About two days ago http://BIT.COM The controversy surrounding the product is quite significant, and I didn't make a statement in the first place mainly because I wanted to experience for myself how the product was made. http://BIT.COM Previously, it was MatrixPort, which is actually familiar to cryptocurrency industry veterans. To be honest, several people in the team are actually friends I have known for many years, and the boss is one of the Chinese OGs who has made significant contributions to the development history of BTC. I see that many people have mentioned it, so I won't repeat it. Many people see the Omnibus IB and think there are problems with it, such as being a "second tier trader", "middleman making price differences", and "opaque assets". However, if we follow this logic, many securities services will have to be labeled as second tier traders. The user has opened a Futu account, but the actual settlement and custody are handled by Interactive Brokers (IB) or other licensed clearing firms in the United States. The user assets are on the IB side, and Futu is the front-end entrance. This is almost identical to the structure described by BIT US stocks. But no one says that Futu is a 'two-way dealer'. Robinhood was not a market maker in the early days, and orders were routed to institutions such as Citadel Securities for execution, which is the famous PFOF (Payment for Order Flow) model. The front-end is Robinhood and the back-end is Citadel. Originally, users only saw the front-end platform in front of them, and what really worked behind it were licensed clearing merchants, DTC custody systems, and exchange liquidity networks. Omnibus IB is an industry standard structure, and it is not a problem in itself. The problem is always whether the clearing agent connected later is real, whether asset isolation is real, and whether the SIPC protection link is open. The compliance chain built by BIT US stock through GMC license+Omnibus IB+US SEC/FINRA licensed clearing merchants (RQD/AVS) is also considered complete, and it has received liquidity from Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange. In the current rapidly changing environment, it is already considered good. There is no perfect thing in the world. If you have to be particularly compliant and able to bypass the domestic iron fist, can you still do it? It's already meat in the pockets of the dragon people. Similar to Robinhood's situation, it's good to develop while working and gradually improve standards. Personally, I don't think there's a big problem with BIT's current approach, and I feel good through my own experiments. If you think what I said makes sense, please feel free to register with my link. I don't have any psychological burden on promoting BIT, and I feel it is very suitable for brothers in the cryptocurrency circle who have not yet opened accounts in mainland China to seamlessly connect and trade US stocks. Create a US stock discussion group for the brothers who registered with my link, and let's make money together in the US stock market. portal https://www. (bit.com)/zh/us-stock-intro? invite_code=BROLEON