Crypto whale James Wynn has made headlines again after dramatically increasing his Bitcoin exposure. He placed a $1.2 billion long position on Hyperliquid, a decentralized derivatives exchange.
This comes shortly after he closed out positions in Ethereum, Sui, and PEPE. The move signals a strategic shift toward Bitcoin as the market rallies.
Crypto Whale Exits Altcoins to Place $1.2 Billion Leveraged Bet on Bitcoin
On May 24, blockchain tracker Lookonchain revealed that Wynn had opened a 40x leveraged position totaling 11,588 BTC, worth approximately $1.25 billion. His liquidation level is set at $105,180.
James Wynn Bitcoin Bet on Hyperliquid. Source: Lookonchain
This move extends a series of aggressive Bitcoin trades Wynn began earlier in the week. On May 21, he opened a long position worth $830 million, from which he took a $400 million profit on the same day.
Since then, he has reloaded his position to over $1 billion as Bitcoin’s price climbed over the past two days.
Moreover, he also shared a screenshot on the social platform X showing that his latest Bitcoin long bet was up 13.4%. This means that the position had generated around $4.2 million in unrealized profit.
Still, his track record has its blemishes. He recently closed his positions in Ethereum and Sui with a combined loss of $5.3 million. However, he offset those setbacks with a $25.19 million gain on a trade involving PEPE.
Solana has emerged as a powerful presence in the crypto industry. Since its inception in 2020, the network has dominated the market, demonstrating remarkable levels of user engagement and practical utility, particularly in decentralized finance (DeFi). Many in the industry view it as the next natural contender to receive an ETF approval in the United States.
However, others are more cautious in their evaluations. BeInCrypto spoke with representatives from Gravity, Variant, and OKX to understand the areas where Solana is still lacking. Industry leaders referred to centralization, network reliability, and excessive regulation as points of contention for Solana’s ETF approval.
Bitcoin and Ethereum’s Precedent
The availability of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) for prominent cryptocurrencies has grown over the past year. These funds offer investors diversified investment opportunities and act as a bridge between traditional finance and the increasingly mainstream cryptocurrency market.
Meanwhile, the deadline for some filings, including Grayscale’s, was extended until October. Nonetheless, posts on X and some analytical reports suggest yesterday’s deadline as a date of interest for an initial or consolidated SEC response to several applications.
2025 Predictions and Market Expectations
The tentative approval of a Solana ETF has generated much debate across social media platforms. ETF President Nate Geraci formally predicted that 2025 would be the year of crypto ETFs and that Solana would receive its approval this year.
Per previous reports, former Trump White House Secretary Anthony Scaramucci expressed that, with a Trump reelection, Solana ETFs could gain approval during Q1 of 2025. According to his predictions, Solana would receive the SEC’s green light during the next two weeks.
Meanwhile, the prediction market Polymarket estimates an 82% chance that a Solana ETF will get approved in 2025.
According to a Polymarket poll, Solana has an 82% chance of getting an ETF approval in 2025. Source: Polymarket
Several factors make an imminent Solana ETF approval seem plausible. Less than five years after the network launched, Solana quickly became a major player in the crypto industry, attracting users for its high transaction speeds and low gas fees.
“From a network perspective, Solana’s performance has been remarkable, now driving nearly 50% of all global DEX volume– a dominance that fundamentally reshapes the DeFi landscape. The blockchain is not just handling unprecedented transaction volumes… it’s transforming our understanding of blockchain scalability at scale,” Lennix Lai, Global Chief Commercial Officer at OKX told BeInCrypto.
Solana has established itself as a dynamic force in the crypto industry following a successful 2024.
A Messari report detailed particular growth in Solana’s final quarter across DeFi, liquid staking, NFTs, and institutional involvement. The total value locked (TVL) in Solana’s DeFi sector increased substantially, growing by 64% to $8.6 billion, which placed it behind Ethereum as the second-largest network based on TVL.
