Best VPN for Crypto Trading: 5 Reliable Options for 2025

Additional data protection never hurt anyone. When trading crypto, it's vital to keep your data to yourself and prevent any leaks. The best VPNs for trading crypto do that, and more. They encrypt your connection, preventing valuable information from going to the public.
Our recommended VPNs for crypto trading also employ advanced protection. This often comes in the form of malware, phishing, and DNS leak protection, which secures your traffic from head to toe. In 2025, using a VPN has become almost a necessity for online safety.
If you're an avid trader looking to for a nudge in the right direction, this guide is for you. You can never be too safe when trading cryptocurrencies, and if you choose the right VPN, you're in for an adventure of your life!
Best VPNs for Crypto Trading At a Glance
NordVPN — the VPN for crypto trading overall ExpressVPN — the fastest choice for crypto traders Private Internet Access — the best multi-device option Proton VPN — market-leading privacy and security Surfshark — best for virus and malware protection
The 5 Best VPNs for Crypto Trading: In-Depth Analysis
Above is a shortlist of the best-rated VPNs for crypto. But now, let's analyze our top picks in-depth and see which features they offer for passionate traders.
1. NordVPN
In our tests, NordVPN was constantly a notch or two above its competitors. It's s VPN that you can use to unblock crypto-trading platforms anywhere. On that note, we were able to confirm that it's the best VPN for accessing Gamdom from anywhere.
In addition, it's fast and reliable, so connection outages won't spoil the fun. Another aspect of NordVPN we like is security.
It uses 256-bit GCM encryption to secure your traffic and make you anonymous. For more protection, you can connect to a Double VPN servers to effectively double your encryption. As the best VPN for crypto trading, NordVPN takes advantage of Threat Protection Pro.
It's an in-house solution for malware and tracker protection, which is vital for crypto-trading industry. NordVPN uses a proprietary NordLynx protocol, although its NordWhisper protocol can also be used to bypass network filtering. Privacy-wise, NordVPN is the #1 VPN globally.
The company doesn't log any sensitive data, which was proven many times in third-party audits. Servers based on RAM attest to that, plus Private DNS, which sidesteps third-party DNS services that could otherwise collect your data. We haven't mentioned this VPN's speed.
Well, it's the fastest VPN for crypto trading, too! With an average speed drop of roughly 18% in our tests, it's ideal for smooth and hassle-free trading. NordVPN is a perfect companion if you're often traveling, as it works on all devices and operating systems you can fathom.
Plus, it packs 10 simultaneous connections to protect all your devices at no additional cost. Speaking of costs, NordVPN is a smart investment. You spend roughly $3/mo now and enjoy the VPN for 24+ months, while also having 30 days to get a full refund if you're unsatisfied.
Visit NordVPN
Pros 256-bit GCM encryption
Double VPN servers
Unblocks all major crypto websites
Malware blocking
NordLynx and NordWhisper protocols
No-logging policy
Cons No malware protection in the Basic plan
Slightly complicated app design
2. ExpressVPN
ExpressVPN is renowned for its speed and ease of use, ranking it almost at the top of this list. No doubt, it's a widely adopted VPN for trading crypto because of its high-speed servers in 105 countries. ExpressVPN uses the Lightway Turbo protocol to beef up its server speed.
This results in excellent reliability and the ability to unblock all crypto-trading platforms, from Kraken and Coinbase to Binance and Bybit. ExpressVPN doesn't hold punches security-wise, and uses tried-and-tested 256-bit encryption, with an automatic kill switch to prevent leaks.
Like NordVPN, with which ExpressVPN is often compared, this VPN blocks ads and trackers on all devices. As of recently, ExpressVPN offers ID Theft Insurance, preventing your sensitive information from ending up in the wrong hands. Dedicated IP addresses are there, as well!
ExpressVPN is a privacy-inclined service, putting huge emphasis on its no-logging policy. Apart from third-party audits, ExpressVPN has proof of its brave promises in the court. It's a great all-purpose VPN for trading crypto, streaming on Netflix, and even torrenting safely.
We want to stress its device support, which is all-inclusive. You'll be able to use it on Windows, Linux, macOS, Android, and iOS. Although 8 simultaneous connections are on the shallow side, we think it's plenty to keep your devices protected. But what about the price?
ExpressVPN is honestly a tad pricier than most of its rivals — not by much. There's a 61% discount with 4 free months for its 24-month plan. We recommend this plan, but whichever you snatch, you'll be covered by a 30-day money-back guarantee, making it a great deal.
