TLDR

• Polygon Labs decided to bring its Open Money Stack to Solana.
• Businesses get bank funding, wallets, cross-chain transfers and global payouts through one integration.
• Kira, a fintech focused on cross-border dollar payments, is among the first adopters.
• Solana says it has handled over $5T in stablecoin volume this year, while Polygon Chain has passed $3T cumulatively.

Polygon Extends Open Money Stack to Solana

Polygon Labs is making a clear play for the payments market. The firm has rolled out its Open Money Stack on Solana, giving companies a single entry point for bank deposits, embedded wallets, cross-network transfers, and payouts.

Developers don’t need to rebuild anything on Solana. This means that teams can adopt the whole package or plug in only the pieces they’re missing. Polygon Foundation CEO Sandeep Nailwal framed it as a way for businesses to stay on the chain their customers prefer while Polygon manages the movement of money around it.

This follows the October 8 addition of TRON support and the Coinme acquisition, which possibly gave Polygon’s US payments arm licensing coverage across 48 states.

How the Stack Works in Practice

The platform links bank transfers, cards, cash services, and crypto funding to apps running on Solana. Users receive accounts and built-in wallets, so they can hold and send digital assets without juggling a separate crypto app.

From there, some of the funds are being routed between Solana, Polygon, Ethereum, TRON and several EVM-compatible chains. Polygon handles conversions, routing, and execution on the backend.

Two examples stand out. A remittance company could pull dollars from a customer’s bank, send USDC over Solana and trigger a local bank payout abroad. A marketplace could accept stablecoins and pay sellers in crypto or local currency. In both cases, users never touch a bridge.

Kira’s use case is the is most concrete. The company serves fintechs, OTC desks and import brokers who regularly pay overseas suppliers. It already moves stablecoins on Solana, and CEO Edrizio De La Cruz said the missing piece was getting those funds into clients’ dollar bank accounts. Polygon’s infrastructure fills that gap. Kira joins Tazapay, Mesh and Toku, which Polygon named as early customers after the Coinme deal closed.

Stablecoin Volume Sets the Stage

Solana Foundation product chief Vibhu Norby said the network has processed more than $5T in stablecoin volume in 2026, and he described Polygon’s stack as another route for businesses to reach banking and payout networks.

Solana has been building its own institutional payments team too. In September it hired former Polygon executive Jamal Raees as general manager of payments. Meanwhile, Polygon says its own chain has cleared over $3T in cumulative stablecoin transfers.

This might be a sign that payments infrastructure is becoming chain-agnostic, with the competition shifting from which network wins to who controls the bridge between blockchains and bank accounts

Polygon Labs has expanded its Open Money Stack payment infrastructure to Solana, allowing businesses to connect bank accounts, digital wallets, cross-chain transfers and global payouts through a single integration. According to an October 29 announcement shared with crypto.news, the integration…

Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko questions projects outside the main blockchain as BULK defends its decision to expand trading across multiple networks.

Solana price slips below $100 as spot SOL ETFs lose $24.82 million in two sessions, with analysts watching $98 support and resistance near $105.

SkyAI raises its cash tender offer to $214.3 million after settling with Bastion Trading and selling its entire Solana treasury to fund the deal.

Solana has been running Alpenglow on mainnet since October 21, replacing a voting system that could take several seconds to finalize a block with one designed to finish in a fraction of a second. The Solana Foundation records the switch…

TL;DR: Solana DvP offers an open-source route to atomic securities settlement, with JPMorgan providing input on institutional requirements.

When a security and the money paying for it move in separate steps, one party can be exposed while waiting for the other. Solana’s newly announced delivery-versus-payment programme is designed to make those two movements part of one atomic blockchain transaction.

Released by the Solana Foundation on October 6 under the MIT licence, the tool offers isolated escrow, time limits and support for SPL Token and Token-2022 assets. It aims to provide a reusable standard for banks and other institutions rather than forcing each project to build a bespoke settlement contract.

