News related to
Collapse

Cryptocurrency markets endured a historic collapse as leveraged positions were liquidated en masse – over 1.6 million traders wiped out $19.13 billion in bets within 24 hours, data from Coinglass shows.

The crash accelerated sharply after U. S. President Donald Trump announced an additional 100 per cent tariff on Chinese imports and threatened export controls on critical software, heightening fears of a full-blown trade war. Bitcoin plunged more than 12 per cent from its recent highs, briefly sliding below $102,000 before rebounding above $113,000.

Before the sell-off, Bitcoin had breached a new all-time peak above $125,000, buoyed by institutional inflows into crypto exchange-traded funds. Governments and institutional investors had viewed digital assets as a hedge amid macroeconomic uncertainty.

Today’s market rout, however, exposed the fragility of overleveraged positions in a thinly capitalised market. In a single hour on Friday, more than $7 billion of liquidations occurred. The top losses were seen among long positions, particularly in Bitcoin and Ethereum derivatives, which accounted for a substantial share of the forced unwinds.

Institutional players and high-net-worth traders were swept up in the cascade. Market watchers noted that order books lacked the depth to absorb such a severe shock, triggering knock-on effects through futures and perpetual swap markets.

Beyond crypto, equity indices faltered under the weight of renewed global risk aversion. The S&P 500 dropped 2.7 percent, while tech stocks, sensitive to trade tensions, bore steep losses.

Some analysts likened the event to a “black swan” moment for crypto markets — a sudden shock revealing systemic vulnerabilities in a still nascent asset class. Traders operating with high leverage, little hedging, and aggressive margin policies found themselves particularly exposed.

Efforts to assess contagion effects to traditional finance are underway. Banks offering crypto derivatives and prime brokers are now scrutinising counterparty risks. Regulators in several jurisdictions may use today’s crash to justify stricter margin and leverage rules for crypto trading.

Reviewing policy implications, the tariff escalation marks a sharp pivot in U. S.–China trade strategy. Trump framed the measures as retaliation for China’s export curbs on rare earth metals, which are critical for tech manufacturing. The move signals willingness to escalate economic confrontation, with markets already pricing in broader disruption to global supply chains.

Despite the volatility, some investors are still betting on long-term resilience of digital assets. The week before the crash saw a record $5.95 billion flow into global crypto ETFs, led by U. S. allocations, suggesting that capital rotation into crypto remains strong over medium timeframes.

Liquidity providers and market makers face fresh trials. Some have temporarily withdrawn from funding markets or widened spreads to mitigate risk exposure. In highly volatile hours, arbitrage desks and algorithmic liquidity engines contributed to exaggerated price swings.

Wider sentiment has turned cautious: on-chain analytics show a rise in stablecoin inflows to exchanges, possibly reflecting flight from risk. Options markets registered growing demand for deep out-of-the-money puts, as traders brace for further downside.

Ethereum’s value slipped beneath the psychologically and technically significant $4,000 mark today, intensifying fears that the second-largest cryptocurrency may be entering a deeper correction. On Binance, ETH dipped to $3,988.89, down almost 8 per cent in 24 hours.

The abrupt drop triggered widespread liquidations, especially among leveraged positions. On-chain liquidation trackers show nearly $188 million in crypto was liquidated in just one hour during the sharp move.

Persistent macroeconomic headwinds, alongside renewed U. S.–China trade tensions, appear to have compounded selling pressure. The Nasdaq and other equity benchmarks also suffered, amplifying risk aversion among crypto investors.

Technical analysts now view the breakdown below $4,000 as a turning point. From a charting perspective, the fall invalidated previously bullish setups such as bull flags, leaving Ethereum exposed to further downside. One analyst cautioned that extended weakness could push ETH toward the $3,750 to $3,500 zone if pivotal support fails.

Support between $4,200 and $4,300 had held in recent sessions, but now that zone is under siege. Should it collapse, the stage may be set for a retest of $3,900 or lower. Traders are watching whether buyers will defend this corridor or capitulate.

