The Ethereum mainnet’s gas limit could theoretically grow 100-fold and reach 2,000 transactions per second under a new Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) put forward by Ethereum Foundation researcher Dankrad Feist.

Feist, who had the blockchain’s “danksharding” data storage solution named after him, put forward EIP-9698 on April 27, which would introduce a “deterministic gas limit growth schedule” starting at epoch 369017, or around June 1.

The proposal would gradually increase the gas limit by a factor of 10 for roughly two years, or 164,250 epochs, when one final tenfold increase would occur.

Ethereum clients would need to vote on the proposal for it to take effect, Feist said.

“By introducing a predictable exponential growth pattern as a client default, this EIP encourages a sustainable and transparent gas limit trajectory, aligned with expected advancements in hardware and protocol efficiency,” he added.

As Ethereum can occasionally reach up to 20 TPS in blocks dominated by simple transactions, a 100x gas limit increase could theoretically increase Ethereum’s TPS to 2,000. Feist’s proposal would better position Ethereum to compete with the likes of Solana, which currently processes a non-vote TPS between 800 to 1,050 and has a theoretical TPS of 65,000.

Source: Fabda.eth

The EIP would expand the current gas limit of 36 million to 3.6 billion, potentially allowing around 6,000 transactions to fit into Ethereum blocks.

Feist’s proposal comes after Ethereum validators agreed to raise the gas limit from 30 million to 36 million in February.

Before that, the last change to Ethereum’s gas limit occurred in August 2021 under the London hard fork, where the figure was roughly doubled from 15 million to 30 million.

Daily change in Ethereum Average Gas Limit over the last five years. Source: YCharts

Feist acknowledged that a rapid increase in the gas limit under his proposal may stress less-optimized nodes and increase block propagation times. 

“However, the exponential schedule with very gradual increments per epoch gives node operators and developers ample time to adapt and optimize,” he said.

Related: Ethereum community members propose new fee structure for the app layer

EIP-9698 marks the Ethereum community’s latest effort to boost scalability at the base layer after predominantly focusing on scaling through layer 2 solutions in recent years.

Critics of Ethereum’s layer-2 focused strategy claim that it has fragmented the ecosystem into several siloed chains with little interoperability, leading to a worse user experience.

EIP-9678 looks to increase gas limit

Ethereum developers are also looking to test a fourfold increase of Ethereum’s gas limit in the Fusaka hard fork under EIP-9678.

Fusaka has been flagged as possibly going online in late 2025, while the next major Ethereum upgrade, Pectra, is scheduled to go live on the mainnet in May.

Magazine: Ethereum is destroying the competition in the $16.1T TradFi tokenization race

Nike has been hit with a class-action lawsuit that accuses the sportswear giant of operating a rug pull for shuttering its non-fungible token (NFT) platform RTFKT in January. 

A group of RTFKT users led by Jagdeep Cheema claimed in the proposed class suit filed in a Brooklyn federal court on April 25 that they suffered “significant damages” as a result of Nike touting its sneaker-themed NFTs to gain investors, then shuttering the platform.

The suit claimed the NFTs were unregistered securities, as Nike sold them without registering with the Securities and Exchange Commission. It accused the company of using “its iconic brand and marketing prowess to hype, promote, and prop up the unregistered securities that RTFKT sold.”

“Because the Nike NFTs derived their value from the success of a given promoter and project — here, Nike and its marketing efforts — investors purchased this digital asset with the hope that its value would increase in the future as the project grows in popularity based on the Nike brand,” the lawsuit argued.

The class suit claimed investors suffered damages due to Nike shutting its NFT platform. Source: CourtListener

The lawsuit asks for $5 million in damages, claiming Nike broke consumer protection laws and violated various state unfair trade and competition laws.

A US court hasn’t definitively ruled on whether NFTs are securities. Still, in an April 9 letter to the SEC, marketplace OpenSea urged the regulator to exclude NFTs from federal securities laws, arguing they don’t meet the legal definition of a security. 

In its case against Nike, the class group said that the court doesn’t necessarily need to rule on the legal status of NFTs to address the complaint.

NFT market value dips 

In 2021, Nike acquired the NFT firm RTFKT Studios, which created virtual sneakers. 

