Hyperliquid Quagmire: Tripartite Game, Winner Takes All

By: blockbeats|2025/03/27 03:30:02
Share
copy
Original Title: "Hyperliquid Under Attack Again: A Multi-party Game of 'Praying Mantis Hunts the Cicada, But the Oriole is Behind'"
Original Source: DeepTech TechFlow

The crypto market's drama often unfolds in the dead of night.

On the night of March 26, the treasury of the decentralized exchange Hyperliquid faced a liquidation risk of up to $240 million due to price manipulation of the memecoin $JELLYJELLY.

Prior to this, a 50x leverage whale on Hyperliquid had previously intentionally liquidated its own long position through a similar tactic, putting the Hyperliquid treasury at risk of loss.

(See "50x Leverage Whale on Hyperliquid" Fully Liquidated, 16M ETH Long Position "Intentionally Liquidated")

This recent attack in the evening not only exposed the vulnerability of DeFi/DEX platforms in high-leverage trading but also became more complex due to the centralized exchange's (CEX) "active support" — resembling more of a 'Praying Mantis Hunts the Cicada, But the Oriole is Behind' hunt:

The attacker sought to profit through price manipulation, while the CEX aimed to attract users and traffic by listing popular tokens, indirectly undermining the fund security and reputation of rival DEXs.

If you are not familiar with Hyperliquid and the recent attack event, we have also gathered summaries and analyses from various parties, attempting to replay the full event, explain the attack principle in layman's terms, and discuss the motives of each party.

Event Timeline: From Short Position to Treasury Crisis

First, you need to know what Hyperliquid is.

Hyperliquid is a decentralized exchange based on its own Layer 1 blockchain, offering perpetual contract trading, aiming to combine the strengths of centralized and decentralized exchanges.

Its treasury, HLP, is a community-owned protocol treasury responsible for market-making and liquidation, allowing users to deposit to share profits and losses. According to Vaults | Hyperliquid Docs, HLP deposits have a 4-day lock-up period to support platform liquidity.

So, what was the entire process of the attack on the HLP treasury like?

Hyperliquid Quagmire: Tripartite Game, Winner Takes All

(Image Source: Ai Auntie Twitter Post)

· Opening a Short Position: According to AI Auntie's monitoring, an attacker opened a $JELLYJELLY short position worth 4.08 million US dollars on Hyperliquid using an address (such as 0xde9...f5c91). The opening price was $0.0095, with a collateral of 3.5 million USDC.

· Price Manipulation to Trigger Liquidation: Another address (such as Hc8gN...WRcwq) cooperated to sell spot $JELLYJELLY, suppressing the spot price to show unrealized gains on the short position. The attacker then withdrew 2.76 million USDC collateral, triggering liquidation, and the treasury took over the position.

· Price Pump to Exacerbate Losses: After liquidation, the attacker made two waves of intensive purchases of $JELLYJELLY at 21:01 and 21:45, driving up the price. According to CoinGecko data, the price surged by 230% in a short period, intensifying the treasury's unrealized losses on the short position.

· CEX Intervention: As long as JELLYJELLY keeps rising, the short position's losses will further deepen. At this point, Binance and OKX launched $JELLYJELLY perpetual contracts, attracting significant trading volume, pushing the price higher and worsening the treasury's losses.

· Treasury Faces Run-Off Risk: As of March 27, 2025, the treasury's unrealized losses amounted to 10.63 million US dollars, with a TVL decrease of around 20 million US dollars, resulting in a new TVL of 231 million US dollars (Hyperliquid dashboard). If the $JELLYJELLY price rises to $0.17, the treasury may face liquidation, incurring a loss of 240 million US dollars.

· Hyperliquid Delists JELLYJELLY Without Losses: Subsequently, Hyperliquid liquidated 3.92 billion JELLY tokens (equivalent to approximately 3.72 million US dollars) at a price of $0.0095, making a profit of 703,000 US dollars with no losses incurred. Additionally, after identifying evidence of suspicious market activity, Hyperliquid's validator set held a meeting and voted to delist the JELLY perpetual contract, with all users being fully compensated by the Hyper Foundation.

