Bitcoin is nearing a decisive moment as it tests two closely aligned on-chain resistance levels, following roughly 75 days of sideways consolidation since its Feb. 6 local bottom at $60,000 as bitcoin climbs above $78,000.
The first metric is the True Market Mean, currently at $78,200. This metric, tracked by Checkonchain, reflects the average acquisition price of actively circulating supply, excluding lost or dormant coins. It effectively captures the aggregate cost basis of engaged market participants.
The True Market Mean filters out lost, dormant, and economically inactive coins, leaving only the cost basis of participants who are actually present in the market, making it a more precise gauge of where real selling pressure resides.
Just above sits the Short-Term Holder realized price (STHRP) at $79,200, according to checkonchain. This cohort, defined as investors holding coins for fewer than 155 days, tends to be more reactive to price swings. With spot prices below their average entry, these participants remain at a slight loss. Bitcoin tested the STHRP in mid-January around $98,000 and got rejected.
A sustained move above this zone could shift both levels into support, strengthening bullish momentum. Conversely, failure to reclaim them may prolong bitcoin’s consolidation phase, with potential downside.
$SPK, the native governance asset of the Spark protocol, is up 1.21% during Tuesday’s U.S. market hours to currently trade at $0.027. The buying pressure followed a capital rotation to leading protocol Sparklend as its major competitor AAVE got caught in the recent Kelp DAO rsETH exploit. The price jumps offer a major breakout from key resistance level, signalling an opportunity for potential recovery in near-term.
Sparklend Gains $1.4B as Kelp DAO Hack Shakes DeFi Markets
On April 18, 2026, Kelp DAO was exploited in a devastating $293 million attack, the biggest DeFi hack of the year. The attacker manipulated a vulnerability in the protocol’s LayerZero-powered bridge, which relied on a flawed single-verifier configuration. The hacker created 116,500 unbacked rsETH (18 percent of the total supply) by forging cross-chain messages and shared these fake coins with over 20 different networks.
The collapse instantly froze Aave. Though its core contracts were protected, the acceptance of rsETH as collateral by the protocol was a crucial flaw. The attacker leveraged the useless rsETH to borrow around $236 million of high-quality assets such as WETH, placing Aave in almost the same position with almost 196 million in bad debt. This sparked a massive liquidity crisis; panicked users withdrew over $5.4 billion, pushing ETH utilization to 100% and effectively trapping remaining funds in a “liquidity crunch.”
This volatility led to a great exodus of capital to protocols seen as more robust, a flight to quality. The main beneficiary of this shift was Sparklend. Whilst Aave had to freeze its markets to test its Umbrella safety module, Sparklend had registered an unprecedented net deposits and loan growth of $1.4 billion and $350 million, respectively, in a span of 48 hours. According to the data, the inflows of April 18th and 20th are by far the largest in all of 2026.
The success of Sparklend was based on its proactive risk management. Spark already halted the rsETH and other low-liquidity assets in January 2026, and had no exposure to the forged tokens. This enabled it to keep on operating fully as competitors were hampered by contagion. The enormous rush of USDS and DAI testifies to the fact that the investors perceived Sparklend as a safe haven, effectively seizing a large portion of liquidity leaving the market in the panic.
Spark Price Gives a Decisive Breakout From 4-Months Consolidation
Following a significant correction in 2025, the Spark price shifted its trajectory to sideways above the $0.019 support. For over four months, the $SPK price remains in a confined range between the horizontal level of $0.026 and $0.018.
This consolidation acted as an accumulation zone for $SPK buyers, evidenced by a rising slope in momentum indicator RSI. The building bullish momentum bolstered price to rebound from the aforementioned despite the geopolitical tension in the middle east.
Furthermore, the Kelp DAO rsETH exploit acted as triggered for capital rotation to Spark price, giving a decisive breakout from the range resistance on April 20th. If the breakout holds, the Spark price could drive a 25% rally to $0.034, followed by a leap to $0.046.
ZetaChain has onboarded Kimi K2.6 from Moonshot AI and Alibaba’s Qwen 3.6 Max, moving toward a vision where AI models operate natively across blockchain ecosystems. The platform positions itself as a universal layer where applications can run across chains and models simultaneously while maintaining private, persistent user memory that belongs to the user rather than the platform.
