Crypto.com says market maker boosts liquidity, denies trading edge on customers

cointelegraphPublicado em 2025-12-23Última atualização em 2025-12-23

Resumo

Crypto.com is establishing an internal market-making team to support its expansion into prediction markets, a move it states is fully compliant with regulations and designed to boost liquidity. The company denies its internal team has any unfair advantage, asserting it does not get a "first look" at customer orders or proprietary data. It emphasized that all market makers operate under the same rules to ensure fairness and that proprietary trading is not a revenue source. The practice is common among competitors like Kalshi and Polymarket, which also use market makers to provide liquidity.

Cryptocurrency exchange Crypto.com is building an internal market-making team as part of its expansion into prediction markets, a move the company says is fully aligned with federal regulations and intended to improve liquidity, even as market-making in outcome-based trading continues to draw scrutiny.

Bloomberg reported Tuesday that the exchange is recruiting for a new role on its market-making desk, citing a job posting for a “quant trader” who would help buy and sell contracts tied to the outcomes of sporting events on Crypto.com’s prediction platform.

The report has drawn attention to the practice of exchanges facilitating trading against customer orders, a structure that can raise questions about conflicts of interest as prediction markets gain traction across both crypto and traditional finance.

In a statement to Cointelegraph, a Crypto.com spokesperson said the company’s internal trading team is fully disclosed to the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission and makes markets across its North American derivatives business.

“The bottom line for customers is [that] more competition and liquidity on the platform creates a better overall experience,” the spokesperson said, adding that internal and external market makers operate under the same rules to ensure market fairness and integrity.

“No market maker at Crypto.com gets a ‘first look’, and our internal market maker does not have access to proprietary data or customer order flow before other market makers or market participants,” the spokesperson said.

They added that Crypto.com does not rely on proprietary trading as a revenue source. “We have a simple business model providing our retail customers access to digital assets for a fee, while staying risk neutral," they said.

Related: Phantom taps Kalshi to offer regulated prediction markets in wallet

Market-making isn’t unique to Crypto.com

Crypto.com is not the only prediction-market operator to rely on market makers to support liquidity.

The Bloomberg report noted that competitors such as Kalshi and Polymarket also use professional trading companies or dedicated liquidity providers to facilitate trading on their platforms.

Kalshi, which operates a federally regulated event-contract exchange, relies on designated market makers rather than a purely peer-to-peer order book, and those arrangements have largely been public. It has been reported that quantitative trading company Susquehanna International Group has provided market-making services to Kalshi since 2024, helping supply liquidity as trading volumes surged.

Polymarket, a decentralized prediction market that drew widespread attention during the US presidential election for accurately predicting the outcome, is also building an internal market-making unit, according to Bloomberg.

*Polymarket’s monthly volumes began to surge in the run-up to the 2024 US presidential election. Source:* *Dune*

Related: DraftKings eyes crypto offerings as it expands into prediction markets

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the primary reason Crypto.com is building an internal market-making team, according to the company?

ACrypto.com states that building an internal market-making team is intended to improve liquidity and create a better overall experience for customers, and it is fully aligned with federal regulations.

QHow does Crypto.com address concerns about conflicts of interest and unfair advantages for its internal market maker?

ACrypto.com states that its internal market maker does not get a 'first look' at proprietary data or customer order flow before other market participants, and all market makers operate under the same rules to ensure fairness and integrity.

QBesides Crypto.com, which other prediction-market operators use market makers to support liquidity, as mentioned in the article?

AThe article mentions that competitors such as Kalshi and Polymarket also use professional trading companies or dedicated liquidity providers to facilitate trading on their platforms.

QWhat is Crypto.com's stated business model regarding proprietary trading and revenue?

ACrypto.com states that it does not rely on proprietary trading as a revenue source and has a simple business model of providing retail customers access to digital assets for a fee while staying risk neutral.

QWhich quantitative trading company has been reported to provide market-making services to Kalshi since 2024?

