inteligencia encarnada. El sector está muy fragmentado, con una sola "unicornio" (Lightwheel AI) que acaparó el 70% de la inversión. 69 fondos han invertido, pero ninguno de forma significativa, mostrando cautela. 5. **Conclusión:** El mercado de datos encarnados es ya una industria independiente y generadora de empleo, pero se encuentra en una fase muy temprana. Aún no está claro si "vender datos" será un negocio rentable, y los próximos 1-2 años serán cruciales para validar el modelo.

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Casi un centenar de jugadores se lanzan al sector de datos embodiment: 44.700 millones de financiación en un año, ¿quién puede ganar dinero realmente "vendiendo datos"?

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片