Price Manipulation and the "Assist" Effect of CEX

If things seem a bit blurry, why not understand a little about shorting and spot coordination, as well as the principle of CEX assistance.

Shorting is when an investor borrows an asset to sell, hoping to buy back at a lower price after the price drops to repay the loan and make a profit.

For example: Let's say the price of $JELLYJELLY is $0.10. An attacker borrows 1 million tokens and sells them, receiving $100,000. If the price drops to $0.05, they buy back for $50,000 to repay, making a profit of $50,000. But if the price rises to $0.15, they would have to buy back at $150,000, resulting in a loss of $50,000.

Hyperliquid's Liquidation Mechanism

At Hyperliquid, when a trader's margin is insufficient to cover potential losses, their position will be liquidated. According to Liquidations | Hyperliquid Docs, liquidation utilizes a mark price (combining external CEX prices and Hyperliquid order book status) to ensure a more robust liquidation. After liquidation, the HLP Treasury takes over the position and assumes the subsequent risk.

Now let's revisit the shorting and spot buying from the previous section:

· Attacker's logic: Price suppression -- Trigger liquidation -- Create losses

The attacker initiates a short position on $JELLYJELLY at $0.0095, while also selling spot to drive down the price, causing the short position to appear profitable.

What makes this manipulation so easy to achieve is that the attacker's target is the Memecoin $Jellyjelly, which has an order book depth gap of N times, making price manipulation much easier.

The attacker withdraws most of the collateral (e.g., 2.76 million USDC), making the short position unsustainable, triggering the liquidation mechanism, and the Hyperliquid Treasury must take over this short position.

The key is that the attacker then buys $JELLYJELLY, pushing the price to $0.16. The Treasury has to buy back $JELLYJELLY at a higher price to close the short position, causing losses to escalate.

Principle of CEX Assistance

By listing a perpetual contract for $JELLYJELLY, a CEX exhibits a clear "assistance" effect.

With its large user base and trading volume, once a CEX lists a perpetual contract for $JELLYJELLY, it attracts a large number of speculators. This significantly drives up the price of $JELLYJELLY, further exacerbating the Treasury's short position losses.

You can also tell from the reply below that the CEX's intention to intervene proactively is very clear.

Subsequent Impact

Although Hyperliquid swiftly took action to delist the $JELLYJELLY perpetual contract, which did not result in any actual loss of funds, this incident exposed the vulnerability of DeFi platforms when facing high-leverage trading and price manipulation.

More importantly, this event has raised widespread questions from the community regarding Hyperliquid's liquidation mechanism and decision-making transparency. Users are concerned about whether the platform can continue to maintain fund security in future similar events, while also questioning whether the platform truly achieves decentralized governance.

One post mentioned that the top 10 deposit addresses provide 15.9% of the funds, and if a whale were to withdraw, it would accelerate a vicious cycle, leading to a "bank run."

Although there was no fund loss, reputational damage may have already begun to manifest.

Is Hyperliquid really a DEX? If it is, why was it able to delist the token so easily? Is governance power concentrated in the hands of a few?

These community voices of doubt reflect DeFi users' concerns about platform governance transparency and community participation, while also presenting Hyperliquid with a new challenge: how to balance decentralization and efficiency while maintaining fund security.

As a DeFi platform, Hyperliquid relies on the community treasury and liquidation mechanism, but in the face of CEX's massive trading volume and market influence, it appears fragile. CEX can swiftly attract funds by listing popular tokens, influencing prices, while DeFi platforms may face crises due to lack of liquidity and price manipulation.

The Mantis Stalks the Cicada, unaware of the Oriole behind

This is a complex game where each participant holds different motives, attempting to take the lead in this price manipulation game.

Attacker: Profit-Driven Price Manipulator

The attacker's goal is to profit through price manipulation. Ai's post shows that the manipulating address holds 124 million $JELLYJELLY tokens (worth $4.86 million), possibly employing a strategy of pumping and dumping at a high price after the surge. They may be imitating the earlier 50x leverage whale operation, leveraging the price volatility of a low-liquidity memecoin.

