Tag: Business – Decrypt

Abstract, the Ethereum layer-2 network built by Pudgy Penguins parent company Igloo Inc., is shutting down after struggling to scale beyond its consumer crypto niche.

The team announced on X that the chain will go dark on Dec. 15. Users must move their assets off the network before then through Abstract’s Migration Hub or its native bridge, which carries a three-hour delay. Funds left behind after the deadline will be inaccessible, the team warned. Abstract’s engineers will also help projects built on the network migrate to other chains.

Abstract said its growth stalled because of a limited DeFi ecosystem, thin on-chain liquidity, little crossover with institutions and a smaller budget than rivals. “Operating a chain focused exclusively on consumer crypto has ultimately proven to be unsustainable as a standalone model,” the team wrote.

By its own count, Abstract processed more than 325 million transactions, logged over $6 billion in decentralized exchange volume and generated more than $40 million in ecosystem revenue. Users created more than 4 million Abstract Global Wallets, and brands including Red Bull Racing and Disney used the chain to reach audiences.

Abstract is a ZK-rollup, a layer-2 network that bundles transactions and verifies them on Ethereum using zero-knowledge proofs, a type of cryptographic receipt.

Igloo pitched it as a home for “consumer crypto” apps aimed at everyday users. The goal was to replicate the mainstream reach Pudgy Penguins found through toys and social media.

Abstract is the second Ethereum layer-2 to announce a shutdown in a matter of days. Blast, the Paradigm-backed network that once drew billions of dollars in deposits, said last week that it would wind down because its operating costs outstripped its revenue.

Abstract also urged users to watch out for impersonators, fake migration sites and direct messages claiming to represent the project.

A developer who goes by hashfunction has posted metadata for about 5.6 billion public TikTok videos on the open-source AI repository Hugging Face, free to download. The dataset, published under the datasocial account, runs from July 2014 through October 2026.

It’s metadata, not footage. Each row carries the caption, hashtags, sound ID, on-screen text, TikTok Shop product and seller IDs, and counts for views, likes, comments, shares, saves, and downloads. The whole thing is 460 GB of Parquet files, one per month.

Some fields are TikTok’s own labels: whether a video is flagged as AI-generated, and whether TikTok keeps it off the For You page. The AI flag is often empty for older videos, which come from an archive.

The dataset isn’t gated, so anyone can pull it. Hugging Face’s counter shows 1,181 downloads so far. It’s also available online on https://datasocial.ai/

Why should anyone care? Because AI developers want this kind of data, and TikTok has made it hard to get. Captions, hashtags, sound IDs and engagement counts for billions of posts are raw material for models that predict what goes viral or what sells on TikTok Shop, what words and phrases click and which don’t, and for language models learning how people write in short-form video.

TikTok’s official route to the data is much narrower. Its Research Tools are open to qualifying researchers at academic institutions in regions including the United States, EEA, UK, Canada, and Switzerland, plus some not-for-profit bodies in the EU, and require an application and approval.

Broad data scraping isn’t allowed by the platform. Section 3.4 of TikTok’s U.S. terms of service bars extracting data from the platform with automated software unless TikTok approves it in writing.

DataSocial’s write-up describes reaching TikTok’s private mobile API with generated device identities that pass as Android phones, reverse-engineered request signatures, and a spoofed TLS handshake. It says the system collected 3.23 billion creator profiles, 5.94 billion videos, and 2.8 billion comments in three weeks. No login or account was involved, according to the write-up.

The free tier doubles as a storefront. The license is CC BY-NC 4.0, and the card says it’s free for research and personal use. Commercial use, creator profiles, and daily updates are routed to datasocial.ai, and the scraper’s source code is sold separately.

Scraping fights are already in court. Reddit sued Perplexity and three data-scraping firms in October 2025, alleging an “industrial-scale” scheme to harvest its content for AI training. In July, a federal judge largely declined to dismiss the case, per Law360.

The surviving claims include DMCA allegations that SerpApi circumvented Google’s anti-bot protections. TikTok isn’t a party, and the case involves scraping through Google search results, not a private mobile API.

As for the data itself, rows include captions, music used, and different checkboxes. There is no creator handle column, but it shows a lot of data and information including captions, hashtags, people mentioned on the video, etc. That said, the user ID is actually available in Datasocial.

The data trove already has company. Copies of a 4.5-billion-video set, also described as collected from TikTok’s mobile API, are on Hugging Face too.

