Bitcoin has recently experienced a notable rally, pulling the price back above $90,000 after over five weeks of stagnation. As of now, Bitcoin is trading near $94,401, just shy of the critical $95,761 resistance.
This suggests that Bitcoin is not yet at its saturation point, with further upward momentum possible if key barriers are breached.
Bitcoin Investors Are Greedy
The market sentiment surrounding Bitcoin remains overwhelmingly positive, with investors showing high levels of optimism for further price gains. Social media posts indicate a sharp spike in bullish sentiment, with the number of optimistic (versus bearish) posts reaching levels not seen since the night of Donald Trump’s election on November 5, 2024. This surge in positivity suggests that many investors are poised to capitalize on Bitcoin’s potential growth, further fueling its rally.
However, the extreme level of greed in the market raises questions about the sustainability of this upward movement. As investor sentiment becomes increasingly optimistic, there is a risk that this could lead to a local top if too many traders become overly greedy.
The broader macro momentum for Bitcoin is signaling a rebound, particularly in the Profit/Loss (P/L) ratio, which is nearing a neutral 1.0 level. This shift indicates a balance between coins in profit and those in loss. Historically, the 1.0 threshold has acted as resistance during bear phases, but a sustained move above this level could signal a stronger recovery and continued upward momentum for Bitcoin.
While the shift towards a neutral P/L ratio suggests potential strength, it also opens up the possibility of selling pressure as investors look to lock in profits. Therefore, Bitcoin’s ability to maintain momentum will depend on how investors react to price movements and whether they decide to sell or hold their positions.
Bitcoin’s recent price action shows a 10% increase in the last seven days, trading at $94,401. The crypto king is now just below the significant $95,761 resistance level, which has been holding steady for some time. A break above this level would set Bitcoin on track to reach new highs, with $100,000 as the next major milestone.
Should Bitcoin breach $95,761, the growing greed within the market will likely encourage investors to hold their positions rather than sell. This will likely feed the altcoin’s bullish momentum, pushing Bitcoin further toward $100,000 as demand remains strong among traders eager to capitalize on potential gains.
However, if Bitcoin fails to maintain its position above $93,625, the price could fall toward the $91,521 support. A deeper decline to $89,800 could put the bullish momentum at risk, delaying any immediate recovery and increasing the chances of a consolidation phase.
The leading altcoin ETH has bucked the broader market downturn over the past 24 hours, posting modest gains of around 1%. At press time, the coin trades at $1,842.
This comes as a key momentum metric — the taker buy-sell ratio—surges to its highest level in 30 days, signaling renewed bullish pressure in the asset’s futures market.
Traders Eye ETH Upside as Buy Pressure and Build
According to CryptoQuant, ETH’s taker-buy-sell ratio is currently at 1.08, marking its highest value since early April.
This metric measures the ratio between the buy and sell volumes in ETH’s futures market. A value above 1 suggests that more traders are aggressively buying ETH contracts than selling, while values below 1 indicate dominant sell pressure.
At 1.08, ETH’s taker buy-sell ratio clearly tilts in favor of buyers, reflecting increasing confidence among traders that prices may continue rising.
Moreover, the altcoin’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) continues to trend upward, supporting this bullish narrative. At press time, it is at 58.39 and climbing.
The RSI indicator measures an asset’s overbought and oversold market conditions. It ranges between 0 and 100, with values above 70 indicating that the asset is overbought and due for a decline. Conversely, values under 30 signal that the asset is oversold and could witness a rebound.
ETH’s RSI reading confirms the strengthening bullish bias toward the altcoin, reinforcing the view that it could be primed for further upside.
ETH Builds Strength Above Short-Term Support
At its current price, ETH rests above its 20-day exponential moving average (EMA), which forms dynamic support below its price at $1,770.
The 20-day EMA measures an asset’s average price over the past 20 trading days, giving weight to recent prices. When an asset trades above this key moving average, it signals short-term bullish momentum. This indicates that recent prices are trending higher than the average over the past 20 days. Traders often view this as a sign of underlying strength or an early uptrend.