Despite today’s plunge, some investors see accumulation underway. Ethereum’s total on-exchange supply has declined to a nine-year low, with large holders withdrawing ETH from exchanges—an indicator that long-term confidence may still remain intact.

Longer term, expectations remain cautiously optimistic. Standard Chartered recently raised its year-end target for ETH to $7,500, citing heightened institutional adoption and increasing use of the Ethereum network in stablecoin and DeFi infrastructures. Meanwhile, Citigroup offers a more conservative forecast of $4,300 by end-2025, warning that current prices may be more sentiment-driven than fundamentals-rooted.

Major upgrades on Ethereum’s roadmap could yet shift sentiment. Among them: the Glamsterdam upgrade, which integrates enhanced proposer-builder separation. However, a fresh academic study warns of a “free option” risk under high volatility, whereby builders may cancel committed payloads without penalty—posing challenges to network liveness during stress.

In the short term, analysts are split. Some argue that the slide is a healthy reset before ETH resumes an uptrend, provided support zones hold. Others say the breach of $4,000 suggests a loss of momentum strong enough to spark a deeper correction.

Crypto markets are already exhibiting signs of strain beyond Ethereum. Bitcoin is under pressure as well, and risk assets broadly are being squeezed by mixed macro data and higher real-interest rates. Some strategists say the crypto pullback could morph into a broader derisking wave unless fresh catalysts emerge.

Looking ahead, observers point to a few key variables: whether ETH can reclaim and sustain above $4,500; whether buyers will step in at $4,200–$4,300; and whether the network upgrades can deliver tangible improvements to gas, scalability, and decentralisation.

Hamas has announced that it will free the final Israeli hostages taken in its October 2023 assault on Israel, but insisted that other elements of a U. S.-backed 20-point peace plan remain subject to negotiation, leaving the path ahead fraught with uncertainty. President Donald Trump welcomed the announcement, calling for an immediate halt to Israeli bombardment and offering indications that he might allow flexibility on the broader proposal.

Under the deal endorsed by Israel, all hostages—alive and deceased—are to be returned within 72 hours of Israel’s public acceptance, in exchange for the release of around 1,950 Palestinian detainees. The agreement envisages a phased Israeli withdrawal, transfer of Gaza’s administrative functions to apolitical technocrats, and demilitarization of Hamas. But Hamas has declined to commit to disarmament, signalling that parts of the plan will undergo further negotiation.

Trump, in a public message, said Israel “must immediately stop” its bombing of Gaza and asserted that he believed Hamas was “ready for lasting peace.” He also warned that failure to accept the terms by the deadline—Sunday at 6 p. m. Eastern Time—would provoke severe consequences. Israel has given tentative backing to the first phase of the plan, though it maintains reservation about Hamas’s retention of weapons.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accepted the peace initiative in principle but imposed caveats: Israel’s withdrawal will be partial, and Gaza will remain under strong security oversight. Netanyahu rejected formation of a Palestinian state under this framework, warning that such a move would reward terrorism. He has also suggested that Hamas participants who commit to peaceful transition could be granted amnesty.

Egypt, Qatar and other regional powers are acting as intermediaries to push Hamas toward acceptance. Israeli officials have reportedly reduced ground operations in Gaza City following U. S. pressure, instructing troops to limit activities to defensive operations even as the air campaign continues. Meanwhile, humanitarian groups warn that any ceasefire in name must be accompanied by unimpeded aid delivery and infrastructure repairs.

Some opposition voices in Israel—particularly among far-right coalition partners—view the latest developments as insufficient, demanding continued military pressure. Families of hostages have expressed cautious optimism, although they remain sceptical of open-ended guarantees.

In Hamas’s statement, the group claimed that the hostage release marks a gesture of “good faith,” but stressed that Israel’s withdrawal, guarantees on the safety of Gaza’s population, and the future role of Palestinian governance must be negotiated further. It described disarmament as “off the negotiating table” and refused to accept unconditional terms.