Solana’s positive performance, coupled with Donald Trump’s reelection to the US presidency, further amplified the crypto industry’s optimism over an ETF approval.
However, some industry experts have expressed more tempered expectations.
Experts Offer Tempered Expectations
A few days before Trump assumed the presidency, Bloomberg Intelligence analyst James Seyffart said Solana ETFs may not be launched in the US until 2026. He cited the SEC’s precedent of taking a lot of time to review filings as the cause for delay.
In another post, Bloomberg Senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas said that ETF approvals for other cryptocurrencies were more likely to occur before Solana.
“We expect a wave of cryptocurrency ETFs next year, albeit not all at once. First out is likely the BTC + ETH combo ETFs, then prob Litecoin (bc its fork of btc = commodity), then HBAR (bc not labeled security) and then XRP/Solana (which have been labeled securities in pending lawsuits),” Balchunas said.
Balchunas further explained that complex legal issues around Solana, relating to its status as a security, need to be resolved before it can gain ETF approval. Consequently, he deemed the approval of Litecoin or Hedera ETFs more likely.
Uncertainty over whether Solana classifies as a security is a major driver fueling doubts over its ETF approval.
Security Classification Concerns
Martins Benkitis, co-founder and CEO of Gravity, explained that Solana’s regulatory classification complicates its path to approval.
“It’s no secret there’s currently a lack of precedent for Layer-1 blockchains beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum in the ETF space, this suggests cautious optimism but with higher regulatory hurdles. Bitcoin, being a commodity in the SEC’s eyes, and Ethereum’s gradual transition to PoS had different legal considerations. Solana, on the other hand, faces concerns over potential classification as a security due to its token distribution and foundation’s involvement,” Benkitis told BeInCrypto.
The SEC identified Solana as a security in lawsuits against Binance and Coinbase over the past two years, although these lawsuits have since been dropped. The SEC argued that these tokens could be considered investment contracts under the Howey Test.
While some interpreted the SEC’s lawsuit withdrawal as a softening stance on Solana’s security classification, others quickly challenged this assumption.
“There is no reason to think [the] SEC has decided SOL is a non-security. That they don’t want to do discovery on a dozen tokens in the Binance case appears to be a litigation tactic, not a change in policy,” said Jake Chervinsky, Chief Legal Officer at Variant, following the Binance lawsuit withdrawal in July 2024.
Others believe that a pro-crypto administration should be enough to influence the SEC to consider Solana as a non-security. Lai disagrees.
“The changing political landscape, particularly with Trump’s victory and pro-crypto stance, could create a more constructive environment for innovative blockchain platforms like Solana. However, the technical and market structure considerations will remain crucial regardless of administration changes,” he said.
In the meantime, there are several other requirements Solana must meet.
On his part, Lai added other aspects to the list of considerations.
“While Polymarket shows high odds for 2025 approval, several critical factors suggest a more complex pathway: Solana’s technological architecture presents unique challenges with its PoS mechanism; The absence of CME futures raises liquidity and risk management concerns; Historical network downtime incidents need addressing; Centralization questions relative to BTC and ETH remain unresolved; Institutional interest hasn’t matched BTC and ETH levels despite the network driving 48% of global DEX volume; [and] the temporary nature of trending themes suggests caution in using current volumes as primary indicators,” Lai told BeInCrypto.
Concerns about centralization and scalability have long been discussed regarding Solana, even outside of discussions over an ETF approval.
Since 2021, Solana has suffered over a dozen network outages varying in severity. These outages have jeopardized the network’s reputation as stable and reliable– two strongly considered characteristics during the ETF approval process.
“From a market making standpoint, network reliability is crucial as any downtime or congestion can significantly impact trading operations and order execution,” Benkitis affirmed.
However, Solana has successfully curbed the number of outages it has experienced. Once notorious for the frequency of its shutdowns, the last time Solana experienced one was in February 2024.
Meanwhile, developers designed Solana’s upcoming Firedancer validator client to improve network stability and transaction processing. Its distinct codebase offers greater resilience against widespread outages and will enhance Solana’s performance.
