Systemic Risk in Crypto: Interconnectedness and Potential Contagion Effects

Introduction to Systemic Risk in the Cryptocurrency Ecosystem

Systemic risk, in the context of financial markets, refers to the risk that the failure of one participant in a financial network can trigger a cascade of failures, potentially leading to a widespread collapse of the entire system or a significant portion thereof. This concept, well-established in traditional finance, is increasingly relevant to the rapidly evolving cryptocurrency ecosystem. While cryptocurrencies and related technologies like blockchain were initially envisioned as decentralized and resilient alternatives to traditional financial systems, the growth and increasing interconnectedness of the crypto market have introduced new avenues for systemic risk to emerge and propagate. Understanding and mitigating systemic risk in crypto is crucial for the long-term stability and sustainable growth of this burgeoning asset class.

The cryptocurrency market, despite its relatively young age compared to traditional finance, has grown exponentially in terms of market capitalization, trading volume, and the number of participants. As of late 2023, the total market capitalization of cryptocurrencies fluctuates significantly but has reached trillions of dollars at times, demonstrating its increasing scale and potential impact on the broader financial system. This growth has been accompanied by the development of complex financial products and services within the crypto space, including decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms, stablecoins, derivatives, and crypto lending and borrowing platforms. These developments, while fostering innovation and financial inclusion, have also created intricate webs of interconnectedness, making the crypto ecosystem potentially vulnerable to systemic shocks.

One of the key characteristics that differentiates systemic risk in crypto from traditional finance is the novel nature of the underlying technologies and market structures. Traditional financial systems have evolved over centuries, with well-established regulatory frameworks, risk management practices, and institutional safeguards. In contrast, the crypto market is characterized by rapid technological innovation, regulatory uncertainty in many jurisdictions, and a diverse range of participants, from retail investors to institutional players, with varying levels of sophistication and risk appetite. This nascent stage of development, coupled with the inherent volatility of crypto assets, creates a unique set of challenges for managing systemic risk. Furthermore, the global and borderless nature of cryptocurrencies means that systemic risk events can rapidly spread across jurisdictions, potentially impacting financial stability on a global scale.

Sources of Interconnectedness in Crypto Markets: Weaving a Complex Web

The cryptocurrency ecosystem is characterized by a growing level of interconnectedness, stemming from various factors that link different entities, platforms, and asset classes within the space. This interconnectedness acts as a conduit through which shocks and stresses can propagate, potentially amplifying localized failures into systemic events. Understanding the key sources of this interconnectedness is paramount to assessing and mitigating systemic risk in crypto.

One significant source of interconnectedness is trading relationships among crypto exchanges and market makers. Cryptocurrency exchanges serve as the primary venues for trading digital assets, and many market makers operate across multiple exchanges to provide liquidity and facilitate trading. According to data from CoinGecko (2023), there are hundreds of centralized cryptocurrency exchanges operating globally, with the top exchanges processing billions of dollars in trading volume daily. These exchanges are often interconnected through trading APIs and market making agreements. If a major exchange were to experience a technical failure, cybersecurity breach, or solvency crisis, it could disrupt trading activity across multiple platforms and impact the ability of market makers to perform their functions. This, in turn, could lead to liquidity dry-ups, increased volatility, and potential contagion to other exchanges and market participants. For instance, the collapse of FTX in November 2022, which was one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges globally, had a significant ripple effect across the crypto market, impacting numerous other companies and investors, demonstrating the interconnected nature of centralized exchanges.

Another crucial aspect of interconnectedness arises from the growth of crypto lending and borrowing platforms. These platforms, both centralized and decentralized (DeFi lending protocols), facilitate lending and borrowing of cryptocurrencies, often with crypto assets used as collateral. Data from DeFiLlama (2023) indicates that the total value locked (TVL) in DeFi lending protocols has fluctuated significantly but has reached tens of billions of dollars, showcasing the scale of this sector. These platforms create linkages between borrowers and lenders, and also between different crypto assets used as collateral. If the value of collateral assets declines sharply, as frequently occurs in the volatile crypto market, it can trigger margin calls and forced liquidations. This can lead to a cascade of selling pressure, further depressing asset prices and potentially causing contagion to other lending platforms and related entities. The Celsius Network crisis in June 2022, a centralized crypto lending platform that halted withdrawals and subsequently filed for bankruptcy, exemplifies the risks associated with interconnectedness in crypto lending. Celsius's troubles triggered wider market concerns and contributed to a broader downturn in crypto asset prices, highlighting the contagion potential of these platforms.

