USDC 價格USDC

Binance has significantly reduced its Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) holdings, converting a large portion of these assets into the stablecoin USDC. According to data shared by AB Kuai Dong, between January and February 2025, Binance’s BTC reserves fell from 46,896 to 2,747 (-94.1%). At the same time, its ETH holdings dropped from 216,313 to 175 (-99.9%). At Bitcoin’s present price of $98K, the converted 44,149 BTC amounts to $4.32 billion. Likewise, the liquidated ETH tokens amount to approximately $584 million at $2,700 per coin. The move appears to be a strategic asset conversion rather than a liquidity crisis. According to Colin Wu, Binance’s holdings shift mirrors previous instances in June 2023 and February 2024, when the exchange reportedly made similar moves. Notably, the majority of Binance’s converted assets have been moved into USDC, with its holdings increasing by 57.5%. Meanwhile, Binance’s native token, BNB, saw only a 16.6% reduction. Related: Binance Impounds 94% of $12.5M Funds Stolen from Abducted Execs Other assets, including Solana (SOL) and Tether (USDT), also saw significant reductions of 99% and 99.9%, respectively. FDUSD holdings were cut by 53.4%. While Binance has not issued an official statement on the reason for the asset shift, industry experts speculate that it could be part of a profit-accrual strategy or a precautionary measure in response to regulatory uncertainties. Looking back, similar large-scale asset conversions occurred in June 2023, when Binance paid regulatory fines, and later in February 2024, though the reasons weren’t clear. Some analysts believe these moves are just part of Binance’s overall financial strategy, making sure they have cash on hand while dealing with operational risks. Worth noting, Dong clarified that the funds were Binance’s past revenue, not customer funds. Related: Binance-WazirX Feud Escalates: Users Demand Clarity Over Frozen Funds In a related development, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Binance have jointly filed a motion to pause their ongoing lawsuit for 60 days. This request suggests the SEC’s newly formed crypto task force could be a factor in ironing out the case about security law violations. Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.

Trump-Backed World Liberty: Big Bets on $ETH and $MOVE ! Recently, WLF acquired an additional 1,917 ETH (approximately $5 million) and 830,469 MOVE tokens (valued at around $470,000). As of now, WLF's crypto holdings are valued at approximately $373 million, with significant investments in Ethereum (ETH) and Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC). In addition to ETH and WBTC, WLF's diversified portfolio includes tokens such as USD Coin (USDC), TRON (TRX), Aave (AAVE), Chainlink (LINK), and Ethena (ENA). Notably, on January 20, WLF made a substantial purchase exceeding $90 million in Wrapped Bitcoin and Ethereum.

