Bullish Crypto Exchange Quietly Files for U.S. IPO Amid Regulatory Shift

Cryptocurrency

Summary:

Peter Thiel-backed Bullish has confidentially filed for an IPO with the SEC, seeking to leverage renewed interest in digital assets under a more crypto-friendly U.S. administration....

Bullish Reignites Public Listing Ambitions in Friendlier Regulatory Climate

Peter Thiel-backed cryptocurrency exchange Bullish has confidentially submitted paperwork to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for an initial public offering, according to a Financial Times report. This marks a renewed effort to enter public markets after its previous attempt via a SPAC merger collapsed in 2022, largely due to unfavorable macroeconomic conditions and regulatory scrutiny during the Biden administration.

Now, under the Trump administration, which has taken a more supportive stance toward digital asset markets, Bullish appears poised to benefit from both political tailwinds and renewed investor appetite for crypto-related equities. The SEC has reportedly softened its posture, having dropped several investigations into cryptocurrency firms — a marked departure from the aggressive oversight seen during the previous administration.

From SPAC Failure to Strategic Reset

Bullish, a subsidiary of Block.one, originally sought to go public in 2021 via a merger with Far Peak Acquisition Corp. at a valuation exceeding $9 billion. That deal unraveled in late 2022, as rising interest rates, declining equity valuations, and mounting regulatory hurdles eroded investor confidence in crypto ventures. The failure also aligned with a broader industry reckoning, including collapses like FTX and scrutiny of stablecoins.

Since then, Bullish has recalibrated. The company has reportedly focused on compliance infrastructure, liquidity provisioning, and expanding institutional partnerships, aiming to distance itself from the speculative excesses that plagued the industry during the last bull run.

IPO Wave Signals Crypto Sector Reawakening

Bullish's confidential filing follows a similar move by Gemini, the cryptocurrency exchange led by Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss. The back-to-back filings suggest a reawakening in IPO interest across the digital asset sector — buoyed by shifting political winds and a broader thaw in regulatory attitudes. Both firms aim to tap into a capital market that is warming again to crypto, especially as token prices and trading volumes have shown signs of recovery in 2025.

With the SEC now taking a more accommodating approach and institutional capital slowly reentering the space, crypto exchanges are seizing what may be a narrow window of opportunity before the next regulatory or market cycle turns.

While Bullish has not confirmed the filing or commented publicly, its confidential IPO submission could signal a cautious but deliberate return of crypto exchanges to mainstream equity markets. The company’s valuation, proposed share structure, and timeline remain under wraps, but the filing itself underscores growing confidence in a more predictable regulatory environment — at least for now. Whether this translates into long-term stability for digital asset firms remains to be seen, especially in an industry prone to volatility, both technical and political.

Source: Reuters

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Cautious BOJ to Hold Rates Through 2025

The Bank of Japan is expected to delay further interest rate hikes until early 2026, according to a slight majority of economists surveyed in a Reuters poll conducted from June 2 to 10. Amid global trade instability and concerns about Japan’s fiscal health, the central bank appears likely to maintain its benchmark short-term interest rate at 0.50% through year-end 2025.

This cautious stance comes despite the BOJ’s continued hawkish rhetoric. Governor Kazuo Ueda has reiterated the bank’s readiness to raise rates if inflationary pressures build. However, economists suggest that external uncertainty, especially U.S. trade policies under President Trump, and internal market fragility are prompting the BOJ to act more conservatively.

Only 17 basis points of tightening are priced in by bond markets for the remainder of the year, reinforcing the perception that significant hikes are unlikely in 2025. January 2026 now emerges as the consensus timing for a potential 25-basis-point increase, although some economists still consider October 2025 or March 2026 as plausible windows.

Tapering to Slow, Super-Long Bond Issuance to Fall

In addition to the rate outlook, the BOJ is also expected to decelerate its quantitative tightening. Over half of the economists polled (17 out of 31) predict that the BOJ will slow its tapering of Japanese government bond (JGB) purchases beyond April 2026, reducing from the current pace of roughly 400 billion yen per quarter. Forecasted reductions vary widely, from 200 billion yen to 370 billion yen.

This policy shift is driven by concerns over Japan’s public debt dynamics and the weakening demand for ultra-long duration bonds. Around three-quarters of economists (21 out of 28) expect the Ministry of Finance to trim issuance of 20-, 30-, and 40-year bonds, with the 30-year category being most frequently identified for cuts.

The drop in demand for long-duration debt, particularly from life insurers, has driven yields on super-long JGBs to record highs. In response, the Japanese government is reportedly weighing bond buybacks to manage debt maturities and reduce refinancing risks — a signal of potential fiscal recalibration in light of shifting interest rate conditions.