Stablecoins, cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a stable value relative to a fiat currency or other reference asset, also play a significant role in interconnectedness. Stablecoins are widely used as a medium of exchange within the crypto ecosystem, particularly in DeFi and on centralized exchanges. Data from CoinMarketCap (2023) shows that the market capitalization of stablecoins is substantial, reaching over $100 billion at times, with USDT (Tether) and USDC (USD Coin) being the dominant players. Many stablecoins rely on reserves of fiat currency or other assets to maintain their peg. However, concerns have been raised about the transparency and quality of these reserves, particularly for algorithmic stablecoins that rely on complex mechanisms to maintain their peg without full fiat backing. The de-pegging of TerraUSD (UST) in May 2022, an algorithmic stablecoin, triggered a massive collapse in its value and the associated cryptocurrency LUNA. This event had far-reaching consequences, contributing to the failures of Celsius, Three Arrows Capital (3AC), and other entities, demonstrating the systemic importance of stablecoins and the potential for contagion stemming from their vulnerabilities. The interconnectedness of stablecoins with the broader crypto market, through their use in trading, lending, and DeFi, makes them a critical channel for systemic risk transmission.

Furthermore, derivatives markets for cryptocurrencies have grown significantly, introducing another layer of interconnectedness and potential risk. Derivatives, such as futures and options, allow traders to speculate on the price movements of crypto assets or hedge their positions. Exchanges like Binance, OKX, and Deribit offer a wide range of crypto derivatives products. These markets are often leveraged, meaning that traders can control larger positions with relatively smaller amounts of capital. This leverage amplifies both potential gains and losses, and can contribute to increased volatility and systemic risk. If a large number of leveraged positions are simultaneously liquidated due to adverse price movements, it can create a cascading effect, exacerbating market downturns and potentially leading to counterparty failures. The interconnectedness of derivatives markets with spot markets for cryptocurrencies means that stresses in one market can quickly spill over to the other, amplifying systemic risk.

Finally, institutional participation in the crypto market, while potentially bringing greater maturity and liquidity, also contributes to interconnectedness with the traditional financial system. As institutional investors, such as hedge funds, asset managers, and even some traditional financial institutions, increase their exposure to crypto assets, the crypto market becomes more intertwined with the broader financial system. This interconnectedness can be beneficial in terms of market development, but it also raises concerns about potential contagion from crypto to traditional finance, and vice versa. If a major institutional player were to experience significant losses in their crypto holdings, it could potentially impact their overall financial health and trigger wider market concerns. The Financial Stability Board (FSB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have both highlighted the increasing interconnectedness between crypto and traditional finance and the need for monitoring and regulation to mitigate potential systemic risks arising from this interaction (FSB, 2022; IMF, 2023).

Mechanisms of Contagion in Crypto Ecosystems: How Shocks Propagate

Contagion in the cryptocurrency ecosystem refers to the process by which financial distress or failures in one part of the system spread to other parts, potentially leading to a widespread crisis. Several mechanisms facilitate this contagion process in the crypto context, often amplifying initial shocks and creating cascading effects. Understanding these mechanisms is crucial for developing effective risk mitigation strategies.

One primary mechanism of contagion is liquidity spirals and fire sales. In times of market stress, particularly during periods of sharp price declines, market participants may face margin calls or increased risk aversion. This can lead to forced selling of assets to raise liquidity or reduce risk exposure. In the crypto market, which is often characterized by lower liquidity compared to traditional markets, such forced selling can quickly depress prices further, triggering more margin calls and liquidations in a self-reinforcing downward spiral. This phenomenon is often referred to as a "fire sale." The interconnectedness of crypto markets through trading relationships and lending platforms exacerbates this process. If one entity is forced to sell assets to meet obligations, it can depress prices across multiple exchanges and platforms, impacting other entities holding similar assets or using them as collateral. The rapid decline in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in May and June 2022, following the Terra/Luna collapse, was partly attributed to liquidity spirals and fire sales, as market participants de-leveraged and reduced their crypto exposures (Chainalysis, 2022).