Hyperliquid: Safeguarding Users and the Platform

Hyperliquid strives to protect user funds and platform stability. A community post mentioned that the platform may adjust the BTC and ETH leverage ratios to mitigate such risks. In the future, increasing margin requirements or enhancing the liquidation mechanism will be necessary to safeguard HLP community funds.

CEX: A "Precision Strike" in Competition

The quick response and listing actions of a centralized exchange (CEX) are not merely business decisions but likely also driven by competitive considerations.

By swiftly listing the $JELLYJELLY perpetual contract, the CEX attracted a large number of speculators to enter the market, driving up the token price. This action indirectly exacerbated the loss risk of the Hyperliquid treasury.

This precise market intervention may seem like profit chasing on the surface but could actually be a "precision strike" — amplifying Hyperliquid's liquidation crisis to weaken its position as a DeFi platform in the market competition.

From the motives above, it is evident that attackers do not always have the upper hand. CEX's market strategy leverages the attacker's behavior to a certain extent, further magnifying its market influence. The roles of hunter and prey constantly alternate in this multi-layered game, ultimately forming a complex web of interests.

For Hyperliquid, this is not only a financial security crisis but also a test of trust.

After all, this is not the first time such an incident has occurred. Previously, the 50x leverage whale took advantage of the Hyperliquid mechanism to "forcefully liquidate a 160,000 ETH long position" and withdrew a profit of $1.857 million...

Whether such an attack will happen again is unpredictable, but in this event, what is clear is:

The gap between the ideal of decentralization and reality still exists, and behind more efficient transactions lies a more cutthroat game.

Original Article Link

You may also like

a16z Leads $18M Seed Round for Catena Labs, Crypto Industry Bets on Stablecoin AI Payment

Traditional finance is still stuck in a "human-to-human" model, while Catena aims to achieve "AI-to-AI" interaction.

Never Underestimate the Significance of the US Stablecoin 'Infrastructure Bill'

Original Title: "Never Underestimate the Significance of the US Stablecoin 'Genius Act'"Original Author: 0xTodd, Partner at Nothing Research


If the US stablecoin bill, the "GENIUS Act," passes smoothly this time, its significance will be tremendous. I even think it's significant enough to enter the top five in Crypto history.



Although abbreviated as the GENIUS Act, which translates directly to the Genius Act, it is actually the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins, which translates to "Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Dollar Stablecoins."


The proposal is lengthy, with several key points summarized for everyone:


· Mandatory 1:1 Full Asset Backing: Assets include cash, demand deposits, and short-term US Treasuries. At the same time, misappropriation and rehypothecation are strictly prohibited.


· High-Frequency Disclosure: Reserve reports must be published at least monthly, introducing external audits.


· Licensing Requirement: Once the circulating market cap of the issuer's stablecoin exceeds $100 billion, it must transition into the federal regulatory system within a specified timeframe, adopting banking-grade regulation.


· Introduction of Custody: The custodian of the stablecoin and its reserve assets must be a regulated qualified financial institution.


· Clear Definition as a Payment Medium: The bill explicitly defines stablecoin as a new type of payment medium, primarily regulated by the banking regulatory system, rather than restricted by the securities or commodities regulatory system.


· Embracing Existing Stablecoins: A maximum 18-month grace period after the bill's enactment, aimed at encouraging existing stablecoin issuers (such as USDT, USDC, etc.) to promptly obtain licenses or become compliant.


After finishing the main content, let's talk about the significance of this matter with an excited heart.


Over the years, when others asked, "After working in the Crypto industry for 16 years, what application have you created?"


In the future, you can confidently tell others—Stablecoins.


First, Clearing Concerns is a Prerequisite


Some people have held opposing views. In the past, people's impression of stablecoins was that they were an opaque black box. Every few months, there would be FUD — whether Tether's assets were frozen or Circle had a significant black hole deficit.


In fact, if you think about it, Tether easily rakes in billions of dollars a year just from the interest on those underlying government bonds. Circle, slightly less, also made a $1.7 billion profit last year.


