Binance's Market Dominance Shrinks in the Wake of Regulatory Clampdown – Coinpedia Fintech News

Binance, a prominent global cryptocurrency exchange, is currently facing increased scrutiny from regulators in the United States. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have initiated investigations into potential violations of securities laws and money laundering regulations by Binance.

The intensified regulatory scrutiny represents a significant setback for Binance, given its status as one of the leading cryptocurrency exchanges worldwide. The operations of Binance in the United States constitute a significant revenue stream for the exchange, making regulatory scrutiny a matter of considerable importance.

Binance witnesses a sharp decline in average monthly volume

According to the latest data provided by CCData to FT, Binance, which had a 57.5% average monthly volume, has now plummeted to 43%.

Binance’s notable decrease in market share can be attributed to several factors, including increased competition within the cryptocurrency exchange industry, heightened scrutiny from US regulators, and the conclusion of a free trading promotion.

In February, Binance faced a setback when New York regulators halted the issuance of BUSD, a stablecoin associated with the exchange. At that time, BUSD accounted for approximately 40% of Binance’s monthly trading volume. The suspension of BUSD issuance further impacted Binance’s trading activities and overall market share.

The scrutiny was followed by a lawsuit by the CFTC, which alleged that Binance’s trading volume came primarily from US customers, which the exchange denied.

Binance’s declining market share can also be attributed to the conclusion of a promotional offer that provided customers with free trading on several bitcoin pairs. This promotion contributed to the exchange’s growth in the latter part of last year but concluded in March.

In addition to the market share decline, Binance has recently announced plans for job cuts. The company clarified that these job cuts were not merely a matter of right-sizing but rather a reassessment of whether the company possesses the necessary talent and expertise in key roles.

Source: Read Full Article