. @Kimi_Moonshot K2.6 and @Alibaba_Qwen 3.6 Max are now onboarded on ZetaChain.
The model layer is moving fast. The memory layer is just getting started.
ZetaChain enables: – Model-agnostic memory – Persistent user context – Private, user-owned data
The model layer is moving fast. The memory layer is just getting started, and that’s where the real infrastructure gap exists.
About ZetaChain & How It is Different
ZetaChain isn’t building another blockchain to chase transactions. It’s building the infrastructure so apps can work across chains and AI models without developers having to wire up each one separately.
An app on ZetaChain picks Kimi, Qwen, or whoever else is onboarded, routes the request to whichever model makes sense for the job, and does it all from one interface.
The cross-chain stuff works the same way. An app executes transactions and accesses liquidity across multiple blockchains without anyone managing bridges, wrapped tokens, or chain-specific integrations. ZetaChain handles those details. You don’t see them.
That abstraction is powerful because it removes the fragmentation that currently makes Web3 applications unnecessarily complex. Users shouldn’t need to understand which chain a liquidity pool lives on to swap assets. Developers shouldn’t need to deploy the same application separately to every blockchain. ZetaChain removes those requirements.
The Memory Layer Is the Real Feature
The model layer with Kimi and Qwen is impressive, but the memory layer is where ZetaChain is making its actual bet on what comes next. Current AI interactions are stateless. You ask a question, you get an answer, and the next conversation starts fresh with no context from what came before. That limitation creates friction for any application that depends on understanding who the user is and what they’ve done previously.
ZetaChain’s memory layer changes that by giving users persistent, private, user-owned context that AI models can access across interactions. An AI agent helping manage a crypto portfolio needs to know what positions the user currently holds, what their risk tolerance is, and what trades they’ve already executed.
Without persistent memory, the agent starts from zero with every interaction and can’t provide intelligent, contextual help.
The private, user-owned part matters as much as the persistence. Current AI services store interaction history on company servers and use that data to train models or sell insights. The memory layer is different from how every other AI service works.
The memory stays with the user. It’s encrypted. It’s theirs. The AI model can read what it needs to give smart responses, but the user owns the data. They can revoke access anytime. They can switch to a different model and their history moves with them.
How This Changes the Pricing Model
The economics are completely different from cloud AI services. Instead of paying a subscription for access to a model, users own their memory and can choose which models to interact with.
A developer building on ZetaChain doesn’t need to host infrastructure. They build the application logic, and ZetaChain handles the model routing, memory management, and cross-chain execution.
That shift moves the economic incentive from locking users into a single platform to providing the best tools and infrastructure for applications that users actually want to use. It’s the difference between renting compute and building applications that control their own infrastructure and data.
Conclusion
ZetaChain onboarding Kimi and Qwen demonstrates the model layer working. The memory layer is where the platform’s actual innovation lives. Users getting persistent, private memory across AI interactions while developers build without managing their own infrastructure represents a genuinely different approach to how AI and Web3 combine. The model layer is moving fast. The memory layer is where the real value starts to compound.
Another day, another exploit. The security crisis in blockchain-based decentralized finance (DeFi), once touted as a challenger to legacy infrastructure, is only getting worse.
The latest victim is Volo Protocol, a platform built on the Sui blockchain, where users deposit assets into yield-generating “vaults,” which function as pooled investments. Deposited tokens such as bitcoin, stablecoins and tokenized assets are deployed using various onchain strategies to generate returns.
Early Wednesday, the protocol confirmed a security breach that drained a total of roughly $3.5 million in digital assets from three of the vaults. Assets locked in other vaults were not affected, it said in a post on X.
“The ~$28M in TVL across all other Volo vaults is safe. The exploit was isolated to 3 specific vaults, and we have confirmed no shared attack vector exists with the remaining vaults,” the protocol said, adding that it is “prepared to absorb” the financial loss rather than pass it on to users.
The attack hit vaults holding wrapped bitcoin (WBTC), Matridock’s tokenized gold token, XAUm, and the dollar-pegged stablecoin USDC. In response, the protocol froze all vaults and began working with the Sui Foundation and onchain investigators to contain the damage and trace funds.
