CoinTalk

Key Takeaways:

• The Simple Moving Average (SMA) is calculated by strictly averaging past prices, giving equal weight to old and new data.
• The Exponential Moving Average (EMA) applies a multiplier to give more weight to recent prices, reducing lag.
• Traders choose between EMA vs SMA based on volatility; EMAs are better for fast scalping, while SMAs are better for long-term trends.

When you open a crypto price chart for the first time, the first indicator you should learn is the Moving Average (MA). But immediately, you are faced with a choice that sparks endless debates in trading communities: EMA vs SMA.

Choosing between the Exponential Moving Average (EMA) and the Simple Moving Average (SMA) might seem like a minor technical detail. However, in the volatile cryptocurrency markets of 2026, this choice dictates your entry and exit points.

One is slow and steady, while the other is fast and reactive. Understanding the mathematical difference between them is the key to building a strategy that actually works.

How Do You Calculate the SMA?

The Simple Moving Average is the easiest to understand because it is basic arithmetic. It treats the price from 50 days ago with the exact same importance as the price from yesterday.

To calculate it, you simply sum up the closing prices of the asset over a specific number of periods and divide by that number of Periods.

• The Formula: SMA = (Sum of Closing Prices) / (Number of Periods)

Because it gives equal weight to old data, the SMA moves slowly. It acts like a heavy tanker ship that takes a long time to turn, which is great for avoiding false signals in choppy markets.

How Do You Calculate the EMA?

The EMA calculation is more complex because it aims to fix the "lag" problem. It applies a weighting factor to the most recent price data.

The formula involves three steps. First, you calculate the SMA to get a starting point. Second, you calculate the "Multiplier" (smoothing factor). Finally, you apply that multiplier to the current price and the previous EMA value.

• The Multiplier Formula: Multiplier = 2 / (Selected Time Period + 1)
• The EMA Formula: (Current Price x Multiplier) + (Previous EMA x (1 - Multiplier))

If Bitcoin crashes $5,000 today, the EMA will turn down immediately to reflect that new reality because the "Current Price" carries more mathematical weight than the "Previous EMA."

Which One Should You Use for Crypto?

The winner of the EMA vs SMA battle depends entirely on your time horizon. If you are a swing trader holding positions for weeks or months, the SMA is superior.

The 200-day SMA is widely watched by institutions. When the price touches the 200 SMA, it often bounces because thousands of traders and bots are treating it as a major support level.

However, if you are trading volatile altcoins on the 15-minute chart, the SMA is too slow. By the time it signals a buy, the pump might be over. For short-term action, the EMA is the standard choice because it hugs the price action tighter.

Can You Use Both Together?

Many professional strategies combine them. A popular setup involves using the EMA for entry signals and the SMA for overall trend bias.

For example, a trader might only take aggressive EMA crossovers if the price is trading above the 200-day SMA. This gives you the best of both worlds: the speed of the exponential calculation with the safety of the simple long-term trend.

Conclusion

There is no perfect indicator, but understanding the EMA vs SMA dynamic allows you to match your tools to your trading style. Don't let lag eat your profits, but don't let noise fake you out.

US Senate Judiciary Pushes Back Against Crypto Developer Protections

A growing divide within the US Senate is threatening to reshape the future of crypto regulation, as top lawmakers from both parties move to strip developer safeguards from a key digital asset bill. The dispute highlights rising concerns that proposed protections could unintentionally weaken law enforcement’s ability to combat illicit financial activity in decentralized crypto markets.

At the center of the debate is the Senate’s long-anticipated crypto market structure legislation, which aims to clarify how regulators oversee digital assets and blockchain-based platforms. However, Senate Judiciary Committee leaders argue that parts of the bill could open dangerous loopholes for criminals operating through decentralized systems.

Bipartisan Warning From the Senate Judiciary Committee

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Charles Grassley and the committee’s senior Democrat, Richard Durbin, issued a rare bipartisan warning to leaders of the Senate Banking Committee. In a letter sent to Banking Chair Tim Scott and ranking member Elizabeth Warren, the lawmakers urged major revisions to the bill’s language.

