# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Regulation

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Regulation", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

Funds Haven't Disappeared, They Just Don't Love Altcoins Anymore

"Capital Hasn't Disappeared—It Just Stopped Loving Altcoins" offers a retrospective analysis of the crypto market in 2025, framing it not as a simple bull or bear cycle but as a period of structural repositioning. The year was defined by a clear regulatory shift, with the U.S. moving from a stance of suppression to establishing a clearer legislative framework, exemplified by the GENIUS Act. This institutionalization was a key driver, with Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs attracting significant institutional capital. However, this capital was highly selective, flowing into low-volatility, compliant channels like stablecoins, low-risk Real-World Assets (RWA), and corporate treasuries (DATs), rather than fueling a broad-based "altcoin season." Consequently, the market experienced a stark stratification: while major assets saw institutional support, approximately 85% of new token launches ended the year below their initial price. The report identifies three key narrative sectors that adapted to this new reality: tokens with real yield (e.g., yield-bearing stablecoins, mature DeFi), which provided a reason to hold assets beyond pure speculation; AI/Robotics x Crypto, seen as a long-term infrastructure play despite short-term underperformance; and prediction markets/Perp DEXs, which thrived by fulfilling the native demand for leveraged trading and event speculation. The conclusion is that 2025 marked a transition in market pricing power, where narratives still drive short-term trades, but only assets with real utility, distribution, and institutional acceptance are poised for long-term value accrual.

marsbit01/20 01:40

Funds Haven't Disappeared, They Just Don't Love Altcoins Anymore

marsbit01/20 01:40

How Do Stablecoins Touch the Most Profitable Nerve of Banks?

U.S. banks are fiercely opposing interest-bearing stablecoins, not because they cause deposit outflows, but because they threaten the core profitability of large commercial banks. When funds flow into stablecoins like USDC, the money eventually returns to the banking system as reserves held in cash or short-term liquid assets. The real concern is the total amount of deposits, but a shift in deposit structure. Large U.S. banks rely heavily on "low-rate banking," where they hold massive amounts of non-interest or ultra-low-interest transaction deposits (used for payments, transfers, and settlements). These deposits are extremely cheap for banks, costing only 0-11 basis points in interest, while the Fed funds rate is 3.5%-3.75%. This spread, along with transaction fees, generates over $360 billion in annual revenue for banks. Interest-bearing stablecoins directly compete with these transaction deposits. If stablecoins offer yield, users may move funds from traditional bank transaction accounts into stablecoins for both utility and returns. Although the money remains in the banking system, stablecoin issuers would likely place most reserves in higher-yielding non-transaction accounts, forcing banks to pay market rates for these funds. This erodes banks' profit margins and reduces their fee income from payment services. The battle over the CLARITY法案 revolves around this profit redistribution. Banks want to ban all forms of yield on stablecoins to protect their lucrative low-cost deposit base and dominant position in the payment ecosystem.

比推01/19 14:58

How Do Stablecoins Touch the Most Profitable Nerve of Banks?

比推01/19 14:58

活动图片