Since the incident, Volo has “frozen” $500,000 in assets through coordination with ecosystem partners, meaning those funds have been immobilized onchain to prevent any movement or withdrawal. Still, the majority of the stolen funds remain under investigation.
Growing unease
The breach adds to growing unease across decentralized finance, where a string of exploits has raised questions about smart contract security and protocol oversight. The timing is particularly sensitive, coming just days after the weekend’s KelpDAO exploit, in which an attacker drained millions by artificially minting unbacked liquid restaking tokens, rsETH.
The aftermath has rippled across the DeFi, triggering collateral damage in multiple protocols, including leading lending platform Aave, where users rushed to withdraw funds because of the heightened uncertainty.
To date, decentralized finance has suffered roughly $7.78 billion in hacks, according to data from DeFiLlama. Bridge protocols — which enable the transfer of assets across blockchains — account for another $2.90 billion in losses. Combined, the figure exceeds $10 billion, roughly equivalent to the market capitalization of cryptocurrencies ranked between 10th and 15th globally.
Volo says it will publish a full post-mortem once its investigation is complete and remediation steps are finalized.
But for DeFi users and investors, a broader pattern is becoming harder to ignore: while institutional adoption is accelerating, relatively little of that capital appears to be flowing into improving security, with exploits continuing to arrive in clusters.
Read more: The $13 billion DeFi wipeout in two days, and it started with KelpDAO attack
The long-standing feud between Justin Sun and $WLFI is escalating.
At this point, the final move came from Tron (TRX) founder Justin Sun.
Justin Sun has filed a lawsuit against World Liberty Finance ($WLFI), a cryptocurrency project supported by US President Donald Trump.
The Sun announced in a post from its X account that it has filed a lawsuit against World Liberty Finance ($WLFI) in a California federal court.
Sun stated in the lawsuit that the $WLFI project team froze their tokens without valid reason, stripped them of their voting rights in governance proposals, and threatened to permanently burn their tokens.
Sun also explained that he tried to negotiate to resolve the issue, but initiated legal action after the project refused to lift the token freeze and restore governance voting rights.
“…I tried to resolve this situation in good faith with the World Liberty project team without resorting to legal action.”
However, the project team rejected my requests to dissolve my tokens and restore my rights as a token holder. They left me no choice but to take legal action. My goal is to be treated the same way as other early investors.”
Sun stated that she still supports President Trump and his administration, emphasizing that her lawsuit targets specific individuals on the project team, not the president himself.
“…Unfortunately, some individuals on the World Liberty project team are running the project in a way that is contrary to President Trump’s values…”
Sun also strongly opposed a new governance proposal announced by World Liberty Finance on April 15, stating that it was disadvantageous to the community because it would require the tokens of those who voted against it to be locked indefinitely or partially burned.
Capital flows into exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the cryptocurrency market continue, with both Bitcoin and Ethereum-based spot ETFs recording consecutive net inflows.
According to SoSoValue data, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net inflow of $11.84 million on the April 21 US trading day, continuing a streak of positive flows for the sixth consecutive day.
The highest daily inflow was seen in the IBIT ETF managed by BlackRock. This fund recorded a net inflow of approximately $39.34 million in a single day, bringing its historical total net inflow to $64.9 billion. It was followed by the Bitcoin Mini Trust ETF offered by Grayscale, which also saw a daily inflow of $17.25 million. Conversely, Grayscale’s GBTC ETF was the product with the largest net outflow of the day, at $17.5 million.
In total, the net asset value of Bitcoin spot ETFs has reached approximately $99.08 billion, which is equivalent to 6.54% of Bitcoin’s total market capitalization. Cumulative net inflow has risen to $57.99 billion.
On the other hand, Ethereum spot ETFs also performed strongly. A total net inflow of $43.36 million was recorded on the same day, marking a nine-day uninterrupted inflow trend in this area. BlackRock’s ETHA ETF led with $37 million, while the ETHE fund experienced outflows of $12.13 million.
Ethereum spot ETFs have reached a total net asset value of $13.66 billion, with cumulative net inflows recorded at $12.05 billion. These figures indicate continued interest from institutional investors.
A recent analysis published by crypto asset management company Grayscale suggests that the Bitcoin market may have formed a permanent bottom. According to the company’s research arm, blockchain data indicates that price movements are settling on a healthier footing.
