Crypto markets are sliding again, and the pain is spreading beyond price charts. This crypto sell-off is now showing up in company treasuries, inside spot exchange-traded funds, and in the daily output of miners. It also shows how crypto hardware can find a second life when a new tech wave arrives.

Ether fell below $2,200 during the latest crypto sell-off, and that matters for BitMine Immersion Technologies. The company built its treasury around Ether and holds about $9.1 billion worth of ETH, including a recent purchase of about 40,302 ETH.

As Ether dropped, BitMine’s paper losses widened. Reports put the firm’s unrealized loss around $7 billion, meaning the coins are worth far less than what the company paid. The loss stays on paper unless BitMine sells, but investors still treat it as real risk. A big crypto position can lift a balance sheet during a rally. In a drawdown, it can limit choices if the firm needs cash or wants to refinance.

BitMine chairman Tom Lee has pushed back on criticism. He argues that a crypto treasury designed to track Ether will move down when Ether moves down. The crypto sell-off still shows the tradeoff. Concentration can boost returns when the market runs. It can also magnify losses when the market turns.

Bitcoin is delivering a similar lesson to a wider crowd through spot Bitcoin ETFs. These funds made it easy to get crypto exposure in a normal brokerage account, without managing keys. But access does not change crypto volatility.

After Bitcoin fell into the mid-$70,000 range, returns for the average dollar invested in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) turned negative, according to Unlimited Funds chief investment officer Bob Elliott. That means the typical buyer is now underwater. It is a reminder that a Bitcoin ETF is still Bitcoin, just wrapped in an ETF.

This shift matters because IBIT grew at record speed. Reports have described it as BlackRock’s fastest fund to reach $70 billion in assets. In calm weeks, that growth looked like crypto was becoming routine. In rough weeks, it becomes a stress test for new holders who have not lived through a long drawdown.

The crypto sell-off is also touching the mining layer. In late January, a strong US winter storm forced many Bitcoin miners to cut production. Data shared by CryptoQuant showed publicly traded miners produced about 70 to 90 BTC per day before the storm, then fell to about 30 to 40 BTC per day at the worst point.

The drop reflected miners reducing load or going offline to ease pressure on local power grids. As conditions improved, output began to recover. The episode highlights a basic fact about crypto mining: hash rate depends on energy. It rides on power lines, weather, and power prices.

These threads connect to a bigger shift in infrastructure. The same data center gear that once served crypto mining is now feeding the boom in AI computing. CoreWeave is a clear example. The company began as a crypto mining firm in 2017 and later pivoted into providing GPU cloud computing for AI workloads.

This pivot shows how quickly computing resources migrate. As crypto demand cooled and Ethereum moved away from proof-of-work, many GPU setups lost their old job. Some of that capacity moved toward AI, where demand for GPUs and power-heavy sites has surged.

Put together, the current crypto sell-off is not just a price story. It is a capital story. It shows up on corporate balance sheets when a crypto treasury swings. It shows up in portfolios when a crypto ETF drops below cost. It shows up in network activity when miners pause during extreme weather. And it shows up in data centers when last cycle’s crypto machines become part of the AI backbone.

China’s regulators issued a new notice on February 6, 2026, aimed at tightening control over virtual currency activity and the growing push to turn real-world assets into blockchain tokens. The document was signed by the People’s Bank of China and several other agencies, and it frames virtual currency business as an illegal financial activity inside China.

The notice repeats a core message: virtual currency is not legal tender. It names common coins like Bitcoin, Ether, and Tether as examples of virtual currency that cannot be used as money in the market. Under the new rules, trading services for virtual currency remain off-limits. That includes exchanging fiat for virtual currency, swapping one virtual currency for another, running a central counterparty that buys and sells virtual currency, and offering pricing or matchmaking for virtual currency trades. Token fundraising tied to virtual currency is also barred. The notice also warns overseas players not to provide virtual currency services into China.

At the same time, regulators put a bright spotlight on real-world asset tokenization, often called RWA tokenization. This is when a company uses blockchain tools to turn rights tied to an asset—like ownership or income rights—into a token that can be issued and traded. The notice says RWA tokenization done inside China, or supported from inside China, can cross into the same legal risk zone as virtual currency deals. The concern is that some RWA tokenization schemes can look like unapproved securities, illegal fundraising, or other banned finance activity. Regulators leave a narrow door open only for approved pilots that run through specific regulated financial infrastructure.