The data is free for non-commercial use. The code that collected it costs $1,699.

Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss are making a bet on privacy coins, filing with regulators to launch a spot Zcash exchange-traded fund as the once-shunned asset enjoys a dramatic revival.

The Winklevoss Zcash ETF, outlined in an S-1 registration statement filed Monday with the Securities and Exchange Commission, would hold ZEC directly and seek to track its price, giving investors exposure through a traditional brokerage account rather than buying and storing the token themselves. The fund is slated to trade on Nasdaq under the ticker “WINK,” with a 0.25% sponsor fee.

The twins’ crypto exchange, Gemini, would serve as custodian, holding the trust’s ZEC in cold storage. Winklevoss Capital Fund has indicated an interest in buying up to $100 million of shares in the offering, though the filing notes that’s a non-binding commitment.

The trust also tapped Cypherpunk Technologies, the Winklevoss-backed Zcash treasury company, as its “Zcash Ecosystem Partner” to advise on protocol matters and coinholder voting.

The filing lands amid a striking resurgence for Zcash, a privacy coin that lets users shield the sender, recipient and amount of a transaction using cryptography called zk-SNARKs.

After years as a regulatory pariah, ZEC has surged into the top ranks of digital assets this year, driven by rising concern over financial surveillance and a wave of institutional packaging. Crypto asset manager Grayscale recently converted its Zcash Trust into a spot ETF in August and later moved to split its shares, while 21Shares listed Europe’s first Zcash exchange-traded product.

A WINK listing would add the industry’s most recognizable set of twins to that push.

The filing doesn’t shy from the risks, flagging ZEC’s extreme volatility and the unique vulnerabilities of privacy coins. It specifically notes the soundness bug found this year in Zcash’s Orchard shielded pool, which briefly sent ZEC down roughly 50% before the network patched it with the Ironwood upgrade.

The filing is only a first step, and the SEC must still sign off before trading can begin. Like all spot crypto ETFs, the fund would track a highly volatile asset, meaning investors could lose big or win big on a coin that has surged over 2,000% in the last year.

Bryan Johnson, the face of the “Don’t Die” movement, just posted the least immortal tweet of his career.

“Sadly, the best anti-aging therapies are filters, retouch and lighting,” the biohacker wrote on X on Tuesday.

That’s an odd line from a man who has said he spends $2 million a year trying to make his body act 18 again. This man has done everything and more in his quest for immortality, from changing his entire habits to weird things like shockwave therapy on his penis.

So is Johnson giving up and praying the gospel of Botox and makeup? Not exactly. But the summer changed him.

On June 30, he announced he has autoimmune gastritis, a chronic condition where the immune system attacks the stomach lining. He said he was diagnosed in May.

Weeks later, his girlfriend and Blueprint co-founder Kate Tolo was diagnosed with endometriosis, plus PMOS and adenomyosis, after about six weeks of testing.

On July 21, Johnson said he had “cloned” himself as a newborn. A community note disagreed. What he made was induced pluripotent stem cells, which are reprogrammed adult cells and not a clone.

Then came the pivot. In a July 24 post, Johnson wrote that he nearly shut down his longevity company last year and asked himself what to build on the eve of superintelligence.

His answer? Cure all diseases. He pointed to GitLab co-founder Sid Sijbrandij, who reported no evidence of disease after going “founder mode” on his cancer. He also cited Paul Conyngham, the Sydney engineer whose custom mRNA vaccine reportedly shrank his dog’s tumors by roughly 75%.

Johnson said he refocused Immortals, the $1 million-a-year program he launched in February with three slots, on building tools so individuals can find and fix their own health problems. He and Tolo are the first customers.

The old menu stays: nutrition, GLP-1s, hormones, peptides, biomarkers. New additions include stem cells, organoids, and personalized therapy development.

Then, last month, Johnson posted that “in many ways” he is 18. He listed sleep, fertility, resting heart rate, vascular health and inflammation as indistinguishable from a teenager’s.

The exceptions were hearing and somatic mutations. He also conceded that he looks his age, 49, which is probably why some botox may beat millions of dollars of medical research to achieve the same results.

Johnson’s attention/obsession has also moved toward women’s health. Tolo told Australia’s ABC that female health was always “next,” and she is aiming to become the “world’s most measured woman”. The protocol collects 14 million data points on her menstrual cycle.