Visit ExpressVPN
Pros Great speeds
Fast 10 Gbps servers globally
Dedicated IP addresses
ID Theft Insurance
Easy-to-use apps
Support for all devices
Cons Not the cheapest VPN
No MultiHop
3. Private Internet Access
Private Internet Access is used by crypto enthusiasts who want multi-device protection and privacy while doing their jobs. It's a VPN with unlimited simultaneous connections whose record-breaking low prices spike excitement in many newcomers. But that's hardly a full story.
PIA VPN offers bank-grade encryption, MultiHop servers, and MACE for blocking ads. Its apps also house obfuscation realized by the Shadowsocks proxy. WireGuard and OpenVPN are used to ensure both speed and security, and very often, a blend of both worlds.
The VPN doesn't keep logs of your whereabouts, and like ExpressVPN, this statement was proven in court. Besides, PIA is stringent about its use of RAM servers that add to your privacy by being wiped clean of data with each restart. We just scratched the surface, though.
PIA, for example, comes with optional dedicated IP addresses with some of the lowest prices on the market. For about $1.4/mo, you can also obtain its Windows Antivirus and protect your crypto-trading adventures from online threats. PIA has the largest server fleet now.
With around 30,000 servers in 91 countries, it's easy to find a fast VPN server for trading crypto on your favorite platforms. PIA capitalizes on its timely 24/7 support, and while it lacks a Firestick TV app, it compensates with unlimited simultaneous connections, as said earlier.
Now, price-wise, PIA costs considerably less than NordVPN and ExpressVPN. Roughly said, it's about $2/mo for the 24-month plan with 2 or 4 free months. Even if you splurge on its Antivirus as an added security measure, it's still less expensive than run-of-the-mill VPNs.
Visit Private Internet Access
Pros The most affordable pick
MultiHop connections
Servers in 91 countries
Optional virus protection
Shadowsocks proxy
Cons No Firestick TV app
Virus protection is limited to Windows
4. Proton VPN
Proton VPN is a versatile VPN usable for trading crypto. It has a premium plan that isn't pricey, bus packs more than essentials to trade crypto like a pro. But then, there's the free plan without bandwidth caps that would also work, albeit, with not many features offered.
As always, we prioritize premium VPNs over free, so let's discuss it. The provider has over 12,000 servers in 117+ countries. It also offers proprietary Secure Core servers to enhance your encryption. Its Secure Core feature blocks ads and trackers, keeping things clean.
In our tests, Proton VPN's speed was excellent as a result of WireGuard and its famous VPN Accelerator. Its apps have Stealth VPN, whose obfuscation helps you unblock crypto platforms and sway off network censorship. Proton VPN has many dedicated servers.
You can use Tor Over VPN to pair the VPN with the Tor browser. But then, you'll find interesting servers for streaming and torrenting, both of which do their jobs impeccably. Proton VPN's privacy is market-leading, thanks to its Swiss jurisdiction and minimal logging.
I mean, Proton keeps virtually nothing on its RAM servers, and is famous for this respectable practice. Similarly to its rivals, the provider uses AES encryption, but spices things up with a kill switch, DNS leak protection, and a Dark Web Monitor to protect you from data breaches.
Proton VPN's longest plans should be your go-to, as outlined in our review. We opt for its 24-month plan, but even the 12-month plan is fairly inexpensive. Either way, you'll spend roughly a coffee a month one one of the most impressive VPNs for trading crypto in 2025.
To make sure you get the lowest possible price, read our summary of the current promotional offers and valid coupons for Proton VPN.
Visit Proton VPN
Pros Audited no-log policy
Tor Over VPN servers
NetShield ad-blocker
It offers a free plan
Cons Not the best customer support
It could be simpler to use
5. Surfshark
Surfshark is more of an all-in-one suite than your everyday VPN. While the Starter package is more like the latter, its Surfshark One plan, which we recommend, includes antivirus for all devices. This ranks it among the safest VPNs you can use for crypto trading and all else.
The provider has also joined forces with NordVPN, so it shares plenty with it. For example, it also offers MultiHop servers, obfuscation with the NoBorders feature, and an innovative IP Rotator that rotates your IP periodically without disconnecting from the VPN server.
A huge advantage is speed—Surfshark is sometimes on par with ExpressVPN, despite the latter's higher price. While occasional slowdowns occur, Surfshark's pursuit of perfection is a bit more challenging. On the other hand, Surfshark offers both dedicated and static IP addresses within its apps.
You'll also be able to use it for streaming and unblock over thirty Netflix libraries. Unlimited simultaneous connections are part of the deal, which translates to endless protection for all your devices. As a result, this renowned VPN for crypto helps you trade even on the fly.
