.Presented By

OVERVIEW

Regulators Have A Year To Define The Rules Which Means We’ll Know What’s Legal Around The Same Time We’re Arrested for It 👮

Before we dive in, here’s today’s crypto market heatmap:

Source: finviz

And here’s a look at crypto’s total market and altcoin market cap charts:

Source: TradingView

NEWS
Nope, Don’t Like That 😶

The compromise language on stablecoin yield in the CLARITY Act has started making the rounds – but only behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, among a select group of lawmakers, banking representatives, and crypto industry leaders invited to review it. 🙄

As of this writing, the actual legislative text has not been made public. The rest of us get to find out what happened to on-chain yield after the banks were done with it.

What I know comes from Eleanor Terrett, who reported Monday evening that new details are emerging from an internal stakeholder email shared with her.

Twitter tweet

The proposal would prohibit platforms from offering yield “directly or indirectly” for holding a stablecoin or in a manner resembling a bank deposit. Activity-based rewards tied to loyalty, promotional, or subscription programs would be permitted – provided they aren’t deemed ‘economically or functionally equivalent to interest. The SEC, CFTC, and Treasury would be directed to jointly define permissible rewards and establish anti-evasion rules within one year.

So to be clear – the bill named CLARITY doesn’t actually clarify the rules. It punts the definitions to three agencies and gives them a year. The Act To Make Sure Banks Never Have To Compete With 5% On-Chain Yield was too long for the title page?

Industry reaction from those who have seen the text is split. One leader called it a “departure” from what had been discussed with the White House. Another called it “the best possible result.”

No ardent crypto person is a fan of the ‘best result possible’ – it’s like the policymaker(s) is behaving as if they’re on a losing tribe in Survivor Season 50 and they just can’t summon up the will to toss that beanbag into the bucket from three feet away and just says ‘f*ck it, I’m spent.’

Suck it up buttercup – there’s no way that this is the best result.

The whole thing just smacks of professional political protectionism for banks. Staking yields are a threat to deposits. American savers can have yield – but only if a bank intermediates it, takes its cut, and reports it on a timeline from 2003. Very clear. Very protective. Not of you.

But this is all just conjecture – need to see the real thing. 👀 

SPONSORED BY META SIGNALS
Trading Crypto With an Edge? – Reported Win Rate Since 2023

With Eric Krown and Crypto Zombie, Meta Signals sends alerts on possible crypto trades in real time. It runs 24/7, using proprietary algorithms to scan 64 pairs across 10 timeframes. The company reports that even in beta, over 5,000 alerts have demonstrated an overall win rate of 65% (learn more on wins and percentages here).

Each alert includes clear entries, exits, and invalidation so you can follow a rules‑based plan instead of reacting emotionally. Newer traders can plug into the system, while experienced traders get alerted to setups on pairs and timeframes they might miss on their own.

Lifetime access is only available until April 1, 2026.

*3rd Party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Stocktwits. See disclosure here.

NEWS
Wall Street’s Oldest Exchange Just Became Its Newest On-Ramp 🤯

RWA’s just keep getting more and more headline space. A day after BlackRock’s Larry Fink showers tokenization as important as the advent of the internet, this gem pops up. 👇️ 

The New York Stock Exchange and Securitize have formalized a bromance via press release.

Securitize is now the first digital transfer agent eligible to mint blockchain-native securities – for corporate and ETF issuers – on NYSE’s upcoming Digital Trading Platform. To be clear, I’m not talking about some fancy shmancy beta test sandbox proof-of-concept idea, but an active and working platform with broker-dealer participation.

BTW, shameless plug, I got to talk with Securitize’s main man in our Cryptotwits podcast – watch/listen to it here.

Securitize is helping design the regulatory, operational, and technology standards for how digital transfer agents function inside this ecosystem. Securitize Markets will also operate as a broker-dealer on the platform.

Big win crypto, blockchain, and TradFi. 👍️ 

SUI
Grayscale Really, Really Likes Sui 🫂

Grayscale launched another Sui product. GSUI,a staking ETF, is the firm’s fourth Sui-focused vehicle in two years. Private placement in 2024. DeepBook and Walrus products in 2025. Staking ETF in 2026. At this rate, Grayscale will have more Sui products than some L1s have dApps. 📱

The product does what you’d expect. Buy $GSUI ( ▼ 2.72% ) from your brokerage or retirement account. You get staked $SUI ( ▼ 1.25% ) exposure – including potential staking rewards – without touching a wallet, managing keys, or knowing what “delegation” means. It sits next to your Apple shares and behaves like a financial product your advisor won’t argue about.

Grayscale’s Head of Product delivered the standard macro framing: capital markets are worth hundreds of trillions of dollars, less than 0.01% is on-chain, Sui is the infrastructure layer built to carry what comes next.

Now, I haven’t taken the time to verify if the 0.01% number is real, but it’s a good point. Whether Sui specifically is the architecture that absorbs the other 99.99% is a different conversation, but one that Grayscale has apparently already had internally and decided they’re comfortable with.

Four products deep isn’t exactly exploratory behavior.

The question is whether the rest of the institutional market follows, or whether Grayscale is furnishing a house nobody else moves into. 🏘️

DEFI
Gigs Of Candlesticks: How Curve Tests Liquidity Pools Before They Go Live 😱

Most DeFi protocols launch a liquidity pool, cross their fingers, and adjust after something breaks. $CRV ( ▲ 1.93% ) does something different – they simulate millions of scenarios against years of real price data before putting a single dollar on-chain. 💲

Also their simulation engine was rewritten from scratch in C++ to run roughly 100x faster, and a full test across millions of parameter combinations takes about ten minutes. Cost: under $10. The whole thing is open source.