作者：shushu，BlockBeats 昨日，Virtuals Protocol 宣布 VIRTUAL 代币现在可以于 Solana 链上交易，其官方 LP 现已在 Meteora 上线，并已为 Virtual Protocol 在 Solana 链上的 Launchpad 做准备。与此同时，Nansen CEO Alex Svanevik 在推特上表示 Aave 什么时候能在 Solana 上使用，并随之艾特了 Aave 的团队成员以及 Solana 创始人等。 但这条推文的评论区却变成了 Solana 帮和 Aave 拥趸者的辩论区，而往更广了看，这也是以太坊生态和 Solana 生态在具体应用领域的市场占有率之争。 Solana 的奶王 Multicoin 合伙人 Kyle Samani 在这条推文下评论了 Kamino，一个 Solana 生态的 DeFi 借贷协议，意在表示 Kamino 就是 Solana 生态的 Aave。 Svanevik 回复称 Aave 的规模比 Kamino 大 10 倍，「如果 Aave 的用户可以轻松切换链，会是一次巨大的 TVL 释放。」 可 Solana 的创始人 toly 和基金会主席 Lily Liu 却并不这么认为。Lily 表示 Kamino 的产品更好，然后颇为骄傲的说「今天的指标不代表明天的表现。」toly 则表示支持一个专注于 Solana 主网的本土团队，作为长期投资比支持一个分散注意力的多链团队更为明智，更是直接掐灭了 Aave 来 Solana 的可能性。 在 Solana 生态一众人的犀利评价下，Aave 乃至以太坊生态的支持者也不甘落下风。 Aave 创始人 Stani 直接开火，说 Solana DeFi 的现状是抄袭 Aave 的旧技术，粘贴一个半成品的 UI，还限制英国用户使用。尽管 Stani 说的是 Solana DeFi，但明眼人知道他针对的是同为借贷协议的 Kamino。 于是，toly 将 Aave 和 Kamino 的 DeFiLlama 界面发了出来，表示 Kamino 的 TVL 是 Aave 的 1/8，但收入只有其 1/2.5。「我不明白为什么 Aave 会是更好的产品，如果从中挤不出收入，TVL 只是一个成本。」 而 Stani 也犀利的回复称 Kamino 的 USDC 储备因子（即平台从每笔交易或资金池中抽取的比例）为 15%，而 Aave 只有 10%，意味着其从用户资金池中提取的费用更高。Stani 认为这是 Solana 生态系统目前的竞争仍然不足的表现，导致用户在选择 DeFi 平台时的议价能力较弱，收取较高费用，最终由用户买单。 而引发这场「口水战」的正主 Alex Svanevik 此时又来添了一把火，他表示 Solana 在多个关键指标上已超越以太坊，包括活跃地址数、交易量、DEX 交易量以及总 Gas 费收入。然而，在 TVL 方面，Solana 仍未能超越以太坊。鉴于此，最直接的策略是吸引以太坊上 TVL 排名第一的应用 Aave 在 Solana 上部署，从而进一步提升其 DeFi 生态的竞争力。 在评论区中有人质疑这种说法不合理，因为 Aave 在 Solana 上部署并不会凭空创造 TVL。Svanevik 解释称要让 Aave 的部署完全不带来 Solana TVL 的增长，必须同时满足以下两个条件： 1、Aave 当前的 TVL 完全没有任何资金迁移到 Solana； 2、没有任何新增的 TVL 进入 Solana 上的 Aave。 然而，Aave 已经成功吸引了 200 亿美元的 TVL，所以 Svanevik 认为 Aave 应该迁移至 Solana 上，让人一时竟分辨不出 Svanevik 到底是以太坊 maxi 还是 Solana maxi。 毫无疑问，Aave 是以太坊生态的核心 DeFi 应用，同 Uniswap、Lido 等一起构成了以太坊 DeFi 核心格局，而社区同样有人质疑为何以太坊的顶级 DeFi 应用会错过 Solana 这样一个有无限潜力的生态。抛开代码等技术因素，让一个应用选择不迁移至新生态的原因同那些选择扩展生态的原因一样，都是为了能够获得增量发展。 Virtuals Protocol 扩展至 Solana，有了更广泛的用户和流动性基础，而 Aave 不去 Solana，想必也有关于竞争格局的考量。Solana 目前的 DeFi 版块已经愈发完善，光是借贷协议，就有 Kamino、marginfi、Save 等多个后期团队竞争市场份额，Aave 的扩展成本将会比想象的要高。 更重要的是，Aave 已经有的品牌形象也将会因为扩展而产生变数。正如社区有人表示「如果一个资金在七到八位数的人希望在确保安全的前提下获得高于链下的收益，那么十次里有十次，都会推荐他们去以太坊上的 Aave，而不是 Solana、Tron、Celestia 等链上的 DeFi。」 安全，是一个借贷产品的根基，只有在有足够的安全审计、应对黑客攻击的经验以及成熟的合约设计做支撑时，资金大户以及普通用户才会选择将资产停泊于此。因此，Aave 之所以能够在以太坊上成为最具影响力的借贷平台之一，背后离不开以太坊长久以来沉淀的开发者生态、安全审计案例以及巨大且成熟的资金池。 DeFi 的金融属性决定了「跑得越久，粘性越大」。这份粘性，根植于对产品合约安全性和稳定性的深刻信任。而这层「信任成本」并不仅仅止于对一条新链速度、性能和交易费用的考量，更包含了基础设施的完善度、审计公司的覆盖度、社区对潜在安全漏洞的警觉程度，以及在极端条件下能否得到及时弥补的生态反应能力。 回顾以太坊 DeFi 这几年的发展历程，不少项目都经历过重大漏洞或安全事件，甚至付出了上亿美元的损失。正是在一次次应对与迭代中，才逐步构筑了以太坊 DeFi 的安全壁垒。Aave 之所以广受青睐，正是依托了这一层安全护城河，使其成为大资金量用户尤其是机构级玩家的首选。换言之，大多数人将 Aave 视为「风险较低、收益可观」的代名词，尤其针对资金量高达数百万甚至上千万美元的用户，安全与稳健永远排在增量收益之前。 与之对比，Solana 作为高性能的 Layer1 区块链，其确实在交易速度、Gas 费用等方面有一定优势。但从借贷协议的角度看，金融应用的核心在于「风险-收益比」。速度快、费用低当然重要，但若无法提供足够久经考验的安全性和对抗攻击的记录，这样的优势往往在 DeFi 赛道里并不足以支撑大量流动性的长久迁移。尤其是借贷业务，本身要面对清算、利率波动、合约审计、黑客攻击等多重风险因素；一旦出问题，平台多年积累下来的品牌形象和信任将会被瞬间瓦解，这种「信任成本」远比技术本身更昂贵。 进一步看，即便 Aave 真的选择扩展至 Solana，也并不一定能带来所谓的「凭空增加」的 TVL。资金是逐利且理性的，Aave 在以太坊主网所积累的二三百亿美元的 TVL，也并非愿意自动分拆迁移到另一条链上。相反，由于各链间的底层技术栈、开发语言甚至社区文化都有巨大差异，Aave 需要投入大量时间和资源去适配与审计，这本身就意味着极高的扩展成本和管理风险。更何况，Solana 上现有的本土借贷协议也在日趋成熟，Aave 并不具备一骑绝尘的先发优势。 因此，在拥有安全壁垒、品牌与资金规模三重护城河的前提下，Aave 若执意大规模扩展至 Solana，未必是最明智的选择。毕竟，在 DeFi 这场漫长的马拉松竞赛里，赢得用户的信任与安全认知，才是最难以撼动的核心壁垒。