Surfshark's no-log policy has been verified multiple times by Deloitte and Cure53. Despite its Dutch jurisdiction (9 Eyes), Surfshark's attempts at preserving users' privacy are successful. This, as expected, comes down to RAM-based servers that prevent all forms of data logging.
Last but not least, Surfshark is affordable and costs close to Private Internet Access. This means you'll enjoy this widely adopted VPN for trading crypto for a pocket change and not even feel like you're spending money. In reality, you barely do — that's the beauty of it.
Visit Surfshark VPN
Pros NoBorders obfuscation
Antivirus for all devices
IP Rotation tool
Cons Occasionally slow speed
Starter plan lacks some features
Why Should You Use a VPN for Trading Crypto?
Can you buy and sell crypto without a VPN? Sure. However, connecting to a server yields some excellent benefits that can improve your overall experience, in both crypto trading and doing mundane online tasks.
Here are the most popular reasons for using the best VPN for crypto:
Encryption: A simple connection to a server immediately encrypts your traffic. It's unreadable and untraceable by your ISP or another entity. This means no one can track your activities or steal your credentials, which ensures safe trading on all devices.
A simple connection to a server immediately encrypts your traffic. It's unreadable and untraceable by your ISP or another entity. This means no one can track your activities or steal your credentials, which ensures safe trading on all devices. Unblocking crypto platforms: Have you tried to access a crypto platform, only to find it's blocked in your location or on a specific WiFi network? Don't worry. Changing your VPN location will do the trick. Connect to a server, get a new IP address, and access the website in seconds.
Have you tried to access a crypto platform, only to find it's blocked in your location or on a specific WiFi network? Don't worry. Changing your VPN location will do the trick. Connect to a server, get a new IP address, and access the website in seconds.
Online privacy: VPNs are known for their privacy and no-logging practices. Unlike crypto (and other) websites infamous for collecting data, VPNs are the opposite — they store nothing! This means you can surf online and not expose your activities to every prying eye.
Despite being called VPNs for trading crypto, they provide countless other benefits.
We mentioned streaming and torrenting, but you can use them for gambling, accessing VoIP services, playing online games, preventing ISP throttling, etc. VPNs have many uses which we explored in a separate article.
Can I Buy a VPN Subscription With Crypto?
Yes, you can, but not in every scenario. Regarding our list, you'll see mixed results. For example, NordVPN, ExpressVPN, Private Internet Access, Proton VPN, and Surfshark support crypto through third-party processors — usually CoinGate.
Should you buy a VPN using crypto, however? It depends. Some providers have different terms of use in this case. In some cases, they won't issue a refund, let's say. However, our top picks treat crypto and 'normal' payments the same, leaving no room for discrimination.
Just be aware that processing these payments might be slower, so don't be confused if your refund takes slower to arrive or your subscription isn't yet 'acknowledged' by the provider.
Final Words
Regardless of your activity — selling, buying, or staking cryptocurrencies, our recommended VPNs for crypto will keep things safe and secure. While not mandatory by any means, they aid your privacy, improve your security, and allow you to access blocked crypto websites.
We've left you with five extraordinary providers, all tested by our diligent team of experts. With so much to offer, each provider is an adventure for itself. We hope our information so far is sufficient to pick the right one and enjoy reliable crypto trading on all your devices.
Try NordVPN Risk-Free for 30 Days
Frequently Asked Questions
Any other questions left in the tank? We'll address them shortly in this section.
🆓 Are free VPNs for crypto trading any good?
They could work, but only in a few cases in which the free provider is particularly good. Proton VPN's free version is great because it offers unlimited bandwidth, rock-solid security, and the same level of privacy. On the other hand, it disables the option to choose a server.
Users also don't get premium security features and fast speeds, with streaming and torrenting being completely off the chart. The free version is good, but not outstanding overall, so don't get your hopes up.
Oh, and Proton VPN is one of the better providers — other picks can be atrocious. You can expect heavy logging, stubborn DNS leaks, and other problems that'll plague the experience from top to bottom.
🪙 Can I trade crypto without a VPN?
Yes, you can, but you're left without proper encryption and privacy. If a crypto website is blocked, also don't think you'll be able to unblock it unless you some how change your IP address. That 'somehow' is a VPN.
🌎 What's the best VPN location for crypto trading?
This is hard to tell, but the best location is the one which blocks the least crypto-trading platforms. Experts usually recommend Singapore, Germany, Switzerland, Estonia, etc. These countries have crypto-friendly laws, which endorses effortless and worry-free trading.