JPMorgan provided feedback on settlement practices. That should not be described as the bank operating, certifying or guaranteeing the software: the Foundation’s own disclaimer explicitly limits the nature of its involvement. The programme has undergone external security reviews, while broader production adoption and planned privacy features remain matters for future implementation.

The opportunity is significant for tokenised securities, where the time between asset delivery and payment can create capital and counterparty costs. Whether the open-source model wins institutions over will depend on legal finality, custody integrations and how errors are handled beyond the smart contract. Fast code alone cannot replace the rest of settlement infrastructure.

More from NewsBTC: Cryptocurrency news · Ethereum coverage · Crypto research and categories

TL;DR: Samsung’s planned USDC remittance feature is due to begin rolling out to eligible US Galaxy users in the final week of October.

Solana’s next payments test will happen on an interface ordinary smartphone owners already recognise. Samsung and the Solana Foundation announced that Samsung Wallet would add cross-border USDC transfers, with availability scheduled to begin during the final week of October 2026.

The feature is intended for Samsung Wallet on 82 million US Galaxy devices, according to the announcement. Users would see a familiar wallet experience, with fiat on- and off-ramps handling conversion to and from local money. Solana would provide underlying blockchain infrastructure rather than requiring every customer to understand network fees or token addresses.

That headline device figure is potential reach, not a count of active stablecoin users or completed remittances. Availability can depend on the rollout, region and supporting payment services. With the launch window now arriving, the useful questions shift to completion rates, fees, payout speed and whether customers can resolve failed transfers.

For SOL observers, the development supports a real-world application narrative, but it is not proof of a corresponding increase in token demand. A successful payments product is measured by repeat transfers and satisfactory consumer outcomes. This rollout finally offers a setting in which those measures could become visible.

More from NewsBTC: Cryptocurrency news · Ethereum coverage · Crypto research and categories

TL;DR: Solana’s October 16 changelog confirms Web3.js v3.1 alongside validator-client releases and developer tooling updates.

A major blockchain upgrade attracts the headlines, but everyday development friction can hold back adoption just as effectively. Solana’s October 16 changelog confirms the arrival of Web3.js v3.1, an update intended to work more closely with the growing set of tools used to build applications on the network.

The release improves interoperability with Solana Kit, Wallet Adapter, Surfpool, Anchor, Codama and SPL interfaces. For application teams, the attraction is not a promised jump in token prices; it is having fewer incompatible pieces between wallet interaction, transaction construction and local testing.

The same changelog lists Agave and Firedancer releases, updates to testing libraries and discussion of validator performance. It also describes proposals around computation limits and post-Alpenglow improvements. Those proposals should not be mistaken for features that have already been deployed. In particular, release numbers and discussion notes describe several distinct stages of the protocol’s engineering pipeline.

Developer experience rarely translates into an immediate market catalyst. It can, however, change the cost of shipping a working financial product. As Solana asks builders to support more complicated payments and tokenised assets, a stable, interoperable JavaScript library is part of the infrastructure that makes those use cases realistic.

More from NewsBTC: Cryptocurrency news · Ethereum coverage · Crypto research and categories

TL;DR: Research into a geo-aware leader schedule suggests quicker validator handovers, but also warns that grouping leaders by location introduces security trade-offs.

Solana’s push for lower latency is moving beyond shorter slots. A new study of SIMD-0675 considers rearranging its validator leader schedule so that consecutive leaders are more likely to be geographically close, reducing the time it takes information to travel between them.

This is not a proposal to give particular validators more production slots. The researchers keep each validator’s allocation unchanged and instead reconsider the order in which those windows occur. Their analysis uses 6,250 synthetic networks based on the chain’s existing 124 validator locations.

The appealing result is a reduction in average handover delay, around 29 milliseconds in one highlighted configuration. But grouping leaders by proximity can leave the schedule concentrated in one region for longer. Because validator locations are declared, it also creates an incentive to misreport geography. The study weighs these costs against the milliseconds saved and identifies a relatively modest grouping range as a potential compromise.

The work remains research, not evidence that this scheduling system has been activated on mainnet. It shows how scaling decisions get harder as a network becomes faster: shaving milliseconds is useful, but only if the randomness and geographical distribution that help preserve resilience are not quietly sacrificed.

