Банк России посоветовал трейдерам отказаться от криптоинвестиций

cryptonews.ruPublicado em 2025-10-23Última atualização em 2025-10-23

Банк России призвал трейдеров быть осторожными при выборе финансовых инструментов, связанных с криптовалютами. ЦБ хочет защитить их от значительных убытков, вызванных волатильностью рынка, заявил первый заместитель председателя центробанка Владимир Чистюхин.

Выступая на презентации площадки срочных финансовых инструментов «Санкт-Петербургской биржи» форума финансовых технологий Finopolis Владимир Чистюхин постарался объяснить точку зрения ЦБ:

«Мы приветствуем развитие любых новых финансовых инструментов. Надеемся, что этот шаг повысит диверсификацию возможностей для российских инвесторов. Но помните: все, что связано с криптоактивами, — это очень рискованно. Поэтому относиться к подобному надо крайне осмотрительно».

Первый зампредседателя ЦБ опасается: криптоактивы, несмотря на их популярность, остаются высокоспекулятивным инструментом, а новичков крипторынка колебания цен цифровых валют могут привести к значительным убыткам, особенно если нет глубокого понимания рынка.

«СПб биржа» на днях объявила о запуске торгов фьючерсами на индекс BTCUSD, который следует за динамикой биткоина (тикер ВТСUSD_17J25). Торги доступны только квалифицированным инвесторам.

В марте центробанк пресек попытку размещения первых в России структурных облигаций и аннулировал два выпуска компаний «Финам» и «Румберг Кэпитал». Эти бумаги были привязаны к курсу биткоина и стоимости бумаг iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (биржевого фонда на биткоин). Формально Банк России не запретил выпуск облигаций «Финам» и «Румберг Кэпитал», а отложил регистрацию. Отсутствие правовой базы для регулирования криптовалют и их использования в расчетах препятствует торговле подобными инструментами на бирже, объяснил тогда свои действия регулятор.

Leituras Relacionadas

The Networking Game in Silicon Valley's Elite Circles: Those with Connections Get $50 Million, While the Truly Talented Can't Raise Money?

"Silicon Valley's Meritocracy to Relationship Game: How Networks Now Trump Talent." The article argues that Silicon Valley has shifted from a meritocracy to a "kingmaker" system where connections and background outweigh true ability. Key factors driving this change include: 1. **AI-Distorted Expectations:** Unprecedented growth curves (e.g., Anthropic) have led VCs to seek only "sure things" or pattern-match against past successes. 2. **Capital Concentration:** LP funds are concentrated in a few large, multi-stage funds, pushing VCs to overpay for hot deals to secure capital. 3. **VC Professionalization:** The industry has become a standardized career path, attracting conformist "NPCs" rather than independent thinkers. The long IPO timeline incentivizes safe, consensus bets for career advancement over risky, fund-returning outliers. This consensus capital fuels consensus founders. Startups are now a standard career option, with accelerators pressuring uniform ideas (e.g., 81% AI). Founders from elite schools (Stanford, OpenAI) easily raise millions based on pedigree, not proof. Large funds preemptively back "centrally cast" teams with $10-50M war chests to dominate categories, sidelining outsiders. The "kingmaker" strategy has downstream effects: it encourages aggressive, sometimes fraudulent, revenue reporting and allows founders to sell significant secondary shares early, attracting grifters. The author predicts a mean reversion. History shows the hottest trends rarely produce the most valuable companies. They advocate backing underestimated outsiders with "a chip on their shoulder" over anointed insiders, believing true meritocracy will ultimately win. "Those chasing the herd are set up for slaughter."

marsbitHá 4m

The Networking Game in Silicon Valley's Elite Circles: Those with Connections Get $50 Million, While the Truly Talented Can't Raise Money?

marsbitHá 4m

From 2 Million Monthly Active Users to Zero: Zapper's Demise in the "Maturation" of DeFi

From 2M MAU to Zero: The Demise of Zapper in a Maturing DeFi Landscape On July 8, 2026, Zapper co-founder Seb Audet announced the platform's full shutdown. Once a DeFi star with 2 million monthly active users, $13B in processed transactions, and $16.5M in funding, Zapper's journey ends. Born in 2020 from the merger of DeFiZap and DeFiSnap, Zapper rode the "DeFi Summer" wave. It became essential for users to track complex, multi-protocol yield farming positions across chains. At its peak, it supported 14 chains, 450+ protocols, and 7000+ tokens, with its signature "Zap" feature simplifying multi-step DeFi actions. However, sustainable revenue never materialized. Its primary model—taking small fees from DEX aggregation—faced fierce competition and squeezed margins. Meanwhile, maintaining its extensive, real-time data indexing system was costly. Crucially, the DeFi ecosystem matured, with activity and liquidity concentrating in fewer top protocols. The core demand for a complex, multi-protocol dashboard waned as user behavior simplified. Zapper attempted multiple pivots that failed to gain traction: an NFT-based points system (2021), a social app called Chainchat (2023), and plans for a ZAP token and open protocol (2024). These efforts reflected a persistent "blockchain-native" mindset focused on creating new C端 (consumer) needs rather than addressing existing pain points or bolstering its revenue-generating products. The article contrasts Zapper with DeBank, which successfully narrowed its asset-tracking focus while developing Rabby Wallet—a revenue-stabilizing, competitive product. Zapper's story serves as a cautionary tale for tooling projects: over-immersion in a purist vision, coupled with an inability to adapt business models to market shifts—like the consolidation of DeFi activity—can be fatal, even for once-dominant platforms.

marsbitHá 27m

From 2 Million Monthly Active Users to Zero: Zapper's Demise in the "Maturation" of DeFi

marsbitHá 27m

Goldman Sachs Bans It, Google Bans It Too: The Gray Zone of Prediction Markets Is Shrinking Fast

Goldman Sachs has updated its personal trading policy, prohibiting employees from trading event contracts on prediction markets involving specific companies (including whether Goldman itself might restructure or initiate acquisitions in a quarter), election outcomes, financial market performance (including Bitcoin prices), macroeconomic data, geopolitical events, and regulatory results for pending M&A deals. Sports and entertainment bets remain allowed. Violations can lead to dismissal or account closure, and the firm may reclaim profits over $200 or donate them to charity. This follows a CFTC case against a Google engineer who allegedly used non-public data to profit $1.2 million on Polymarket. Simultaneously, Google's Chrome Web Store updated its policy, banning extensions that facilitate real-money trading on prediction market outcomes, effective August 1, 2026. While not affecting platforms' websites or mobile apps directly, this restricts a key user access channel. These actions occur amid growing regulatory pressure on prediction markets. The CFTC is investigating Polymarket for alleged misconduct, and a consumer group has filed a lawsuit. Over 30 countries, including Argentina, have blocked access. Despite this, trading volume has hit record highs, and major investments continue, such as ICE's $2 billion stake in Polymarket. The core debate remains whether prediction markets are financial instruments or gambling. CFTC argues for federal oversight as derivatives, while some states seek to regulate them under gambling laws. Multiple fronts—federal probes, political pressure, internal corporate bans, and platform restrictions—are narrowing the operational space for these markets.

Foresight NewsHá 33m

Goldman Sachs Bans It, Google Bans It Too: The Gray Zone of Prediction Markets Is Shrinking Fast

Foresight NewsHá 33m

Trading

Spot
活动图片