Some countries, like Morocco and China, block or partially restrict some platforms. Generally, it's not a good idea to use an IP address from such countries. Focus on the recommended locations instead.
⚖️ Is using a VPN for crypto trading legal?
You'll find that VPNs are illegal in very few instances. This, in turn, means it's usually legal to use a VPN, and by extension, to trade crypto with one. Countries that banned cryptocurrencies deem their trading illegal, so even with a VPN, you're in the illicit territory.
In theory, encryption and added security should work in your favor, but again, you're going against the law and that's never good. Region-locked crypto websites have anti-VPN stances, so unblocking them is 'disrespectful', but not illegal, because they won't sue you.
Albeit, you might get a permanent account ban, so there's a risk of losing your valuable investments.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

3 hours ago

• Yahoo

McDonald's Changes That Completely Fell Flat With Customers

McDonald's built a global empire on consistency, convenience, and crowd-pleasing classics. However, even the minds behind the golden arches aren't immune to missteps. Over the years, the fast-food giant has introduced ambitious new products, redesigned its restaurants, and even launched an entire spinoff chain, only to watch many of these changes backfire spectacularly. Some of the McDonald's misfires were driven by shifting consumer trends, cost-cutting efforts, or corporate experimentation. Regardless of the motivation behind them, several of these changes left customers confused, disappointed, or outright angry. From popular McDonald's items that were discontinued — like the McD.L.T. and Cinnamon Melts — to bold swings and misses like McPizza and a McDonald's hot dog, not every golden idea turned out to be a roaring success. In other cases, the company changed too much of what customers loved, such as altering its recipe for cooking fries and overhauling the look of its classic restaurants to become less bright and cheerful. While not always contentious, these changes were no doubt bound to stir up debate. Read more: 22 Fast Food Breakfast Menus Ranked From Worst To Best In late 2023, McDonald's launched a highly anticipated spinoff chain called CosMc's — a drink-focused concept named after a little-known McDonaldland alien mascot from the '80s. The new venture was meant to rival the likes of Starbucks and Dunkin' with a menu packed with cold-brew coffee, iced latte, and quirky food items like blueberry-lemon sundaes and the Creamy Avocado Tomatillo Sandwich. But by May 2025, McDonald's announced it would shut down its CosMc's test locations, effectively calling time on the experiment within a matter of months after it began. The concept was first launched with a location in Bolingbrook, Illinois, with McDonald's executives aiming to create a beverage-centered brand geared towards afternoon traffic. When starting out this enterprise, the company planned to expand CosMc's to about 10 locations by 2025, including multiple sites in Texas. Despite initial buzz, CosMc's quickly drew criticism from customers and analysts. The new chain's disjointed menu offerings, focus on drive-thru customers, and underwhelming marketing didn't sit well with many fast-food fans. One commenter on Reddit bluntly called CosMc's "another blunder by McDonald's executives. I thought the clown was only the mascot, but the entire management team seems to be entirely made up of clowns." When McDonald's introduced all-day breakfast in 2015, customers were thrilled. The move catered to diners who craved Egg McMuffins and hash browns long after traditional breakfast hours had passed. Sales figures immediately jumped in the following months, and it was considered as a wildly successful McDonald's menu expansion. However, by March 2020, all-day breakfast at McDonald's was shelved, reportedly as a temporary measure to simplify kitchen operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. But the change stuck. While individual franchisees can determine the hours when breakfast is sold at the McDonald's locations they operate, the chain generally stops serving McMuffins and hash browns at 11 a.m. or earlier. The decision left many fans disappointed. Some McDonald's employees have taken to social media to explain that while all-day breakfast boosted sales, it also complicated workflows and slowed down service, particularly during busy lunch and dinner hours. Still, for customers who loved ordering hotcakes in the evening, the loss of flexibility has remained a sore spot. Few discontinued McDonald's items inspire as much longing as Cinnamon Melts. Introduced around 2007, these warm, gooey, miniature-sized cinnamon rolls were compared favorably to the confections of Cinnabon. They were a hit with customers seeking something sweet to pair with a morning coffee. Despite their popularity, McDonald's phased out Cinnamon Melts by 2017, supposedly due to steep production costs, low sales, and because the process of preparing them was relatively difficult. They also required unique packaging to contain the icing, which may have hindered efficiency in McDonald's kitchens. Diners were not happy. Commenters on multiple online forums have lamented the item's disappearance. Some speculate that despite being delicious, Cinnamon Melts were simply not profitable enough to remain on the menu. Years later, people are still begging for their return. But McDonald's management doesn't appear to be budging from the decision