From January to February 2025, Binance's own BTC holdings are suspected to have dropped from 46,896 to 2,747; ETH holdings have dropped from 216,313 to 175; most have been converted to USDC. It may be a profit accrual at the beginning of the year. Similar situations occurred in…

Whale activity—large-scale transactions by individuals or entities holding significant amounts of a cryptocurrency—can substantially influence the price dynamics of tokens like Berachain's BERA. Impact of Whale Activity on BERA's Price: Market Volatility: Whales can induce significant price swings through large buy or sell orders. For instance, following BERA's mainnet launch, a whale deposited 1.6 million USDC into the Hyperliquid exchange and shorted BERA at approximately $13 per token. Within two hours, this position was closed, yielding a profit of $589,000. Such substantial trades can lead to rapid price fluctuations, affecting market stability. Price Suppression: Large-scale shorting by whales can exert downward pressure on a token's price. The aforementioned shorting activity contributed to BERA's price declining from its peak of $15 to around $7.50. Market Sentiment: Whale actions can influence broader market perceptions. Significant sell-offs or short positions by whales may signal a lack of confidence, prompting other investors to follow suit, thereby amplifying price movements. Considerations for Investors: Increased Volatility: Whale activities can lead to heightened volatility, presenting both opportunities and risks for traders. Market Manipulation: The potential for whales to manipulate prices necessitates caution among retail investors, as sudden price movements can result in unexpected losses. Due Diligence: Investors should monitor large transactions and overall market sentiment to make informed decisions, recognizing the outsized impact that whale activities can have on token prices. In summary, while whale activities can inject liquidity into the market, they also pose challenges by contributing to volatility and potential price manipulation. Investors in BERA should remain vigilant, conduct thorough research, and consider the implications of large-scale trading activities when making investment decisions. $BERA