Written by: JW, Techub News

The non-ferrous metal market shows initial signs of strength in 2025; the beginning of 2026 has entered a "boiling moment" without any warm-up. The prices of the three major precious metals—gold, silver, and platinum—are leading the charge, while heavy metals like copper and aluminum are steadily following suit, and rare metals like lithium and tungsten are blooming in multiple areas. A grand market feast is unfolding.

In contrast, Bitcoin has been stagnant since October 2025, after experiencing a rapid surge, hovering around $90,000 and entering a prolonged consolidation phase. The sentiment, trading volume, and liquidity in the crypto market have thus entered a cooling period. The price trends of gold, silver, and Bitcoin create a sense of disconnection.

However, a cooling market does not mean that exchanges are "lying flat." If you have recently followed Binance's trading listings, you will notice a phenomenon.

It is not a new chain, nor a new narrative, and certainly not a suddenly skyrocketing meme. What stands out instead are gold, silver, and a bunch of names you would only see in U.S. stock software.

At first glance, it might leave you stunned: Is this still a cryptocurrency exchange?

Looking again at the listing rhythm, it is continuous, dense, and pushed up with almost no explanation. All contracts are available for trading right away, with no discussion of compliance frameworks. It feels more like a market reaction to chase hot trends: when the original items are hard to sell, the counter naturally needs to switch to popular goods.

When trading volume cools, how do platforms make money?

Many people underestimate the pressure that the current market puts on exchanges. From the outside, it seems that cryptocurrency prices haven't dropped significantly, and BTC is still in a "not too bad" position. But from the perspective of exchanges, this is actually one of the most uncomfortable market conditions.

No explosive rises or falls, sentiment is stagnant, trading frequency has clearly decreased, altcoins are stagnant, spot markets lack stories, and contracts have no sustained trends. So how do exchanges survive? Not through vision, nor through narrative, but through users continuously placing orders and assets constantly changing hands. In previous years, as long as new coins were listed quickly and narratives were compelling enough, even air could generate trading volume. But now it’s different. The Alpha region has started to converge significantly, and after being "educated" by one round of market conditions after another, users have become cautious.

So the question arises: without speculating on new coins and without telling stories, what else can they rely on to make money?

At the most basic level, the revenue structure of exchanges is extremely simple: "transaction fees and funding rates." This is no different from any market: whether it’s stocks, commodities, or derivatives, exchanges make money based on liquidity and trading volume. Native crypto assets can generate explosive volumes during bull markets through their story and sentiment, and Binance once became the largest platform in the world by this model; however, in the current bear market, no matter how beautifully the story is told, if prices are stagnant, it is difficult to maintain high trading volumes.

This predicament does not only belong to Binance. The entire crypto derivatives market has experienced nearly collective trading volume shrinkage during the bear market: spot markets lack momentum, and no matter how innovative contracts are, it is hard to attract enough capital to participate.

For exchanges, a question is becoming increasingly clear: the existing crypto asset portfolio is no longer sufficient to support the past model of revenue growth from transaction fees.

One "advantage" of the crypto market is that contract products can be launched almost seamlessly; whatever asset is hot in the market can be quickly introduced. This is precisely why Binance has chosen to "rush to list" these gold, silver, and U.S. stock index contracts: not because they inherently belong to crypto, but because they can generate real trading activity.

If we compare exchanges to a shopping mall, during a bull market, the mall relies on new products, concepts, and foot traffic; but when the market cools, what truly determines survival is which counters can continue to attract consumers. Precious metals and traditional asset contracts belong to that category of "even without a story, there are people willing to trade repeatedly."

Thus, in today's world, every industry has trading, and trading behavior itself is the core source of income.

This is also why we see that against the backdrop of an overall decline in risk appetite, exchanges are placing more emphasis on those assets with historically stable volatility and mature participant structures. They do not need to be repackaged repeatedly, nor do they rely on sentiment to drive them, yet they can continuously contribute to real transactions in a relatively calm market.

Not a coincidence, but a market choice

Some may say: "Listing gold, silver, and U.S. stock contracts is not a new thing; it has happened before."

But if you carefully compare the timing and rhythm, you will find that this round is distinctly different. The initiation speed is faster, the density is higher, and it almost synchronizes with changes in market sentiment.