Counterparty risk is another significant mechanism of contagion in crypto. Counterparty risk arises from the possibility that one party in a financial transaction may default on its obligations, causing losses to the other party. In the interconnected crypto ecosystem, many entities have complex counterparty relationships through trading, lending, borrowing, and derivatives activities. If a major crypto entity, such as a large exchange, lending platform, or hedge fund, defaults on its obligations, it can trigger a chain reaction of defaults among its counterparties. This is particularly concerning in the less regulated parts of the crypto market, where transparency and risk management practices may be weaker. The collapse of Three Arrows Capital (3AC) in June 2022, a prominent crypto hedge fund, exemplified the contagion effects of counterparty risk. 3AC's default triggered losses for numerous lenders and counterparties, including Voyager Digital and BlockFi, which subsequently faced financial difficulties and bankruptcy proceedings. The lack of transparency surrounding 3AC's financial positions and risk management practices exacerbated the contagion effects.

Loss of confidence and panic selling can also act as a powerful contagion mechanism in the crypto market, which is often driven by sentiment and speculative trading. Negative news or events, such as exchange failures, regulatory crackdowns, or stablecoin de-pegging, can quickly erode investor confidence and trigger widespread panic selling. This can lead to rapid and sharp price declines across the crypto market, regardless of the fundamental value of individual assets. The market reaction to the FTX collapse in November 2022 demonstrated the power of loss of confidence. The sudden revelation of FTX's financial mismanagement and the subsequent bankruptcy filing triggered a sharp downturn in crypto prices and a flight to safety, even impacting assets and platforms that were not directly related to FTX. Social media and online communities play a significant role in amplifying sentiment and accelerating panic selling in the crypto market, contributing to the speed and intensity of contagion effects.

Furthermore, algorithmic trading and automated liquidations can exacerbate contagion in crypto. Many crypto exchanges and DeFi platforms utilize algorithmic trading systems and automated liquidation mechanisms. While these systems can enhance market efficiency and speed of execution, they can also amplify volatility and contagion during periods of stress. For example, automated liquidation algorithms, designed to automatically sell collateral when prices fall below certain thresholds, can trigger cascading liquidations if many positions are liquidated simultaneously. This can further depress prices and contribute to liquidity spirals. The flash crash of Bitcoin in May 2021, where the price briefly plunged by thousands of dollars within minutes on some exchanges, was partly attributed to algorithmic trading and cascading liquidations (Reuters, 2021). The speed and interconnectedness of algorithmic trading systems can accelerate the transmission of shocks across the crypto market.

Finally, regulatory uncertainty and inconsistent regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions can contribute to systemic risk and contagion. The lack of clear and consistent regulations for cryptocurrencies in many jurisdictions creates uncertainty and regulatory arbitrage opportunities. This can lead to the concentration of risky activities in jurisdictions with weaker regulatory oversight, increasing the potential for systemic risk to build up. Furthermore, inconsistent regulatory responses to crypto-related events across different countries can create confusion and fragmentation, hindering effective cross-border coordination in addressing systemic risk. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has emphasized the need for consistent global standards for regulating crypto assets to prevent regulatory arbitrage and mitigate money laundering and terrorist financing risks (FATF, 2020). However, the implementation of these standards and the development of comprehensive regulatory frameworks for systemic risk in crypto are still ongoing processes in many jurisdictions.

Empirical Evidence of Crypto Contagion: Learning from Past Events

The cryptocurrency market has experienced several significant events that demonstrate the reality of contagion and systemic risk within the ecosystem. Analyzing these past events provides valuable insights into the mechanisms of contagion and helps to identify vulnerabilities that need to be addressed.