They basically made money while standing there. From a motivational standpoint, they have no malicious intentions. In fact, they are the most eager for compliance.


Now, this opaque black box will become a transparent white box.


In the past, the only complaint was that Tether's funds might have been frozen by the United States. Now, they will be directly placed into U.S. compliant custodial institutions, with high-frequency disclosures, so you can rest assured.


【No need to worry about a rug pull】 is such a huge advantage—I think especially all Crypto people understand this.


Second, Mastering the Standard is Very Important


Stablecoins were once almost on the verge of being overtaken by CBDCs. In any country, if a central bank digital currency really exists, it is highly likely not built on a blockchain, at most it is built on some internal central bank consortium chain, which to be honest, is meaningless.


When CBDCs were at their peak, that was the most dangerous time for stablecoins.


If CBDCs had become a reality back then, stablecoins today would have been relentlessly suppressed into a dark corner, and blockchain would only be able to play a minimal role.


The remaining half-dead stablecoins would even have to learn the standards of central bank digital currencies, completely relinquishing their standard-setting power.


And now, stablecoins have won (or are about to).


Instead, everyone should learn the 【Blockchain + Token】 standard.


Nowadays, many blockchains actually have no meaningful applications on top, only stablecoin transfers. For example, with Aptos, the only scenario I use Aptos for is transfers between Binance and OKX.


And now, stablecoins will be legislated, what does that mean?


That's right, blockchain will become the only standard.


In the future, every stablecoin user will be the first to learn how to use a wallet.


As an aside, I actually think Ethereum's concerted push for EIP-7702 is quite forward-thinking. While other chains are all about memes, thank you Ethereum for sticking to account abstraction.



EIP-7702 is about Account Abstraction, which can support, for example:


· Social Account Registration Wallet

· Paying GAS with Native Coin

· And more


This paves the way for future new users to heavily use stablecoins, solving the last-mile problem.


Third, Deposit Enters a New Era


Furthermore, once stablecoins receive legislative support, deposits and withdrawals will become even easier.


Let's imagine a scenario: previously, hindered by the gray nature of stablecoins, but after the bill passes, many traditional brokerages can support stablecoins themselves. The money from a US stock investor can be converted into stablecoins in minutes and instantly deposited into Coinbase. Believe it or not.



Let's imagine another scenario: if the brilliant bill smoothly passes through the House of Representatives, next, you will see:


Due to the extremely lucrative nature of this trading, existing stablecoin leaders and newly entering traditional giants will crazily start promoting their stablecoin products.


And an outsider, due to these promotions, will start using stablecoins. And then one day, after finding out that the wallet account has been created, will explore Bitcoin inside. Is mining Bitcoin difficult?


Stablecoins are a huge Trojan horse. The moment you start using stablecoins, you unwittingly step half a foot into the Crypto world.


Fourth, Conclusion


As a large reservoir for digesting US debt, although stablecoins cannot directly absorb debt, they at least provide ammunition for the US debt secondary market. These functions are quite important, and slowly, stablecoins are becoming a part of the US debt market's body. Therefore, once the US legislation is passed and experiences the benefits, there is no turning back.


And, we are also confident that stablecoins are indeed one of the great innovations in our industry. People who have used stablecoins will find it hard to return to the traditional cash-banking system.


Once the bill is passed, users can't go back. In the future, concerns are about to be resolved, standards will be mastered, and the era of large deposits seems to be on the horizon.


Original Article Link

Pharos, deeply integrated with AntChain, is about to launch. How can we get involved?

What is the relationship between the $8 million funded NewChain and Ant, and how will they interact?

$COIN Joins S&P 500, but Coinbase Isn't Celebrating

On May 13, S&P Dow Jones Indices announced that Coinbase would officially replace Discover Financial Services in the S&P 500 on May 19. While other companies like Block and MicroStrategy, closely tied to Bitcoin, were already part of the S&P 500, Coinbase became the first cryptocurrency exchange whose primary business is in the index. This also signifies that cryptocurrency is gradually moving from the fringes to the mainstream in the U.S.