Analysts caution that the hostages’ release, while important, does not resolve deep structural issues: the role of Hamas in governance, security guarantees for Israel, and Gaza’s long-term reconstruction remain unresolved. Regional watchers view the moment as the most significant opening for a potential ceasefire in years—but one that may collapse without strict adherence to implementation timelines and third-party oversight.

International leaders have responded with varying tones. Some support the deal as a rare breakthrough, while others urge caution, calling for clear mechanisms to enforce demilitarization and civilian protections. The United Nations has reiterated its demand for accountability under international law and its role in aid operations.

Oil prices are sliding as traders cite mounting unsold Middle Eastern crude and weakening demand from key importers. This shift raises prospects of a global oversupply even as OPEC+ debates its next policy move.

Estimates from trading houses place unsold crude cargoes for November loading in the Middle East between 6 million and 12 million barrels. These volumes represent a departure from usual patterns where discount-seeking buyers quickly absorb surplus cargoes. Market participants point to a combination of subdued Chinese demand and logistical bottlenecks as contributing factors.

Spot premiums on benchmark grades such as Oman, Dubai and Murban have plunged below $2 per barrel, reflecting the discounts sellers are forced to offer to entice buyers. One trading analyst noted that the drop in premiums signals heightened desperation amid a buyer’s market for Middle Eastern crude.

China, a traditional backstop for surplus exports, is showing signs of pulling back. In May, China recorded a crude surplus of 1.4 million barrels per day—indicating that imports significantly outpaced refinery throughput. That accumulated surplus suggests refiners are prioritising inventory building over active processing, perhaps in anticipation of future market volatility.

Iran adds another layer of complexity. Tanker-tracking firms estimate that between 23 million and 33 million barrels of Iranian crude are currently held in floating storage. While Iran’s oil minister has denied any unsold inventory, satellite and maritime data paint a different picture. Analysts say the discrepancy reflects the country’s use of ship-to-ship transfers and “ghost fleet” operations to obscure the origin and movement of crude, especially in shipments headed for China.

These movements coincide with a broader recalibration in OPEC+ strategy. Some member states, notably Iraq, have increased destination-free exports, signalling an intent to saturate markets and regain influence with trading partners. Iraq’s shipment of Basrah Medium crude is projected to rise significantly in the coming month, following a period in which pledged output increases by coalition members have lagged deliveries.

Many analysts believe that OPEC+ will proceed cautiously in its production decisions. A sudden output cut might stoke accusations of market manipulation, while continued supply expansion could exacerbate falling price trends. Ahead of its upcoming meeting, the group faces the dilemma of balancing the need to safeguard revenue against the risk of triggering a price collapse.

Meanwhile, U. S. domestic supply is contributing to uncertainty. The Energy Information Administration reports that U. S. output has strengthened marginally, offset by curtailed imports of Russian crude under tightened sanctions. But some industry observers warn that U. S. production may have peaked. One petroleum engineer pointed to a 12 percent decline in output from October 2024 to June 2025, citing state-level data that may undercut EIA projections.

Oil futures reflect growing anxiety. Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate have posted their steepest weekly drops since June, falling over 8 percent in some benchmarks amid concerns that global inventories will build significantly. Traders increasingly view OPEC’s next move as critical in determining whether markets stabilise or cede ground to excess supply.

In this environment, floating storage becomes a more active tool. The accumulation of oil held offshore is not just a symptom of imbalance but a way to temporally manage supply pressure. Floating oil reserves enable sellers to delay deliveries until market conditions improve—or until buyers return.

Refiners in Asia and Europe are approaching capacity constraints. Some are cutting processing rates or entering maintenance periods, reducing appetite for new crude. Because many surplus cargoes are being offered on destination-free terms, they face competition across regions—and the lack of clear demand is forcing suppliers to lengthen delivery offers or scale back premiums.

