FalconX 冲击上市中,加密经纪第一股会复制 Circle 还是 Coinbase?

链捕手Publicado a 2025-06-20Actualizado a 2025-06-20

作者:叮当,Odaily 星球日报

 

2025 年 6 月 5 日,稳定币巨头 Circle 正式在纽约证券交易所挂牌上市,发行价定为每股 31 美元,显著高于早期预估 24 ~ 26 美元区间。而更令人瞩目的是,截至目前,CRCL 盘后价格一度攀升至 214 美元,市值突破 480 亿美元,短短十余日内,累计涨幅接近 600% 。与此同时,SBET、SRM 等新一批加密概念股也表现强劲。(详情参考:《加密牛市,全在美股:Circle 从 31 美元到 165 美元的十天》)

在美国监管环境持续改善、机构资金加速入场的背景下,加密企业「奔赴华尔街」的潮流正在全面提速。按主营业务定位划分,交易所、稳定币、矿业均已有代表,而本次加密主经纪商 FalconX 被曝筹备年内上市计划。这家估值 80 亿美元、服务对象为全球机构投资者的公司,正试图抓住这波「机构化浪潮」的时间窗口,抢占资本市场先机。

从硅谷出发,FalconX 如何跑出加密主经纪路线?

FalconX 诞生于 2018 年的硅谷,一个擅长将科技叙事转化为资本神话的地方。联合创始人 Prabhakar Reddy 拥有深厚的跨境金融基础设施背景,其早期创办的 OpenFX 曾专注于外汇市场技术服务,也为 FalconX 奠定了坚实的交易系统基础。

不同于面向散户的加密交易所,FalconX 自创立之初便将目标锁定在机构客户,明确定位为「加密主经纪商」(Prime Broker),专注于为专业投资者提供全方位服务,其业务涵盖三大核心板块:

  • 聚合多家交易所流动性与智能订单路由,实现高效撮合与成本优化;
  • 提供结构化融资与加密资产抵押贷款服务,满足机构灵活融资需求;
  • 拓展资产管理与衍生品策略产品,打造机构投资组合的完整解决方案。

截至 2025 年,FalconX 已在纽约、伦敦、新加坡、硅谷、班加罗尔、瓦莱塔等七地设立全球办事处,基本完成机构服务网络的初步搭建。

FalconX 的团队则融合了传统金融与科技领域的双重基因,核心成员来自摩根大通、花旗、PayPal、Kraken、Affirm 与微软等顶尖企业,兼具严谨的风控能力与卓越的技术执行力。

2022 年,公司完成 1.5 亿美元融资,估值跃升至 80 亿美元,背后投资方包括 GIC、Tiger Global、Accel、Lightspeed 等知名机构资本,为其机构青睐的品牌形象再添砝码。

加速并购扩张,FalconX 的 2025 

进入 2025 年,FalconX 显著加快了业务扩张的步伐,围绕衍生品市场、机构融资与资产管理三大板块展开重点布局,战略意图日益清晰:

2025 年 1 月,收购衍生品初创公司 Arbelos Markets,进一步增强其在结构性产品设计与风险对冲方面的能力;

2025 年 3 月,与 StoneX 合作,在芝加哥商品交易所(CME)推出 Solana 期货产品,并完成首笔大宗交易,同时成为 CME 加密衍生品的主要流动性提供商;

2025 年 5 月,与 Cantor Fitzgerald 合作,完成首笔比特币支持的融资交易,并计划为机构客户提供高达 20 亿美元的融资额度。同期,与全球银行 Standard Chartered 建立战略合作伙伴关系,借助其银行与外汇服务能力,进一步打通传统金融与加密市场之间的通道;

2025 年 6 月,收购资产管理公司 Monarq Asset Management 的多数股权(前 LedgerPrime,原属 FTX 生态),扩展 FalconX 在资产管理与量化交易领域的产品能力与客户触达。

通过一系列并购、产品推出与战略合作,FalconX 正在从单一交易撮合的「经纪商」角色,逐步转型为覆盖多资产、多服务模块的平台型金融服务商。这些举措不仅丰富了其业务矩阵,也为即将到来的 IPO 筹备构建了更具说服力的资本叙事。

为何此时上市?IPO 背后的资本逻辑与节奏控制

消息人士透露,FalconX 已与投行顾问展开非正式接洽,评估 IPO 的可行性,并可能于年内提交上市申请。

选择此刻启动上市筹备,并非仓促之举。过去几个月,加密行业发生了一系列标志性事件。

Circle 成功登陆纽交所,上市十余日市值飙升至 480 亿美元,远超市场预期。这一壮举极大提振了投资者信心,也迅速改变了资本市场对加密企业的风险定价逻辑;Kraken、Gemini、Bullish 等头部平台也纷纷传出 IPO 筹备计划,资本窗口正在逐步开启。

与此同时,监管环境出现微妙变化。新一届美国政府释放出更为友好的信号,SEC 态度趋于温和,为加密企业提供了更明确的预期空间。机构客户的需求结构也在悄然转变,从单一交易走向结构化融资、衍生品管理与综合风险配置,主经纪商的地位日益凸显。

种种信号交织之下,FalconX 似乎找准了自己的时点。不是作为追随者,而是试图成为这场制度化周期中的先行者。对 FalconX 而言,IPO 不仅是一次筹资机会,更是一次品牌重塑与战略跃迁的关键节点:从「高成长初创公司」跃升为「全球加密金融基础设施提供者」,公开市场的认可将成为其可信度的重要背书。

当然,窗口虽开,但不会长久。Circle 点燃的情绪红利仍在延续,而资本市场的节奏向来瞬息万变。若 FalconX 无法在此轮周期内顺利入场,下一次窗口的开启可能需等待数年乃至一个完整的市场周期。