On the day of the announcement, Coinbase's stock price surged by 23%, surpassing the $250 mark. However, just 3 days later, Coinbase was hit by two consecutive events: a hack where employees were bribed to steal customer data and a demand for a $20 million ransom, and an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) into the authenticity of its claim of having over 100 million "verified users" in its securities filings and marketing materials. These two events acted as mini-bombs, and at the time of writing, Coinbase's stock had already dropped by over 7.3%.


Coincidentally, Discover Financial Services, being replaced by Coinbase, can also be considered the "Coinbase" of the previous payment era. Discover is a U.S.-based digital banking and payment services company headquartered in Illinois, founded in 1960. Its payment network, Discover Network, is the fourth largest payment network apart from Visa, Mastercard, and American Express.


In April, after the approval of the acquisition of Discover by the sixth-largest U.S. bank, Capital One, this well-established digital banking company of over 60 years smoothly handed over its S&P 500 "seat" to this emerging cryptocurrency "bank." This unexpected coincidence also portrayed the handover between the new and old eras in Coinbase's entry into the S&P 500, resembling a relay race scene. However, this relay baton also brought Coinbase's accumulated "external troubles and internal strife" to a tipping point.


Side Effects of ETFs


Over the past decade, cryptocurrency exchanges have been the most stable "profit machines." They play a role in providing liquidity to the entire industry and rely on trading fees to sustain their operations. However, with the comprehensive rollout of ETF products in the U.S. market, this profit model is facing unprecedented challenges. As the leader in the "American stack," with over 80% of its business coming from the U.S., Coinbase is most affected by this.



Starting from the approval of Bitcoin and Ethereum spot ETFs, traditional financial capital has significantly onboarded users and funds that originally belonged to exchanges in a more cost-effective, compliant, and transparent manner. The transaction fee revenue of cryptocurrency exchanges has started to decline, and this trend may further intensify in the coming months.


According to Coinbase's 2024 Q4 financial report, the platform's total trading revenue was $417 million, a 45% year-on-year decrease. The contribution of BTC and ETH's trading revenue dropped from 65% in the same period last year to less than 50%.


This decline is not a result of a decrease in market enthusiasm. In fact, since the approval of the Bitcoin ETF in January 2024, the inflow of BTC into the U.S. market has continued to reach new highs, with asset management giants like BlackRock and Fidelity rapidly expanding their management scale. Data shows that BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) alone has surpassed $17 billion in assets under management. As of mid-May 2025, the cumulative net inflow of 11 major institutional Bitcoin spot ETFs on the market has exceeded $41.5 billion, with a total net asset value of $1214.69 billion, accounting for approximately 5.91% of the total Bitcoin market capitalization.


Chart showing the trend of net outflows for Grayscale among the 11 institutions


Institutional investors and some retail investors are shifting towards ETF products, partly due to compliance and tax considerations. On one hand, ETFs have much lower trading costs compared to cryptocurrency exchanges. While Coinbase's spot trading fee rate varies annually in a tiered manner but averages around 1.49%, for example, the management fee for IBIT ETF is only 0.25%, and the majority of ETF institution fees fluctuate around 0.15% to 0.25%.



In other words, the more rational users are, the more likely they are to move from exchanges to ETF products, especially for investors aiming for long-term holdings.


According to multiple sources, several institutions, including VanEck and Grayscale, have submitted applications to the SEC for a Solana (SOL) ETF, with some institutions also planning to submit an XRP ETF proposal. Once approved, this may trigger a new round of fund migration. According to a report submitted by Coinbase to the SEC, as of April, the platform's trading revenue from XRP and Solana accounted for 18% and 10%, nearly one-third of the platform's fee revenue.



However, the Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs passed in 2024 also reduced the fees for these two tokens on Coinbase from 30% and 15% to 26% and 10%, respectively. If the SOL and XRP ETFs are approved, it will further undermine the core fee revenue of exchanges like Coinbase.