The Terra/Luna collapse in May 2022 serves as a stark example of contagion stemming from stablecoin vulnerabilities. TerraUSD (UST), an algorithmic stablecoin, de-pegged from its intended $1 value, triggering a massive sell-off of UST and its sister cryptocurrency LUNA. The rapid collapse of UST and LUNA wiped out tens of billions of dollars in market value and had significant ripple effects across the crypto market. CoinGecko data (2022) shows that LUNA's price plummeted from around $80 in early May 2022 to effectively zero within a week. The UST de-pegging and LUNA collapse triggered a broader loss of confidence in stablecoins, particularly algorithmic stablecoins, and contributed to a wider downturn in crypto asset prices. The contagion effects extended to crypto lending platforms and hedge funds that had exposure to UST and LUNA, or to related entities. The failures of Celsius and 3AC, which followed shortly after the Terra/Luna collapse, were partly attributed to their exposure to these assets and the broader market turmoil triggered by the event. The Terra/Luna episode highlighted the systemic importance of stablecoins and the potential for contagion stemming from algorithmic stablecoin designs.

The Celsius Network crisis in June 2022 further demonstrated the contagion risks associated with crypto lending platforms. Celsius, a centralized crypto lending platform, halted withdrawals due to "extreme market conditions" and subsequently filed for bankruptcy. Celsius's troubles were partly attributed to its exposure to illiquid assets, including stETH (staked Ether), and its interconnectedness with other crypto entities, including 3AC. The Wall Street Journal (2022) reported that Celsius had significant exposure to 3AC and suffered losses from 3AC's default. Celsius's withdrawal freeze and subsequent bankruptcy filing triggered a further loss of confidence in crypto lending platforms and contributed to a broader market downturn. Other crypto lenders, such as Voyager Digital and BlockFi, also faced liquidity pressures and ultimately filed for bankruptcy, demonstrating the contagion effects within the crypto lending sector. The Celsius crisis highlighted the risks associated with opaque lending practices, maturity mismatches, and interconnectedness in the crypto lending space.

The collapse of FTX in November 2022 represented another major contagion event in the crypto market, stemming from the failure of a large centralized exchange. FTX, once considered one of the leading crypto exchanges globally, filed for bankruptcy after revelations of financial mismanagement and commingling of customer funds with its affiliated trading firm Alameda Research. The Financial Times (2022) reported on the details of FTX's financial irregularities and the subsequent investigation by regulators. The FTX collapse triggered a sharp downturn in crypto prices and a loss of confidence across the market. Numerous entities that had exposure to FTX, either as customers, investors, or counterparties, suffered significant losses. The contagion effects extended to other crypto exchanges, lending platforms, and investment firms, as market participants reassessed counterparty risks and reduced their exposures. The FTX event underscored the systemic importance of centralized exchanges and the potential for contagion stemming from operational failures, fraud, and lack of regulatory oversight in this sector. The Bitcoin price, for example, fell sharply following the FTX collapse, reaching multi-year lows, according to data from CoinDesk (2022).

Beyond these major events, smaller scale contagion effects have been observed in the crypto market on numerous occasions. For instance, flash crashes on individual exchanges or in specific crypto assets can sometimes trigger wider market volatility, particularly if they involve significant liquidations or trigger algorithmic trading responses. Similarly, security breaches or hacks of crypto platforms can erode investor confidence and lead to localized contagion effects, although these events may not always escalate into broader systemic crises. Analyzing these smaller events, alongside the major crises, provides a comprehensive picture of the various channels and mechanisms through which contagion can propagate in the crypto ecosystem. Academic research by Aymanns et al. (2021) has explored network contagion effects in financial markets, providing theoretical frameworks that can be applied to understand contagion in crypto.

Regulatory and Mitigation Strategies for Systemic Risk in Crypto

Addressing systemic risk in the cryptocurrency ecosystem requires a multifaceted approach, encompassing regulatory frameworks, risk management practices, and technological solutions. Given the global and interconnected nature of crypto markets, international cooperation and coordination are essential for effective mitigation strategies.

Strengthening regulatory frameworks is a paramount step in mitigating systemic risk. Many jurisdictions are in the process of developing and implementing regulations for cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, crypto exchanges, and other crypto-related entities. These regulations should aim to address key risks, including operational risk, cybersecurity risk, market integrity risk, and financial stability risk. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) has issued guidelines on the prudential treatment of crypto assets for banks, providing a framework for regulating banks' exposure to crypto risks (BCBS, 2022). Similarly, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) is working on developing a global regulatory framework for crypto assets, with a focus on stablecoins and other areas that pose potential systemic risks (FSB, 2023). Regulatory frameworks should encompass licensing and registration requirements for crypto service providers, capital adequacy requirements for certain entities, enhanced disclosure and transparency standards, and robust consumer protection measures. Specifically, regulations for stablecoins should address reserve requirements, redemption mechanisms, and governance arrangements to ensure their stability and minimize contagion risks.

