Tether and Bitfinex Transfer 25,812.22 BTC, Valued at $2.7 Billion, To Twenty One Capital

Tether and Bitfinex transferred a combined 25,812.22 BTC, valued at approximately $2.7 billion, to Twenty One Capital. This transfer was part of the pre-funding for Twenty One Capital’s equity raise and its strategy to build a significant Bitcoin treasury, aiming for 420,000 BTC to become the third-largest corporate Bitcoin holder. The breakdown includes Tether moving 14,000 BTC and 4,812.22 BTC in separate transactions, while Bitfinex sent 7,000 BTC.

Additionally, Tether transferred 10,500 BTC on behalf of SoftBank, bringing the total to 37,229.69 BTC (worth ~$3.9 billion) in some reports. Regarding Cantor Equity Partners (CEP), which is merging with Twenty One Capital via a SPAC to list on Nasdaq under the ticker “XXI,” its share price rose 7% to $43 on June 2, 2025, with a peak at $59.75, reflecting strong investor enthusiasm. However, the specific claim of CEP being up 4% pre-market lacks direct confirmation in the provided sources.

Twenty One Capital, led by Strike CEO Jack Mallers, is backed by Tether, Bitfinex, SoftBank, and Cantor Fitzgerald, with a focus on Bitcoin-native financial products and transparency through public wallet addresses. The transfer of 25,812.22 BTC (valued at approximately $2.7 billion) from Tether and Bitfinex to Twenty One Capital, coupled with Cantor Equity Partners’ (CEP) merger to form a Bitcoin-centric public company, has significant implications for the cryptocurrency market, institutional adoption, and broader financial systems.

The transfer, backed by major players like Tether, Bitfinex, SoftBank, and Cantor Fitzgerald, signals strong institutional belief in Bitcoin as a store of value and a strategic asset. Twenty One Capital’s goal to hold 42,000 BTC, positioning it as the third-largest corporate Bitcoin treasury behind MicroStrategy and MARA Holdings, underscores Bitcoin’s growing legitimacy among traditional financial institutions. Large-scale Bitcoin acquisitions by institutions can reduce available supply, potentially driving price increases, especially if demand remains steady or grows.

By merging with CEP to form a publicly traded entity (Nasdaq: XXI), Twenty One Capital allows retail and institutional investors to gain Bitcoin exposure without directly holding the asset, similar to MicroStrategy’s model. This could accelerate mainstream adoption but also introduces risks tied to market speculation, as evidenced by CEP’s stock surging 134%–462% post-announcement. Twenty One Capital, led by Strike CEO Jack Mallers, aims to develop Bitcoin-native financial products, such as lending models and capital market instruments, using metrics like Bitcoin Per Share (BPS).

This could redefine corporate performance metrics, prioritizing Bitcoin accumulation over traditional earnings. Mallers’ emphasis on proof of reserves via public wallet addresses could set a new standard for transparency in crypto-related firms, addressing concerns about opaque operations, particularly with Tether’s controversial history. The use of convertible notes and corporate debt to fund Bitcoin purchases mirrors MicroStrategy’s high-risk, high-reward strategy. While this could amplify returns in a bull market, it risks significant losses if Bitcoin’s price crashes or if debt obligations become unmanageable.

CEP Stock Performance

CEP’s share price surged from $10.65 to a peak of $59.75, with a 7% rise to $43 on June 2, 2025, reflecting investor enthusiasm for Bitcoin’s potential and the merger’s high-profile backing. However, the stock later settled at $29.84, indicating volatility and possible overvaluation driven by “FOMO” (fear of missing out). Some sources describe CEP as a “meme stock,” driven by retail investor hype rather than fundamentals. This suggests potential for sharp corrections if market sentiment shifts, especially amid global economic uncertainties like trade wars or Bitcoin price fluctuations.

The claim of CEP being up 4% pre-market lacks direct confirmation in the sources, but the stock’s history of sharp gains (e.g., 5.2% after-hours post-Bitcoin purchase) suggests such movements are plausible. Tether’s involvement raises concerns due to its past regulatory scrutiny over reserve transparency. Some analysts suggest Twenty One Capital could act as a “shadow central bank,” leveraging Tether’s stablecoin liquidity to influence Bitcoin markets within U.S. equity structures, potentially bypassing regulatory oversight. This could challenge traditional monetary systems but risks regulatory pushback.

Bitcoin’s appeal as a hedge against economic risks (e.g., trade wars under a Trump administration) is noted, but its recent underperformance compared to gold suggests it’s not yet a universal safe-haven asset. Twenty One Capital’s launch, backed by Wall Street (Cantor Fitzgerald) and crypto giants (Tether, Bitfinex), exemplifies the convergence of traditional and decentralized finance.

However, it also creates a divide, as Bitcoin-native firms like Twenty One challenge legacy financial models by prioritizing decentralized assets over fiat-based metrics. Analysts frame Twenty One as a “monetary infrastructure node” competing with central banks like the Federal Reserve. This suggests a structural divide where Bitcoin-based entities could undermine traditional monetary policy, creating parallel financial systems.

Publicly traded Bitcoin treasuries like Twenty One allow broader investor access, but the complexity of SPACs, convertible notes, and Bitcoin volatility may exclude less sophisticated retail investors, deepening the divide between institutional and individual participation. Institutional Bitcoin accumulation (e.g., Twenty One’s 42,000 BTC goal) concentrates wealth among entities with capital to invest, potentially widening the gap between crypto “whales” and average investors. If Bitcoin’s price surges, early institutional adopters stand to gain disproportionately.

Bitcoin-native financial products, like those Twenty One plans to develop, may primarily benefit those already integrated into crypto or financial markets, leaving unbanked or underserved communities further behind unless initiatives like Strike’s Bitcoin payment platform expand access. The “meme stock” frenzy around CEP could draw in retail investors seeking quick gains, but volatility risks losses for those least equipped to absorb them, reinforcing economic divides.

Twenty One’s mission, articulated by Mallers as “a public stock, built by Bitcoiners, for Bitcoiners,” highlights an ideological divide between Bitcoin advocates who view it as “reliable money” and skeptics who see it as speculative or risky. The divide extends globally, as Bitcoin’s appeal as a hedge against fiat inflation (noted in relation to global M2 money supply) contrasts with traditional safe-haven assets like gold, which have outperformed Bitcoin in recent market turmoil.

While the transfer and merger signal Bitcoin’s growing institutional acceptance, they also amplify risks and divides. Tether’s opaque history and the speculative nature of CEP’s stock surge raise questions about sustainability. The Bitcoin-native model could disrupt traditional finance, but its reliance on debt and market sentiment mirrors past financial bubbles. The socioeconomic divide may widen if access to Bitcoin’s benefits remains skewed toward institutions and wealthy investors. Conversely, transparency efforts and financial innovation could bridge gaps if executed inclusively.