Therefore, ETH could maintain its rally toward $2,027 if buying pressure gains momentum.
Regulatory sandboxes have emerged as a concept to drive innovation in a controlled setting. They allow companies to test new crypto products and services while regulators observe and adapt regulations. While jurisdictions like the UK, the UAE, and Singapore have already created sandboxes, the US has yet to create one at the federal level.
BeInCrypto spoke with representatives of OilXCoin and Asset Token Ventures LLC to understand what the US needs to build a federal regulatory sandbox and how it can unify a fragmented testing environment for innovators.
A Patchwork Approach
As the name suggests, regulatory sandboxes have emerged as a tool for providing a controlled testing ground. This environment allows entrepreneurs, businesses, industry leaders, and lawmakers to interact with new and innovative products.
According to the Institute for Reforming Government, 14 states in the United States currently have regulatory sandboxes for fintech innovation.
Of those, 11 are industry-specific and cover other sectors like artificial intelligence, real estate, insurance, child care, healthcare, and education.
Utah, Arizona, and Kentucky are the only jurisdictions among these states with an all-inclusive sandbox. Meanwhile, all but 12 states are currently considering legislation to create some regulatory sandbox for innovation.
Due to its relatively short existence, the crypto market has underdeveloped legislation. While state-level sandboxes enable innovators to demonstrate their products’ capabilities to the public, they are significantly constrained by the lack of federal regulatory sandboxes.
The Need for Federal Oversight
Though statewide efforts to create regulatory sandboxes are vital for innovation, entrepreneurs and businesses still face constraints in developing across borders or reaching an audience at a national level.
Rapid advancements in fields like blockchain and artificial intelligence (AI) add a particular layer of uncertainty, given that existing legal frameworks may not be well-suited to these technologies.
At the same time, regulators may face difficulties in developing appropriate rules for these technologies due to a potential lack of familiarity with these constantly changing industries.
As a result, industry participants are increasingly calling for creating a federal regulatory sandbox. This environment could be a collaborative framework to address the gap, facilitating communication and knowledge sharing between regulators and industry stakeholders.
“The implementation of a federal regulatory sandbox in the United States has the potential to significantly enhance both innovation and regulatory oversight by reducing the uncertainties often associated with navigating the regulatory landscape across state lines. Such an initiative could help establish a coherent framework characterized by uniformity, continuity, and a conducive environment for innovation,” said Paul Talbert, Managing Director of ATV Fund.
According to Rademacher and Talbert, this proposal would meet the needs of all players involved.
Benefits of a Federal Regulatory Sandbox
A sandbox provides innovators with a controlled environment to test products under regulatory oversight without the immediate burden of full compliance with rules that may not yet fit their technology.
It also allows regulators to acquire firsthand insights into blockchain applications, facilitating the creation of more knowledgeable and flexible regulatory policies.
“Startups should have clear eligibility criteria to determine their qualification for participation, while regulators must outline specific objectives—whether focused on refining token classification frameworks, testing DeFi applications, or improving compliance processes,” Rademacher said.
It could also help the United States reinforce its position as a leader in technological innovation.
“By fostering innovation through simplicity, regulatory certainty, and conducive environments, the United States can significantly strengthen its competitive position in the global fintech landscape,” Talbert added.
While the United States has stalled in creating a federal framework for fintech innovation, other jurisdictions around the world have already gained significant ground in this regard.
Global Precedents
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which regulates the United Kingdom’s financial services, launched the first regulatory sandbox in 2014 as part of Project Innovate. This initiative aimed to provide a controlled environment for testing innovative products.
The government asked the FCA to establish a regulatory process to promote new technology-based financial services and fintech and ensure consumer protection.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Singapore, in particular, have made progressive strides in creating federal regulatory sandboxes.
The UAE, for example, currently has four different sandboxes: the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Regulation Lab, the DSFA Sandbox, the CBUAE FinTech Sandbox, and the DFF Regulation Lab.
Their focus areas include digital banking, blockchain, payment systems, AI, and autonomous transport.