The product is FXSwap – pools designed for foreign exchange pairs and stablecoins. Think of a pool as a pot of money that lets people swap between two assets. The challenge is keeping the pool’s internal price aligned with the real-world market price. When that alignment drifts, traders get bad deals and the pool loses money.

Curve’s solution is a mechanism called “refueling” – an external budget that subsidizes the cost of keeping the pool’s price accurate. Simulations show that spending roughly $20,000 to $40,000 a year on a $1M pool keeps everything tight.

For stablecoin issuers already earning 5-14% annually on their reserves, carving off 2-4% to fund on-chain liquidity is cheaper than the usual approach of throwing token incentives at the problem and hoping volume follows.

The Frankencoin pool (that’s a real thing) a Swiss franc stablecoin paired against Curve’s crvUSD – is the live test case. It launched with conservative settings, attracted real trading volume from both retail and institutional users, and is now moving toward optimized parameters through a DAO governance vote backed by simulation data.

And this is awesome, too: Curve flagged that directional fees are in active research. Meaning the idea being that trades which help rebalance a pool should be treated differently than trades that push it further off balance. /insert_sarcasm Crazyness.

Anyway, the simulator is open source and Curve will run backtests for asset issuers considering deployment. 👏 

DEFI
Balancer Just Told Its Own Token It’s Time to Move Out 🏠️

$BAL ( ▼ 0.78% ) dropped two companion governance proposals yesterday that, taken together, amount to a full protocol reset. ⏹️

• The first kills all BAL token emissions, sunsets the lock-and-earn system, cuts the V3 swap fee protocol share from 50% to 25%, and routes 100% of protocol revenue to the DAO treasury. It also offers a $3.6M buyback for anyone who wants out.

• The second slashes the team from 25 to 12.5, cuts the operating budget by 34%, narrows active chain support from nine to four, and consolidates all operations under a single entity after Balancer Labs shuts down. The projected outcome: annual deficit drops from $2.6M to $700K and treasury runway extends from under four years to roughly nine.

How We Got Here

veBAL (the whole space really needs to just stop making these tickers more confusing) was Balancer’s governance token – hodlers locked BAL for up to a year in exchange for voting power over how emissions were distributed and a share of protocol fees. The idea was that committed holders would steer liquidity where the protocol needed it most.

In practice, uber big governance protocols like Aura and large holders like Humpy accumulated enough voting power to redirect emissions toward their own interests, turning a decentralized governance system into something closer to three guys in a trench coat.

And at the same time, the incentives market ran in circles: the protocol spent money on intermediaries to attract liquidity that generated less in fees than the emissions cost to produce. The treasury was capturing just 17.5% of its own revenue. And the November exploit of V2 Composable Stable Pools was the last popsicle stick holding up the model house.

The Conversation

And so Balancer and its own token sat down at the kitchen table. Two governance proposals hit the forum. Together, they read like the conversation you have when someone’s already packed a bag but wants to pretend there’s still a dialogue happening.

“We need to talk about the emissions.”

BAL had been showing up every year – 3.78 million tokens annually – crashing on the couch, eating through the treasury, and calling it “incentivized growth.” It believed that the liquidity would stick around once BAL stopped subsidizing every pool like a parent covering rent for a 30-year-old.

It didn’t.

The DAO was pulling in $1.65M a year in protocol fees and keeping $290K of it. The rest went to veBAL holders, core pool incentives, Alliance partners – a whole extended family of obligations that looked a lot like love languages until someone ran the spreadsheet.

Annual deficit: $2.6M. Runway: under four years. BAL was trading below its own net asset value and no one thought that was a good deal. The market was literally saying this relationship is worth less than the furniture.

Sometimes the healthiest thing a protocol can do is admit the relationship it built its identity around was the thing holding it back. 😥

Get In Touch 📬

Email me, Jonathan Morgan, feedback; I’d love to hear from you. 📧
Follow me on Stocktwits 🫂 And Sponsor this newsletter 😎 

Terms & Conditions 📝

Securities Disclaimer: STOCKTWITS IS NOT A TAX ADVISOR, BROKER, FINANCIAL ADVISOR OR INVESTMENT ADVISOR. THE SERVICE IS NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE TAX, LEGAL, FINANCIAL OR INVESTMENT ADVICE, AND NOTHING ON THE SERVICE SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS AN OFFER TO SELL, A SOLICITATION OF AN OFFER TO BUY, OR A RECOMMENDATION FOR ANY SECURITY. Trading in such securities can result in immediate and substantial losses of the capital invested. You should only invest risk capital, and not capital required for other purposes. You alone are solely responsible for determining whether any investment, security or strategy, or any other product or service, is appropriate or suitable for you based on your investment objectives and personal and financial situation. You should also consult an attorney or tax professional regarding your specific legal or tax situation. The Content is to be used for informational and entertainment purposes only and the Service does not provide investment advice for any individual. Stocktwits, its affiliates and partners specifically disclaim any and all liability or loss arising out of any action taken in reliance on Content, including but not limited to market value or other loss on the sale or purchase of any company, property, product, service, security, instrument, or any other matter. You understand that an investment in any security is subject to a number of risks, and that discussions of any security published on the Service will not contain a list or description of relevant risk factors. In addition, please note that some of the stocks about which Content is published on the Service have a low market capitalization and/or insufficient public float. Such stocks are subject to more risk than stocks of larger companies, including greater volatility, lower liquidity and less publicly available information. Read the full terms & conditions here. 🔍

Author Disclosure: The author of this newsletter holds positions in AVAX, ADA, PUDGY, WLC, IMX, XTZ, NEAR, HBAR, ALGO, INJ, LTC, LINK, ZEC, XLM, and FET. 📋