AQuantitative trading company Susquehanna International Group has been reported to provide market-making services to Kalshi since 2024.

Leituras Relacionadas

No Sales Team, $20 Million in Revenue: How Did AI Employee Viktor Win Over 30,000 Companies?

The AI employee Viktor, developed by a team with DeepMind background, has achieved $20 million in annual revenue without a traditional sales team, serving over 30,000 companies. Its core innovation lies in positioning itself as a "Tier 3 AI Coworker" capable of "end-to-end execution and delivery of results," moving beyond the "draft and wait for human completion" model of typical AI assistants. Users can simply mention Viktor in Slack or Microsoft Teams using natural language commands, and it autonomously performs tasks like pulling sales data from a CRM, generating reports, or even cross-tool operations like creating board meeting PPTs by aggregating data from six different sources. Key to its growth is a pure Product-Led Growth (PLG) model, eliminating complex implementation cycles and per-seat licensing. Instead, it charges based on task credits or consumption, lowering the trial barrier with a $100 free credit offer and no credit card required. This enabled viral, bottom-up adoption within organizations. Viktor's interaction paradigm removes the barrier of prompt engineering, allowing non-technical employees to delegate complex workflows seamlessly. It also features proactive, automated task execution (e.g., overnight bookkeeping, scheduled reports) based on triggers, effectively embedding AI as an automated "process layer" within business operations. However, its expansion into Microsoft Teams—a platform with 320 million users—highlights challenges. Large enterprises require stringent IT compliance, security reviews (e.g., SOC 2), and governance, potentially hindering the frictionless, user-driven adoption that succeeded in Slack. Additionally, the "black box" nature of its autonomous decision-making raises concerns about operational risks, data integrity, and the need for robust audit logs and permission controls. Balancing efficiency gains with security and trust remains a critical hurdle for Viktor and similar AI agents aiming to become core enterprise infrastructure.

marsbitHá 18m

No Sales Team, $20 Million in Revenue: How Did AI Employee Viktor Win Over 30,000 Companies?

marsbitHá 18m

Interview with CoreWeave Co-founders: AI Demand Seems to 'Intensify' Every Day

An Interview with CoreWeave Executives: AI Demand Seems to 'Intensify' Every Day In an interview, CoreWeave executives highlight a structural shift in AI infrastructure demand. While GPU availability remains crucial, the primary bottlenecks are evolving to include powered data center shells, skilled labor (like electricians), and complex supply chain execution. They note that AI demand, particularly for agentic AI and reasoning models, continues to intensify daily, accelerating since Q1 2024. This demand is driving a need for more balanced infrastructure. CoreWeave is redesigning data centers to allocate more space for storage and CPUs alongside GPUs, with significant interest in Nvidia's upcoming Vera CPUs. The company, serving top AI labs and hyperscalers, emphasizes its client-driven model, building precisely to customer specifications. CoreWeave attributes its competitive edge to proven execution, performance, and a mature platform for AI deployment. Pricing is structured to pass component cost increases (e.g., for HBM memory) to customers, protecting margins. Looking ahead, they anticipate Vera Rubin platform deployments to begin meaningfully in late 2025, with a major ramp throughout 2027, mirroring the Blackwell (GB) series rollout pattern. The competition is shifting from merely acquiring chips to holistic engineering and delivery capability.

marsbitHá 36m

Interview with CoreWeave Co-founders: AI Demand Seems to 'Intensify' Every Day

marsbitHá 36m

Manus Buyback Plan Emerges: Chinese Investors Plan to Repurchase Equity with $2 Billion, Path to Hong Kong IPO Becomes Clearer