Meanwhile, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) launched its Fintech Regulatory Sandbox in 2016. Three years later, MAS also launched the Sandbox Express, providing firms with a faster option for market testing certain low-risk activities in pre-defined environments.
“The success of regulatory sandboxes in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates has highlighted the importance of key attributes: regulatory collaboration, transparent processes, continuous monitoring, and the allocation of dedicated resources. As a result, a growing number of jurisdictions worldwide are looking to replicate the frameworks established by these pioneering countries to strengthen their competitive position in the global fintech landscape,” Talbert said.
Rademacher believes these jurisdictions’ innovations should prompt the United States to accelerate its progress.
For that to happen, the United States must overcome certain hurdles.
Challenges of a Fragmented US Regulatory Landscape
A fragmented network of federal and state agencies overseeing financial services presents a key challenge to establishing a US federal regulatory sandbox.
“Unlike other countries with a single financial authority overseeing the market, the U.S. has multiple agencies—including the SEC, CFTC, and banking regulators—each with different perspectives on how digital assets should be classified and regulated. The lack of inter-agency coordination makes implementing a unified sandbox more complex than in jurisdictions with a single regulatory body,” Rademacher told BeInCrypto.
Yet, in recent years, important SEC and CFTC actors have expressed interest in adopting a more favorable regulatory approach to innovation.
“Even though I tend to be more of a beach than a sandbox type of regulator, sandboxes have proven effective in facilitating innovation in highly regulated sectors. Experience in the UK and elsewhere has shown that sandboxes can help innovators try out their innovations under real-world conditions. A sandbox can provide a viable path for smaller, disruptive firms to enter highly regulated markets to compete with larger incumbent firms,” Peirce said in a statement last May.
However, the full scope of national regulations far exceeds the authority of these two entities.
Congressional and Constitutional Hurdles
Any legislative measure to develop a federal regulatory framework for sandboxes in the United States would have to undergo Congressional approval. Talbert highlighted several potential constitutional dilemmas the promotion of an initiative of this nature may face.
“These dilemmas include issues related to the non-delegation doctrine, which raises concerns about the constitutionality of delegating legislative power; equal protection considerations under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause; challenges arising from the Supremacy Clause; and implications under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and principles of judicial review,” he said.
To address these complexities, Congress must enact clear legal boundaries that ensure a regulatory framework is both predictable and open. Given the current administration’s emphasis on technological innovation, the prospects for creating a sandbox appear positive.
“Given the current composition of Congress, which aligns with the political orientation of the new executive branch, there may be a timely opportunity for regulatory reform. Such reform could facilitate the creation of a cohesive federal regulatory framework and enhance collaboration among federal agencies,” Talbert told BeInCrypto.
However, creating a federal regulatory sandbox is not a one-size-fits-all solution.
Balancing State Autonomy and Federal Regulations
State autonomy is enshrined in the US Constitution. This protection means that, even though a regulatory sandbox may exist at the national level, individual states still have the authority to restrict or prohibit sandboxes within their jurisdictions.
Encouragingly, most US states are already exploring regulatory sandboxes, and the states that have already implemented them represent diverse political viewpoints.
However, other considerations beyond political resistance must also be addressed.
“A federal regulatory sandbox might also face opposition from established financial institutions, including banks, which may perceive potential threats to their existing business models. Furthermore, federal budgetary constraints could impede the government’s capacity to support the development and maintenance of a federal regulatory framework,” Talbert added.
Effective federal regulations will also require a balance between businesses’ concerns and regulators’ responsibilities.
“The two biggest risks are overregulation—imposing excessive restrictions that undermine the sandbox’s purpose—or underregulation, failing to provide meaningful clarity. If the rules are too restrictive, businesses may avoid participation, limiting the sandbox’s effectiveness. If they are too lax, there is a risk of abuse or regulatory arbitrage. A well-executed federal regulatory sandbox should not become a bureaucratic burden but rather a dynamic framework that fosters responsible growth in the digital asset space,” Rademacher told BeInCrypto.
