Encrypted CEXs are becoming a thing of the past.
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Encrypted CEXs are becoming a thing of the past.
A silent species transition has begun.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: momo, ChainCatcher
Bitcoin has underperformed gold, silver, crude oil, and tech stocks. The “altcoin season” has nearly vanished, and the narrative that “crypto has entered garbage time” has grown increasingly loud. Yet precisely during this so-called garbage time, crypto-native users are being forced to broaden their global perspective—and a profound restructuring of future trading paradigms is already underway.
I. Crypto-Natives Are Forced to Understand the Entire World
Placing two sets of data side by side may yield a markedly different perspective on the “crypto is in garbage time” thesis.
The first set reflects a surging TradFi trading trend emerging within crypto. Over the past year, assets such as gold, U.S. equities, and commodities like crude oil have continuously absorbed global liquidity. Simultaneously, trading volumes for TradFi assets on crypto exchanges have also surged. Recently, Hyperliquid’s RWA trading volume hit record highs; Binance’s gold and silver futures volumes reached new peaks; and Bitget’s CFD section—now offering 79 popular instruments including gold, silver, and crude oil—recorded a single-day trading volume exceeding $6 billion, another all-time high. To put that in context: Binance’s recent daily spot trading volume stands at roughly $8 billion.
This implies that, even amid a bear market, crypto traders no longer face an “exit-only” choice—as was often the case before. Instead, they can remain fully within the crypto account ecosystem—unconstrained by geography or market hours—and seamlessly switch to TradFi assets to seek new yield opportunities or execute risk hedges.
Though crypto natives frequently lament being stuck in “garbage time,” this phase compels them to learn about and engage with the broader world—paying attention to variables they previously overlooked: the Fed’s interest-rate path, inflation data, AI industry cycles, and even crude oil supply-demand dynamics.
This shift is already spilling over into professional content creation. Whether media outlets or KOLs, their discussion topics have clearly expanded—macroeconomics, AI, and commodities now appear alongside crypto, not merely as background context.
A recent KOL analysis found that nearly half of today’s crypto media content is no longer “pure crypto,” but instead heavily features AI and traditional financial assets. Even crypto-native CEXs like Bitget now structure their daily market reports as hybrid information streams covering macro trends, TradFi, AI, and crypto.
The second dataset reveals an even more “counterintuitive” shift in user flows.
Historically, bull markets attracted users via wealth effects, while bear markets triggered mass exodus. Yet according to @smartestxyz’s report, a metric called “Non-Crypto-First Users”—defined as users whose first on-chain transaction is an RWA perpetual contract rather than a crypto asset—has now approached 50,000 as of March 2026. Their first encounter with crypto isn’t Bitcoin—it’s stock indices, gold, or crude oil.
This signals that bear markets can still drive user acquisition—but the motivations of these newcomers have shifted. They aren’t drawn by crypto’s “get-rich-quick” narratives, but rather by pain points in traditional finance—such as high entry barriers and low operational efficiency—and are onboarded by the convenience of on-chain finance. In other words, crypto is no longer acquiring users solely through narratives and airdrops, but increasingly through solving real-world trading needs.
The value of crypto reflected in these two datasets stands, to some extent, in direct contradiction to the “garbage time” thesis. Perhaps more accurately, today’s crypto market appears outwardly quiet—but internally, it is undergoing deep structural reconfiguration.
If crypto used to resemble a narrative-driven market, it is now entering an era driven by genuine demand. In a sense, this may truly mark the beginning of its maturation.
II. “Crypto-Only CEXs” May Become Extinct
Yet the migration of both insider and outsider users toward TradFi may ultimately render “crypto-only CEXs” obsolete—not disappearing overnight, but gradually fading as standalone entities. Exchanges that trade only crypto assets will likely struggle to sustain long-term viability.
For crypto CEXs, this crisis was already evident during the 2024 bull run: contrary to expectations, no large-scale influx of non-crypto users materialized, and the consensus across the industry is that traffic-driven growth has plateaued. Relying solely on subsidies and trading rebates to boost volume has become inefficient and unsustainable.
The underlying reason is straightforward: multi-asset trading—spanning TradFi and on-chain assets—is no longer a short-term trend but an enduring new normal, one that helps smooth out cyclical volatility.
For a long time, the crypto market operated as a relatively self-contained system—its narratives, liquidity, and price cycles largely confined within the ecosystem. But over the past 1–2 years, that self-containment is breaking down.
The simplistic four-year bull-bear cycle is no longer operative. Merely enduring a bear market no longer guarantees a broad-based bull run. Airdrop-driven incentives have lost efficacy. Bitcoin is increasingly embedded in macroeconomic cycles—it is no longer just a “crypto asset,” but an integral component of global liquidity.
Under these conditions, crypto investors naturally seek more than single-asset exposure. They aim to leverage crypto’s liquidity to capture alpha and cyclical returns from global mainstream assets.
The explosive growth of the RWA market further underscores this point. According to recent data from RWA.xyz, the total on-chain value of tokenized real-world assets (excluding stablecoins) has surpassed $25 billion—nearly quadrupling from $6.4 billion a year ago. Six asset classes now each exceed $1 billion in on-chain value: U.S. Treasuries, commodities, private credit, institutional alternative investment funds, corporate bonds, and non-U.S. sovereign debt.
III. UEX Takes the Baton: A Covert Battle Has Begun
If the “crypto-only CEX” model gradually fades, what will define the next generation of trading apps? Crypto’s leading exchanges and TradFi institutions are already waging a quiet war over this very question.
1. Restructuring the Trading Architecture of Crypto CEXs
Many have noticed that major exchanges—including Binance, OKX, Bitget, and Bybit—are launching TradFi assets. Most observers interpret this as yet another “hot narrative,” akin to Chinese memes or AI.
