Finance

Pharos (PROS) uses a technical architecture that combines parallel execution with modular design to improve the throughput efficiency and scalability of on-chain financial applications. The parallel execution mechanism can process multiple transactions at the same time, significantly reducing network congestion and improving processing speed. The modular architecture separates the execution layer from functional modules, providing more flexible underlying support for RWA and institutional finance scenarios. Compared with traditional general purpose public blockchains, Pharos’ architecture is better suited to financial scenarios such as high frequency payments, asset settlement, and bringing real assets on-chain, providing the technical foundation for high performance RealFi infrastructure.

Pharos (PROS) is a high performance Layer1 blockchain network focused on real world assets, RWA, and institutional grade financial applications. It aims to provide underlying infrastructure for bringing real financial assets on-chain through a parallel execution architecture, modular design, and native compliance support. Unlike traditional general purpose public blockchains, Pharos places greater emphasis on high throughput, low latency, and financial grade network capabilities that meet institutional needs. Its goal is to become RealFi infrastructure that connects traditional financial assets with on-chain liquidity. As the RWA sector continues to expand, Pharos is attempting to build a next generation base network for the future of on-chain finance.

Pharos and Plume are both infrastructure projects focused on the real world asset, RWA, sector, but they follow different development paths. Pharos places greater emphasis on building the underlying RealFi network through a high performance Layer1 architecture, providing infrastructure support for asset issuance, payment settlement, and on-chain liquidity. Plume, on the other hand, focuses more on RWA asset issuance and ecosystem connectivity, creating an asset circulation gateway by integrating asset issuers and DeFi protocols. In simple terms, Pharos is centered on improving financial infrastructure performance, while Plume focuses on expanding RWA ecosystem collaboration. Together, they represent two different directions within RWA infrastructure: the infrastructure layer and the asset ecosystem layer.

Pharos (PROS) supports the on-chain adoption of real world assets, RWA, through a high performance Layer1 architecture and infrastructure optimized for financial use cases. With parallel execution, modular design, and scalable financial function modules, Pharos can meet the needs of asset issuance, transaction settlement, and institutional capital flows, helping real assets connect to the on-chain financial system more efficiently. Its core logic is to connect traditional assets with on-chain liquidity by building RealFi infrastructure, thereby providing a more stable and efficient underlying network for the RWA market.

Pharos (PROS) tokenomics is designed around long term incentives, supply scarcity, and value capture from RealFi infrastructure, with the goal of closely linking network growth to token value. PROS not only functions as a transaction fee and staking token, but also controls the pace of supply through a long term release mechanism and strengthens token value support through demand generated by network usage.

Aave and Compound are both decentralized liquidity protocols built on blockchain technology, enabling users to borrow assets with over-collateralization or earn interest by supplying liquidity. The key distinction lies in Aave’s broader range of features and risk-layered design, whereas Compound stands out for its straightforward interest rate model and modular governance framework.

SPCX is a fractional investment product designed to track the private market valuation of SpaceX, allowing retail investors to gain indirect exposure to the company’s pre-IPO equity at a lower entry threshold. Since SpaceX is not publicly listed, investors cannot directly purchase its shares. Instead, SPCX provides an alternative by reflecting changes in its private valuation. Compared to traditional private equity investments, SPCX offers a more accessible participation process, though it still carries risks such as limited valuation transparency, constrained liquidity, and structural complexity. It is best suited for investors who fully understand how the product works before making an investment decision.

The key differences between SPCX and traditional private equity funds lie in investment thresholds, liquidity, and ownership structure. Traditional private equity funds typically target high-net-worth investors, require larger capital commitments, and involve longer lock-up periods, but often provide more direct ownership of underlying assets. SPCX, by contrast, lowers the entry barrier through a fractional structure and offers more flexible, indirect exposure. Each approach has its own advantages and is suited to investors with different risk tolerances and capital levels.

SpaceX’s high valuation potential is primarily driven by two key engines: the cost advantage of its commercial launch business and the long-term revenue potential of its Starlink satellite internet network. By reducing launch costs through reusable rocket technology and building recurring revenue through satellite broadband services, SpaceX has developed a valuation framework based on technological barriers, high-growth markets, and long-term cash flow expectations. This combination of innovation and scalable commercial potential makes it one of the most closely watched high-valuation private companies in the market.

In March, BTC and ETH exhibited a “decline-then-stabilization” recovery pattern. Institutional allocation remained BTC-centric with ETH as a supplement. BTC ETFs recorded cumulative inflows of approximately $86.8 billion, while ETH ETFs saw around $12.6 billion. Within Gate Private Wealth’s quantitative funds, USDT strategies delivered an average annualized return of 5.7%. Xinghe Smart Investment (USDT) achieved the highest one-year return at 9.5%, while Interstellar Hedging (USDT) recorded a cumulative return of 18.0% with all 21 cycles profitable, achieving a 100% win rate. Gravity Hedging (USDT) maintained a maximum drawdown of just 0.01%, demonstrating strong stability. By the end of March, tensions around the Strait of Hormuz eased marginally, supporting a stable outlook for risk assets.

Following the announcement of a two-week ceasefire between the US and Iran, which includes the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, WTI crude oil prices experienced a significant decline. Drawing on the latest developments as of April 8, 2026, this article examines the underlying causes of the oil price plunge, the trajectory of supply restoration, the implications for inflation transmission, and the effects on A-shares and global assets.

Gate Research Weekly Report: BTC and ETH pulled back after a spike, shifting into a short-term bearish consolidation; ~$274M in liquidations over 24h with shorts dominant, while the Fear & Greed Index sits around 17, reflecting a defensive stance in capital flows. Amid broad altcoin weakness, privacy and DeFi outperformed, with RSC, STIK, and ARIA emerging as structural leaders. Total stablecoin market cap edged up to ~$315.4B, while Ethereum-based stablecoins hit a record ~$180B; gas fees remain low. MSBT saw ~$34M in inflows on day one, Strategy raised enough to buy over 2,500 BTC, and Canary filed for a PEPE ETF. Focus on U.S.–Iran developments, shifts in risk appetite, upcoming stablecoin regulation, as well as Pharos and GoSats funding and token unlocks including APT.

Keeta operates around three core pillars: transaction execution, compliance validation, and integration with external systems. A typical transaction in Keeta goes through stages such as signature construction, rule validation, network propagation, consensus ordering, and state execution. Through anchors, it can also interact with fiat systems, identity systems, and other blockchains. This design allows Keeta to maintain high performance while directly connecting on-chain activity with traditional financial systems.

The reported move, if confirmed, could have serious ramifications for the blockchain’s developers. But success for the troubled regulator is far from certain and unanswered questions abound.

This article examines the EU's approach to regulating stablecoins, emphasizing the role of auditors in security and risk assessments under these