to discontinue Cinnamon Melts, even ignoring an online petition with over 18,000 signatures to demand the return of this sweet-and-spiced treat. In early 2013, McDonald's attempted to ride the wave of nugget-style innovation with Fish McBites — a bite-sized, breaded take on the pollock used in its classic Filet-O-Fish sandwich. Initially marketed as a limited-time offering for the period of Lent, the product aimed to attract customers seeking a non-meat option. It was also intended to appeal to younger diners as a Happy Meal option. But Fish McBites didn't stick around. The menu item was discontinued after just a few months. Despite a flashy rollout and considerable marketing investment, McDonald's fish nuggets failed to make a lasting impression. Customer feedback was lukewarm, with reviews stating that the nuggets lacked flavor and had an unappetizing texture. Years later, Fish McBites appear to be remembered more for the menu item's obscurity rather than its taste, with one person on Reddit alleging that "there is seemingly no evidence of them ever existing." Despite Fish McBites being a huge flop, the classic Filet-O-Fish sandwich is still loved and enjoyed by seafood lovers in multiple countries around the world. Originally introduced in California in 1996, the Big N' Tasty featured a quarter-pound beef patty with lettuce, tomato, onions, and pickles on a sesame seed bun. It was sold nationally by 2001, and for a while it was considered as a staple of the McDonald's Dollar Menu. Despite garnering many fans, it's widely reported that the Big N' Tasty was quietly discontinued in most U.S. locations by 2011, although it's still sometimes available with some variations at a number of international restaurant sites. McDonald's management has explained that this burger's size presented a logistical challenge, stating that keeping it as a regular menu item would hinder the chain's ability to cook other special-offer burgers introduced for a limited time. Nostalgia for the menu item remains strong, with many people taking to online forums and wondering whatever happened to McDonald's Big N' Tasty burger. Diners still share fond memories of the Big N' Tasty, especially from during the time when it cost $1. In the mid-2000s, McDonald's began overhauling its iconic red-and-yellow buildings, phasing out the interiors dominated by colorful plastic and replacing them with darker hues, wood fixtures, and sleek furnishings. This rebranding aimed to present a more sophisticated image, hoping to attract adult diners seeking a less garish dining setting. While the effort aligned with broader trends in fast-casual dining, many customers felt the redesign stripped away the brand's charm. Instead enjoying a bright, family-friendly atmosphere, the new decor at McDonald's has left visitors complaining on Reddit that the restaurants look "sterile" and "eerily similar" to each other. One commenter shared the following question: "When did McD go from a happy, fun-loving child to a depressed, midlife-crisis adult?" Other online commenters theorize that McDonald's needed to diminish its focus on attracting children to eat fast food, and that the less-distinctive design will make it easier to repurpose McDonald's locations that shut down. While the rebranding may have met some of McDonald's strategic goals, it also seems to have created a disconnect for loyal customers who miss the playful aesthetics and family-centric vibe of its previous aesthetic style. In 2002, McDonald's released the McAfrika in Norway — a pita-style sandwich filled with beef, cheese, and vegetables — that was meant to evoke African flavors. But the timing couldn't have been worse. The launch occurred during a severe famine in Africa that affected some 12 million people. Humanitarian groups quickly condemned the campaign as tone-deaf and insensitive. Following the backlash, a McDonald's spokesperson acknowledged the appearance of insensitivity, but the chain did not immediately remove the McAfrika from its Norway menus. While McDonald's officials welcomed famine-aid organizations to place donation boxes and fundraising appeals in its Norwegian restaurants, this wasn't enough to stop the criticism. To this day, the ill-timed McAfrika launch is considered among the biggest mistakes ever committed by the fast food chain. Unbelievably, the controversy resurfaced in 2008 when McDonald's Australia attempted to a launch the similarly named McAfrica burger as part of a limited-time promotion connected with that year's Olympic Games. This incident did not inspire the same level of protests as seen in Norway six years earlier, but it again drew attention to the questionable decisions of McDonald's marketing practices. In 2000, McDonald's introduced McSalad Shakers, a portable serving of chopped greens served in a clear plastic cup. Customers were encouraged to pour in dressings like ranch, Thousand Island, or herb vinaigrette, then shake the container, and enjoy a healthier fast food option on the go. This innovation was meant as an offering for health-conscious consumers. Despite being offered in three versions — Garden, Chef, and Grilled Chicken Caesar — and sold for relatively low prices, McSalad Shakers were discontinued in 2003. While it's difficult to find any detailed explanation about what happened to McDonald's McSalad Shakers, McDonald's management has expressed in recent years that demand for salads at the fast food chain is generally low. Nonetheless, some fans remember McSalad Shakers fondly as a relatively healthy McDonald's