In 2025, the performance of precious metal prices far exceeded that of most crypto assets, and throughout the year, gold and silver repeatedly set historical highs, significantly increasing market interest in safe-haven assets. In traditional finance, such market conditions are sufficient to constitute a reason for macro strategy adjustments.

When the volatility of risk assets like Bitcoin and altcoins diminishes and upward momentum is lacking, stable and rising precious metals naturally become targets for traders seeking hedging and arbitrage. If exchanges do not provide corresponding derivative tools in such a market environment, trading behavior will naturally flow to platforms that can offer related products. In other words, this is not Binance actively "crossing over," but rather the market, through real capital flows, pushing it to this position, which itself is a form of strategic adaptation.

Moreover, it is worth noting that this time it is not simply about "bringing in" traditional assets, but rather packaging products as "tradable, understandable, and participatory" derivatives under a compliance environment that remains relatively sensitive. This is itself an adaptation to market realities, rather than a declaration of ideology.

From a certain perspective, this is more of a defensive choice. When native crypto assets struggle to continuously generate trading volume, exchanges should not wait for the market to warm up but should actively meet the existing trading demand.

Compliance is a framework, not an ironclad rule

There is a subtle but important signal hidden here: Binance has not placed these contracts in the form of spot or on-chain assets, but continues to use the perpetual contract derivative structure. This is not a technical choice, but a path of minimal compliance friction. A qualified derivative framework, supported by regulatory entities, can alleviate regulatory disputes to some extent, and even allow products that were originally in the "gray area" to gain more institutional tolerance.

If you look back at the regulatory evolution over the past few years, you will find a fact: compliance has never been just a slogan, but a dynamically adjusted boundary. What can be done and what cannot be done are boundaries shaped by policies, market forces, and business needs, rather than determined by any one party alone. The rapid listing of these products by Binance precisely illustrates a reality: as long as market demand is strong and trading behavior is sufficient, even if there is room for regulatory discussion, such products may still "survive" in the institutional cracks.

Not decentralization vs. centralization, but "who can generate trading"

This brings us to a core issue that has been repeatedly mentioned in the industry but still has cognitive differences: Is "decentralization" and "centralization" really important?

In the idealized blockchain narrative, everyone emphasizes decentralization, stressing that native crypto assets can replace traditional finance; but in real trading behavior, we see a completely different prioritization. Exchanges are market infrastructure; they care about trading volume and transaction fees; traders care about liquidity and profitability; products care about whether there are enough participants.

When crypto assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum rise, decentralization is the main storyline; when the market is weak, traders naturally seek other assets that can provide strategic value for trading, which leads to products like gold and silver being listed.

Ultimately, what the market truly chooses is not a value system, but a mechanism for realizing value: which assets are easier to generate trading, thus bringing transaction fees? Which assets can better attract user retention? Which products can maintain liquidity even in a bear market? The importance of these questions far outweighs any abstract ideology.

The deeper significance of this move

When we look back at Binance's recent product launches, they actually reflect several deeper signals:

The return of the exchange's commercial logic to reality. In a high-growth era, a good story can attract users; in a dull market, practical products are more meaningful. This is precisely why precious metal contracts and similar traditional asset derivatives are prioritized for launch.

"Compliance" is more like a balancing strategy rather than a hard prohibition. The boundaries of regulation have never been a wall of separation but rather an elastic framework that can be pulled by market forces. When market demand and the commercial drive of exchanges are strong enough, certain products will find a foothold in compliance discussions.

The boundaries between traditional assets and the crypto ecosystem are further blurred. This is not a simple overlay but a fusion of derivative infrastructure: the price signals of traditional assets, the 24/7 trading attributes of crypto protocols, and stablecoins as settlement mediums. This fusion has effectively coupled the trading behaviors of the two markets.

In conclusion

Binance's frequent listing of gold, silver, and U.S. stock contracts in a short period has not presented any grand vision but is instead signaling to the market through action: when trading is inactive, the platform will prioritize assets that can bring liquidity.

Decentralization is still important, but in business terms, whether a transaction can be made always comes first. Whether it can retain users and sustain trading frequency are the key factors that determine the platform's real choices.

As the crypto market stands at a new crossroads, such actions also remind us: stories attract attention, but liquidity truly determines how far a path can go.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。