Johnson told the same outlet he remains committed to his goal of immortality by 2039, it’s just not his only life goal. The deadline is 13 years away, so he would be an immortal dude in his 60s.

Probably not how an immortal person would like to look for eternity, but also nothing that some concealer can’t fix.

Cross-border payments company Conduit is taking Tether to court, alleging the stablecoin giant froze $2.76 million of its money without justification and has refused for more than a year to release it.

In a complaint filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Conduit says Tether froze its treasury wallet, essentially the digital equivalent of its operating bank account, on Sept. 24, 2025, and has since kept the funds locked while profiting from the reserves backing them.

The suit brings claims including conversion, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty and computer fraud, and demands the funds be returned.

At the heart of the dispute is a Brazilian investigation that Conduit says has nothing to do with it. According to the filing, Brazil’s Federal Police were probing entities tied to a firm called Onix, which had once used Conduit’s platform.

But Conduit says its frozen treasury wallet was created in May 2025, nearly a month after Onix’s last transaction on its platform, and never held any Onix funds. The company says the Federal Police confirmed they never flagged the wallet and don’t know what criteria Tether used to freeze it, pointing to Tether’s own T3 Financial Crime Unit as having made the call independently.

Conduit argues the freeze has gutted its business. The wallet processed more than $1.1 billion in volume across roughly four months before being locked, and the company says the liquidity hit has forced it to lay off employees and close offices.

Meanwhile, the company contends, Tether continues to earn interest on the U.S. Treasury securities backing the frozen tokens, “reaping the financial rewards” of the freeze at no cost to itself.

The case adds to mounting scrutiny of Tether’s power to freeze USDT at will.

Tether was separately sued this year over a $42.4 million freeze, and the company has frozen hundreds of millions in tokens flagged for illicit activity. Tether also recently joined Circle in freezing funds tied to the Bitget hack.

Meanwhile, and somewhat ironically, the company has faced political heat for apparently not freezing enough. Sen. Richard Blumenthal recently called USDT a “superhighway” for sanctions evasion, pointing to Iran’s use of the stablecoin. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Flash loan attacks drained $1.211 billion from decentralized finance platforms between February 2020 and July 2024, according to newly published research in the Journal of Financial Crime.

The study, by Professor Tim Hall of the University of Winchester and Remo Stieger, a former partner at Swiss risk intelligence firm SyntiFi, identified 72 flash loan attacks among 254 successful attacks on DeFi over the period. Those 254 attacks caused $6.568 billion in losses, 18.44% of which came from flash loan attacks.

Hall said in a statement that “we now are seeing crimes that we have never seen before,” some “capable of stealing mind-boggling sums of money, often in the tens of millions of dollars.”

Flash loans let users borrow assets from a liquidity pool without collateral, provided the loan is repaid within the same blockchain transaction. Attackers use them to access the large sums needed to execute an exploit.

More than 80% of flash loan attack losses occurred on Ethereum, the study found. Individual attacks ranged from $80,000 to $197 million, and those that stole $10 million or more accounted for over 88% of losses.

The researchers identified 14 types of flash loan attack, falling into two broad groups: those that manipulate price feeds, and those that exploit flaws in a protocol’s underlying logic. Logic exploits were less frequent but caused higher average losses.

Logic exploits accounted for 28% of flash loan attack losses between February 2020 and January 2022, and 55% from February 2022 to July 2024, according to the paper.

Four attack types accounted for more than 81% of losses: price oracle attacks, donate function logic exploits, reentrancy attacks and a single governance attack, which cost $181 million.

Flash loan attackers

Attack activity moved through phases of growth and consolidation, which the authors write suggests platforms improved their security after attacks while attackers found new vulnerabilities.

The study drew on an interview with one platform that suffered a major flash loan attack, granted anonymity at its request. The bug exploited had passed “ourselves and several of the auditors,” the platform’s representative said, and went unnoticed on-chain for more than a year.

The attacker began “taunting” the platform on social media afterward, Hall said, which “led to some victims engaging with the attacker and outlining the devastating impacts that the loss of this money had on them.”

The representative divided attackers into “hobbyist individual researchers” and professional state-level or organized crime groups, citing North Korea. From a blockchain security perspective, the professionals’ attacks “are not at all advanced,” the representative said.