The expansion of ETF products is gradually weakening the financial intermediary status of cryptocurrency exchanges. From their original roles as matchmakers and clearers to now gradually becoming mere "on-ramps and off-ramps" for funds, exchanges are seeing their marginal value squeezed by ETFs.


Robinhood Takes a Stand, Traditional Brokerages Join the Fray


On May 12, 2025, SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins gave a keynote speech at the Tokenization and Cryptocurrency Working Group roundtable. The theme of his speech revolved around "It is a new day at the SEC," where he indicated that the SEC would not approach enforcement and regulation the same way as before but would instead pave the way for cryptocurrency assets in the U.S. market.



With signs of cryptocurrency compliance such as the SEC's "NEW DAY" declaration, an increasing number of traditional brokerages are attempting to enter the cryptocurrency industry. One of the most representative cases is the well-known U.S. brokerage Robinhood, which began expanding its crypto business in 2018. By the time of its IPO in 2021, Robinhood's crypto business revenue accounted for over 50% of the company, with a significant boost from the Dogecoin "moonshot" promoted by Musk.


In Q1 2025 earnings report, Robinhood showcased strong growth, especially in revenue from cryptocurrency and options trading. Fueled by Trump's Memecoin, cryptocurrency-related revenue reached $250 million, nearly doubling year-over-year. Consequently, Robinhood Gold subscription users reached 3.5 million, a 90% increase from the previous year, with the rapid growth of Robinhood Gold providing the company with a stable source of income.



Meanwhile, RobinHood is actively pursuing acquisitions in the cryptocurrency space. In 2024, it announced a $2 billion acquisition of the long-standing European cryptocurrency exchange Bitstamp. Additionally, Canada's largest cryptocurrency CEX, WonderFi, which recently went public on the Toronto Stock Exchange, also announced its integration with RobinHood Crypto. After obtaining virtual asset licenses in the UK, Canada, Singapore, and other markets, RobinHood has taken a proactive approach in the compliant cryptocurrency trading market.



Furthermore, an increasing number of brokerage firms are exploring the same path. Futu Securities, Tiger Brokers, and others are also dipping their toes into cryptocurrency trading, with some having applied for or obtained the VA license from the Hong Kong SFC. Although their user bases are currently small, traditional brokerages have a natural advantage in user trust, regulatory licenses, and low fee structures. This could pose a threat to native cryptocurrency platforms in the future.



User Data Breach: Is Coinbase Still Secure?


In April 2025, security researchers discovered that some Coinbase user data was leaked on the dark web. While the platform initially responded by attributing it to a "technical misinformation," it still raised concerns among users regarding its security and privacy protection. Just two days before Dow Jones Indexes announced Coinbase's addition to the S&P 500 Index, on May 11, 2025, Coinbase received an email from an unknown threat actor claiming to have obtained customer account information and internal documents, demanding a $20 million ransom to keep the data private. Subsequent investigations confirmed the data breach.


Cybercriminals obtained the data by bribing overseas customer service agents and support staff, mainly in "non-U.S. regions such as India." These agents abused their access to Coinbase's internal customer support system and stole customer data. As early as February this year, blockchain detective ZachXBT revealed on X platform that between December 2024 and January 2025, Coinbase users lost over $65 million to social engineering scams, with the actual amount potentially higher.


Among the victims was a well-known figure, 67-year-old Ed Suman, an established artist in the art world for nearly two decades, having been involved in the creation of artworks such as Jeff Koons' "Balloon Dog" sculpture. Earlier this year, he fell victim to an impersonation scam involving fake Coinbase customer support, resulting in a loss of over $2 million in cryptocurrency. ZachXBT critiqued Coinbase for its inadequate handling of such scams, noting that other major exchanges have not faced similar issues and recommending Coinbase to enhance its security measures.


Amidst a series of ongoing social engineering incidents, although there has not been any impact on user assets at the technical level so far, it has raised concerns among many retail and institutional investors. Especially institutions holding massive assets on Coinbase. Just considering the U.S. BTC ETF institutions, as of mid-May 2025, they collectively hold nearly 840,000 BTC, and 75% of these are custodied by Coinbase. If we price BTC at $100,000, this amount reaches a staggering $63 billion, which is equivalent to the nominal GDP of two Iceland in the year 2024.