Stablecoins get special attention. The notice says a stablecoin pegged to a fiat currency can act like money in daily use, even if it is branded as a token. It states that no one may issue a stablecoin linked to the renminbi without approval, even if the issuance happens outside China. This point matters because stablecoins often serve as the bridge between trading accounts and virtual currency markets. Cutting off a renminbi-pegged stablecoin reduces a path for moving funds into virtual currency trading.

The notice also tries to tighten the “plumbing” that supports virtual currency and RWA tokenization. Financial institutions and payment firms are told not to open accounts, move funds, or provide clearing and settlement for virtual currency business. They also cannot sell virtual currency-linked products, accept virtual currency as collateral, or write insurance tied to virtual currency. For unapproved RWA tokenization, custody and settlement services are also restricted. In plain terms, the rules aim to make it harder for virtual currency flows to touch the banking system.

Internet platforms are pulled into the enforcement plan. The notice says online firms cannot offer hosting, marketing, paid traffic, or other support for virtual currency and RWA tokenization schemes. If a platform finds signs of a virtual currency operation, it must report it and help with investigations. Regulators also say they can shut down websites, apps, mini-programs, and social accounts tied to virtual currency promotion or sales. This is designed to reduce the reach of virtual currency ads and cut off new users before they are pulled into risky offers.

Market regulators are told to block branding that normalizes the space. The notice says business registrations and business scopes should not include terms like “virtual currency,” “crypto asset,” “stablecoin,” “RWA,” or “real-world asset tokenization.” It also calls for stricter checks on advertising tied to virtual currency and RWA tokenization. The goal is to limit storefront-style signals that make virtual currency activity look permitted.

Mining returns as a key target. China already moved against crypto mining in earlier campaigns, but the notice calls for continued cleanup. It says provinces should find and shut down remaining mining projects, stop new mining projects, and prevent mining machine makers from offering sales services inside China. Mining matters because it can create large, hard-to-trace virtual currency flows and can also stress local power grids.

One of the strongest lines is about legal protection. The notice states that investing in virtual currency, RWA tokens, or related products can be treated as violating public order and good morals, making the civil act invalid and leaving losses with the investor. A similar warning appeared in China’s 2021 notice on virtual currency trading risk, and it signals that courts may not help someone recover money lost in a virtual currency deal.

The cross-border section ties the themes together. China is not only watching virtual currency at home, but also watching how domestic firms use offshore structures. The notice says domestic entities and their controlled overseas entities cannot issue virtual currency abroad without approval. It also says tokenized deals tied to onshore assets—such as tokenized asset-backed structures—will face strict filing and review by agencies like the CSRC, with a “same business, same risk, same rules” approach. That keeps RWA tokenization from becoming a back door for virtual currency-style fundraising.

For enthusiasts, the message is clear: China is drawing a hard line around virtual currency while trying to keep tighter control over any form of tokenized finance that looks like a security. Virtual currency trading, virtual currency marketing, and virtual currency payment rails remain the main targets. RWA tokenization is not treated as a free pass, and stablecoin plans tied to the renminbi face a direct ban without approval.

Bitcoin slid under $63,000 on Thursday and rattled traders. Weak U.S. job data, a softer stock market, and fresh worry about an AI spending boom pushed investors toward safety. In that mix, many asked one question: can Bitcoin rebound to $90,000 by March?

A key clue sits in Bitcoin options. Bitcoin options let traders buy insurance or take a view on price without owning BTC. Because Bitcoin options trade every day, Bitcoin options often show mood shifts before spot markets calm down. Right now, Bitcoin options look cautious.

On Deribit, a major crypto derivatives exchange, traders priced the March 27 contract that pays off above $90,000 at a low level. That $90,000 call option traded near $522. In plain terms, Bitcoin options buyers did not pay much for a big upside swing. Using common pricing tools such as Black-Scholes, that call price implies odds under 6% for $90,000 by late March. Bitcoin options also show demand for crash protection. A March 27 put option near the $50,000 strike traded around $1,380, implying roughly a one-in-five chance of a much deeper drop.

Those numbers do not predict the future. They show what traders are willing to pay right now. Bitcoin options turn crowd emotion into “implied volatility,” a market estimate of how hard price could whip around. When implied volatility rises, Bitcoin options cost more because risk feels higher. When implied volatility falls, Bitcoin options get cheaper because traders expect calmer trading. The current mix says traders see limited upside and meaningful downside risk in the next several weeks.