According to Grayscale Research, Bitcoin has risen by nearly 20% since hitting a low of around $63,000 on February 5th, reaching the $76,000 range. This surge is seen as a critical threshold, particularly for investors who recently bought, as it represents a return to their cost basis.
Grayscale Research Head Zach Pandl stated that the transparent nature of the Bitcoin network allows for detailed analysis of investor behavior. According to Pandl, the “realized price” metric, frequently used in analyses—that is, the average cost at which coins moved on the last chain—is approximately $74,000 for transactions over the last 1 to 3 months.
Related NewsBREAKING: U.S.-Iran Diplomatic Process Paused Due to Lack of Response from Iran
This situation indicates that a large portion of investors who recently entered the market have reached the break-even point again. According to the analyst, if the price rises above current levels, this group of investors will be able to profit, which could signal the first phase of a potential bull market.
On the other hand, the Bitcoin price is still trading below its October peak levels. However, according to Grayscale, recent data suggests that the market may have formed a strong and lasting bottom in the $65,000 to $70,000 range.
Vitalik Buterin, one of the most followed figures in the cryptocurrency market, has had his current portfolio allocation revealed. The data shows that the Ethereum founder holds the majority of his assets in Ethereum, and his portfolio is significantly focused on the main asset.
According to portfolio data, Buterin holds approximately 224,144 ETH. At current prices, the total value of these assets is around $517.1 million.
Looking at assets other than Ethereum, a more limited but noteworthy diversification is evident. Buterin holds approximately 1.75 million AETHLUSD tokens, a stablecoin belonging to the Aave ecosystem, worth approximately $1.75 million. In addition, he has 10 billion WHITE tokens in his portfolio, valued at approximately $718,500.
Related NewsThe U.S. Army Is Evaluating Bitcoin for National Defense Applications – News Emerged Today
Buterin’s Frankencoin (ZCHF) holdings are worth approximately $510,000. He also has positions of $259,800 in Moo Deng (MOODENG) tokens and approximately $100,000 in Kyber Network (KNC) tokens.
However, it should also be noted that assets other than Ethereum were sent to Vitalik Buterin’s wallet without his knowledge by developers who wanted to promote these tokens.
New York sued Coinbase and Gemini on Tuesday, becoming the latest state to argue that prediction market contracts dealing with sports, entertainment and elections are violating state gambling laws.
According to the lawsuits, Coinbase and Gemini’s prediction market offerings are really unlicensed gambling products, pointing to how the companies advertised their prediction markets and their role as bookmakers on the platforms. The NYAG’s office also described the actual behavior of the prediction market platforms, describing users as “bettors” and saying that “each contract is a bet.” The suits also argued that the platforms allow people to place bets between the ages of 18 and 21, when New York bars anyone under 21 from gambling on mobile apps.
“As described above, what Respondent offers through its platform is quintessentially gambling: It allows a bettor to stake or risk money upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under the bettor’s control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome,” the suit against Coinbase said.
New York is just the latest state to sue prediction market providers over their sports and entertainment products. Nevada, Washington and a host of other states have similarly filed suit, arguing that at least the sports-related bets are, indeed, bets, and not federally regulated swaps. It’s an issue that now sits before multiple appeals courts, and is likely to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Coinbase Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal said in a post on X (formerly Twitter) that “prediction markets are federally regulated national exchanges” and that Coinbase would fight for federal oversight.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Mike Selig, for his part, has argued that prediction markets — including the sports-related contracts — fall under his agency’s “exclusive jurisdiction.” The CFTC has filed suit against Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois to block them from bringing charges against prediction market providers, and it filed to join another case out of Nevada to defend the prediction market providers.
Kalshi, one of the biggest prediction market providers, was not named as a defendant on Tuesday. The company preemptively sued the New York State Gaming Commission last fall, asking a federal court to rule that state gambling laws do not apply to its platform. That case is still working its way through the Southern District of New York courthouse.
In a statement, New York State Attorney General Letitia James said both Gemini and Coinbase’s products were “illegal gambling operations.”
“Gambling by another name is still gambling, and it is not exempt from regulation under our state laws and Constitution,” she said.
