Swiss cantonal bank BancaStato has introduced regulated cryptocurrency trading, deploying infrastructure from digital asset bank Sygnum and banking software provider Avaloq, according to Odaily Planet Daily. The lender serves the Italian-speaking region of Ticino. BancaStato has joined Sygnum's business-to-business banking platform, embedding Sygnum's trading and custody capabilities into its existing Avaloq core banking setup. Through the bank's web and mobile banking apps, clients can buy, sell, and hold Bitcoin, ETH, LTC, and SOL. Sygnum said its B2B platform is already used by more than 25 financial institutions, with banking partners including Société Générale-FORGE, PostFinance, and VZ Depotbank. In late June, Sygnum also announced that its Liechtenstein subsidiary, Sygnum Europe AG, received a crypto-asset service provider license under the MiCA framework.

Bank of America's Bull & Bear Indicator climbed to 9.6, its highest reading since December 2020 and the third-highest level in 24 years. The surge points to exceptionally bullish investor sentiment—a condition that has often coincided with elevated market risk.

Bitcoin exchange-traded funds have posted net inflows for seven consecutive days since July 14, according to Santiment. Total net inflows over the period reached $981.2 million. Bitcoin (BTC) climbed as high as $66,300 during the streak. The last comparable run of sustained inflows was seen in October 2025, when BTC was nearing its all-time high of $126,000. (Santiment)

The latest draft of the U.S. CLARITY Act is running into fresh resistance in the Senate after a bloc of influential Democrats said they cannot support the bill as written, complicating its path to the 60 votes needed for passage. Crypto journalist Brendan Pedersen characterized the outlook plainly: "Crypto doesn't have the votes on the Clarity Act." The group of Democratic senators opposing the current draft includes Angela Alsobrooks, Cory Booker, Catherine Cortez Masto, Ruben Gallego, John Hickenlooper, Mark Warner and Raphael Warnock. In their view, the legislation still falls short in several areas, including tougher ethics standards, stronger consumer protections, safeguards against illicit finance, clearer conflict-of-interest protections and overall market integrity. Ethics and enforcement have emerged as the central sticking points. Democrats are pushing for rules that would prevent elected officials and senior government leaders from personally benefiting from crypto-related businesses while shaping digital-asset policy. Pedersen reported that Senator Thom Tillis is a "no" absent ethics changes, while Alsobrooks has called the lack of state attorney general enforcement "unacceptable." Senator Cynthia Lummis has also remained firm on expanding state AG enforcement authority. Another focus is proposed ethics language that would bar all federal officials, including the president, from issuing or sponsoring a digital asset for profit. Lummis praised the concept, arguing it would create "real enforcement and real penalties" while setting a higher ethical bar. Crypto analyst Lark Davis said violations could carry a U.S. Department of Justice fine of $250,000 per day, and pointed to reports that President Trump supported the ethics language despite reportedly earning $1.2 billion in crypto income last year. Senator John Kennedy has indicated support for the bill, while warning that Republicans still face other obstacles, including the ongoing dispute over stablecoin yield. The CLARITY Act is intended to clarify digital-asset rules, define regulatory responsibilities and reduce uncertainty for crypto companies and investors. Democrats who oppose the current draft say they have not abandoned the effort and will continue negotiating with Republicans in search of a bipartisan agreement. With Republicans pushing to advance the measure and Democrats demanding tighter safeguards, the next round of talks will determine whether lawmakers can bridge the gaps on ethics, enforcement and consumer protection—or whether the bill slips further on the Senate calendar.

Kristoffer Kjaer Lomholt, Head of Fixed Income and Foreign Exchange Research at Danske Bank, said in a note that investors are paying closer attention to the 30-year U.S. Treasury yield, which has moved above 5%. He pointed to the intensifying Middle East conflict pushing Brent crude prices toward $100 a barrel, adding to inflation pressure ahead of next week's Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting. As of publication, the 30-year Treasury yield was up 0.3 basis points at 5.15%, close to a two-month high.