Macro stress helps explain why Bitcoin options lean defensive. New layoff data hit the tape as crypto slipped. U.S. employers announced 108,435 job cuts in January, up 118% from January 2025, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas. It was the biggest January total since 2009. Job cuts like that can weaken risk appetite. When investors rush to reduce exposure, Bitcoin options often price less chance of a fast rebound and more demand for protection.

Equities added to the pressure. Bitcoin’s recent drop tracked losses in several large listed companies tied to payments, trading, and software. When stocks wobble, Bitcoin often trades like a high-beta asset, rising and falling with broader risk sentiment. That link matters because many funds use Bitcoin options to hedge, so shaky equities can lift Bitcoin options premiums on the downside.

Another driver is the AI spending debate. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, said it expects 2026 capital spending around $175 billion to $185 billion. That is far above what many analysts expected and has raised questions about returns on data-center builds. When investors doubt the “AI trade,” they often cut exposure across growth assets. That shift can show up quickly in Bitcoin options, since traders reach for puts when they fear a wider selloff.

A newer fear also hangs over Bitcoin options: quantum computing. The worry is not that today’s machines can crack Bitcoin, but that future systems could threaten older cryptography if they advance fast. Jefferies strategist Christopher Wood recently removed a Bitcoin allocation from his model portfolio and cited quantum risk. Headlines like that can weigh on sentiment, and Bitcoin options price uncertainty even when the timeline is unclear.

Traders also watch corporate Bitcoin reserves. Some public companies built large BTC holdings using debt or new shares. If Bitcoin stays weak for long, those firms could face pressure to refinance, raise cash, or cut risk. Investors fear forced selling because it can speed up declines. When that fear rises, Bitcoin options demand for downside hedges can rise too.

So what would have to change for a $90,000 push by March? Bitcoin options would likely show it first through stronger demand for upside calls and higher prices for $90,000 strikes. Traders would also want calmer macro news, steadier stocks, and less stress around AI spending plans. A bounce can happen in a rough market, but a move that large usually needs fuel from risk-on flows and fresh spot buying that spills into Bitcoin options.

For now, Bitcoin options suggest $90,000 is possible but not the base case for March. That does not rule out a rally. It means traders are not paying much for that outcome today. At the same time, Bitcoin options show many still want protection if the slide deepens.

Bithumb apologized to customers after a payout mistake during a promotion caused a sudden shake-up in bitcoin trading on its platform. In a notice posted in Korean, the South Korea crypto exchange said it was “sincerely sorry for the inconvenience” and blamed “confusion during the payment process for this event.” The exchange said that, during the payout, “an abnormal amount of bitcoin was paid to some customers,” and that selling by some of the accounts led to a brief, sharp move in the bitcoin price on Bithumb.

Bithumb said it spotted the problem right away through its internal controls and then moved fast to limit trading on the related accounts. Bithumb also said the market price returned to a normal level within about five minutes. It added that its “domino liquidation prevention system” worked as designed, so the abnormal bitcoin price did not trigger a chain of forced liquidations. For traders, that detail matters because fast drops can push leveraged positions into liquidation, which can create more selling and even larger swings. Bithumb said that did not happen this time.

In the same notice, Bithumb stressed that the incident was not caused by an outside attack. Bithumb said the issue had “no connection to external hacking or a security breach,” and that there were no problems with system security or customer asset management. Bithumb also said customer assets remained safe, and that trading, deposits, and withdrawals were operating normally after the brief disruption.

Bithumb did not share how much bitcoin was sent by mistake or how many accounts received it. Still, local reporting tied the event to a “Random Box” giveaway. Under that event, Bithumb planned to distribute prizes worth up to 50,000 won. But reports said a payout meant to be 2,000 won ended up being treated as 2,000 BTC for some recipients, which would be a massive sum. Bithumb has been asked to clarify the exact numbers.

On the market side, the bitcoin/Korean won pair on Bithumb appeared to drop hard during the confusion, with reports describing a fall of around 15% before prices recovered. Some users said on social media that their Bithumb accounts were frozen after the abnormal deposits and sales. Bithumb said it restricted trading on the relevant accounts as part of its response.