The representative also described the toll on teams that suffer attacks, saying that “most often it ends up fracturing them and destroying them,” even when funds are recovered.

Losses exceeded 0.5% of the value borrowed through flash loans in only one six-month period, and flash loan use kept growing, the paper found.

The authors characterize the attacks as significant, increasingly sophisticated and unpredictable “but not existential” threats to DeFi.

Since the study period ended, decentralized exchange Bunni shut down in October 2025 after an $8.4 million exploit that used flash loans, saying it could not afford the cost of a secure relaunch.

“We are keen that this isn’t seen just as a piece of academic research,” Hall said. “The analysis we did has a host of applications for the cryptocurrency industry, for regulators and for legal and law enforcement agencies.

After weeks of Bitcoin turning heads and climbing the charts, the top of the crypto market is now barely moving. Bitcoin trades at $86,264.06, up 0.59% over 24 hours. Ethereum sits at $2,714.39, up just 0.34%.

The whole market is worth just north of $3 trillion, essentially flat for the day, according to CoinGecko data. The rest of the 12 largest coins are drifting in roughly the same way. Solana gained 1.4% and XRP 1.07%, while BNB lost 0.41% and Tron 0.22%.

Most traditional coins are flat, and then there’s privacy coins.

Zcash, perhaps the best known privacy coin, has been on a tear over the last year, and today is up 3%, recovering from a pullback off its recent peak near $1,600. Monero, meanwhile, is up 2.14% at $562.32 over the last 24 hours, making the privacy coins the standout performers on the day.

The daily charts tell the two coins apart. Zcash is up 2.62% on Binance since the day’s candle opened, so its move is still running. Monero is riding a spike that began yesterday and kept running during the last 24 hours..

The overall flat tape for the crypto market has a reason. The Federal Reserve raised rates to 3.75%-4.00% on Sept. 16, its first hike since July 2023. Then the September jobs report landed with just 29,000 new jobs against the 84,000 economists expected, and unemployment ticked up to 4.2%.

That weak print cut the odds of an October hike to about 22% right after the report, according to CME FedWatch. The likelihood that interest rates do not increase again is a good sign for risk assets, so the September rate hike combined with odds of another hike sinking is essentially a wash—hence, a flat market.

Bitcoin, though, continues to show bullish momentum. Yesterday, it flashed a second golden cross, with its 100-day exponential moving average crossing above the 200-day. It is still sitting below resistance at $87,354. But even the most sustained bull runs need time to breathe.

Now, here’s the caveat on Zcash. A green day is not a trend reversal. ZEC still sits about 19% below its late-September high of $1,698, and one day of buying does not close that gap.

Zcash slid to $1,333.50 intraday on October first as Grayscale’s Zcash ETF lost $30.25 million. Even after that outflow, the fund has taken in about $268 million in net inflows since it launched on Aug. 25.

Zoom out, and Zcash is its own story. The coin has gained about 2,500% over the previous 12 months, and it still not showing signs of a serious trend reversal.

The latest leg was a 253% climb from a $480.72 base to the $1,698 high in late September. It came with two big events: Grayscale’s Zcash ETF launched on Aug. 25, and coinholders voted 98.9% on Sept. 17 to keep Bitcoin-style halvings (and keep the coin’s inflation in check).

A cooldown is not out of character for this coin. ZEC dropped 38% when the Ironwood counterfeiting scare hit earlier this year, then recovered past $1,600. Against that, the current slide of about 19% from the September high is mild.

Monero is in a similar spot. XMR trades about 11% below its September high of $632.86. Its market cap is $10.57 billion, less than half of Zcash’s $23.18 billion.

Based on the daily charts, both privacy coins are in consolidation, not breakout. On Zcash’s daily chart, price is at $1,372.69, stuck just under the resistance zone at $1,403.89, measured from the $451.75 low to the $1,698 high. Today’s high of $1,385 did not reach it. The 38.2% level at $1,221.93 sits below as the next marker.

A faster gauge disagrees on Monero, which is deep in overbought territory, but is showing a more constrained movement, trading sideways since late September.

Here are the levels to watch in the near term: Bitcoin needs to clear $87,354, Zcash faces $1,403.89 overhead, and Monero needs to keep holding above $558.69.

Paris-based Mistral AI launched Mistral Large 4 on Tuesday, an AI model with 1 trillion parameters. That is the kind of system behind chatbots like ChatGPT and Claude, as parameters are the adjustable numbers it tunes during training—more of them generally means more capacity to learn, and more expensive to run.