menu option that was actually tasty and convenient. Although short-lived, these portable salads remain a cult favorite among a dedicated cadre of online commenters who clamor for their return. The McD.L.T. — short for "McDonald's lettuce and tomato" — was launched in the mid-1980s as a premium burger with packaging designed to keep the hot and cold ingredients separated. It came in a two-sided styrofoam container: one side for the hot beef patty and bottom bun, and the other side for the lettuce, tomato, cheese, and top bun. This design promised a fresher burger that diners could assemble just before eating. While some customers appreciated this burger's taste and novel container, environmentalists were less enthusiastic. As the public was becoming aware of the growing amount of non-biodegradable waste going to landfills, the McD.L.T.'s oversized polystyrene packaging drew heavy criticism. As pressure mounted from the controversy, McDonald's faced a public relations dilemma. By the early 1990s, the McD.L.T. was canceled. Over the following years, McDonald's joined other fast food chains in the eco-friendly trend to serve menu items in durable paper containers instead of polystyrene packaging. The rise and fall of this McDonald's burger became an emblem of the turning point in how fast food companies approach environmental responsibility; today an original McD.L.T. container is exhibited in the National Museum of American History. A few fans still praise this sandwich — "It really was probably the best burger McDonald's has ever had," wrote one commenter on Reddit — while acknowledging that it had to go for the sake of the planet. Although McDonald's has experimented with diverse food items, one handheld meal that never gained traction was the McHotDog. Originally sold at select locations in the U.S. in 1995, it was introduced despite strong objections from the chain's founder, who died more than a decade before the launch. Ray Kroc didn't think McDonald's should sell hot dogs, because he believed that the sausages' mystery-meat reputation is not compatible with the chain's quality standards. Kroc even made this clear in his autobiography, "Grinding It Out: The Making of McDonald's." Despite Kroc's overt misgivings about dishing out frankfurters beneath the golden arches, McDonald's corporate management gave the McHotDog a shot — and it quickly became one of the biggest flops in McDonald's history. But while the chain's U.S. customers clearly didn't want this product, McDonald's hot dogs continually made sporadic appearances over the years at international locations, reportedly surfacing in Germany and on the restaurant's breakfast menu in Japan. Nonetheless, McDonald's never successfully established hot dogs as a permanent menu item. For most customers, the McHotDog remains a forgotten oddity, probably proving that Kroc was right all along. McDonald's has dabbled in varied seafood offerings, and one of its most curious was the McLobster. First introduced in 1993 and reportedly limited to markets in New England and eastern Canada, the McLobster was a sandwich similar to a lobster roll, made with Atlantic lobster meat, lettuce, and a light sauce, all served in a long bun. The McLobster had its fans, and for quite a few years it occasionally appeared as a seasonal item on McDonald's menus in states like Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts, as well as Canada's Atlantic-coast provinces. However, the sandwich never went national. This is likely due to the price of lobster varying considerably depending on the season and region, making it a difficult food to order regularly for a fast food chain known for uniformity. In 2017, McDonald's Canadian management specifically cited price concerns as the reason why the McLobster would not be offered at any restaurants that year, leaving aficionados of the sandwich high and dry. For years, McDonald's deep-fried apple pies were a customer favorite. With their golden-brown, crispy crust and sweet filling, they were a staple dessert of the chain from the 1960s through the early 1990s. But in 1992, McDonald's made a controversial change: At most U.S. locations, employees started baking apple pies instead of frying them. This new cooking technique was meant as part of an effort to provide healthier menu items, but sweet-toothed diners were not pleased. Fans of the original pies lamented the loss of the crispy texture and piping-hot filling of the deep-fried apple pies. Luckily for them, some McDonald's locations continue to sell the fried versions, such as a historic McDonald's in Downey, California, as well as the chain's restaurants in Hawaii. Although McDonald's has tweaked the recipe of its baked apple pies over the years — switching to a lattice crust and adjusting the filling ingredients — critics argue that the newer version never measured up to the deep-fried pies. In 1991, McDonald's debuted the McLean Deluxe, a low-fat hamburger aimed at health-conscious consumers. Billed as a 91% fat-free alternative to standard burgers, the McLean Deluxe featured a patty made with lean beef that was blended with carrageenan — a seaweed-derived thickener — to retain moisture and texture. Initially, the McLean Deluxe seemed poised for success. McDonald's spent a fortune (reportedly at least $50 million) developing and marketing the new item, positioning it as a health-boosting revolution in fast food. But almost immediately, the McLean Deluxe ran into trouble. Customers complained that the burger lacked flavor, and couldn't