GMT and APE Carrying Cryptocurrency Market as Total Volume Reaches $6.2 Billion

u.todayPublished on 2022-04-29Last updated on 2022-04-29

Abstract

GMT and APE are two of the most volatile assets on the cryptocurrency market, as tokens gained from 100% to 444% in less than a month.

Contents

GMT price performance

APE is not aiming for a reversal
GMT and APE are two of the most volatile assets on the cryptocurrency market, as tokens gained from 100% to 444% in less than a month, making the two positions the most profitable assets from the top 100 of assets by capitalization.
GMT price performance
Stepn is probably one of the most unexpected and surprising assets on the market that brings early investors over 400% of profit, making it the most profitable asset on the cryptocurrency market in April.

Source: TradingView As for the technical side of the question, STEPN is showing a strong and relatively stable performance despite the speculative nature of the rally. Usually, traders expect a full reversal of the asset after a price increase of more than two times. But GMT has not reversed to enter the consolidation channel that it has successfully broken.
The most recent price performance of GMT also does not signal a reversal as the asset is down by only 13% and is yet to face the first support levels, which may act as a foundation for a further rally.
APE is not aiming for a reversal
According to the daily chart of the asset, APE is moving in a sharp uptrend and not showing any weaknesses despite the most recent 18% reversal, which some traders and industry experts mark as the top.

Source: TradingView Since the listing, APE lost 78% of its value in one candle and has not yet recovered to the same value. Currently, APE needs to gain at least 71% to the local high, which will put it back at the ATH.
APE is strongly tied to performing the BAYC NFT collection, which is gaining more attention from users after the Metaverse release.

The Fate of Digital Banks: No Fancy App Can Outshine a Banking License

The Fate of Digital Banks: A Flashy App is No Match for a Banking License The article argues that despite attracting billions of users with fee-free checking accounts and sleek apps, most "neobanks" struggle to be profitable because their core business—transaction fees—is inherently low-margin. The real profit engine of banking is lending (credit), which generates interest income. However, many early neobanks operated without their own banking licenses, which restricted their ability to lend at scale. Examples like Nubank, Revolut, and Chime illustrate the point. While they gained users with free accounts, their eventual profitability came from rolling out credit products. The piece highlights systemic risks for neobanks that rely on third-party infrastructure, citing the Synapse bankruptcy, which froze user funds and revealed the fragility of such models. The solution, according to the author, is obtaining a formal banking license, like the U.S. OCC's national trust charter. This provides regulatory backing, allows direct custody of funds, and eliminates dependency on intermediary partners. The trend is now evident in the crypto sector, where companies like Kraken, SoFi, and others are actively pursuing such licenses. The article concludes that while technology changes, the fundamental business logic of banking—profiting from lending—remains constant. Successful digital banks ultimately conform to this old model, just with better interfaces and fairer terms.

Foresight News6m ago

The Fate of Digital Banks: No Fancy App Can Outshine a Banking License

Foresight News6m ago

In the Name of Charity, For the Benefit of the Family: How the Trump Family Turns Philanthropy into Profit?

Charity for Profit: How the Trump Family Turned Philanthropy into Personal Gain Amid a recent controversy over misleading claims about his cryptocurrency company American Bitcoin, Eric Trump invoked his children's cancer charity as evidence of his good intentions. While his Curetivity foundation (formerly the Eric Trump Foundation) has donated over $25 million to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, an investigation reveals a pattern of self-dealing and opaque practices that benefited the Trump family business. Internal documents show that from 2011 to 2016, over $500,000 from the charity was funneled back to Trump-owned properties for event costs, transactions often omitted from tax filings. This created clear conflicts of interest, with figures like former club manager and current White House aide Dan Scavino involved on both sides. Public claims of "one of the lowest expense ratios" were contradicted by records showing significant spending on entertainment, auctions, and transportation. Facing scrutiny in 2017, Eric Trump distanced himself from the board and rebranded the foundation. After a state investigation shifted focus to compliance rather than enforcement, he returned as the public face. Fundraising events, now less transparent, continue at Trump venues. Estimates suggest these events have directed over $1 million to the Trump Organization over two decades. The same playbook of optimistic claims and obscured financial realities is now evident in Eric Trump's role at American Bitcoin. He promoted it as a highly profitable venture with low mining costs, but reports indicate most Bitcoin was purchased with funds from constant stock issuance, not mined, with actual costs far higher than claimed. While the company's stock has crashed nearly 90% from its peak, Eric Trump's personal stake remains valuable. The recurring pattern involves aggressive public defense, legal maneuvering to bury records, making minimal changes to satisfy regulators, and eventually repackaging the venture to regain trust, often successfully.

marsbit15m ago

In the Name of Charity, For the Benefit of the Family: How the Trump Family Turns Philanthropy into Profit?

marsbit15m ago

Charity in Name, Family Gain in Reality: How the Trump Family Turns Philanthropy into Profit?