According to Grassley and Durbin, the current draft risks undermining long-standing unlicensed money transmitter laws by shielding certain crypto developers and network operators from liability. They warned that this could severely limit the government’s ability to pursue bad actors who exploit decentralized platforms for illegal purposes.

The letter, first reported by Politico, described the proposed protections as creating a  significant enforcement gap  that sophisticated criminal organizations could take advantage of.

Lawmakers Fear Criminal Exploitation of Decentralized Platforms

Grassley and Durbin emphasized that criminal groups already rely on advanced methods to hide illegal transactions, including the use of complex financial structures and anonymizing technologies. They argued that the bill, as currently written, would make it even harder for prosecutors to trace and punish unlawful activity tied to decentralized digital assets.

In their view, removing accountability from developers and network maintainers could turn decentralized platforms into attractive safe havens for illicit actors, including transnational criminal organizations and cartels. The senators stressed that regulatory clarity should not come at the cost of weakening public safety or financial crime enforcement.

The Role of the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act

The controversy largely stems from the inclusion of provisions inspired by the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, or BRCA. This proposal seeks to clarify that individuals who develop blockchain software or maintain decentralized networks are not automatically classified as money transmitters under federal or state law.

Supporters argue that such protections are necessary to foster innovation and prevent developers from being punished for how others use open-source technology. Critics, however, warn that overly broad exemptions could shield individuals who play a more active role in facilitating illicit transactions.

Grassley and Durbin contend that the bill fails to clearly distinguish between neutral software development and conduct that effectively enables unlicensed money transmission.

Judiciary Committee Says It Was Left Out of the Process

Adding to the tension, the Senate Judiciary Committee leaders said they were not consulted during the drafting of the bill, despite their committee’s authority over federal criminal statutes and the Department of Justice.

They expressed frustration that proposed changes affecting criminal enforcement were advanced without giving the Judiciary Committee a meaningful opportunity to review or weigh in. In their letter, they urged the Banking Committee to reject any language that could weaken the government’s ability to hold culpable actors accountable.

This procedural dispute has further complicated efforts to move the legislation forward.

Legislative Delays and Political Uncertainty

The crypto market structure bill has already faced setbacks, with both the Senate Banking and Agriculture Committees postponing scheduled markups in an effort to build broader bipartisan support. The latest objections from the Judiciary Committee add another obstacle to an already fragile legislative path.

If the bill eventually reaches the Senate floor, it will require at least 60 votes to pass. That threshold would likely demand unanimous Republican support and backing from several Democrats, making any internal disagreement particularly consequential.

Crypto Industry Support Begins to Fracture

Industry reaction has also been mixed. Coinbase, one of the most influential lobbying forces in the crypto sector, withdrew its support for the bill earlier this week, citing concerns over multiple provisions. While the company has since indicated that negotiations with lawmakers are ongoing, the move underscored growing unease within the industry.

The combination of political resistance and shifting industry alliances raises questions about whether the bill can survive in its current form.

What This Means for the Future of US Crypto Regulation

The clash over developer protections reflects a broader struggle to balance innovation with enforcement in the rapidly evolving crypto space. Lawmakers face mounting pressure to define clear rules without creating blind spots that criminals can exploit.

As negotiations continue behind closed doors, the fate of the crypto market structure bill remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the debate has entered a critical phase—one that could shape how decentralized technologies are regulated in the United States for years to come.

Crypto Markets Slide as Trump’s Tariff Threats Shake Global Confidence

Global cryptocurrency markets came under renewed pressure as investors reacted sharply to fresh tariff threats from US President Donald Trump, triggering a broader risk-off move across equities, bonds and digital assets. What initially looked like a routine correction has evolved into a deeper sell-off, fueled by rising bond yields, geopolitical uncertainty and growing fears of macroeconomic contagion.

Bitcoin and Ether both slid back toward recent lows as traders reassessed their exposure to high-risk assets. The sell-off coincided with turbulence in traditional markets, reinforcing the idea that crypto remains tightly linked to global financial sentiment rather than operating as a fully independent hedge.

Tariff Tensions Spill Into Crypto and Equities

Trump’s announcement of potential new tariffs, reportedly aimed at pressuring Denmark over Greenland-related geopolitical disputes, unsettled investors worldwide. European leaders responded with firm rhetoric, signaling resistance rather than compromise, which amplified fears of escalating trade and diplomatic friction.