Yet, Solana must also mitigate centralization concerns to improve its chances of obtaining ETF approval.
Centralization Concerns
Solana’s validator node requirements, which demand significant hardware investments, can create barriers to entry. These obstacles can potentially concentrate power within the network among those capable of affording the necessary infrastructure.
In turn, the protocol’s limited number of validators compared to other networks raises concerns over centralization. For context, while Solana currently has around 2,000 active validators, Ethereum passed the one million benchmark last year—the largest number recorded by any blockchain network.
Though Solana’s hardware reliance speeds up the network, it also raises decentralization concerns. Benkitis factored this aspect into his evaluation of an ETF approval.
Its currently underdeveloped futures market infrastructure further complicates Solana’s viability as an ETF candidate.
Its filings were unprecedented because the network did not have a previously established futures market. This factor was crucial in determining an ETF approval for Bitcoin and Ethereum.
“The lack of CME futures and institutional frameworks comparable to BTC/ETH could influence [the SEC’s] evaluation,” Lai said.
He added that the proliferation of meme tokens minted on Solana could present themselves as a potential roadblock.
“Market reactions reflect Solana’s emergence as the primary driver of this cycle, with DEX volumes exceeding $100 billion and dominating major aggregators. However, I believe the temporary nature of trending themes suggests continued volatility. While technological advancement and growing institutional adoption may provide stronger foundations, we need to maintain perspective on the cyclical nature of crypto trends,” Lai said.
This more recent development in Solana’s attraction also brings its set of downsides.
Meme Coin Influence and Regulatory Concerns
The expanding meme coin market on Solana partially explains its popularity. Platforms like Pump.fun allow anyone to launch their tokens, and this design has even led to celebrities launching their tokens on the platform.
More recently, political figures like Donald Trump and Argentine president Javier Milei have also launched meme tokens on Solana platforms. Yet, these activities have proven to be high-risk. In many cases, meme coin investments have caused smaller retailers millions of dollars in losses.
Benkitis said that the SEC might frown upon the speculative nature of these trading activities.
“While an ETF approval could unlock liquidity opportunities, the market’s heavy dependence on speculative sentiment calls for a measured and cautious approach,” he said.
With so many considerations, approving a Solana ETF in 2025 is far from guaranteed. The SEC’s eventual decision will be a defining moment for the network and the broader crypto industry.
The decentralized finance (DeFi) sector faced another major setback this weekend as two protocols, Loopscale and Term Finance, suffered exploits totaling over $7 million in losses.
These incidents have fueled growing concerns about the vulnerabilities of DeFi platforms in 2025.
Loopscale Loses $5.8 Million in Major Exploit
On April 26, Solana-based Loopscale reported a significant security breach impacting its USDC and SOL vaults.
The exploit drained around $5.8 million, representing roughly 12% of the platform’s total value. Notably, this attack came just two weeks after Loopscale’s official launch.
Loopscale’s co-founder, Mary Gooneratne, confirmed that an attacker exploited the system by securing under-collateralized loans.
Investigations revealed that the root cause stemmed from an isolated issue in the platform’s RateX-based collateral pricing system.
However, Loopscale clarified that RateX itself was not compromised.
“The root cause of the exploit has been identified as an isolated issue with Loopscale’s pricing of RateX-based collateral. There is no issue with RateX itself related to this. Loss of funds explicitly affects depositors to SOL and USDC Genesis vaults,” Loopscale stated.
Following the breach, Loopscale temporarily halted all markets to assess the damage.
The platform has since resumed partial operations, enabling key functions like loan repayments, top-ups, and loop closures, while vault withdrawals remain restricted.
The platform requested the return of 90% of the stolen assets and warned of legal action if the attacker did not respond by April 28.
“We agree to allow you to retain a bounty of 10% of the funds (3,947 SOL) and release you from any and all liability regarding the attack,” Loopscale added.
Loopscale is currently working with security firms and law enforcement agencies to manage the situation.