If the pricing squeeze deepens, some producers may respond by cutting output unilaterally. Others might seek to promote further cooperation on coordinated supply restraint, though such moves carry reputational risk if markets judge them as manipulative. Meanwhile, importers in developing markets—particularly in Africa and Southeast Asia—could benefit from cheaper crude. But those gains may not offset pressure on oil-producing economies that rely heavily on export revenue to fund budgets and social programmes.

India defeated Pakistan in the Asia Cup final in Dubai, but it was the trophy presentation that has reverberated across cricketing circles. Indian players refused to accept the trophy or medals from Mohsin Naqvi, the head of the Pakistan Cricket Board and President of the Asian Cricket Council, turning what should have been a moment of celebration into a publicly charged standoff.

Tensions ripple beyond the pitch because of this act. Through the refusal, both nations have set what analysts say is a dangerous template where political grievances eclipse sport itself. The decision to rebuff a symbolic handover, traditionally steeped in sporting civility, signals that future India-Pakistan fixtures may be shaped less by cricketing merit than by national narratives.

The refusal drew immediate attention. India’s captain, Suryakumar Yadav, lamented that his team was denied the rightful moment of recognition. Across national media, voices questioned the boundaries between patriotism and play. In Pakistan, captain Salman Ali Agha accused India of disrespecting the spirit of cricket, while insisting that gestures made behind closed doors had been misrepresented.

For India, the refusal came after repeated snubs in the tournament — players declined to shake hands with their Pakistani counterparts. The Board of Control for Cricket in India confirmed that the team had resolved not to accept the trophy from Naqvi. The BCCI plans to lodge a formal protest at the upcoming ICC meeting.

Observers see this as the collapse of the practice known as “cricket diplomacy” — the idea that cricketing encounters might ease broader geopolitical tensions. Analysts warn that once such norms crumble, they are difficult to resurrect. The absence of handshakes, the broken presentation protocol, and accusations of politicisation all feed into a narrative that cricket is simply another front in the bilateral rivalry.

This is not the first time politics has shadowed India-Pakistan cricket, but few moments match the clarity of this rupture. Political polarisation in both countries has long influenced bilateral relations, and the 2025 military flare-ups between them have deepened fissures. Some critics argue that the match-day conduct was unavoidable given the broader climate of hostility. Others contend that the sanctity of the game deserves insulation from statecraft.

Stakeholders are now walking a tightrope. The ACC must decide whether to uphold its leadership’s neutrality or face accusations of bias. The ICC will be pressured to weigh in — either by endorsing standards that separate sport from politics or by allowing countries to redefine the conduct of play. Grassroots cricket lovers, meanwhile, worry that the spectacle of national identities may overshadow the joy of the game itself.

Bitcoin nudged higher overnight, trading around $109,448, as markets showed signs of stabilisation following a wave of forced liquidations across crypto derivatives.

Stock market information for Bitcoin
Bitcoin is a crypto in the CRYPTO market.
The price is 109448.0 USD currently with a change of 30.00 USD from the previous close.
The intraday high is 110305.0 USD and the intraday low is 108741.0 USD.

Ethereum outperformed, crossing the $4,000 threshold, while broader sentiment remains under strain amid macro uncertainty.

Crypto markets endured brutal deleveraging earlier in the week, with more than $1.5 billion in long positions wiped from derivatives across major tokens. Analysts report that Ether accounted for a significant share of that, prompting cascade liquidations in leveraged positions. Some firms with heavy Bitcoin exposure have seen their stock valuations collapse below the value of token holdings.

Investors tagged this as the sharpest deleveraging event of 2025, emphasising how excess leverage built up in recent months is being violently unwound. That same vulnerability leaves markets sensitive to any surprise in macro data or central bank commentary.

The immediate bounce in Bitcoin and Ether is viewed as corrective rather than structural—several traders suggest the market may trade sideways or drift lower unless fresh catalysts emerge. The rebound succeeded in erasing some losses, but resistance above $110,000 for Bitcoin and around $4,200 for Ether remained challenging.