Trade Tensions Cloud Monetary Outlook

The broader macroeconomic landscape remains complicated by global trade frictions. Unpredictable tariff policies from the U.S. — including recent retaliatory threats — have shaken Japan’s export-driven economy and raised concerns about the durability of current growth momentum. While the BOJ maintains a medium-term inflation target of 2%, the foundation for consistent price gains is far from secure.

Takumi Tsunoda from Shinkin Central Bank Research Institute emphasized that global trade progress could revive economic momentum, but the timing remains uncertain. As such, the BOJ is unlikely to act aggressively until there is greater clarity on external demand and inflation stability.

The June Reuters poll indicates a subtle but clear shift in sentiment toward policy patience. Although Japan was among the last to exit ultra-loose monetary settings, the fragile post-pandemic recovery, volatile trade environment, and structural debt challenges are forcing the BOJ into a cautious mode. While inflation remains on the radar, domestic and international vulnerabilities are likely to keep policy rates steady through at least Q1 2026. The next few quarters will test the BOJ’s ability to balance normalization with market stability, particularly as bond markets signal mounting stress.

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

James Whitman

Economic

China–U.S. Trade War

The US and China capped two days of high-stakes trade talks with a plan to revive the flow of sensitive goods — a framework now awaiting the blessing of Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

After some 20 hours of negotiations in London, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said both sides had established a framework for implementing the Geneva consensus that last month brought down tariffs. “First we had to get sort of the negativity out,” he said. “Now we can go forward to try to do positive trade, growing trade.”

Capping a marathon round of haggling that stretched over 12 hours on Tuesday, Lutnick said the Chinese had pledged to speed up shipments of rare earth metals critical to US auto and defence firms, while Washington would ease some of its own export controls — suggesting progress was made on two of the thorniest issues in bilateral ties.

The US and Chinese delegations will take that proposal back to their respective leaders, according to China’s chief trade negotiator Li Chenggang. Negotiations were “in-depth and candid”, he told reporters in brief remarks before midnight outside Lancaster House, a Georgian-era mansion near Buckingham Palace that served as this week’s meeting site.

While the positive tone should reassure investors worried about a decoupling of the world’s largest economies, details were scarce and the deal could still be nixed by top leaders. The discussions also did little to fix issues such as China’s massive trade surplus with the US and a belief in Washington that Beijing is dumping goods on its markets.

Initial market reaction to the announcement was muted, with US equity futures edging lower and the offshore yuan little changed. The Chinese onshore benchmark stock gauge was up 0.9% on Wednesday morning, on track for the biggest increase since May 14, shortly after the Geneva agreement.

“Markets will likely welcome the shift from confrontation to coordination,” said Charu Chanana, chief investment strategist at Saxo Markets. “We’re not out of the woods yet — it’s up to Trump and Xi to approve and enforce the deal.”

The Chinese Foreign Ministry and Commerce Ministry didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The London meetings came together at short notice after Trump last week spoke to Xi for the first time since taking office, in a bid to stop ties spiralling over claims both sides had reneged on the Geneva accord. US officials accused China of stalling magnet exports while Trump officials angered Beijing with new controls on chip design software, jet engines and student visas.

That spat showcased the growing role of export controls in modern trade warfare, where access to rare metals or tiny microchips can give one economy leverage over a rival. European trade officials and global carmakers also sounded the alarm in recent weeks on disruption of supplies from China that are critical for fighter jets and electric vehicles.

Lutnick suggested they’d found a way to overcome the deadlock.

“There were a number of measures the United States of America put on when those rare earths were not coming,” he added. “You should expect those to come off — sort of, as President Trump said, in a balanced way.”

Allowing technology that’s critical to Beijing’s military advancement to become a bargaining chip would mark a major departure for Washington, which has justified such export controls with national security concerns. It would also open the door for China to use its dominance of rare earths to put a lid on further limits on cutting-edge chips.

The US relenting on export controls is “unprecedented”, Wendy Cutler, a former senior US trade negotiator now at the Asia Society Policy Institute, wrote on LinkedIn, while pointing to the fragility of the current arrangement.

It took two days, three US Cabinet members and one Chinese vice premier to get back to upholding the Geneva accord, she added. That’s “a preview” for the next 60 days, she said, when US and Chinese officials have to hammer out agreements on excess capacity, unfair trade practices and the flow of fentanyl as part of a broader trade agreement.

US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the issue of fentanyl, which the Trump administration cited as a rationale for imposing a 20% tariff on China, was a priority for the US president. “We would expect to see progress from the Chinese on that issue in a major way,” he added.

