Repetitive Trade Sizes Dominated Bitcoin and Ether Perpetual Volumes on Kalshi
A recurring pattern in the numbers
A CoinDesk analysis of Kalshi's public trade records found that a small number of repeating trade sizes accounted for more than half the value traded on the exchange's bitcoin and ether perpetual-futures markets. The findings raise questions about what the reported volume on these markets actually represents.
Kalshi is a U.S. derivatives exchange regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, best known for its prediction markets. It added bitcoin perpetual futures — contracts that track the asset's price without expiring — in late May.
Key numbers from the analysis
- Trades valued near $5,499 accounted for $7.7 million, or 57%, of the $13.5 million in ether-perpetual transactions analyzed from Sept. 17 through Sept. 20.
- Two recurring bitcoin trade sizes of roughly $2,500 and $5,000 accounted for 54% of the $8.5 million sampled over the same period.
- In 43 of 46 one-hour samples between June 19 and Sept. 20, ether trades repeatedly clustered around specific dollar targets.
- CoinDesk analyzed 3,450 ether-perpetual trades across 23 one-hour samples during the four-day period.
What the data shows
The prevailing ether trade size accounted for about 45% of the value across the sampled hours and more than half the value on 15 separate dates. The dollar value of the trades stayed nearly fixed even as the number of contracts in each trade changed with ether's price, which rose from around $1,700 to roughly $2,500 between June and September. This pattern is consistent with automated trading programs executing predetermined dollar amounts, known among traders as clips.
The target dollar amount shifted over time. Trades clustered around $4,999 in earlier samples, while trades near $9,999 accounted for 72% of sampled value on June 28. A recurring $3,999 target appeared on Aug. 10, followed by $4,499 on Aug. 18 and $5,499 on Aug. 24.
Bitcoin showed a similar pattern. Two recurring trade sizes moved in lockstep as the price changed, with the larger trade staying almost exactly twice the size of the smaller one. When bitcoin traded near $76,300, the pair was 327 and 655 contracts; by the time of the analysis, it was 307 and 614 contracts.
The ether perpetual market also showed unusually heavy trading relative to open interest, or the number of outstanding positions. A snapshot showed roughly 93 million contracts of 24-hour volume against 1.5 million of open interest — a ratio of 61, meaning about 61 contracts changed hands for every one left open. That was the second-highest ratio among the 20 Kalshi perpetual markets with open interest, compared with a median of about eight. The bitcoin contract's ratio was 26.
Kalshi responds after publication
CoinDesk asked Kalshi whether one or several participants produced the repeating trade sizes, whether any were covered by market-making arrangements, and whether the exchange had found self-matching or common ownership among accounts. Kalshi had not responded by press time. However, after publication, Kalshi said in a blog post that the recurring trades came from a single market maker posting fixed-size orders under a program that pays firms a flat monthly amount to keep bids and offers available within set size and price limits.
The exchange said hundreds of distinct traders took the other side of those orders, with takers consistently faster and profitable while the market maker repeatedly traded at a disadvantage as prices moved elsewhere. Kalshi also said it mechanically blocks traders from matching against themselves, monitors for coordinated trading, and found no evidence of collusion or wash trading.
Self-clearing members had their perpetual-futures trading fees refunded under a temporary program operating since July. A separate update that would have set crypto taker fees and maker rebates at 0.003% did not take effect because it required an additional exchange notice, Kalshi said.
Who raised concerns
Pseudonymous trader known as Beni flagged the repeating sizes on the social media platform X and accused Kalshi of inflating its crypto volume. Kalshi's crypto head, who posts as IcoBeast, disputed part of that argument, saying a volume-share chart Beni cited covered prediction markets rather than perpetual futures. He added that Kalshi does not pay rebates on its crypto prediction markets and must publicly file incentives offered on its regulated exchange. The response did not identify who produced the repeating ether-perpetual trades or explain why the fixed dollar amount changed over time.
What remains unclear
Public order-book data cannot establish whether the activity reflected legitimate trading or rebate farming. The CFTC rebate program that took effect on Sept. 16 cut fees for some firms to 0.003% and paid market makers a rebate of the same size, but that program began one day before the four-day sample and almost a month after the recurring trade sizes first appeared, so it does not explain their emergence. Kalshi's account-level claims cannot be independently checked through the public feed, which contains no participant identifiers.
Why this matters
Volume is one of the first metrics traders use to judge how active and liquid a market is. High volume can make a new market appear widely used. If a large share of that activity comes from the same recurring trade sizes, understanding what drives the pattern is important for assessing what the volume actually represents. The repeated sizes suggest automated execution rather than broad organic participation, though the exchange says hundreds of traders were involved on the other side.
Sources
Newisty Editorial Team covers technology, cryptocurrency, digital products, online platforms, developer tools and the wider digital economy. Our content is researched from official sources, company announcements, public documentation, market data and other primary or reputable sources. Articles are reviewed and edited before publication for clarity, accuracy and useful context.