Term Finance Suffers $1.5 Million Liquidation Loss
Meanwhile, Ethereum-based Term Finance, a pioneer in scalable fixed-rate lending, also reported a security incident on April 26.
Blockchain security firm TenArmorAlert identified two suspicious transactions linked to Term Labs, resulting in losses of about $1.5 million.
“It appears that something is wrong with the liquidation. Someone spent a very small amount of ETH to liquidate over 586 Treehouse collateral,” TenArmorAlert stated.
Term Finance later confirmed that a faulty update to its tETH oracle caused the problem. Fortunately, no smart contracts were exploited, and the issue was contained within the tETH markets.
The platform assured users that all other funds remain secure and has committed to a full reimbursement plan for those affected.
These attacks contribute to a worrying trend in 2025, with crypto projects losing close to $2 billion this year.
Stablecoins—cryptocurrencies pegged to stable assets like the USD—are drawing increasing attention from top payment companies. Recent reports claim stablecoin transaction volumes over the past year have surpassed Visa.
However, industry experts are skeptical of these numbers. This article explores the reasons behind that skepticism.
Why Experts Suspect Stablecoin Volume Might Be Inflated
Recently, Chamath Palihapitiya, CEO of Social Capital, posted on X that the weekly transaction volume of stablecoins has exceeded that of Visa, reaching over $400 billion. He added that companies like Visa, Mastercard, and Stripe are actively embracing the trend.
According to the data, in Q4 of 2024, the average weekly stablecoin transaction volume reached $464 billion. That’s significantly higher than Visa’s $319 billion. A Bitwise report estimates that stablecoins processed about $13.5 trillion in total transaction volume in 2024. This marks the first time stablecoin volume surpassed Visa’s annual total.
At first glance, this seems like a major milestone, suggesting that stablecoins could reshape the future of global payments. Citigroup even projects that the stablecoin market could reach $3.7 trillion by 2030.
Not everyone shares the enthusiasm. Some experts have warned that the reported stablecoin volume might be inflated. They argue it doesn’t reflect real economic activity and shouldn’t be directly compared with traditional systems like Visa.
Joe, an advisor at Maven 11 Capital, pointed out that professional traders can generate hundreds of millions in volume using very little initial capital.
“If you have $100,000 of USDC on Solana, you can do ~$136 million of ‘stablecoin volume’ for $1 in fees,” Joe said.
He used Solana as an example. Solana is a fast blockchain with extremely low transaction fees—about $0.0036 per transaction. Joe even joked that with $3,400, someone could double weekly stablecoin transaction volumes. He implied that the metric is easy to manipulate and not truly reliable.
Dan Smith, a data expert at Blockworks Research, strongly supported Joe’s view. Dan explained that using flash loans—uncollateralized loans in DeFi—can inflate volume even further at lower costs.
Flash loans allow users to borrow large sums without collateral, as long as they repay within the same transaction. This enables volume manipulation without requiring significant capital, further casting doubt on the numbers cited by Palihapitiya.
Rajiv, a member of Framework Ventures, was even more direct. He called stablecoin volume a “useless metric.” Dan Smith agreed. He added that the unusually high volume often signals exploitative behavior within the system.
Wash Trading and Bot Trading Undermine Economic Value
One key reason experts doubt stablecoin volume is the presence of wash trading and bot trading.
Wash trading involves repeatedly buying and selling between wallets controlled by the same person or entity. The goal is to artificially inflate transaction volume. Bot trading uses automated programs to conduct trades, often for arbitrage or fake liquidity.
A $1 million stablecoin transaction might just be money transferred between two wallets owned by the same person. It adds no real economic value. This contrasts sharply with Visa, where each transaction typically represents a real purchase or payment, like buying goods or services.
Last year, Visa’s dashboard also reported that only 10% of stablecoin transactions were genuine. A wash trading report by Chainalysis found that wash trades involving ERC-20 and BEP-20 tokens could total up to $2.57 billion in volume in 2024.