“[Mistral Large 4] is at the frontier of open models, and by far the strongest open-weight model from the US or Europe,” Mistral AI’s Chief scientist Guillaume Lample, wrote on X.

Not all of those parameters work at once. Large 4 uses a “mixture of experts” design, meaning the model routes each question to a few specialist sub-networks, so only 49 billion parameters fire per answer. Mistral’s last flagship, Large 3, did the same with 41 billion active out of 675 billion.

The whole “Le Chonk” nickname has a backstory. In June, after Mistral renamed its Le Chat assistant to Vibe, fans on Reddit and X invented a fictional model called Le Chaton Fat—roughly “the fat kitten”—with 30 trillion parameters, 1,000 meows per second, and fake benchmarks claiming it beat Claude Fable 5.

CEO Arthur Mensch played along, replying that the model was really called “le gros chaton,” French for “the big kitten.” Mistral then added a cartoon cat to its Vibe website. Its real launch post now lists the model as, “very officially,” le Chonk.

Mistral sells “sovereign AI”—models a country or company can own and run without handing its data to outside firms. Saudi Arabia’s state-backed HUMAIN signed a deal worth hundreds of millions of euros in August with this company for this exact reason.

Mistral raised a €3 billion ($3.37 billion) Series D—a funding round that sells shares to investors—in September at a valuation above €21 billion ($23.6 billion), led by Samsung. Mistral says Large 4 is the first milestone on the roadmap that money funds.

Le Chunk costs $1.36 per million input tokens and $4.18 per million output tokens—the chunks of text, roughly three-quarters of a word each, that AI companies bill by. Claude Opus 5.5 charges $4 and $20, while GPT-6 Astra charges $10 and $50.

That puts Large 4 at about a third of Opus 5.5’s price on input and a fifth on output. Against Astra, it is roughly a seventh and a twelfth.

What the benchmarks say

Mistral’s announcement mostly benchmarks Large 4 against Chinese open-weight models—DeepSeek V4 Pro, Kimi K3, GLM-5.3, and Qwen3.8 Max—and “open-weight” means anyone can download and run the model. Claude and GPT show up in only a handful of comparisons, and the newest Claude, Opus 5.5, appears only in a cybersecurity claim.

In a blind human evaluation of coding quality by Surge AI, Mistral Large 4 ranked second of five models with 3.74 out of 5, behind Claude Opus 5’s 4.22.

AutomationBench hands an AI 657 chores in simulated business software—finance, HR, sales, support—and scores the share of each task’s goals it completes, with zero credit if it breaks a rule. Large 4 scored 59.9 points. On Artificial Analysis’s board, Claude Sonnet 5.5 hit 71.8, Opus 5.5 hit 69.5, and Gemini 4 Argon topped the page at 77.5 on that same benchmark.

On DeepSWE 1.1, which is one of the benchmarks developers check out when trying to assess how good a model is at coding, Large 4 scored 62. That tops GLM-5.3 at 61 and DeepSeek V4 Pro at 57 but trails Kimi K3’s 68. Datacurve’s own leaderboard has GPT-6 Astra and Claude Opus 5 at 74.

Mistral says it will release Large 4’s weights—the trained numbers that make the model work—by the end of October, which would let outside developers download the model and test those claims themselves.

DeFi Development Corp., a Financial services and asset management company known in the crypto ecosystem for having the second biggest Solana holdings in the world, just added 26,202 SOL, worth roughly $3 million, to its treasury. The funds came in between Sept. 28 and Oct. 2, according to an 8-K, the form public companies file to disclose significant events.

The Nasdaq-listed company, ticker DFDV, now holds 2,564,212 SOL and “SOL equivalents,” a term the filing doesn’t define. It values the pile at $302 million. That’s a 1% increase from the 2,538,010 it held on Sept. 25.

The pace with which the company is adding to its coffers is cooling. DFDV added 101,381 SOL in the week ending Sept. 18 and 47,706 SOL the week after.

CEO Joseph Onorati framed it differently in the company’s press release. “The DFDV ship is flying at lightning speed. We have continued buying SOL and have grown our treasury by 11% since August 12,” he said.

Lightning speed, in this case, was roughly half the previous week’s pace.