Ultimately, the best approach will require coordination from different governing bodies, industry stakeholders, and bipartisan collaboration.
Fostering Collaboration for a Successful Sandbox
Due to recent strained communication between tech and federal agencies, Rademacher believes fostering a cooperative atmosphere is essential for creating a functional federal sandbox.
“The approach must be collaborative rather than adversarial. Agencies should view the sandbox as an opportunity to refine regulations in real time, working alongside industry participants to develop policies that foster responsible innovation. Involvement from banking regulators and the Treasury Department could also be valuable in ensuring that digital assets are integrated into the broader financial system in a responsible manner,” he said.
Achieving this requires a bipartisan approach to harmonizing regulatory goals and setting clear boundaries. Industry collaboration with lawmakers and regulators is vital to showing how a sandbox can promote responsible innovation while safeguarding consumers.
“Its success will ultimately depend on whether it serves as a bridge between innovation and regulation, rather than an additional layer of complexity,” Rademacher concluded.
Despite political controversies surrounding the Trump Gala Dinner event, the crypto market has recently witnessed a significant accumulation wave of the TRUMP token, a meme coin associated with the Trump family.
These activities reflect strong interest from major investors, often called “whales,” and highlight the TRUMP token’s growth potential amidst a volatile market.
Whales’ accumulation to secure VIP tickets
The accumulation trend for the TRUMP token gained momentum as large investors consistently executed noteworthy transactions.
On April 28, 2025, a whale withdrew 190,987 TRUMP tokens from Binance, increasing its total holdings to 1.389 million tokens, equivalent to $20.59 million. This investor, known by the alias “MeCo,” currently holds the second position among the top holders vying for a spot at the Trump Gala Dinner, trailing only Justin Sun.
On the same day, another whale bolstered its holdings by adding 92,460 TRUMP tokens, belonging to the top 125 holders.
Before that, on April 27, a savvy trader swapped 1.18 million Fartcoins for 78,671 TRUMP tokens. Moving to April 26, a prominent whale reinvested early profits and additional funds, purchasing $5.73 million worth of TRUMP tokens.
These transactions reveal a clear trend: major investors are accumulating TRUMP tokens to secure their spots at the Trump Gala Dinner, an exclusive event reserved for top token holders.
Challenges starting
Despite these activities, TRUMP has shown positive performance signals in the market. According to data from BeInCrypto, the price of TRUMP surged by 84% over the past seven days, outpacing many other cryptocurrencies.
The spot trading volume of TRUMP on Binance also skyrocketed by 202% within nine days. However, despite these positive indicators, the Trump Gala Dinner has sparked intense political controversy.
On April 25, 2025, two US Senators, Adam Schiff and Elizabeth Warren, sent a letter to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. They called for an investigation into the event because they believed it violated federal ethics regulations.
The Senators expressed concerns that the event could constitute a “pay-to-play” scheme. Investors pay for political access, as Trump promised a private dinner on May 22, 2025, for the top.
Following this announcement, the TRUMP token’s value surged over $100 million. This raised suspicions that the Trump family might leverage their political influence for profit.
Schiff and Warren also questioned whether Trump or his family had received guidance on profiting from digital assets during his tenure. And what safeguards exist to prevent the purchase of political access through TRUMP token investments?
First, Donald Trump launches a memecoin, netting himself billions.
Next, his family gets in on the scheme.
Now his billionaire buddies are getting even richer too.
This controversy has sparked broader questions about the intersection of cryptocurrency and politics, particularly as more public figures engage with the crypto market.
Furthermore, as previously reported by BeInCrypto, there is speculation that Trump might use the Trump Gala Dinner to promote a new NFT project.
In summary, the accumulation wave of TRUMP tokens to attend the Trump Gala Dinner shows this meme coin’s strong financial appeal due to its social and political significance. Positive price and trading volume data reinforce investor confidence in TRUMP’s growth potential.
However, the political controversies surrounding the event also introduce significant risks. Investors should remain vigilant, closely monitoring market developments and related legal factors.