As a result, global stock markets moved lower, with the S&P 500 posting one of its sharpest single-day declines this month. At the same time, investors rushed toward perceived safe havens, pushing gold prices to fresh all-time highs. Cryptocurrencies, often marketed as an alternative store of value, instead followed equities lower, highlighting their vulnerability during periods of systemic stress.

Bitcoin and Ether Lose Momentum as Risk Appetite Fades

Bitcoin retested levels not seen in over two weeks, slipping below the psychological $90,000 zone as selling pressure intensified. Ether mirrored the move, drifting toward the lower end of its recent trading range and struggling to reclaim bullish momentum.

The broader crypto market felt the impact even more severely. Total market capitalization fell sharply, erasing hundreds of billions of dollars in value within days and moving more than 30% below its October 2025 peak. This decline underscores how quickly sentiment can shift when macroeconomic uncertainty dominates investor decision-making.

Rising Bond Yields Send a Warning Signal

One of the most concerning developments for risk assets has been the rapid rise in government bond yields. US five-year Treasury yields climbed to their highest levels in nearly six months, a move often associated with fears of inflation persistence, fiscal stress or looming recession risks.

Even more alarming was the surge in Japanese government bond yields, particularly at the long end of the curve. Japan’s 20-year yields reached record highs, sparking concerns that bond market volatility could spread globally. Analysts warned that higher yields increase borrowing costs and reduce liquidity, creating a hostile environment for speculative assets such as cryptocurrencies.

Ray Dalio Warns of a New Financial Conflict Era

Billionaire investor Ray Dalio added to market anxiety by warning that the world may be entering a new phase of global financial conflict. According to Dalio, escalating trade disputes could extend beyond tariffs into capital flows, currency exposure and investment restrictions.

He emphasized that declining confidence in traditional financial systems, particularly the US dollar, has historically led to unpredictable shifts in asset allocation. While this narrative might appear bullish for crypto in theory, current market behavior suggests investors are prioritizing liquidity and stability over alternative monetary systems.

Safe Havens Outperform as Crypto Struggles

While cryptocurrencies struggled, precious metals told a very different story. Silver emerged as one of the strongest-performing assets, surging dramatically over recent months and pushing its market capitalization well above that of the entire crypto sector. Gold’s continued rally further reinforced the preference for tangible safe havens during times of geopolitical and economic stress.

This divergence highlights a key challenge for crypto adoption: during acute market shocks, investors still gravitate toward traditional stores of value rather than digital alternatives.

Bitcoin’s Position Among Global Assets Comes Under Pressure

Despite the downturn, Bitcoin remains one of the world’s largest tradable assets by market capitalization. However, the gap between Bitcoin and major corporations is narrowing. Technology giants and energy companies are rapidly closing in, raising questions about Bitcoin’s long-term dominance during prolonged risk-off cycles.

Ether’s situation appears more fragile. Its market capitalization has slipped down the global rankings, overtaken by several major US corporations. This shift reflects not only price weakness but also growing competition for investor capital in a high-yield, high-interest-rate environment.

Japan’s Debt and Political Uncertainty Add Fuel to the Fire

Japan’s economic outlook has become another focal point for global investors. With public debt exceeding 200% of GDP and political uncertainty rising ahead of a potential snap election, markets are increasingly sensitive to policy credibility. Expectations of expanded stimulus measures have further pressured bond markets, intensifying global yield volatility.

Financial institutions warn that these developments could act as a catalyst for broader market instability, particularly if confidence in fiscal discipline erodes across other heavily indebted nations.

What Comes Next for Bitcoin and Ether?

Looking ahead, the short-term trajectory of crypto markets may hinge on diplomatic developments rather than blockchain fundamentals. Bitcoin’s ability to reclaim the $95,000 level and Ether’s prospects of revisiting the $3,300 zone depend largely on whether geopolitical tensions ease and bond markets stabilize.

If negotiations between the US and European leaders fail to produce meaningful progress, risk assets could remain under pressure. Until clarity emerges, cryptocurrencies are likely to trade defensively, closely tracking macroeconomic signals rather than internal adoption metrics.

Aave Steps Back as Lens Enters a New Era Under Mask Network