The U. S. personal consumption expenditures index for August showed year-on-year inflation of 2.7%, broadly in line with expectations. That alignment suggests policymakers are threading a narrow path between supporting growth and avoiding inflation surprises. Some strategists believe the muted inflation reading reduces pressure on central banks to delay easing; others caution that sticky core inflation still leaves room for hawkish surprises.

Crypto sentiment has weakened sharply. The Fear & Greed Index plunged to levels last seen in mid-April, underscoring elevated trader anxiety. According to strategists, over $3 billion of leveraged long positions have been liquidated in the past few sessions, pushing the long-to-short ratio in many tokens toward one-to-nine. That extreme positioning could set the stage for short squeezes—but not without attendant risk.

On-chain flows hint at institutional accumulation, a counterpoint to retail panic. Ethereum has seen meaningful inflows tied to existing ETH ETFs, while some large wallets have made ETH-to-BTC swaps. That movement could reflect growing conviction in Ethereum as a structural play for DeFi and smart contract demand, rather than a pure speculative asset. But challenges remain: Ethereum’s fee-based economics have softened, and alternative chains are gaining traction in niche sectors.

Seasonal models bolster optimism toward the year-end. Historically, Bitcoin has delivered an average return of over 80 per cent in the final quarter, with November being the strongest month on record. Ether, though more volatile, also has a track record of strong Q4 performance. These patterns are not guarantees, but they influence positioning among quantitative funds.

Creditors who complete required verification on FTX’s claims portal and comply with tax documentation will receive payouts via service providers BitGo, Kraken, or Payoneer. Funds are expected to arrive in accounts within three business days after distribution.

Class-5B U. S. customer entitlement claims will receive 40% in this round, elevating their cumulative recovery to 95%. “Dotcom” customers will obtain an additional 6%, bringing their total recovery to 78%. General unsecured and digital asset loan claims will be paid 24%, lifting them to 85% total recovery. Convenience claims will be paid at 120%, exceeding their original declared amounts.

To date, over $6 billion has been repaid to creditors across prior distributions under the plan.

The distributions are being overseen by the FTX Recovery Trust, which is executing on its court-approved strategy to restore assets and settle claims. The plan reflects a structured priority of classes: senior claims and verified claims first, with smaller or “convenience” classes handled in earlier rounds. Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX’s founder, is serving a 25-year sentence for fraud and conspiracy tied to the exchange’s collapse.

Shares in Santos plunged by up to 13.6% as the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company-backed XRG consortium formally withdrew its A$36.4 billion takeover offer, stating it could not reach agreement with Santos on critical commercial terms.

The consortium, which includes ADQ and Carlyle alongside XRG, had proposed A$8.89 per share in June, equivalent to US$5.76 at the time. Santos had adjusted that for a dividend and told XRG on Monday that it was prepared to accept US$5.626 per share.

This marks the third unsuccessful major offer for Santos over seven years, including a rejected bid from Harbour Energy in 2018 and abandoned merger talks with Woodside Energy. Analysts warn that repeated deal failures erode investor confidence in the company’s ability to seal a large-scale acquisition.

Investor concern was immediately reflected in the market. Santos shares dropped to A$6.61 in early trading, their lowest level since June 10, as the premium embedded in the bid evaporated. The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index was marginally down.

Analysts and banks responded by downgrading the stock. Jarden cut its rating from “overweight” to “underweight”, lowering its 12-month target from A$8.40 to A$7.05 per share. turn0news10turn0search1turn0search2

Santos leadership emphasised its strong project pipeline, pointing to the Barossa gas project in northern Australia and the Pikka oil venture in Alaska as key future growth drivers. Company chair Keith Spence reiterated that Santos has a clear strategy to generate cash, reward shareholders, reinvest in infrastructure and grow production while maintaining safety and reliability.

XRG stated that a “combination of factors, when considered collectively, have impacted the Consortium’s assessment of its indicative offer”, including inability to agree on terms under the Scheme Implementation Agreement. Among sticking points was the demand that the consortium assume certain regulatory and tax-risk obligations, which XRG considered unacceptable.