DFDV is what’s known as a digital asset treasury company, a business whose main strategy is piling up one cryptocurrency on its balance sheet. It applies the approach Michael Saylor’s Strategy popularized with Bitcoin to Solana, and it runs its own validators, the computers that help run the network and earn rewards. For shareholders, the appeal is exposure to SOL through a regular brokerage account.

DFDV pitches itself as a bigger swing on Solana. In an August release, Onorati said the company is designed to give investors magnified exposure to SOL. In practice, that means moves in SOL’s price are supposed to hit the stock harder, in both directions.

The company sells CHAD, a preferred stock—shares that get paid dividends ahead of common stock—to raise money that its prospectus says will go partly toward buying SOL. CHAD has a stated amount of $10 and currently pays 13% a year, or $1.30 per share, according to the release. Its board can adjust that rate, per the same prospectus.

The company also set up a $300 million at-the-market program, a way to sell new shares over time at market prices, per the release.

On Sept. 1, the company was offering 2.2 million shares of CHAD at $9, a deal that could raise $19.8 million. The IPO priced two days later at 1,375,000 shares and $8 each, for about $11 million. Against a treasury the company values at $302 million, that’s a small slice.

DFDV also issued preliminary third-quarter estimates as of Sept. 30, not final results. It said SOL per share and total SOL grew by double digits since Aug. 12. Net asset value per share—what’s left for each common share after subtracting debts and preferred stock from holdings and cash—grew more than 100%.

The company was known as Janover, a commercial real estate platform, until its 2025 pivot. In May 2025, it held nearly 600,000 SOL. It now holds more than four times that.

The DAT model, though, has a catch. Treasury firms grow by selling shares at a premium, meaning more than the tokens behind each share are worth, and history has proven that growth stalls when shares fall below that value. By December 2025, many firms’ shares had slipped below the value of their crypto holdings, Strategy’s included.

The company has declared CHAD dividends of $0.00516 per share for each business day through Oct. 30.

Strive bought 2,000 Bitcoin last week—its biggest haul in four months.

The publicly traded company paid an average of about $84,422 per coin between Sept. 28 and Oct. 2, according to its a filing with the SEC. That works out to roughly $169 million.

The company’s last biggest buy was 2,500 Bitcoin between May 23 and June, which lifted Strive’s total to 19,000.

Holdings now stand at 29,462 Bitcoin as of Oct. 2. At an average price of roughly $86,000 per coin, that’s about $2.5 billion.

Strive is what’s called a Bitcoin treasury company—a business that raises money from investors and parks it in Bitcoin instead of cash. In September 2025, it agreed to buy Semler Scientific, a healthcare technology firm sitting on roughly 5,000 Bitcoin, and from there its stack just grew.

Shareholders approved the deal in January, creating a combined stash of about 12,800 BTC. By late April, Strive held 14,557 Bitcoin. By mid-August it held 20,246 BTC.

The market has also moved since, and in the directions hodlers had hoped. Last week’s average price was about 41% above that July figure, and Strive’s holdings are up 48% in dollar amounts since July 2.

Where does the money come from? The filing doesn’t say this week. But in recent weeks, Strive has raised most of it by selling SATA, a type of preferred stock—a share that pays holders a regular dividend, meaning a cash payout, ahead of ordinary shareholders.

SATA supplied 70% of capital in the week ending Sept. 4 and 85% in the week ending Sept. 25.

Each share carries a $100 stated amount, and Strive currently pays about 13% a year. The rate is adjustable, and the company said then it would start paying dividends every business day on June 16.

In plain terms, investors hand Strive cash and Strive currently pays about $13 a year for every $100 share. Bitcoin pays no interest, so those dividends have to come from Strive’s cash or from raising more money. The filing lists $284.7 million in cash and no debt.

The filing puts Strive’s average cost at $90,170 per Bitcoin at the end of September, above the roughly $86,000 where Bitcoin traded Monday. On paper, that position is worth less than Strive paid for it.

For anyone who has never touched crypto, the setup is simple. Strive’s stock, which trades on the Nasdaq, lets you bet on Bitcoin through a regular brokerage account, while SATA pays a dividend and is issued by a company holding nearly 30,000 bitcoin.

Strive ranks fifth among public Bitcoin holders, behind Strategy, Twenty One Capital, Metaplanet and MARA, per Bitcoin Treasuries. Twenty One holds 43,514 Bitcoin, and Strive is now 14,052 coins short of that.