#密码资产动态追踪 **2026 Cryptocurrency Market Trend Observation in January**

In the past week, three events are worth a close look, each reflecting a different evolutionary logic of the crypto market.

**Safe-haven assets are also entering on-chain trading**

A leading exchange has launched $XAUUSDT and $XAGUSDT perpetual contracts—the USDT-settled versions of gold and silver. On the surface, this appears to be "gold trading," but the underlying logic is more interesting: the crypto ecosystem is beginning to become a new trading venue for traditional safe-haven assets.

Users no longer need to open brokerage accounts, exchange USD, or go through complex currency conversion processes; they can participate directly in metal asset price fluctuations using stablecoins. This seemingly simple step is quietly changing the positioning of exchanges—they are evolving from purely crypto asset trading platforms into comprehensive financial infrastructure covering multiple asset classes.

Tensions in geopolitical situations and uncertain interest rate outlooks have caused safe-haven demand, traditionally confined to traditional finance, to flow into on-chain assets. What does this indicate? The appeal of the crypto market has broken out of the "high-risk investor" circle.

**Institutional Ethereum allocation strategies are changing**

BitMine recently increased its ETH holdings and is directly staking to earn yields. But the key isn’t just "how much they bought," but "how they bought"—they record ETH on their balance sheet as a long-term asset class, rather than a short-term speculative tool.

This reflects a trend: the role definition of Ethereum is changing. It’s no longer just a highly volatile token but is increasingly regarded as a dual-attribute digital asset—capable of generating staking yields and serving as a foundational infrastructure with network effects.

From a supply chain perspective, this means more ETH is being locked in staking contracts by institutions, tightening long-term liquidity. The source of selling pressure is also shifting: no longer mainly retail panic selling and short-term profit-taking, but more proactive asset allocation adjustments by institutions. The pricing logic is changing accordingly—it’s no longer about hype-driven speculation but increasingly about valuing an "asset."

**The institutional competition over digital currency regulation is now transparent**

China allows digital RMB wallets to accrue interest; the US explicitly prohibits stablecoins from offering yields to users. This is not a matter of who is more aggressive but a fundamental difference in understanding the essence of digital currencies.

One side views digital currency as an evolution of the monetary system itself, which should have storage and interest-earning functions; the other strictly defines stablecoins as payment tools, strictly preventing them from threatening the traditional banking system.

Behind this divergence lies a fundamental question: **Are digital currencies primarily financial infrastructure or financial products?**

If stablecoins are forever prohibited from offering yields, Coinbase’s concerns are justified—over the long-term global competition, they may gradually lose attractiveness. But this also exposes the regulatory dilemma: either loosen the yield provisions for stablecoins or accept the gradual weakening of their appeal compared to traditional finance.

These three events are essentially telling the same story: the crypto market is evolving from a clearly defined "alternative asset trading venue" into a complex financial system crossing traditional financial boundaries. Every participant is redefining their position.