Greer said there are no other meetings scheduled, adding that both sides talk frequently. Striking a similar tone, China’s Li said: “We hope the progress we made will be conducive to building trust.”

The US and China are about a third of the way through a 90-day reprieve on the crippling tit-for-tat tariffs imposed on each other through April. Though the Geneva settlement dramatically reduced duties, trade remains disrupted — China’s exports to the US fell in May by the most since early 2020 when the pandemic shut down the Chinese economy.

The trade war’s biggest casualty hasn’t been lost sales but lost trust, according to Josef Gregory Mahoney, a professor of international relations at Shanghai’s East China Normal University.

“We’ve heard a lot about agreements on frameworks for talks,” he added. “But the fundamental issue remains: Chips vs rare earths. Everything else is a peacock dance.”

Source: Bloomberg

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Stocks

Asian Equity Markets Rally on Trade Truce Optimism

Asia’s major stock indices rallied on Wednesday after the United States and China announced a framework to move forward on their Geneva trade truce. The deal, reached after two days of discussions in London, was hailed by officials from both nations, though analysts questioned the depth of the agreement, suggesting it was more a reaffirmation of previous promises than a breakthrough.

In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 advanced 0.5% to 38,385.37, with sentiment buoyed by Bank of Japan data showing easing wholesale inflation in May. This suggests a lower likelihood of near-term rate hikes from the central bank, giving equities a further boost. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose 0.8% to 24,364.77, while the Shanghai Composite climbed 0.5% to 3,402.72. Markets in Australia and South Korea also posted moderate gains, with the ASX 200 and Kospi up 0.3% and 0.6% respectively.

Muted Progress in Trade Talks

The rally was partially fueled by a cautious sense of progress in trade negotiations. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick described the London discussions as going “really, really well,” echoing previous comments from Chinese officials. However, investors and analysts expressed skepticism about the substance of the agreement.

Stephen Innes of SPI Asset Management noted that the outcome of the 48-hour talks was largely procedural rather than substantive. “Markets were expecting substance, they got process instead,” he said, highlighting the still-precarious nature of global trade relationships.

Despite temporary pauses on many announced tariffs, the economic toll of the trade conflict continues to weigh on corporate strategies. For instance, Designer Brands — the owner of DSW and other shoe brands — withdrew its financial forecast for 2025 due to uncertainty from global trade policies, sending its stock down over 18%. CEO Doug Howe emphasized that “persistent instability” is suppressing consumer discretionary spending.

US Markets Mirror Cautious Optimism

Wall Street extended gains as the S&P 500 rose 0.5% to 6,038.81, the Nasdaq gained 0.6%, and the Dow added 0.2%. The S&P 500 is now just 1.7% below its record high from February, rebounding from a sharp drop triggered by Trump’s surprise tariff announcements two months prior.

Tesla shares climbed 5.7%, partly recovering from last week’s losses tied to political tension between CEO Elon Musk and the Trump administration. Similarly, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.’s US-listed shares rose 2.6% after a strong revenue report, showcasing resilience in the semiconductor sector despite trade headwinds.

Mixed Signals from US Economy

While some US companies are struggling with uncertainty, optimism among small businesses showed a slight uptick in May. According to the National Federation of Independent Business, owners reported more positive expectations for business conditions and sales growth, though broader economic momentum remains fragile.

In currency markets, the US dollar edged higher against the yen, reaching 144.94, while the euro slipped slightly to $1.1414. US bond yields remained stable, with the 10-year Treasury yield at 4.48%. Oil prices showed minimal movement, with US crude at $64.86 per barrel and Brent at $66.72.

The latest market rally underscores investor sensitivity to geopolitical headlines and central bank signals. While the trade framework between the US and China has temporarily lifted sentiment, the path forward remains unclear, with no binding agreements and many tariffs still in place. Businesses and markets alike will be watching closely as the July deadline for Trump’s tariff pause approaches, hoping for real policy clarity rather than rhetorical reassurance.

Source: AP

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Racing to the Bottom: China’s EV Industry Caught in Self-Destructive Price War

China’s once-booming electric vehicle (EV) sector, long hailed as a symbol of green industrial strength and technological leadership, is now teetering on the edge of financial instability. The recent wave of price cuts initiated by top manufacturer BYD has triggered a brutal price war that is eroding profits across the value chain — from automakers to used car dealers — and prompting comparisons to the collapse of the property giant Evergrande.