According to a report by The Information, early Chinese investors of Manus, including Tencent, Sequoia Capital China, and ZhenFund, are planning to repurchase the company from Meta for $2 billion—the same price Meta paid in its acquisition last December. This move is a direct response to the Chinese government's prohibition of the foreign acquisition in April. As part of the repurchase plan, Manus is considering establishing a Sino-foreign joint venture within China. This structure is seen as a way to ensure regulatory compliance for its Chinese investors and to pave the way for a future IPO in Hong Kong. Notably, U.S. investor Benchmark will not participate in the buyback, which will concentrate ownership even more among Chinese capital. Since its acquisition by Meta, Manus's business has grown rapidly, with its annualized revenue run rate reportedly increasing four-to-fivefold to $400-$500 million in roughly six months. This strong growth underpins the investors' willingness to repurchase at the original price. Financially, the forced unwinding of the deal may benefit the early investors, allowing them to regain equity at a cost far below the company's current implied valuation, with the added prospect of an independent future listing. However, specific terms of the repurchase, including funding proportions and the joint venture's equity structure, are still under negotiation. This "repurchase-joint venture-Hong Kong IPO" approach could serve as a reference model for other Chinese AI startups navigating cross-border M&A regulations.

marsbitHá 45m

Manus Buyback Plan Emerges: Chinese Investors Plan to Repurchase Equity with $2 Billion, Path to Hong Kong IPO Becomes Clearer

marsbitHá 45m

STRC Loses Peg by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Running?

The article discusses the significant and concerning depegging of MicroStrategy's (MSTR) preferred stock, STRC. Designed to trade near its $100 target par value, STRC has recently fallen sharply, reaching a low of $83.26 and closing at $88.59, representing an over 11% discount. STRC is a core component of MicroStrategy's financial strategy. As a perpetual preferred stock, it allows the company to raise capital through an "at-the-market" (ATM) issuance program without diluting common shareholders (MSTR). This capital is primarily used to purchase Bitcoin, creating a "capital flywheel": issuing STRC → raising cash → buying BTC → increasing net assets → supporting STRC's value. The flywheel's operation depends on STRC maintaining its $100 price. To enforce this, MicroStrategy employs a dynamic dividend mechanism, recently raising the rate to 11.5% and increasing payout frequency. However, this has failed to halt the depegging, indicating market concerns extend beyond yield. Analysts cite two main reasons. First, technical factors like forced liquidations from leveraged arbitrage trades may have exacerbated the sell-off. Second, and more fundamentally, is waning confidence in MicroStrategy's financial resilience. A JPMorgan report highlighted the company's limited cash relative to its ~$1.7 billion annual dividend obligation, raising liquidity concerns. While MicroStrategy counters that its massive Bitcoin holdings provide decades of coverage, this argument relies on the potential need to sell BTC—a departure from its long-standing "never sell" narrative. The company's recent sale of a small amount of Bitcoin for "testing," despite being framed as minor, has intensified these fears. The persistent depegging threatens to cripple MicroStrategy's primary funding channel. If STRC remains discounted, the company's ability to fund further Bitcoin purchases weakens. Should cash reserves dwindle while financing is constrained, the market may increasingly price in the risk of MicroStrategy becoming a forced seller of Bitcoin to meet obligations. This shift from a major marginal buyer to a potential seller could pose significant downside risk to the broader Bitcoin market.

链捕手Há 54m

STRC Loses Peg by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Running?

链捕手Há 54m

Altcoins Face Deepest Spot Sell Pressure Since 2020, CryptoQuant Data Shows

Altcoins are enduring one of their most severe periods of spot-market selling pressure since 2020, according to CryptoQuant data, with a cumulative buy/sell volume gap of roughly $209 billion. This reflects weak retail demand, a rotation into safer assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and stablecoin yield products, and broad investor caution. While such extreme selling can set the stage for a contrarian opportunity by showing one-sided positioning, the data does not yet signal an immediate reversal or altcoin season. The market remains in a defensive state, lacking the sustained spot accumulation and broad sector improvement needed for a confirmed bullish turn.

bitcoinistHá 1h

Altcoins Face Deepest Spot Sell Pressure Since 2020, CryptoQuant Data Shows