sufficiently satisfy their hunger. Other diners were less than enthusiastic about consuming seaweed in their fast food. People stopped buying the McDonald's McLean Deluxe, and by 1996, it was quietly removed from McDonald's menus. Though the chain attempted to lead a charge into the realm of healthy fast food, this failure showed that flavor can't be sacrificed beneath the golden arches — even in the name of nutrition. There was a time when McDonald's french fries were arguably the best in the fast food business — but many say that McDonald's fries don't taste as good as they used to before 1990. That year, the company made a major behind-the-scenes shift in its use of cooking oil, ditching beef tallow and switching to vegetable oil. Nutritionally, the change seemed like a good idea. Beef tallow is high in saturated fats, while vegetable oil primarily contains unsaturated fat, making it a seemingly heart-healthier option. However, many customers felt betrayed when they noticed the change in flavor. The new fries lost savory depth, and yearnings for the original version quickly took root. In fact, restaurants where you can still order beef tallow fries remain in demand today. McDonald's did try to recapture the previous taste by adding beef flavoring to the oil blend, but critics still argue that the former fries were better. Yes, McDonald's really tried selling pizza, but there's a good reason why many people aren't aware of that. The largely untold truth of McDonald's pizza began in the mid-1980s, as part of an ambitious attempt to diversify the chain's menu. By the early 1990s, McPizza had expanded to hundreds of test locations. However, it wasn't long before the idea started to unravel. The process of making a McPizza took significantly more time than preparing burgers or fries, which slowed down operations in the chain's famously fast-paced kitchens. Many franchisees found the required ovens inconvenient to install. Extensive marketing efforts didn't help. The taste of McPizza is fondly recalled by some folks, but it never stood out in a crowded market among huge names like Pizza Hut and Domino's. By the early 2000s, McDonald's had pulled McPizza from most locations. People now remember McPizza as either a quirky novelty or a misguided experiment. The failed launch provides proof that although McDonald's is a colossal brand, not every type of food belongs under the golden arches. Read the original article on Mashed.

Yahoo

3 hours ago

• Yahoo

Bad ‘vibes' may be having a bigger impact on the economy now

There has been a disconnect in recent years between the so-called soft economic data and the hard data as weak readings on consumer confidence didn't always translate to lower payrolls or GDP. But that may be changing as key buffers that propped up spending are disappearing, according to NerdWallet senior economist Elizabeth Renter. Americans used to say one thing about their feelings on the economy and do something else with their actual dollars. But that may be changing. The disconnect between weak readings on consumer confidence versus solid employment, income and GDP data was previously described as a 'vibecession' by economist Kyla Scanlon, who first used the term in her 2022 Substack post. The last vibecession hit as inflation was at the highest levels in more than 40 years, while an aggressive rate-hiking campaign from the Federal Reserve spiked borrowing costs, making auto loans and mortgages more expensive. But consumers continued to spend as the labor market remained robust. And aside from a brief dip in GDP, the economy avoided a recession. Confidence surveys also increasingly reflected partisan differences more than the actual economy. Fast forward to 2025. Consumer sentiment collapsed after President Donald Trump launched his trade war, and GDP shrank again, skewed by a rush to buy imported goods ahead of higher tariffs. Still, payrolls have held up, and inflation hasn't been as affected by tariffs as feared. But while sentiment recovered a bit after Trump postponed his highest tariff rates, it's still 20% below December 2024 levels. 'Despite this month's notable improvement, consumers remain guarded and concerned about the trajectory of the economy,' the most recent University of Michigan survey said. At the same time, the Trump administration is slashing spending and jobs, with ripple effects reaching contractors and even certain real estate markets. Businesses that are uncertain about the economy and the direction of tariffs have slowed hiring. Student-loan delinquencies are up, and AI is eliminating many entry-level jobs that once went to newly minted college graduates. Then there's oil prices, which have jumped since Israel launched airstrikes on Iran. The cumulative effect is taking a toll. 'I don't think the U.S. consumer has grown numb or blind to the headlines and economic risk—over the past month we've seen some sentiment scores rise slightly, but we have to think about where they were rising from,' Elizabeth Renter, senior economist at NerdWallet, said in a note on Friday. 'A little bit better doesn't necessarily mean good, even if it might mean hopeful.' As a result, it's getting harder to dismiss the so-called soft data on the economy and focus instead on the hard data. That's as Fed Chairman Jerome Powell has said he and his fellow policymakers won't act on rates until the hard data on unemployment and inflation gives them a clear reason to. But the soft stuff may be leaking into the hard stuff. 