More from NewsBTC: Cryptocurrency news · Ethereum coverage · Crypto research and categories

Solana has reached a record 1.5 million tokenized equity holders, with the number growing fivefold since August, even as SOL continues to struggle near $100 following weeks of selling pressure. According to an October 26 post from Solana, citing Blockworks…

BloomTrading identifies a third-party RCE flaw behind the $947K Solana theft affecting nine users, rules out private key exposure and pledges full refunds.

Reflect’s Create launch, promoted by Solana on October 22, offers a fast route to issuing a branded yield-bearing token. The interface can simplify issuance, but the economics still come from the collateral behind the token and the way its interest is shared.

TL;DR

• Create wraps approved collateral into a branded token.
• Issuers choose how underlying interest is divided.
• A new name and a faster launch do not remove the collateral’s risks.

The token is a wrapper around an existing economic position

Solana’s launch post points to Create’s availability. Reflect’s product documentation describes a single-transaction issuance flow using approved, freely transferable collateral. A project can issue a branded dollar product or a token representing a basket of assets.

The design also lets an issuer retain a share of generated interest. That share is a division of the underlying income stream, not an additional source of income. If the collateral produces less, there is less to divide between the issuer and holders.

This matters because a familiar brand can make an unfamiliar financial claim feel simple. A user may recognize an application’s name without understanding the lending markets, asset issuers or contracts that ultimately determine the token’s value.

Reflect’s FAQ explicitly distinguishes a yield-bearing stablecoin wrapper from the stablecoin it contains. It says the wrapped position adds the risks of the lending markets receiving the reserves. That qualification belongs beside the product’s convenience claims.

It is the same underlying-versus-wrapper distinction seen in tokenized equities: the token’s appearance cannot explain all the rights and dependencies behind it.

Routing access helps execution but does not create a fixed return

Reflect says its issuance system connects to Jupiter and Titan routing, allowing minting and redemption to form part of a swap route. The operational aim is to avoid requiring a separate liquidity pool for every branded token.

That can reduce a distribution obstacle. It does not make every collateral position equally liquid or establish that every redemption can be completed at a value a holder expects. The quality of the backing assets remains central to what the wrapper can deliver.

The documentation also warns that a basket can contain correlated risks. Several assets exposed to the same issuer, market or failure mode may provide less diversification than their separate names suggest.

Changes in exchange routing illustrate how infrastructure can improve access to liquidity. They do not settle the separate question of what an asset is worth.

Similarly, tokenized-deposit products need to be read through their legal and economic structure, even when the user experience resembles a digital dollar balance.

Create lowers the technical work involved in launching a token. For holders, the durable questions remain concrete: what backs it, where the interest originates, how much the issuer keeps and what happens when the collateral underperforms.

Written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

Securitize has confirmed that 12 tokenized U.S. stocks, including Apple, Nvidia and Tesla, are live on Solana for eligible investors, with each token backed by a share the company says is never lent out. In its Oct. 23 X post,…

Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko has named five major applications as higher priorities for network optimization than validators, developers, market makers, or core engineers, arguing that products holding substantial assets and handling retail trading volume deserve the most attention. Anatoly Yakovenko…

Bitwise reports 72.8% of Solana stake sits with European validators, raising geographic resilience questions as 250ms slots expose regional voting gaps.

KIMCHI token crashes after a QR code promotion linked to Pump.fun co-founder Alon disappears, as Lookonchain flags $385K in suspected trading profits.

TL;DR: Anza says Alpenglow activated on Solana mainnet-beta on October 21. The consensus change targets roughly 150-millisecond finality; further networking and post-quantum improvements remain planned work.

Solana has replaced the consensus protocol it used from launch, bringing a long-discussed change in transaction finality onto the live network.

Core engineering firm Anza announced the Alpenglow activation at slot 459,653,000, around 14:00 UTC on Wednesday. According to the company, validators retired TowerBFT during the transition without moving activity to a separate chain.