Regulators also took notice. Reports said South Korea’s Financial Services Commission and Financial Supervisory Service planned to investigate the cause, describing the situation as serious given the size of the potential damage. Another report said about 3 billion won was withdrawn after selling the mistakenly deposited bitcoin. If accurate, that figure would suggest at least some funds moved off-platform before controls fully locked things down.

The incident lands at a time when South Korea is watching crypto exchanges more closely. Recent reporting has described rising scrutiny of major platforms, including checks on how exchanges run promotions and how they present trading conditions to customers. In that setting, a Bithumb promotion error can draw extra attention, even if Bithumb says there was no hack and no customer asset loss.

For users, the key questions are simple: what failed, who got the mistaken bitcoin, and what happens next. Bithumb said it will share follow-up steps in a transparent way and promised to take responsibility so that “not a single customer” is harmed. Bithumb also said it believes there was no loss or damage to customer assets from the incident, though it did not provide a full public accounting of every transaction linked to the payout.

Mistaken deposits are rare, but they can be disruptive because crypto trading runs around the clock and prices can react in seconds. When the mistake involves bitcoin, the impact can spread fast through the order book, especially if recipients try to sell at once. That is why Bithumb focused on its internal controls, its trading restrictions, and its liquidation backstop. Bithumb is one of the largest exchanges in South Korea, and its systems handle high-volume bitcoin and won trading each day.

Bithumb now faces the hard part: proving, with clear facts, that the brief bitcoin crash on Bithumb did not hurt regular traders and that the account freezes were handled fairly. Bithumb said it will disclose more details as it confirms what happened inside the payout process. For now, the exchange’s message is that this was an internal error during a Bithumb event, not a security breach, and that Bithumb’s safeguards kept a bad moment from turning into a wider liquidation wave.

Europe has become the riskiest region for wrench attacks, according to a new report from blockchain security firm CertiK. The report tracks physical crimes tied to crypto ownership, such as robberies, assaults, and kidnappings where attackers force victims to hand over coins. CertiK counted 72 verified wrench attacks worldwide in 2025, up 75% from 2024. Europe made up more than 40% of those wrench attacks, nearly double its share a year earlier.

CertiK says wrench attacks are getting harsher. Kidnappings rose 66% in 2025, while physical assaults jumped 250%. These wrench attacks often start with doxxing and basic surveillance. Criminals look for brag posts, wallet screenshots, or clues about where someone lives. CertiK says many wrench attacks use OSINT, or open-source intelligence, pulled from public data and social media.

Wrench attacks hit Europe harder than other regions in the dataset. France was the top country in 2025, with 19 incidents, more than any other nation tracked. The United States logged eight in the same count.

A high-profile case showed how wrench attacks can turn brutal. In January 2025, Ledger co-founder David Balland and his wife were kidnapped from their home in France, and the attackers demanded a large crypto ransom. Prosecutors said Balland was seriously injured during the ordeal before police freed the couple and detained suspects. The case became a warning that wrench attacks are not only about money.

Wrench attacks are not limited to Europe. Asia still made up about one-third of cases in 2025. CertiK flags risk to crypto tourists and expatriates in hubs like Thailand and Hong Kong. Some wrench attacks begin after a target shares a ride, flashes a wallet app, or meets a new contact who seems helpful.

Wrench attacks can also be costly, even when totals are unclear. CertiK says losses linked to wrench attacks exceeded $40.9 million in 2025, but the figure is likely low because many victims do not report crimes, and ransoms can be hard to trace. In wrench attacks, the goal is speed.

The report’s main point is that code upgrades alone will not stop wrench attacks. As exchanges and wallets get harder to crack online, criminals shift to real-life pressure. CertiK says humans remain the single point of failure, which helps explain why wrench attacks can rise even when cybersecurity improves. That is why “just protect your seed phrase” is no longer enough.

To cut the risk of wrench attacks, focus on simple habits and personal security awareness. Limit what you share online. Avoid posting your location in real time. Keep most funds in cold storage on a hardware wallet, and keep only a small “spending” wallet on your phone. For larger balances, use multi-signature wallets or a passphrase so one stolen device cannot move everything at once. These steps cannot prevent every wrench attack, but they can slow a thief and limit damage.

While wrench attacks rise, Russia is moving closer to opening crypto trading to more retail users. State Duma lawmaker Anatoly Aksakov said a draft bill is ready that would let non-qualified investors trade crypto under set limits, according to Russian reporting. Under the plan discussed by officials, non-qualified investors could buy up to 300,000 rubles of crypto, while professional market participants would face no such cap. Officials also say the rules could support cross-border settlements and the overseas placement of Russian-issued tokens.

