Bitcoin has broken from its long-standing correlation with equities, marking its first full-year divergence from stocks in over a decade.

The shift highlights a growing disconnect between crypto and traditional markets, raising questions about Bitcoin’s role in the current cycle.

A Historic Market Decoupling

Bitcoin and stocks have historically moved in tandem. However, that relationship appears to have fractured.

According to Bloomberg data, the S&P 500 has climbed more than 16% this year while Bitcoin is down 3%, marking the first such split since 2014.

BREAKING: Bitcoin is headed for its first full-year split from stocks in over a decade, marking the first time since 2014 equities rallied while crypto fell. pic.twitter.com/Ns25xJ2KV2

— Short Squeez (@shortsqueeznews) December 7, 2025

Such a clean break is unusual even by crypto standards, prompting renewed scrutiny of Bitcoin’s role within global markets. The divergence challenges expectations that regulatory optimism and institutional participation would automatically translate into sustained performance.

It is especially striking given the broader environment, where artificial intelligence stocks are soaring, capital spending is accelerating, and investors are pouring back into equities. At the same time, traditional defensive assets are attracting attention, suggesting investors are reallocating rather than broadly embracing risk.

Crypto-specific pressures, including forced liquidations and a sharp decline in retail participation, have materially exacerbated Bitcoin’s underperformance. Billions of unwound positions have amplified downside moves, turning what began as a correction into an industry retreat.

As these signals accumulate, market sentiment has weakened, sparking debate over whether this represents a routine correction or a more significant structural change.

Normal Pullback Or Something More?

Bitcoin has long behaved as a momentum-driven asset, but the breakdown in sustained upside suggests that leadership within risk markets has shifted elsewhere.

Inflows into Bitcoin ETFs have slowed, prominent endorsements have grown quieter, and key technical indicators are flashing renewed weakness.

Price action reflects that cooling confidence. Bitcoin has struggled to regain momentum since its October peak near $126,000 and is now hovering closer to $90,000, reinforcing the sense that this divergence is being driven by fading conviction rather than short-term volatility alone.

Despite the current divergence, longer time horizons complicate the narrative. 

On a multi-year basis, Bitcoin continues to outperform equities, suggesting the recent split may reflect earlier excess gains unwinding rather than a decisive break in trend. 

From that perspective, underperformance could still align with a normal pullback within a broader bull-market cycle, despite calendar-year contrasts.

The post Bitcoin’s First Full-Year Split From Stocks in Over a Decade appeared first on BeInCrypto.

The OCC today conditionally approved five digital asset-oriented companies for national trust bank charters, signaling a measured but tangible expansion of crypto firms into the federal banking system.

The decision challenges claims from parts of the banking industry that crypto cannot comply with regulatory standards. However, it also complicates the sector’s own narrative of a coordinated effort to cut it off from financial services.

The Five Firms Behind Approval

Alongside Ripple National Trust Bank, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) conditionally approved four additional digital asset-focused institutions, signaling a broader regulatory move rather than an isolated exception.

In addition to Ripple, the OCC approved a de novo trust bank application for First National Digital Currency Bank and authorized Circle, BitGo, Fidelity Digital Assets, and Paxos to convert from state charters.

🚨 JUST IN: The OCC just approved conditional national trust bank charters: Ripple. Paxos. BitGo. Fidelity Digital Assets. Circle.

A national trust charter means federal supervision, 50-state reach, and the credibility to custody assets for ETFs, treasuries, and institutions… pic.twitter.com/DWQyX6jKsm

— Simon Taylor (@sytaylor) December 12, 2025

All five approvals remain conditional, requiring each institution to meet specific operational, governance, and compliance standards before final authorization.

“New entrants into the federal banking sector are good for consumers, the banking industry and the economy,” said OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould in a press release. “They provide access to new products, services and sources of credit to consumers, and ensure a dynamic, competitive and diverse banking system.”

The unifying factor across these firms is their business model and regulatory positioning within the financial system.

None of them intends to operate as a full-service commercial bank offering deposits or traditional lending products. Instead, they focus on custody, settlement, and digital asset infrastructure designed primarily for institutional clients.

For established players like Fidelity and Paxos, a national charter provides a single federal supervisor and nationwide authority. That shift replaces fragmented state-level oversight, simplifying regulatory engagement for institutional-scale operations.

For newer entrants such as Ripple National Trust Bank and First National Digital Currency Bank, the approvals open federal access without consumer banking exposure.