截至目前,FalconX 仍未正式聘请投资银行承销,这是启动上市流程的常规第一步,意味着 IPO 尚处于筹备初期,仍存在诸多不确定性。

潜在隐忧:组织调整与高管离职潮

值得注意的是,FalconX 在高速扩张的同时,也面临组织管理上的挑战。

2025 年 3 月,公司被曝出现高管密集离职,包括欧洲区负责人、信贷主管、总法律顾问及首席合规官等十余位员工先后出走。据传此次人事波动涉及裁员与主动辞职,公司对此未作公开回应。

在快速成长的公司中,人事调整并不罕见。然而,对一家正谋求 IPO 的企业而言,治理结构的稳定性与高管团队的连续性,往往被投资者视为企业成熟度与风险管理能力的重要指标。

这也提醒市场:IPO 的考验不仅在于营收增长与客户扩张,更在于公司能否在资本、组织、人事与合规等多个维度展现出稳定、可持续的「全栈能力」。

小结:华尔街敞门,加密主经纪的下半场开局

FalconX 能否顺利敲响纳斯达克的钟声,仍有待更多官方信号释放。但可以肯定的是,其一系列战略动作已清晰勾勒出未来轮廓:

在 Circle 打开加密 IPO 信心窗口之后,FalconX 正试图作为「加密机构化浪潮的下一颗落子」进入公众视野。它的角色,不只是某一家公司的估值故事,更是整个加密行业从边缘走向主流的象征转折。

它能否复制 Circle 的资本奇迹?又是否能避开 Coinbase 曾在 2021 年遭遇的估值高点与币价下滑共振?这些问题的答案,也许将在其即将披露的招股书中逐步显现。

但可以确定的是:在这场资本、信任与制度协同的新周期中,FalconX 已经不再是旁观者。

Lecturas Relacionadas

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

According to an analysis published by ZeroDrift on June 22, 2026, attackers have stolen approximately $16.9 million over 40 days from five deprecated but still operational smart contracts across various blockchains. The primary issue is not a specific vulnerability but the incomplete decommissioning of legacy contracts. These "zombie contracts" often retain economic value, operational permissions, and callable functions, making them prime targets long after teams cease active development. The most significant loss occurred at DxSale, where an old locker contract lost about $7.3 million due to a forgotten control path becoming accessible again. Other affected projects include TrustedVolumes (~$5.87M), Raydium's legacy AMM pool (~$1.34M), Aztec Connect (~$2.28M), and Huma Finance V1 pool (~$101k). These incidents involved diverse systems—RFQ settlement, credit pools, liquidity lockers, AMMs—demonstrating the widespread nature of the risk. The analysis highlights that automated tools are lowering the cost for attackers to systematically scan for these long-tail targets, which have public code and weaker monitoring. In contrast, defensive practices for contract retirement remain underdeveloped. While the DeFi industry has mature audit processes for new deployments, it lacks strict protocols for securely sunsetting old contracts, which only become truly "retired" after all funds, permissions, authorizations, and trust assumptions are removed.

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbitHace 50 min(s)

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbitHace 50 min(s)

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Title: STRC Deeply Discounted, mNAV Falls Below Break-even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Redefined The recent volatility in MSTR and STRC highlights the need to reassess the core business model of Bitcoin reserve companies. These entities function more like leveraged, single-asset banks rather than software/tech firms. Consequently, they should be valued using banking metrics, not based on their total Bitcoin holdings. The key valuation metric is mNAV (market net asset value), akin to a price-to-book ratio. It compares the company's market capitalization to the equity value of its Bitcoin holdings after deducting all senior debt and preferred equity (like STRC). As of June 24, Strategy's mNAV was 1.10x. The focus should be on "net Bitcoin per share" (the Bitcoin claim per share after senior claims) and its growth rate, equivalent to a bank's book value and return on assets. Given STRC's 19% discount to its $100 par value (yielding 14.2%), issuing new MSTR equity at the current price to buy more Bitcoin is inefficient. It slightly dilutes the widely watched "total Bitcoin per share" metric while providing minimal improvement to the more critical "net Bitcoin per share." The article analyzes four potential uses for $1 billion in new equity: 1. **Buy Bitcoin:** Least effective. Improves net Bitcoin per share only marginally while diluting total Bitcoin per share. 2. **Repurchase STRC:** Most effective for balance sheet repair. The discount creates immediate value, increasing net Bitcoin per share by 1.0%, reducing debt burden, and lowering future dividend obligations. 3. **Boost Cash Reserves:** Dramatically improves the "cash coverage ratio" for STRC dividends from 9.8 months to 16.8 months, a crucial liquidity metric in a tightening funding environment. 4. **50/50 Split (STRC buyback & cash):** A balanced approach improving all key metrics. Strategy's own Q1 report indicates its internal break-even mNAV for profitable equity issuance to buy Bitcoin is 1.22x. With the current mNAV at 1.10x, such a move would be value-destructive. The core assumptions of its previous expansion model—issuing STRC at par and maintaining ample dividend coverage—have broken down. The recommended path is to use new capital to optimize core financial health: repurchasing discounted STRC and/or bolstering cash reserves. This would repair the balance sheet, signal liquidity strength, support STRC's price, lower its yield, and potentially reopen the par-value issuance channel. The current STRC discount represents a low-cost capital opportunity to restart this positive cycle. Bitcoin reserve companies must be evaluated as banks, focusing on book value, leverage, and liquidity resilience.

Foresight NewsHace 52 min(s)

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Foresight NewsHace 52 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片