HashKey IPO To Test Hong Kong Crypto Market

source:

[1] Law firms predict that after a trial run in 2025, cryptocurrency IPOs will face their real test in 2026. - Bitget (https://www.bitget.com/amp/news/detail/125606 ...)[2] Law firm: After a trial period in 2025, crypto companies will face their real IPO test in 2026 - Bitget (https://www.bitget.com/amp/news/detail/125606 ...)[3] Press Release - Mining.com (https://www.mining.com/press-release?id=693cb ...)

Related News

Dec 14 2025, 08:38

Yuk Chi Collapse Exposes Copy-Trading Fraud Risk

## Executive Summary Yuk Chi Financial Co., Ltd., a firm operating in the virtual asset copy-trading space, is reported to have conducted a "soft runaway," effectively an exit scam. This event highlights the significant counterparty risks inherent in the largely unregulated crypto-derivatives market, particularly on platforms that promise passive returns through copy trading. The collapse serves as a critical warning for investors regarding due diligence and platform solvency. ## The Event in Detail Reports indicate that **Yuk Chi Financial** has ceased meaningful operations, a move described as a "soft runaway." This term refers to a scenario where project developers gradually and quietly abandon a project after raising capital, leading to a collapse in the associated asset's value and loss of user funds. Unlike a "hard rug pull," where liquidity is abruptly removed, a soft runaway is a slower process of disinvestment and operational neglect, making it harder for investors to identify until it is too late. The firm, which marketed itself as a "virtual asset copy trading" service, is now uncommunicative, leaving its users without access to their capital. ## Market Implications The failure of **Yuk Chi Financial** has injected significant bearish sentiment into the copy-trading sector. Investor confidence is paramount for platforms that require users to deposit capital for automated trading strategies. This incident is likely to trigger heightened scrutiny and potential capital flight from smaller, less-established copy-trading firms. The event underscores the operational and fraudulent risks that exist beyond market volatility, potentially leading to calls for greater regulatory oversight in this specific DeFi niche. ## Expert Commentary While specific commentary on Yuk Chi is emerging, market analysts draw parallels to established patterns of securities fraud in traditional finance. Law firms like **Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP** are currently investigating firms such as **Varonis Systems, Inc. (VRNS)** for alleged violations of federal securities laws. Varonis's stock fell nearly 49% after it revealed poor performance and "sales process issues," which the firm had allegedly not disclosed to investors. Similarly, a class-action lawsuit against **James Hardie Industries (JHX)** alleges the company misled investors through "fraudulent channel stuffing," resulting in a 34% stock decline upon revelation. These cases demonstrate a recurring theme: corporate entities allegedly misrepresenting their operational health, leading to sudden and severe investor losses. The Yuk Chi scenario appears to be the crypto-native equivalent of such alleged frauds. ## Broader Context The Yuk Chi collapse fits into a broader narrative of risk and reward within the digital asset ecosystem. Exit scams and project failures remain a persistent threat, demanding rigorous due diligence from participants. However, the market also contains projects focused on transparent development and long-term utility. For example, DeFi lending protocol **Mutuum Finance (MUTM)** recently reported raising over $19 million while consistently hitting its V1 development milestones, including the completion of its Phase 2 development ahead of its testnet launch. This contrast highlights the bifurcation of the market: on one side, fraudulent actors exploit market hype, while on the other, legitimate projects build foundational infrastructure. For investors, the key challenge remains distinguishing between credible, long-term ventures and speculative, high-risk platforms.