According to the complaint, holders of the resulting Nike NFTs were told the tokens could be traded peer-to-peer on the secondary market and used to complete challenges and quests that could lead to rewards.

Nike’s crypto kick NFT collection was changing hands for an average of 3.5 Ether (ETH), or around $8,000 when they were first listed on April 18, 2022, but were trading for around 0.009 Ether, or roughly $16 as of April 21, according to OpenSea. 

Nike NFTs have seen a sharp drop in value since they were first listed. Source: OpenSea

Nike shut down RTFKT in January, which the class suit claims decimated investors when “prices plunged and did not recover,” and also took away the chance to take part in the challenges and quests, which the group argued was a primary reason for purchasing the tokens. 

Related: RTFKT’s CloneX avatars reappear after issue blacks out NFTs

The overall NFT market dropped sharply in the first quarter of 2025, with sales plunging 63% year-over-year, to $1.5 billion in total sales from January to March 2025, down from $4.1 billion during the same period in 2024.

Nike did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Magazine: Financial nihilism in crypto is over — It’s time to dream big again

Key takeaways:

Heavy liquidations played a role in Bitcoin’s return to $95,000.

Bitcoin’s weakening correlation with stocks highlights its growing independence as an asset.

Bullish institutional investor positioning contrasts with retail traders’ caution, supporting a rally above $100,000.

Bitcoin (BTC) gained 11% between April 20 and April 26, demonstrating resilience by holding near its two-month high around $94,000. This relief rally followed signals from the Trump administration about easing import tariffs, as well as strong corporate earnings reports.

Investor confidence in Bitcoin was further boosted by a record $3.1 billion in net inflows to spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) over five days. However, a key BTC derivatives indicator showed signs of bearish momentum, raising questions about whether the $100,000 target is still realistic.

Perpetual Bitcoin futures contracts are favored by retail traders because their prices closely track the spot market. A positive funding rate means that buyers pay to maintain their positions, so a reversal in this rate is typically linked to bearish trends.

Bitcoin perpetual futures annualized funding rate. Source: Laevitas.ch

The sharp negative funding rates recorded on April 26 are highly unusual during bull markets, as they indicate stronger demand from sellers. This metric has been volatile since April 14, but sellers were caught off guard as Bitcoin’s price climbed above $94,000. Since April 21, over $450 million in BTC short positions have been liquidated.

Some of the renewed confidence and Bitcoin’s price strength can be attributed to the S&P 500’s 7.1% weekly gain. However, despite this optimism, US President Donald Trump reportedly said on April 25 that negotiations would depend on China making concessions, causing traders to question the sustainability of recent gains.

Companies are now reporting first-quarter earnings from before the escalation of the trade war, so the factors driving the stock market and Bitcoin are different. In fact, Bitcoin’s price is no longer closely correlated with the S&P 500.

30-day correlation: S&P 500 vs Bitcoin/USD. Source: TradingView / Cointelegraph

Currently, the 30-day correlation between the S&P 500 and Bitcoin stands at 29%, well below the 60% level seen from March to mid-April. While this lower correlation does not mean a complete decoupling, since investor sentiment is still influenced by macroeconomic factors, it does show that Bitcoin is not simply a proxy for technology stocks.

Bitcoin’s status as an independent asset has strengthened

Gold’s inability to maintain its bullish momentum after reaching an all-time high of $3,500 on April 22 was also seen as significant for Bitcoin’s status as an independent asset class. Some traders had questioned the “digital gold” narrative, but the longer BTC remains above $90,000, the more confidence investors may have, potentially paving the way for further gains.

The increased demand for bearish leverage in perpetual BTC futures does not align with the sentiment of professional traders. Monthly Bitcoin futures contracts avoid fluctuating funding rates, so traders know their leverage costs in advance.

Bitcoin 2-month futures annualized premium. Source: Laevitas.ch

On April 26, the two-month Bitcoin futures premium (basis rate) rose to its highest level in seven weeks, indicating greater interest in bullish positions. At 6.5%, this metric remains within the neutral 5% to 10% range, but is moving away from bearish territory.

The disconnect between leverage demand in perpetual futures and monthly BTC contracts is not unusual. Even if retail traders remain cautious, substantial accumulation by institutions could be enough to push Bitcoin’s price above $100,000 in the near future.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.