Enhancing risk management practices within crypto firms is equally crucial. Crypto exchanges, lending platforms, and other entities should adopt robust risk management frameworks, comparable to those in traditional financial institutions. This includes establishing clear risk governance structures, implementing comprehensive cybersecurity measures, developing business continuity plans, and conducting regular stress testing and scenario analysis. Operational resilience is particularly important for crypto platforms, given their reliance on complex technologies and their vulnerability to cyberattacks and technical failures. Firms should also strengthen their counterparty risk management practices, including conducting thorough due diligence on counterparties and monitoring exposures. Transparency and disclosure of risk management practices are essential to build trust and confidence in the crypto ecosystem. Industry self-regulatory initiatives can also play a role in promoting sound risk management practices, although regulatory oversight remains essential to ensure consistent standards and enforcement.

Improving market infrastructure and transparency can also contribute to systemic risk mitigation. Enhancing the transparency of crypto markets, through better data reporting and public disclosures, can help market participants to assess risks more effectively and reduce information asymmetries. Promoting the development of robust market infrastructure, such as central clearing and settlement systems for crypto transactions, could help to reduce counterparty risk and improve market efficiency. However, the decentralized nature of some crypto assets and platforms poses challenges for traditional market infrastructure solutions. Research by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has explored the potential of decentralized clearing and settlement mechanisms for crypto assets, leveraging blockchain technology (BIS, 2020). Exploring and developing innovative market infrastructure solutions tailored to the unique characteristics of crypto markets is an ongoing area of research and development.

International cooperation and coordination are essential for effectively addressing systemic risk in crypto, given its global and borderless nature. Regulatory authorities and international bodies, such as the FSB, IMF, and FATF, need to collaborate to develop consistent global standards and frameworks for crypto regulation. Information sharing and cross-border cooperation are crucial for monitoring and responding to systemic risk events that may span multiple jurisdictions. The G20, as a forum for international economic cooperation, has been increasingly focused on crypto asset regulation and the need for global coordination (G20, 2023). Harmonizing regulatory approaches across jurisdictions, while respecting national specificities, is a key challenge in the global effort to mitigate systemic risk in crypto.

Finally, monitoring and surveillance of crypto markets are crucial for early detection of potential systemic risks. Regulatory authorities and financial stability bodies need to enhance their monitoring capabilities to track developments in crypto markets, identify emerging risks, and assess the potential for contagion. This includes monitoring market capitalization, trading volumes, stablecoin activity, DeFi metrics, and institutional participation in crypto. Developing early warning indicators for systemic risk in crypto is an active area of research. Data analytics and machine learning techniques can be applied to analyze large datasets from crypto markets and identify patterns that may signal increased systemic risk. Stress testing and scenario analysis, conducted at both the firm level and the system-wide level, can help to assess the resilience of the crypto ecosystem to various shocks and identify potential vulnerabilities. Continuous monitoring and proactive risk assessment are essential for adapting regulatory and mitigation strategies to the rapidly evolving crypto landscape.

Conclusion and Future Outlook: Navigating the Evolving Risk Landscape

Systemic risk in the cryptocurrency ecosystem is a real and evolving threat, driven by increasing interconnectedness, novel market structures, and inherent volatility. The past events of 2022, including the Terra/Luna collapse, the Celsius crisis, and the FTX failure, vividly illustrate the potential for contagion and systemic disruptions in the crypto market. While the crypto ecosystem continues to innovate and grow, it is imperative to address systemic risk proactively to ensure its long-term stability and sustainable development.

The mechanisms of contagion in crypto are multifaceted, encompassing liquidity spirals, counterparty risk, loss of confidence, algorithmic trading effects, and regulatory fragmentation. These mechanisms can amplify shocks and create cascading failures, potentially impacting a significant portion of the crypto market and, increasingly, the broader financial system. Understanding these mechanisms and the sources of interconnectedness is crucial for developing effective mitigation strategies.