Cross-chain bridge security is again in focus after investigators flagged two separate exploits just hours apart, with combined losses topping $31.6 million. On-chain security firm Blockaid said funds were taken from bridge infrastructure tied to decentralized perpetual exchange AFX and from the Verus Ethereum Bridge. Blockaid attributed $24.15 million in losses to an AFX-operated bridge on Arbitrum on Wednesday. A second incident, targeting the Verus Ethereum Bridge, reportedly drained about $7.5 million from bridge reserves. The back-to-back breaches highlight how bridge operators—and protocols that integrate them—can be exposed even when the issue is not linked to a single chain-level flaw. Key points - Blockaid reported $24.15 million stolen from an AFX-run bridge on Arbitrum and roughly $7.5 million drained from the Verus Ethereum Bridge within hours. - Offchain Labs co-founder Stephen Goldfeder said Arbitrum’s native bridge was not compromised and pointed to activity originating from a third-party protocol. - Security researchers said the AFX incident appears more consistent with compromised keys than a smart contract logic bug. - Blockaid said the Verus exploit resembles a May incident, using a similar method but a different attacker wallet. - The incidents reinforce why bridges remain high-value targets: they hold large asset pools and facilitate transfers across ecosystems. AFX bridge incident on Arbitrum Blockaid said it detected the AFX-related exploit at 9:30 pm UTC, describing it as a compromise involving a bridge operated by AFX, which runs on Arbitrum. Investigators characterized the event as an issue affecting a third-party integration rather than a breach of Arbitrum’s core bridging infrastructure. Goldfeder addressed online claims of an “Arbitrum bridge hack,” saying the transaction in question originated from another protocol and that Arbitrum’s native bridge “has not been hacked or exploited in any way.” Separate analysis from SunSec—founder of the DeFi security community DeFiHackLabs and a contributor to SEAL—said available evidence points more toward compromised keys than a vulnerability in contract logic. If confirmed, that would shift the response priority toward credential rotation and access review, underscoring that operational security can be as critical as smart contract design. Cointelegraph sought comment from AFX. Blockaid’s findings and investigator observations form the basis of the current account. Verus Ethereum Bridge: attack mirrors May method In the second breach, Blockaid said the Verus Ethereum Bridge was exploited for about $7.5 million across multiple assets held in reserves. Tokens cited included Ether (ETH), tBTC, USDC, USDt, EURC, MKR, and scrvUSD. Blockaid said the technique appears similar to a May Verus Ethereum Bridge incident that resulted in $11.58 million stolen, though it involved a different attacker wallet. According to Blockaid, the attacker used the bridge’s “import path” to trigger “unbacked Ethereum-side payouts.” In effect, the workflow may allow assets to be released on Ethereum without corresponding backing elsewhere, creating a direct route to draining reserves. Why bridge exploits keep happening Bridge exploits remain difficult to eradicate because cross-chain systems combine custody, message passing (or import/export flows), and permissioning around settlement. Weaknesses at the seams—including credential compromise, flawed authorization, or brittle cross-chain state validation—can enable rapid fund extraction. On-chain investigator TheCrypticWolf said on X that bridges will remain a weak link until “security is upgraded.” While that view is broad, the two same-day incidents add weight to the underlying point: large reserves attract attackers, and complexity makes comprehensive hardening challenging. What to monitor next Bridge incidents often trigger emergency measures such as pausing functionality, tightening authorization, and expanding monitoring. Market participants will be watching for follow-up disclosures from AFX and the Verus ecosystem, including investigator conclusions on root cause—whether key compromise, authorization failures, or repeatable weaknesses in import/export settlement. More broadly, the events underscore that cross-chain risk extends beyond bridge operators. Decentralized applications and traders relying on bridges for liquidity and settlement may need to treat bridge security as an ongoing, evolving exposure rather than a one-time due diligence item.

Blockchain analytics firm Lookonchain reported three security incidents across the crypto sector today, with combined losses estimated at about $35.55 million. AFX Trade recorded the largest hit at roughly $24.15 million. Verus's Ethereum cross-chain bridge was attacked, with losses of about $7.55 million, while B² Network reported losses of approximately $3.86 million following a compromise.

Huo Xing Finance said July 23 that Lookonchain data showed three cyberattacks were recorded today, with combined losses estimated at roughly $35.55 million. AFX Trade accounted for about $24.15 million in losses. An attack on the VerusCoin Ethereum bridge resulted in losses of around $7.55 million. B² Network was also hit, with losses estimated at about $3.86 million.

ETF FLOWS: Spot BTC and ETH ETFs recorded net inflows on July 22, while spot SOL ETFs posted net outflows. BTC: $68.99M. ETH: $72.64M. SOL: $1.27M.