Visualization: ChatGPT, Source: Farside


In addition, Coinbase Custody also serves over 300 institutional clients, including hedge funds, family offices, pension funds, and endowments. As of the Q1 2025 financial report, Coinbase's total assets under management (including institutional and retail clients) reached $404 billion. The specific amount of institutional custodied assets was not explicitly disclosed in the latest report, but it should still be over 50% based on the Q4 2024 report.


Visualization: ChatGPT


Once this security barrier is breached, not only could the rate of user attrition far exceed expectations, but more importantly, institutional trust in it would undermine the foundation of its business. Therefore, after a hacking event, Coinbase's stock price plummeted significantly.


CEXs are All in Self-Rescue Mode


Facing a decline in spot trading fee revenue, Coinbase is also accelerating its transformation, attempting to find growth opportunities in derivatives and emerging assets. Coinbase acquired a stake in the options platform Deribit at the end of 2024 and announced the official launch of perpetual contract products in 2025. This acquisition fills in Coinbase's gap in options trading and its relatively small global market share.



Deribit has a strong presence in non-U.S. markets, especially in Asia and Europe. The acquisition has enabled Coinbase to gain a dominant position in bitcoin and ethereum options trading on Deribit, accounting for approximately 80% of the global options trading volume, with daily trading volume remaining above $2 billion.


Meanwhile, 80-90% of Deribit's customer base consists of institutional investors, with their professionalism and liquidity in the Bitcoin and Ethereum options market highly favored by institutions. Coinbase's compliance advantage, coupled with its already robust institutional ecosystem, makes it even more suitable. By using institutions as an entry point, it can face the squeeze from giants like Binance and OKX in the derivatives market.



Facing a similar dilemma is Kraken, which is attempting to replicate Binance Futures' model in non-U.S. markets. Since the derivatives market relies more on professional users, fee rates are relatively higher and stickiness is stronger, making it a significant source of revenue for exchanges. In the first half of 2025, Kraken completed the acquisition of TradeStation Crypto and a futures exchange, aiming to build a complete derivatives trading ecosystem to hedge the risk of declining spot transaction fee income.


With the surge of Memecoin in 2024, Binance, OKX, and various CEX platforms began massively listing small-market-cap, highly volatile tokens to activate active trading users. Due to the wealth effect and trading activity of Memecoins, Coinbase was also forced to join the battle, successively listing popular tokens from the Solana ecosystem such as BOOK OF MEME and Dogwifhat. Although these coins are controversial, they are frequently traded, with fee rates several times higher than mainstream coins, serving as a "blood-boosting" method for spot trading.


However, due to its status as a publicly traded company, this practice is a riskier endeavor for Coinbase. Even in the current crypto-friendly environment, the SEC is still investigating whether tokens like SOL, ADA, and SAND constitute securities.


In addition to the forced transformation strategies carried out by the aforementioned CEXs, they are also starting to lay out RWAs and the most talked-about stablecoin payment fields, such as the PYUSD launched through a collaboration between Coinbase and Paypal, Coinbase's support for the Euro stablecoin EURC by Circle that complies with EU MiCA regulatory requirements, or the USD1 launched through a collaboration between Binance and WIFL. In the increasingly crowded trading field, many CEXs have shifted their focus from just the trading market to the application field.


The golden age of transaction fees has quietly ended, and the second half of the crypto exchange platform game has silently begun.


Arthur Hayes: Why I'm Betting on ETH While the Market Is Obsessed with SOL

"I personally have also allocated 20% to gold, expecting the price of gold to potentially rise to $10,000-20,000 by the end of this market cycle."

CryptoPunks Changes Hands Twice, Did the Originator of NFTs Finally Find Its "Forever Home" This Time?

The original NFT pioneer CryptoPunks has once again officially changed ownership after being sold to the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) developer Yuga Labs.

Popular coins

Latest Crypto News

Read more