Dec 14 2025, 03:58

AI Data Center Anxiety Pressures Bloom Energy Stock

## The Event in Detail **Bloom Energy (NYSE: BE)** experienced significant selling pressure this week, with its stock price falling approximately 19.5% to close at **$94.98** on December 12. The decline was not linked to any direct corporate announcements but was instead a reaction to broader market anxiety concerning the pace and financial viability of the artificial intelligence data center expansion. Two primary factors drove the negative sentiment: 1. **Oracle’s Financials:** Disappointing results from key partner **Oracle** fueled investor debate about a potential mismatch between massive upfront capital expenditure for AI infrastructure and the timeline for monetization. The subsequent drop in **Oracle's** stock created a contagion effect. 2. **Reported Project Delays:** A media report, which **Oracle** later publicly denied, claimed that some data centers being built for **OpenAI** were facing delays due to labor and materials constraints. Although refuted, the report amplified existing market nervousness about the logistical and financial hurdles of building AI facilities at hyperscale. ## Business Strategy & Financial Mechanics **Bloom Energy's** strategic positioning is as a provider of fast, reliable, on-site power for data centers, bypassing slower grid-based solutions. This strategy has made its stock a high-beta proxy for the AI infrastructure boom. The company’s investment thesis is heavily dependent on major partnerships, most notably with **Oracle Cloud Infrastructure** and a **$5 billion strategic AI infrastructure partnership with Brookfield**. This week’s events demonstrate the double-edged nature of this strategy. When the AI narrative is strong, **BE** stock benefits from sentiment around power scarcity. Conversely, when partners like **Oracle** show signs of headwinds or the buildout narrative falters, **BE** stock is treated as collateral damage. Fundamentally, the company reported strong Q3 2025 results with **$519.0 million in revenue** (a 57.1% year-over-year increase) and a **non-GAAP gross margin of 30.4%**. However, the market is currently weighing this performance against the execution risk of its forward-looking pipeline. ## Market Implications The sharp decline in **Bloom Energy's** stock reflects a broader market recalibration. Investors are moving beyond pure narrative and are beginning to scrutinize the practical and financial realities of the AI buildout. The episode highlights that the market is becoming more selective, rewarding not just AI-related promises but also demonstrated, profitable execution. The focus is shifting toward tangible constraints, including power availability, construction supply chains, and the cost of capital required to fund these multi-billion dollar projects. For **Bloom Energy**, this means the company must convert its significant partnerships into durable, contract-backed revenue fast enough to justify a valuation that has priced in substantial future growth. ## Expert Commentary Wall Street consensus reflects deep uncertainty regarding **Bloom Energy's** valuation. Analyst ratings aggregated by MarketBeat show a consensus "Hold" rating. The 12-month price targets are exceptionally wide, ranging from a low of **$10** to a high of **$157**, with an average of **$93.77**. This divergence indicates a fundamental debate over the company’s business model. Bulls see a scalable "data center power platform," while bears see a lumpy, project-based company whose stock price has outrun its near-term contractual support. As noted by Barron's, at least one bearish analyst has argued that the company's valuation has stretched beyond its fundamentals, despite the powerful AI tailwind. ## Broader Context **Bloom Energy** operates within a fiercely competitive and evolving energy landscape. Big Tech firms are pursuing an "all of the above" strategy to power their data centers, including renewables, natural gas, and even long-term nuclear options. While **Bloom's** on-site fuel cells fill a critical gap for rapid deployment, they compete with other immediate and long-term solutions. Furthermore, the market is undergoing a "hydrogen reality check." As reported by Barron's and the Financial Times, enthusiasm for a clean hydrogen economy is cooling, with major players like **ExxonMobil** scaling back investments. This trend reinforces that **Bloom Energy's** near-term demand is primarily for natural gas-powered fuel cells, with its "hydrogen-ready" technology being viewed as a longer-dated call option rather than an immediate value driver.

Dec 14 2025, 01:29

Aevo Smart Contract Breach Inflicts $2.7M Loss

## Executive Summary Aevo, a prominent decentralized derivatives exchange, has confirmed a significant security breach on one of its legacy smart contracts. On December 12, an attacker exploited a vulnerability in an older Ribbon DOV (Decentralized Options Vault), resulting in financial losses estimated at $2.7 million. The event serves as a stark reminder of the inherent technical risks within the DeFi sector, particularly concerning the maintenance and security of legacy code. ## The Event in Detail The attack specifically targeted an older, deprecated version of the Ribbon Finance DOV smart contracts, which are part of the Aevo ecosystem. These vaults are designed as structured products that automate complex options-trading strategies to generate yield for depositors. The vulnerability within the contract's logic permitted an unauthorized withdrawal of the funds held in the vault. While Aevo has stressed that the breach was contained to a legacy system and that its core exchange and newer vaults remain secure, the $2.7 million loss represents a material failure in safeguarding user assets. This incident underscores the lifecycle risk of smart contracts, where older, less-monitored code can become a prime target for attackers. ## Market Implications The immediate market reaction has been negative, placing downward pressure on **Aevo's** reputation and potentially its native token. Such exploits erode user trust, a critical component for any platform handling significant financial assets. The incident may lead to a flight of capital towards protocols that can demonstrate more robust and consistent security practices, including regular, comprehensive audits of both new and legacy systems. This event forces a necessary conversation in the DeFi space about the long-term security obligations for protocols. The "legacy" designation does not absolve developers of responsibility, and the market is likely to demand greater transparency regarding how older contracts are managed and eventually deprecated. ## Expert Commentary While no specific expert commentary on the **Aevo** breach has been released, the incident aligns with broad warnings from cybersecurity agencies. The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) frequently notes that such vulnerabilities are a "frequent attack vector for malicious cyber actors and poses significant risks." The breach at **Aevo** also stands in contrast to the proactive security measures publicly embraced by other emerging DeFi projects. For example, the lending protocol **Mutuum Finance (MUTM)** is currently undergoing formal security reviews with third-party firms **Halborn** and **CertiK** prior to its V1 testnet launch. This security-first approach, including active bug bounties, is becoming the industry standard for mitigating the kind of risk that led to **Aevo's** losses. ## Broader Context The **Aevo** hack is not an isolated event but part of a wider pattern of escalating cybersecurity threats observed in late 2025. This period, dubbed "Dangerous December" by some analysts, has seen a surge in high-profile vulnerabilities. These include a zero-day exploit (CVE-2025-14174) impacting **Google's** Chromium browser and a self-replicating worm known as "Shai-Hulud 2.0" targeting cloud service API keys across **Microsoft Azure** and **Amazon Web Services**. This environment of heightened risk across both Web2 and Web3 infrastructure demonstrates that sophisticated attackers are actively probing for weaknesses in complex software systems. For the DeFi industry, it highlights that on-chain security cannot be viewed in a vacuum and is intrinsically linked to the overall health of the digital ecosystem.