Taken together, the approvals suggest the OCC is not blocking crypto firms, but refining which models gain entry.

The Debanking Dispute Explained

The debate over crypto “debanking” has intensified over recent years, often framed as a standoff between regulators, banks, and digital asset firms.

Crypto industry leaders have repeatedly argued that banks, encouraged by regulators, systematically restricted access to basic financial services. This narrative gained traction under the label “Operation Choke Point 2.0,” drawing comparisons to past regulatory crackdowns closely attributed to former SEC Chair Gary Gensler.

Banks and regulators pushed back, arguing they made decisions based on risk management, compliance, and reputational concerns rather than ideology.

Those tensions resurfaced on Wednesday, when the OCC released preliminary findings from its review of alleged debanking by the largest US banks.

Debanking Was Real, But Limited

In its December 10 review, the OCC concluded that between 2020 and 2023, the nation’s largest banks engaged in debanking practices. 

The agency said banks made inappropriate distinctions among lawful businesses, restricting access or imposing heightened reviews driven by reputational concerns.

The OCC is committed to ending efforts that weaponize finance. Read the OCC’s preliminary findings from its supervisory review of debanking activities at the nine largest national banks. https://t.co/pFMi7Rt8kh pic.twitter.com/XWfbCheo91

— OCC (@USOCC) December 10, 2025

Digital asset activities were explicitly listed among the affected sectors, alongside firearms, energy, adult entertainment, and payday lending. 

However, the OCC’s framing is narrower than the industry’s “Operation Choke Point 2.0” rhetoric. The report focuses on bank-created policies and escalation processes, not a centralized directive ordering banks to cut off crypto firms. 

 That distinction matters for how this newly unfolding debate is interpreted.

Much of the period under review overlaps with the 2022–2023 crypto downturn and its spillover into banking. 

The review was released under Gould, who was appointed earlier this year by President Donald Trump. Gould framed the findings as part of an effort to limit “weaponized” finance and reputational-risk-driven exclusions.

Against that backdrop, the OCC’s conditional approvals for five crypto-oriented trust banks complicate claims of ongoing systemic exclusion. 

Even as banks and trade groups warn of regulatory asymmetry, the approvals indicate that federal access is expanding for compliance-focused trust bank models.

The post OCC Approves Five Crypto Trust Banks as ‘Debanking’ Claims Face Scrutiny appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Ripple has received conditional approval for a federal banking license, which could potentially enable its operation under US banking regulations. If granted, the license would allow Ripple to operate as a federally regulated financial institution under US banking law.

The approval strengthens Ripple’s position in cross-border payments and digital asset settlement infrastructure across regulated financial markets. However, the development may not result in an immediate or substantial impact on XRP’s market price.

OCC Opens Federal Charter Path

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has opened a pathway for Ripple to charter Ripple National Trust Bank.

To receive full approval, Ripple must still meet specific OCC regulatory and operational requirements before licensing is finalized.

HUGE news! @Ripple just received conditional approval from the @USOCC to charter Ripple National Trust Bank. This is a massive step forward – first for $RLUSD, setting the highest standard for stablecoin compliance with both federal (OCC) & state (NYDFS) oversight.

To the…

— Brad Garlinghouse (@bgarlinghouse) December 12, 2025

Even if approved, Ripple would not operate like traditional banks such as Bank of America or JPMorgan Chase. Trust banks are legally restricted from accepting public deposits or offering conventional lending products, such as consumer loans.

Instead, a Ripple National Trust Bank would focus primarily on custody, settlement, and digital asset management services. That distinction matters.

A national trust bank:

• Can provide custody, fiduciary, and settlement services
• Can hold assets on behalf of clients
• Is federally supervised by the OCC
• Cannot take retail deposits or issue loans
• Does not get FDIC insurance

So Ripple is becoming a regulated financial infrastructure provider.

Despite limitations, the approval represents a meaningful regulatory milestone for the company’s long-term operational strategy. Unlike state money transmitter licenses, which limit operations geographically, a federal charter enables nationwide regulatory coverage.

Such approval may influence broader market sentiment, but its primary significance lies in infrastructure development and long-term institutional adoption, rather than short-term speculative demand for XRP.

CEO Brad Garlinghouse acknowledged the decision publicly, framing it as a response to long-standing resistance from traditional banking industry lobbyists toward crypto-native firms entering federally regulated financial markets.

The post Is Ripple Becoming a Bank Good or Bad for XRP? appeared first on BeInCrypto.