Summary: The article examines how the Trump family, particularly Eric Trump, has allegedly leveraged charitable and business ventures for financial gain. It details the operations of Eric's children's cancer charity (now Curetivity), which, despite donating over $25 million to St. Jude, reportedly funneled at least $500,000 back to Trump-owned properties for event costs between 2011-2016. These transactions, often undisclosed, involved clear conflicts of interest with Trump Organization employees on the board. Following media scrutiny and a state investigation, the charity reformed but continued holding costly fundraisers at Trump venues. The piece draws parallels to Eric's role at cryptocurrency company American Bitcoin (ABTC), where he promoted unrealistic mining cost savings. Investigative reporting revealed most Bitcoin was acquired through share dilution, with actual costs far higher than claimed, contributing to a ~90% stock price drop and significant investor losses, while insiders like Eric retained substantial wealth. The pattern identified involves using misleading rhetoric, opaque accounting, and legal strategies to navigate controversies, often deflecting criticism as political attacks before resuming operations with minimal substantive change.

链捕手23m ago

Charity in Name, Family Gain in Reality: How the Trump Family Turns Philanthropy into Profit?

链捕手23m ago

Bernstein Report: Agentic AI Will Transform CPU from Supporting Role to Leading Role, Bullish on Hygon Information

Bernstein research report: Agentic AI will turn CPUs from supporting players to leading roles, bullish on Hygon Information. Analysts led by David Dai argue that AI is transitioning from the chatbot era to the agentic AI era. Unlike simple query-response models, agentic AI involves complex workflows including retrieval, planning, tool calling, and multi-step reasoning. This shift dramatically increases the demand for CPU compute to orchestrate these tasks, manage memory, and prevent expensive GPU idling. The report forecasts that the GPU-to-CPU ratio in inference clusters will reverse from 8:1 in 2025 to 1:1 by 2029. In agentic AI workloads, CPUs could account for 50% of the compute, on par with GPUs. Consequently, the server CPU Total Addressable Market (TAM) is projected to surge from $37 billion in 2025 to $223 billion by 2030, representing a 6x expansion. Arm is identified as a key beneficiary due to its superior performance-per-watt and a strategic shift from IP licensing to designing its own chips, targeting $15 billion in chip revenue by 2030. Bernstein raises Arm's price target to $500. For x86 vendors, the report is Overweight on AMD (target $600) and Hygon Information (target CNY 450), citing leadership and strong growth in the Chinese market respectively. Intel's target is raised to $100, reflecting upgraded earnings assumptions. The analysis acknowledges significant supply-side risks, questioning whether foundry and memory capacity can support such rapid CPU growth. The optimistic demand forecast also heavily relies on Nvidia's guidance for over $1 trillion in annual AI infrastructure spend by 2027.

marsbit23m ago

Bernstein Report: Agentic AI Will Transform CPU from Supporting Role to Leading Role, Bullish on Hygon Information

marsbit23m ago

Will UNI Reach $100 in Four Years? Can Standard Chartered's Prediction Come True?

TL;DR: Standard Chartered Bank predicts UNI token will reach $100 by 2030, based on the growth of tokenized assets fueling demand for open DeFi liquidity and Uniswap's potential to capture fees from that trading. However, institutional tokenized products like BlackRock's BUIDL fund show that strict access controls and permissioned systems remain major barriers. Standard Chartered's $100 price target for Uniswap's (UNI) governance token by 2030 projects massive growth from current levels. The bank's thesis hinges on tokenized real-world assets (RWA) reaching trillions in value and a significant portion flowing into open, decentralized markets for trading and liquidity, rather than remaining in closed, permissioned systems. Uniswap's position as a leading decentralized exchange (DEX) infrastructure could allow it to capture a major share of this future trading activity. A key challenge is whether tokenized assets like bonds, funds, and stocks will trade openly on DEXs or be restricted to controlled, institutional platforms. The case of BlackRock's BUIDL fund exemplifies this tension: while it uses Uniswap's technology for settlements, trading is strictly limited to pre-approved, whitelisted institutional participants. This hybrid model provides DeFi efficiency but maintains traditional access barriers. For UNI to achieve such a high valuation, Uniswap must not only see increased trading volume from tokenized assets but also implement effective value-capture mechanisms for token holders. Recent governance proposals aim to direct protocol fees to UNI stakers, creating a clearer link between platform usage and token value. Ultimately, the realization of Standard Chartered's prediction depends on the future structure of the tokenized asset market. If open liquidity pools and reduced restrictions prevail, Uniswap's role could expand far beyond crypto-native trading. If permissioned, walled-garden systems dominate, its growth from institutional tokenization may be limited. The prediction itself signals growing institutional recognition of DeFi's potential role in the future of finance.

marsbit31m ago

Will UNI Reach $100 in Four Years? Can Standard Chartered's Prediction Come True?

marsbit31m ago

Trading

Spot

Futures