Finality Is The Point Of The Upgrade

Anza describes the design as reducing the path to finality from approximately 12.8 seconds to around 150 milliseconds. That is the developer’s stated performance target, not a network-wide latency measurement independently reproduced for this article.

Finality concerns when a transaction can be treated as irreversible under the network’s consensus rules. It is different from the moment a wallet displays a transaction or an application gives a user an initial confirmation.

That difference is particularly relevant to payments and trading. An interface can appear responsive before the recipient is willing to treat the transfer as settled. Shortening that second interval can reduce the period in which an exchange, merchant or application waits before acting on a payment.

It does not make every application instant. Wallet signing, internet connections, transaction inclusion and the application’s own checks still contribute to the time a user experiences. Nor does a lower finality target, by itself, establish higher transaction throughput.

More Changes Remain On The Roadmap

Anza lists Rotor, geographically aware leader rotation and the post-quantum research design Quantumglow as further developments, with no committed release dates in the announcement.

Their inclusion should not blur the scope of Wednesday’s event. Alpenglow’s activation is the completed milestone being reported; the additional work describes where the engineering team wants to take the system next.

For applications built on Solana, the practical question now is how the new consensus behaves under real traffic and varying network conditions. Operational evidence will determine how closely users’ settlement experience matches the design’s headline speed.

Related Reading

• Fidelity Sees A Stronger Solana Network, With Concentration Risks Still In View
• Solana’s Tokenized Asset Market Grows More Than Sixfold In A Year
• Solana Foundation Launches Atomic DvP Settlement Tool With JPMorgan Input

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

TL;DR: DefiLlama’s chain-revenue figures put Tron at roughly $23.4 million over 30 days, ahead of Ethereum and Solana combined on that specific measure.

A look at blockchain fee revenue offers a different picture of the market from token prices and headline transaction counts. In DefiLlama’s latest 30-day chain figures, Tron recorded approximately $23.4 million, compared with around $6.3 million for Ethereum and $3.4 million for Solana in the same category.

That is a substantial gap, but the category needs explaining. The dashboard’s figures reflect its defined chain-revenue methodology, including TRX fees burned on Tron. They are not a comprehensive comparison of every dollar earned by applications, validators or infrastructure providers across the three ecosystems.

Tron’s position is closely tied to stablecoin usage, particularly USDT. The network has become an important route for moving dollar-denominated tokens, especially in markets where transfer costs and familiarity matter more than the latest DeFi application.

Revenue can tell us something about how much economic activity a network captures, though it does not measure decentralisation, developer adoption or the long-term value of a token. Fee policy also differs considerably between chains.

That’s why the comparison is worth watching rather than turning into a sweeping conclusion about which blockchain has won. A network can generate more revenue in one category while its rivals lead on liquidity, application activity or other measures.

As with all live dashboards, the figures will continue moving after publication.

Written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

TL;DR: DefiLlama’s chain-revenue figures put Tron at roughly $23.4 million over 30 days, ahead of Ethereum and Solana combined on that specific measure.

A look at blockchain fee revenue offers a different picture of the market from token prices and headline transaction counts. In DefiLlama’s latest 30-day chain figures, Tron recorded approximately $23.4 million, compared with around $6.3 million for Ethereum and $3.4 million for Solana in the same category.

That is a substantial gap, but the category needs explaining. The dashboard’s figures reflect its defined chain-revenue methodology, including TRX fees burned on Tron. They are not a comprehensive comparison of every dollar earned by applications, validators or infrastructure providers across the three ecosystems.

Tron’s position is closely tied to stablecoin usage, particularly USDT. The network has become an important route for moving dollar-denominated tokens, especially in markets where transfer costs and familiarity matter more than the latest DeFi application.

Revenue can tell us something about how much economic activity a network captures, though it does not measure decentralisation, developer adoption or the long-term value of a token. Fee policy also differs considerably between chains.

That’s why the comparison is worth watching rather than turning into a sweeping conclusion about which blockchain has won. A network can generate more revenue in one category while its rivals lead on liquidity, application activity or other measures.

As with all live dashboards, the figures will continue moving after publication.

Written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.