Bitfinex’s LEO token has a major liquidity problem

Bitfinex’s LEO token has a major liquidity problem

LEO, a token issued by Bitfinex’s parent company, iFinex, was revealed to have a major liquidity problem. Bitfinex order books revealed that $500,000 buy and sell orders swung LEO’s price by 25 percent.

Bitfinex’s cop-out plan

Launched earlier this year, LEO token was issued by iFinex Inc., Bitfinex and Tether‘s parent company based in the British Virgin Islands. The company used LEO to raise funds to cover the $850 million loss it encountered when the funds it sent to a Panamanian payment processor were seized by authorities.

Facing accusations of bank fraud, Bitfinex‘s plan to hold an initial exchange offering (IEO) was supposed to alleviate the company from the financial burden it was facing. Paolo Ardoino, the CTO of Tether and Bitfinex, said that the company was able to raise $1 billion USDT in 10 days in a private sale of LEO.

What made LEO attractive to investors was Bitfinex’s continuous burn mechanism – the company said it would dedicate at least 27 percent of its revenue and the revenue of its subsidiaries to buy back the LEO tokens it sold. Gross revenues from iFinex will be allocated toward the purchase of LEO tokens at market rates until 100 percent of the tokens have been burned, the company said.

However, despite the company’s transparency initiative, many have questioned iFinex’s intentions with LEO. While some saw this as a chance to turn over a quick profit in the buy-back, others have advocated for using the token as a long-term asset.

No liquidity in LEO

Su Zhu, the CEO of Three Arrows Capital, pointed out on Twitter that LEO was a relatively illiquid market. The observation followed a lengthy discussion about the massive outflow of Bitcoin from Bitmex. Some Twitter users argued that the $73 million worth of Bitcoin leaving one of the world’s largest exchanges was used to pump the price of certain altcoins.

Many fingers were pointed at LEO, which saw major price fluctuations in the past couple of days. iFinex was quickly accused of using LEO, which was devised as a cop-out plan, as a smart money dumping platform where bigtime traders could turn a big profit.

However, Zhu said that it was most likely not the case with LEO. He pointed out that LEO was an illiquid market, where $500,000 buy and sell orders have the potential to swing its price up and down by 25 percent. Buy orders as large as $3 million have previously doubled LEO’s price to $2.00. A $3 million sell order, on the other hand, had sent its price down to $0.93.

All of this, Zhu said, points to the fact that LEO is a long-term asset.

Zhu said that LEO has the potential to outperform Bitcoin if Bitfinex was to maintain or increase its market share.

However, not everyone seemed to agree with him, with many saying that LEO’s very definition makes it hard to put it in the same basket as Bitcoin. While Zhu said LEO fell into the category of preferred shares, others insisted that LEO’s price/volume action makes it closest to a coupon bond.

The intense discussions led about the future of the token seem to have affected LEO’s price, which dropped from $1.99 in the second half of June to just $1.30 in the second half of July. However, LEO looks like it’s on its way to recovering at least some of its losses, as its price has been going upwards in the past couple of days.

Filed Under: Altcoins, Analysis, Bitfinex
Priyeshu Garg

Priyeshu is a software engineer who is passionate about machine learning and blockchain technology. He holds an engineering degree in computer science engineering and is a passionate economist. He built his first digital marketing startup when he was a teenager, and worked with multiple Fortune 500 companies along with smaller firms. When he is not solving transportation problems at his company (Ola), he can be found writing about the blockchain or roller skating with his friends.

View author profile

Commitment to Transparency: The author of this article is invested and/or has an interest in one or more assets discussed in this post. CryptoSlate does not endorse any project or asset that may be mentioned or linked to in this article. Please take that into consideration when evaluating the content within this article.

Disclaimer: Our writers' opinions are solely their own and do not reflect the opinion of CryptoSlate. None of the information you read on CryptoSlate should be taken as investment advice, nor does CryptoSlate endorse any project that may be mentioned or linked to in this article. Buying and trading cryptocurrencies should be considered a high-risk activity. Please do your own due diligence before taking any action related to content within this article. Finally, CryptoSlate takes no responsibility should you lose money trading cryptocurrencies.