But one detail is often overlooked: exchanges like Bitget have moved TradFi assets out of secondary or tertiary menus and placed them directly as top-level navigation items—on equal footing with crypto. This is analogous to how Alibaba and JD.com, during the food delivery wars, integrated food delivery directly into their core homepage interfaces—not merely adding a new category, but shifting the platform’s strategic center of gravity.
In other words, TradFi differs fundamentally from memes or AI. It is not just another asset listing—it represents a structural and strategic pivot in trading architecture.
Viewed in this light, the concept of UEX (Universal Exchange) becomes easier to grasp. First proposed by Bitget, UEX aims to unify accounts and settle trades in stablecoins, enabling users to transact across multiple asset classes—including crypto, equities, FX, commodities, and on-chain assets—all within a single platform.
Similar ambitions appear in Coinbase’s public statements. Its CEO has spoken of building an “exchange for everything.” However, Coinbase emphasizes “on-chain native” infrastructure, whereas Bitget stresses “integration”—coexistence of diverse assets and trading forms, both on-chain and off-chain, within a unified framework.
Even with aligned goals, execution pace and pathways diverge significantly.
One path is conservative and incremental—exemplified by Binance and OKX. Their approach centers on gradually expanding TradFi capabilities within their existing crypto trading architecture. Beyond integrating select Ondo tokenized assets into wallets, they predominantly offer TradFi instruments as crypto-style perpetual contracts—settled in USDT, with no expiry—and emphasize seamless in-platform experience and restrained asset coverage.
Essentially, they embed TradFi into the established crypto trading paradigm—not building a separate system for it.
The other path leans closer to “structural reconstruction.” Bitget, for instance, operates squarely within the UEX framework:
It has comprehensively restructured its entire trading architecture: last year, it unified on-chain and CEX account systems; then introduced RWA assets to bridge on-chain and traditional assets; and earlier this year completed its multi-asset trading toolkit—including TradFi tokenized perpetuals and CFDs.
One lesser-known yet critical distinction lies in CFDs (Contracts for Difference)—a key differentiator in Bitget’s TradFi integration strategy compared with the more cautious approaches of Binance and OKX.
CFDs represent a mature TradFi trading framework: users do not hold the underlying asset but instead take long or short positions based on price movements, with profit/loss determined by the bid-ask spread. Widely used in FX, precious metals, equity indices, and commodities, CFDs feature transparent rules, well-defined cost structures, and robust margin and risk management mechanisms.
Fundamentally, this approach does not force TradFi into a crypto mold—rather, it embraces coexistence of multiple paradigms.
Bitget’s approach is also more aggressive in asset coverage: it now offers over 250 equity-related instruments—the most comprehensive among peers. Bitget has disclosed that TradFi assets accounted for over 10% of its total January trading volume, a share expected to grow steadily—accelerating the decline of crypto-only vertical exchanges.
2. Intensified On-Chain Moves by Traditional TradFi Exchanges
Traditional TradFi exchanges are converging on the same destination. Though crypto sentiment remains subdued, never before has the TradFi sector shown such intense enthusiasm for crypto.
Over these first three months of 2026, TradFi institutions’ counter-cyclical bets on crypto have been extraordinary.
- ICE invested in OKX at a $25 billion valuation—a concrete, capital-backed commitment;
- The NYSE has developed tokenization technology and plans to launch a blockchain-based, 24/7 platform for tokenized stocks and ETFs;
- Nasdaq received SEC approval to pilot tokenized securities trading—enabling on-chain stock circulation and shared order books with legacy systems;
- Robinhood launched over 2,000 tokenized U.S. equities in Europe and plans to roll out 24/7 trading and DeFi functionality.
These initiatives converge on a shared objective: moving core TradFi assets—stocks, ETFs, etc.—onto blockchains and integrating them with crypto assets and tools to capture crypto’s greatest advantages: 7×24 availability, borderless access, and programmability.
From this perspective, crypto CEXs and traditional exchanges are aligning on a common vision: UEX is the future form of the exchange.
While many have grown weary of institutional moves, this wave is distinct: infrastructure and regulatory frameworks are maturing in tandem.
During this recent crude oil rally, 50,000 users chose on-chain trading—a clear sign that infrastructure has reached a tipping point for user acquisition. On the regulatory front, the U.S. SEC’s January 28 guidance classified tokenized securities into direct issuance and third-party models—reducing compliance uncertainty. Congress is advancing the stablecoin-focused CLARITY Act. In February, China’s eight ministries issued new RWA tokenization policies, opening a compliant RWA pathway for Hong Kong.
Conclusion
As TradFi assets are progressively integrated, the boundary between crypto exchanges and traditional exchanges is rapidly dissolving. Yet the pivotal question remains: who will define the next-generation exchange—traditional players or crypto-native ones?
Currently, each holds distinct advantages. Traditional exchanges control asset origination, compliance frameworks, and pricing authority. Crypto exchanges command global distribution, 7×24 trading capability, and more flexible account and product architectures.
This is not simple competition—it is convergence toward a unified, multi-asset trading gateway.
Yet this UEX-driven evolution remains in its earliest stage: most platforms have merely aggregated CEXs and DEXs, crypto and TradFi assets, onto a single interface. Deeper challenges persist—such as unifying pricing, risk controls, and fund utilization across disparate asset classes within a single account.
Thus, the true inflection point lies not at the product layer, but deeper—in account architecture and capital efficiency. Whoever first unlocks cross-asset margin models and integrated risk frameworks may be best positioned to embody the next-generation exchange.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
ChainCatcher 链捕手