The most symbolic move came with BYD’s decision in late May to slash prices on several models, including a 34% discount on its entry-level Seagull mini hatchback, now selling for around $7,700. While the cuts have driven down sticker prices for consumers, they have sparked panic in the industry and accusations of market dumping. China’s top car industry association, CAAM, criticized what it called “irrational” pricing behavior, in a veiled attack on BYD’s aggressive strategy.

Warning Signals: Executive Outcry and Government Concern

Industry leaders are sounding increasingly dire warnings. Great Wall Motor’s Chairman Wei Jianjun likened the situation to the early stages of the property sector collapse, stating in a May interview that “an Evergrande-like crisis already exists” in the auto industry. His remarks reflect broader anxiety over the systemic risks of overcapacity, overcompetition, and artificially inflated sales figures — such as the sale of “zero mileage used cars” that are registered but never actually driven.

These concerns have been echoed by state media. In a striking move, the People’s Daily — the official newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party — condemned the price war as “disorderly” and “unsustainable,” warning that it undermines the broader automotive ecosystem, reduces worker incomes, and discourages consumer confidence. As inflation-adjusted wages stagnate and economic uncertainty rises, even falling EV prices are failing to ignite significant new demand.

Profit Pressure Meets Structural Overcapacity

At the heart of the crisis is a classic problem: too many firms chasing too little profit in an overbuilt sector. China has promoted EV production through a mix of subsidies, mandates, and consumer incentives, creating an explosion in output that has not been matched by domestic consumption. This structural overcapacity has now been magnified by firms attempting to compete primarily through discounting rather than innovation or export expansion.

The “race to the bottom” is especially damaging in a sector already burdened by high capital expenditures, long development cycles, and dependency on battery material prices. Smaller and less financially resilient automakers are now struggling to stay afloat, raising the risk of mass bankruptcies or government-led consolidation efforts in the coming quarters.

Used Car Dealers and Consumer Uncertainty

The effects are not limited to automakers. Used car sellers in Beijing, like Ma Hui, are already reporting sharp declines in profitability and a growing reluctance among consumers to purchase. “All of us were losing money last year,” Ma told CNBC, citing saturated inventory and pricing uncertainty as key barriers. With prices falling, potential buyers are delaying purchases in hopes of deeper discounts — a deflationary dynamic that mirrors broader consumer behavior in China’s cooling economy.

Moreover, consumer trust is being shaken by unusual practices like “zero mileage used cars,” which, while technically legal, raise concerns about transparency and the real health of the industry’s sales numbers.

Toward a Financial Reckoning

The Chinese EV industry’s price war is not simply a commercial dispute — it reflects deeper imbalances in industrial policy, market saturation, and demand dynamics. Without a coordinated policy response to encourage rational pricing, reduce overcapacity, and stabilize consumer expectations, the sector risks falling into the same trap that ensnared China’s real estate developers: inflated growth, unsustainable debt, and an eventual collapse.

As the government signals concern but stops short of direct intervention, the next few months could determine whether China’s EV sector stabilizes or becomes the next cautionary tale in the country’s shifting economic landscape.

Source: CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Stocks

Market Optimism Rides on Thin Ice

Wall Street’s latest rally — with the S&P 500 rising 0.55% and the Nasdaq climbing 0.63% on Tuesday — reflects a surge of investor optimism spurred by upbeat trade signals and tech euphoria. Yet, this momentum may be overlooking critical macroeconomic and geopolitical fault lines. With inflation data, Treasury auctions, and ongoing tariff uncertainties converging this week, the market’s buoyancy seems less a sign of confidence than a hopeful wager against risk.

Investors appear to be betting that the U.S.–China trade consensus reached in London — described by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick as a “framework to implement the Geneva consensus” — will de-escalate tensions and forestall further tariff damage. However, the details remain vague, and existing duties remain intact, especially those under President Trump’s “reciprocal tariff” strategy, which continues to exert pressure on global supply chains.

Underlying Risks: Inflation, Debt, and Global Capital

Beyond surface-level gains in equities, the bond market is signaling caution. With long-duration Treasury auctions and CPI/PPI data releases scheduled midweek, any surprises in inflation or weak demand for government debt could send yields climbing again. Higher yields increase borrowing costs, pressure equity valuations, and may shift the Federal Reserve’s stance on potential rate cuts.

Corporate signals are equally sobering. Layoffs announced by tech titans like Google, Microsoft, and Paramount reflect an undercurrent of cost-cutting not usually seen in robust economic cycles. While markets may respond positively to such actions in the short term — interpreting them as margin protection — these reductions are often precursors to revenue weakness and declining business confidence.