Russia’s central bank has laid out a similar framework. In a December 23, 2025 statement, the Bank of Russia said non-qualified investors could buy the most liquid cryptocurrencies only after passing a risk-awareness test, and only within the 300,000 ruble annual limit through one intermediary. The same proposal says crypto and stablecoins may be traded but may not be used for payments inside Russia.

Both stories meet at the user level. More access can bring more new holders, and new holders can become targets for wrench attacks if they overshare or carry large balances on a phone. CertiK says wrench attacks are rising faster in Europe than in North America, but it warns this does not prove North America is “safe.”

For anyone holding crypto in 2026, wrench attacks are part of the threat map. Treat personal safety like wallet safety. Keep your identity and holdings private, plan how you move funds, and assume criminals read the same posts you do. Wrench attacks succeed when a target has no plan and no time.

Crypto winter has been the main story in digital assets since early 2025. Many traders still call it a dip, but the price action looks like a true crypto winter. Bitcoin hit a record above $125,000 in early October 2025, then slid hard in the months that followed. Now, the market is trying to find its footing, and that is what a crypto winter feels like.

In a crypto winter, good headlines do not move prices the way people expect. You can get news about new products, new rules, and new big-name buyers, and the charts still fall. That gap confuses people. It should not. A crypto winter often runs on one thing: forced selling. When leverage builds up, a drop triggers liquidations. When that happens, even strong projects can sink with the rest of the market.

This crypto winter also shows a split inside crypto itself. Large coins that big firms can buy tend to hold up better. Smaller coins that lack easy access through funds tend to drop more. That pattern matters because it changes how the pain spreads. Retail holders feel the crypto winter first. Big flows can mask it for a while, then the stress shows up later when the market runs out of new buyers.

That backdrop set the tone Tuesday in New York City, where Pantera Capital CEO Dan Morehead spoke on a panel with Tom Lee at the Ondo Summit. They acknowledged the rough market, but they pushed a long view. Morehead argued that bitcoin should beat gold over the next decade because bitcoin has a fixed supply, while fiat money loses buying power over time. In a crypto winter, that kind of claim will not lift prices today, but it tells you how long-term investors frame the trade.

Morehead also said many large institutions still hold little or no crypto, even after bitcoin ETFs arrived. That point matters in a crypto winter because it hints at where new demand could come from later. If big pools of money stay on the sidelines during a crypto winter, the market can remain weak. If those pools start to allocate after conditions calm, prices can recover faster than most expect.

Lee challenged a simple “four-year cycle” story. He pointed to signs of a major deleveraging event tied to the October 2025 crash and said the market structure keeps changing. Crypto winter does not always follow the same script. Sometimes the bottom comes when people stop watching. Sometimes it comes after a final wave of forced selling. Either way, crypto winter tends to end when sellers run out, not when optimists show up.

Regulation sits in the middle of this crypto winter. In the United States, lawmakers have debated a market-structure proposal often called the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025. The bill aims to set clearer federal rules for digital assets. But talks have hit friction, including a fight over whether stablecoin issuers should be allowed to offer interest-like rewards. This matters because stablecoins act like the cash leg of crypto trading. In a crypto winter, traders lean on stablecoins even more, since they want to park value without leaving the ecosystem.

Even with policy debates, builders keep shipping. Stablecoins keep growing. Tokenized assets keep showing up in pilots. Big firms keep exploring custody and settlement tech. Those trends can feel invisible during a crypto winter because price screens drown out everything else. Still, they build the rails that can support the next upcycle.

So how should an enthusiast read this crypto winter? First, treat it like a season, not a weekend event. Crypto winter can last long enough to wear people down. Second, watch where stress shows up. If liquidations spike, it can force another leg down. If volume dries up and price stops falling on bad news, crypto winter may be closer to the end. Third, keep an eye on the gap between large coins and smaller coins. That gap often tells you where liquidity sits, and liquidity runs the show in a crypto winter.

No one can call the exact turn. But crypto winter has a pattern: it ends when boredom replaces panic. If you expected nonstop rallies because of ETFs, institutions, or new laws, this crypto winter is the reminder that markets move on positioning and cash flow first. When the selling fades, the same “good news” that got ignored during crypto winter can start to matter again.