'Unlike a few years ago, the 'vibes' now stand to have a greater impact on behavior, and thus the health of the economy,' Renter wrote. 'That's because unlike a few years ago, people don't have the luxury of easily stumbling into a better job or relying on excess savings and debt payment forbearances.' In fact, household debt is rebounding to pre-pandemic levels and beyond, eroding the ability to absorb an unexpected expense or job loss, she added. Bill Adams, chief economist at Comerica Bank, similarly drew a direct line between consumer sentiment and actual spending. Digging into the May retail sales report, he noted that consumers didn't just pull back on durable goods like electronics and cars, which fell after an earlier jump to get ahead of tariffs, they also reined in spending on daily expenses like groceries and restaurants. Spending at building material and garden supply stores also saw big drops, suggesting less residential investment in home improvements. 'With declines visible in unrelated categories, it looks like weak consumer confidence was to blame for the pullback in consumer spending last month,' Adams wrote. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Yahoo

3 hours ago

• Yahoo

Banks Drop the Climate Pretense and Follow the Money

Forget betrayal. Forget backsliding. What global banks are doing right now isn't a reversal of climate commitments—it's a long-overdue reality check. In 2024, they dumped nearly $900 billion into fossil fuel financing, according to the latest 'Banking on Climate Chaos' report. And while advocacy groups are clutching their pearls, investors are quietly nodding. Banks funding fossil fuels haven't lost their way—they've just stopped pretending. JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Barclays topped the charts, each tacking on over $10 billion in new fossil-fuel financing. JPM alone dropped $53.5 billion into oil, gas, and coal. That's not exactly chump change—and it's certainly not the behavior of an institution planning to kick the hydrocarbon habit anytime soon. Critics say this undermines climate targets. The reality? These banks were never designed to hit climate targets. Their mandate is to maximize returns. And with interest rates stabilizing, oil prices firming, and energy demand still rising globally, fossil fuel investments—messy, profitable, scalable—are back in vogue. Yes, some of these banks made splashy commitments during the ESG boom. They joined net-zero alliances. They funded glossy sustainability reports. But those were branding exercises, not binding strategies. The minute those commitments became a regulatory liability—or a political punchline—they started dissolving. Exhibit A: the exodus from the UN-sponsored Net-Zero Banking Alliance, timed nicely with President Trump's return to office. 'This reversal exemplifies the limits of voluntary commitments by financial firms whose primary goal is short-term profit,' the report complains. That's the closest the report comes to admitting the obvious: voluntary green finance was always a shaky foundation for fact, the Banking on Climate Chaos report makes that plain: banks committed $869 billion to fossil fuel companies in 2024 alone—up $162 billion from the year before. Nearly half of that financing came from U.S.-based banks, with JPMorgan Chase leading at $53.5 billion, followed by Bank of America ($46 billion) and Citigroup ($44.7 billion). Barclays was the top fossil fuel financier in Europe at $35.4 billion. Meanwhile, over $347 billion went to the top 100 companies actively expanding their fossil fuel not lost on anyone that some of the same banks being scolded for fossil fuel financing are still pouring money into renewables and climate tech. But here's the thing: they're not missionaries—they're market players. And right now, oil and gas projects are delivering stable returns, while clean tech continues to wrestle with cost overruns, supply chain headaches, and policy volatility. Banks are not public policy arms. They're capital allocators. And right now, capital is flowing toward fossil fuels for one simple reason: the energy transition isn't happening fast enough to make renewables the better bet. There's also the regulatory vacuum to consider. As long as no one is forcing banks to price in climate risk with real teeth, voluntary initiatives will keep folding under pressure. A report can scold them all it wants—until there's a law on the books or a tax on the balance sheet, banks will do what they've always done: follow the money. What's more, climate advocacy itself has lost coherence. The same groups that demand banks stop lending to fossil fuels often oppose mining permits for the metals and minerals needed for clean tech. That contradiction hasn't gone unnoticed in boardrooms. Banks, to their credit, have at least picked a lane: they'll fund what actually gets built. And for now, what's getting built—at scale, at speed, and at profit—is still largely oil and gas. As long as energy security, inflation, and political volatility remain unresolved, fossil fuels will continue to look like the safer bet. Not morally. But financially. So yes, banks are still backing fossil fuels. And yes, they're still issuing climate reports. But no, they're not confused. They're just honest—at least in their balance sheets. The climate movement may not like it, but until the economics change or the regulations bite, this isn't a scandal. It's a strategy. And for now, it seems to be working. By Julianne Geiger for More Top Reads From this article on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data