Meanwhile, political uncertainty is casting its own shadow. Trump’s proposed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” particularly Section 899, threatens to penalize foreign firms from jurisdictions with “unfair tax practices.” Fund managers warn that such policies may accelerate foreign capital flight from U.S. equities, undermining market liquidity and investor confidence. The Investment Company Institute has cautioned that these provisions could cause capital outflows that may destabilize asset pricing in the medium term.

Tesla’s Divergent Signals

Tesla embodies the dichotomy between market excitement and strategic uncertainty. On one hand, its shares surged 5.7% after Elon Musk unveiled robotaxi test footage from Austin, Texas — reigniting excitement over autonomous driving. On the other hand, analysts at Wells Fargo remain deeply skeptical, projecting a 63% plunge in Tesla’s valuation due to weakening fundamentals and underwhelming sales momentum.

This divergence illustrates a broader concern: while innovation stories continue to power select stocks, long-term valuations are increasingly disconnected from near-term operational realities.

AI, Defense, and the Disruptor Surge

The CNBC Disruptor 50 list captures another driver of speculative enthusiasm — the meteoric rise of defense-tech and AI startups. With companies like Anduril Industries at the forefront, the sector now commands nearly $500 billion in combined valuation. But these valuations are premised more on projected breakthroughs than realized revenues, reinforcing the broader theme of stretched optimism.

Though innovation in AI, health tech, and autonomous systems is genuine, investor expectations may be accelerating faster than the regulatory or infrastructure environment can accommodate. Many of these firms operate in frontier industries that depend heavily on future government contracts or still-untested business models.

Bracing for a Correction?

Wall Street’s resilience appears increasingly dependent on best-case scenarios: successful trade negotiations, tame inflation, continued tech outperformance, and favorable monetary policy. Yet the bond market, corporate behavior, and policy developments suggest a more nuanced reality — one where risks remain structurally embedded and corrections could be swift if expectations are disappointed.

Unless macroeconomic data align perfectly with market hopes, the current rally may be less a new bull run than a temporary reprieve in a volatile, policy-driven global environment.

Source: CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Global Trade Tensions Worsen: Policy Realignment Now Crucial

In a high-stakes environment of economic nationalism and retaliatory tariffs, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde has delivered a pointed warning: trade wars are inherently destructive, and the path to resolution demands multilateral concessions and policy introspection. Speaking from Beijing, Lagarde’s message was not just diplomatic, but strategically timed as global financial markets reel from the ripple effects of U.S. President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs, introduced in April.

Lagarde’s critique extends across geographies. While acknowledging that China’s long-standing reliance on subsidies — particularly for export-oriented sectors — has contributed to trade distortions, she also highlighted that such practices are increasingly common among emerging economies. According to the ECB chief, since 2014, subsidy-driven interventions have more than tripled worldwide, signaling a shift toward protectionist industrial policies with global implications.

United States: Excess Demand and Fiscal Imbalances

Lagarde didn’t reserve her criticisms for developing nations alone. She underscored the disproportionate role of the U.S. in recent demand imbalances, attributing much of it to inflated public sector spending. This perspective aligns with concerns that the U.S., under Trump’s aggressive tariff regime, is contributing to global disequilibrium not only through trade barriers, but also via domestic fiscal policy that fuels excessive consumption of imported goods.

This diagnosis challenges Washington’s current narrative that attributes trade deficits purely to unfair foreign practices. Lagarde’s argument reframes the discussion: rather than unilateral tariffs, coordinated adjustments — including fiscal restraint and structural reforms — are needed to restore balance in global demand and supply.

The Consequences of Prolonged Protectionism

The broader implication of Lagarde’s remarks is a clear rejection of zero-sum trade strategies. By cautioning that “everybody loses in trade wars,” she reinforces the view that retaliatory measures — whether in the form of rare earth restrictions from China or reciprocal tariffs from the U.S. — only exacerbate systemic risk. The ongoing disruptions to supply chains, investor sentiment, and capital flows threaten long-term global prosperity.

Her call for solutions rooted in international rules and mutually beneficial regional agreements reflects the institutionalist approach the ECB champions. However, this may clash with the Trump administration’s transactional, sovereignty-first stance, which has shown skepticism toward multilateral governance structures like the WTO.

Lagarde’s intervention in Beijing underscores a core message: resolving the trade war is not about winning or yielding, but about rebalancing. Both surplus economies like China and deficit nations like the U.S. must align domestic policies with broader trade equilibrium goals. If this call goes unheeded, the erosion of global rules and the entrenchment of economic nationalism could make recovery slower, costlier, and more politically divisive than any short-term gain from tariff-driven leverage.