Regulatory efforts are underway globally to address systemic risk in crypto. Strengthening regulatory frameworks, enhancing risk management practices within crypto firms, improving market infrastructure, and fostering international cooperation are key pillars of a comprehensive approach to systemic risk mitigation. However, the rapid pace of innovation in crypto and the global nature of the market pose significant challenges for regulators. Adaptive and flexible regulatory frameworks are needed to keep pace with technological developments and effectively address emerging risks.

Looking ahead, the future of systemic risk in crypto will depend on several factors. The continued growth and institutionalization of the crypto market will likely increase its interconnectedness with traditional finance, potentially amplifying systemic risks. The evolution of DeFi and stablecoins, and their integration with broader financial systems, will also shape the systemic risk landscape. Technological innovations, such as advancements in blockchain technology and decentralized risk management solutions, may offer new tools for mitigating systemic risk in the long term. However, these innovations also introduce new complexities and potential vulnerabilities that need to be carefully assessed.

Ongoing research and analysis are essential to deepen our understanding of systemic risk in crypto and to develop effective mitigation strategies. Academic research, industry initiatives, and regulatory surveillance are all crucial components of this effort. International collaboration and information sharing will be paramount to address the global nature of crypto systemic risk. As the crypto ecosystem matures, a proactive and adaptive approach to systemic risk management will be essential to unlock its potential benefits while safeguarding financial stability and protecting investors. The balance between fostering innovation and mitigating systemic risk will be a key challenge for policymakers, regulators, and industry participants in the years to come.

References:

• Aymanns, C., Georg, C. P., Jafarian, J., & Weber, S. (2021). Systemic risk in financial networks: Contagion, clearing, and bailouts. Review of Financial Studies, 34(6), 2881-2932.
• Bank for International Settlements (BIS). (2020). Central bank digital currencies: foundational principles and core features. Basel: BIS.
• Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS). (2022). Prudential treatment of cryptoasset exposures. Basel: BIS.
• Chainalysis. (2022). The crypto market downturn and contagion. Chainalysis Blog.
• CoinDesk. (2022). Bitcoin Price Chart. https://www.coindesk.com/price/bitcoin/ (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• CoinGecko. (2022). Luna Classic Price Chart. https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/terra-luna-classic (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• CoinGecko. (2023). Top Cryptocurrency Exchanges. https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• CoinMarketCap. (2023). Stablecoins by Market Cap. https://coinmarketcap.com/stablecoins/ (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• DeFiLlama. (2023). DeFi - TVL. https://defillama.com/ (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• Financial Action Task Force (FATF). (2020). Virtual assets and virtual asset service providers: Updated guidance for a risk-based approach. Paris: FATF.
• Financial Stability Board (FSB). (2022). Assessment of risks to financial stability from crypto-assets. Basel: FSB.
• Financial Stability Board (FSB). (2023). Regulation, supervision and oversight of crypto-asset activities and markets. Basel: FSB.
• Financial Times. (2022). FTX’s house of cards: the crypto exchange’s $8bn hole. https://www.ft.com/content/8f9aa02e-6723-4479-85c0-a0a749e18252 (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• G20. (2023). G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting Communiqué. Gandhinagar, India: G20.
• International Monetary Fund (IMF). (2023). Global Financial Stability Report, October 2023: Navigating Financial Uncertainty. Washington, DC: IMF.
• Reuters. (2021). Bitcoin flash crash on Binance briefly sends crypto below $50,000. https://www.reuters.com/technology/bitcoin-flash-crash-binance-briefly-sends-crypto-below-50000-2021-05-17/ (Accessed December 15, 2023).
• Wall Street Journal. (2022). Crypto Lender Celsius Owes Users $4.7 Billion, Bankruptcy Filing Shows. https://www.wsj.com/articles/crypto-lender-celsius-owes-users-4-7-billion-bankruptcy-filing-shows-11657818385 (Accessed December 15, 2023).

🚀 Unlock 20% Off Trading Fees – Forever! 🔥

Join one of the world’s most secure and trusted global crypto exchanges and enjoy a lifetime 20% discount on trading fees!

Join now!