MSTR stock price rose by over 1% on Boxing Day as Bitcoin and other 
cryptocurrencies staged a cautious rebound.

MSTR stock forms a death cross pattern as enterprise mNAV turns negative

The mainnet rollout follows the Fermi testnet activation in November, further 
reducing block times on the layer-1 blockchain network.

BNB Chain Fermi hard fork scheduled for January activation

In an exclusive Cointelegraph interview, the crypto analyst pointed to macro 
headwinds, muted sentiment and cycle dynamics shaping Bitcoin’s path into 
2026.

Bitcoin’s current setup looks like 2019, says Benjamin Cowen

Banks have mostly stayed on the sidelines when it comes to holding XRP 
directly, even as interest in digital assets continues to increase. That 
hesitation has not been due to a lack of utility or demand but to strict 
regulatory capital rules that made holding XRP economically impractical for 
regulated institutions. However, a small adjustment in how XRP is treated 
under global banking rules could remove that barrier and change how banks 
interact with the cryptocurrency. Why Banks Can’t Hold XRP The main obstacle 
preventing banks from holding XRP has been its treatment under the global 
banking framework known as Basel III. Basel III is an international regulatory 
framework developed after the 2008 financial crisis that introduces higher 
quality and quantity of capital requirements in the international banking 
sector. Right now, XRP currently falls into the Type 2 crypto exposure under 
Basel III, which is set up with rules for assets that pose higher risks. Under 
these rules, most cryptocurrencies, including XRP, fall into a high-risk 
category that carries a punitive capital requirement. Banks are required to 
apply a 1,250% risk weight to such assets, implying they must set aside far 
more capital than the value of the XRP itself. This means that under the Basel 
III framework, for every $1 of XRP exposure, a bank must hold $12.50 in 
capital. This dynamic was recently explained by a crypto commentator with the 
name Stern Drew on the social media platform X. In a post on X, Drew explained 
that this capital inefficiency alone accounts for years of institutional 
hesitation. The issue has not been demand nor technology, but the regulatory 
capital treatment that made holding XRP irrational from a balance sheet 
perspective. The Regulatory Inflection Point The conversation around XRP’s 
regulatory status is becoming increasingly important to its long-term outlook. 
Interestingly, Drew’s analysis goes further by pointing to what he describes 
as an inflection point that markets may be overlooking. Now that legal and 
regulatory clarity surrounding cryptocurrencies is improving, XRP could be 
reclassified into a lower-risk category under Basel III. The endgame is that 
XRP is on a clear path to becoming a Tier-1 digital asset for global 
institutions, which is mostly for tokenized traditional assets and stablecoins 
with strong mechanisms. If that reclassification occurs, the economics will 
change immediately. XRP would become acceptable for direct balance sheet 
exposure, allowing banks to custody, deploy, and settle using the asset 
without the need of excessive capital. This is not a discussion about short- 
term price movements but about capital mechanics that determine whether large 
pools of institutional money can participate in holding XRP at all. In this 
case, liquidity provisioning of XRP by banks would change from off-balance- 
sheet usage to direct institutional ownership. Featured image created with 
Dall.E, chart from Tradingview.com

Banks Could Start Holding XRP Due To This Simple Change

Ethereum is entering a critical consolidation phase as price action stabilizes 
just below the $3,000 psychological resistance.

Cryptocurrency price in HUF