Coinbase Backs CFTC on Stock Perps as Hayes Says He Is Flattered

November 15, 2026 MM Crypto Team

The fight over stock perpetual futures has drawn in the biggest names in crypto. Coinbase backs CFTC stock perps in a new filing defending the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s approval of single-stock perpetual futures against a challenge from traditional market giants. Coinbase, Kalshi, Kraken parent Payward, DRW Holdings, Jump Trading and Paradigm asked a federal judge on November 9 to file a brief backing the CFTC against the Capital Markets Alliance Association, Cointelegraph reported. Two days later, BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes said he was flattered by the show of support, a decade after his old exchange launched the first Bitcoin perpetual swap in 2016.

The dispute is the CMAA stock perpetuals lawsuit, a case that will decide which regulator governs a fast-growing product in American markets. The CMAA, whose members include Cboe and Citadel Securities, sued to undo the CFTC’s approval of single-stock perpetual futures, arguing the contracts should be treated as security-based swaps. The six firms backing the CFTC argue the opposite: nothing in the law requires a security future to expire, and the contracts can sit under joint oversight of the CFTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission. The court accepted the brief on Tuesday, November 10, per Cointelegraph.

What a perpetual future is and why it matters

A perpetual future, usually shortened to perp, is a derivative contract that lets a trader bet on the price of an asset without ever owning it, and without the contract ever expiring. Traditional futures have a fixed expiry date, and the trader must close the position or roll it into a new contract. A perpetual future has no expiry date. Instead, it uses funding payments between buyers and sellers to keep the contract’s price close to the underlying asset. If the perp trades above the asset’s price, buyers pay sellers, and vice versa, keeping the contract in line indefinitely.

The product was born in crypto. BitMEX, co-founded by Arthur Hayes, launched the first Bitcoin perpetual swap in 2016, and the design quickly became the dominant way to trade crypto derivatives. Perps now dominate crypto derivatives volume, because they let traders hold leveraged positions indefinitely without rolling contracts each month. The leap to single stocks is what makes this case significant. A perpetual future on an individual US stock gives a trader the same always-on, leveraged exposure crypto traders have enjoyed for a decade, without buying the share itself. The Arthur Hayes flattered stock perps reaction reflects that history: the product he helped invent has crossed into the American stock market, and the industry’s biggest firms are now defending it in court.

The six-firm brief and the court’s acceptance

The brief filed on November 9 is notable for the breadth of its coalition. Coinbase is the largest American crypto exchange. Kalshi is the prediction market behind the disputed stock perpetuals. Payward is the parent company of Kraken, another major exchange. DRW Holdings and Jump Trading are prominent trading firms active across crypto and traditional markets, and Paradigm is a leading crypto investment firm. Together they represent the full spectrum of the digital-asset industry, and their joint filing signals that the industry sees this case as a collective interest.

The court accepted the brief on Tuesday, November 10, according to Cointelegraph, which means the judge will consider the six firms’ arguments alongside those of the CFTC itself. Acceptance of an amicus brief, a filing by interested parties not directly involved in the case, is a routine step, but it puts the industry’s legal reasoning formally before the court. The brief supports the CFTC’s position that the approval of single-stock perpetual futures was lawful. For the CFTC, the backing of six major firms is a meaningful show of strength.

The case had already produced one significant ruling. US District Judge Valerie Caproni denied the CMAA’s request for a temporary restraining order on November 3, finding the group had not shown likely irreparable harm. The order would have halted trading in the stock perpetuals while the case was decided, so the denial meant the products could keep trading. That was an early setback for the challengers, though not a ruling on the merits. The full question of whether the CFTC acted lawfully remains to be decided.

Hayes says he is flattered, a decade after BitMEX

Two days later, on November 11, Arthur Hayes weighed in with a reaction that captured the crypto world’s attention. Hayes said he was flattered by the show of support for stock perpetual futures, a decade after his old exchange launched the first Bitcoin perpetual swap in 2016. The comment was brief, but it carried weight because of who Hayes is. As the co-founder of BitMEX, he built the exchange that invented the perpetual swap and turned it into the defining product of crypto derivatives trading.

Hayes has long argued that perpetual futures are a superior way to trade, and his reaction suggests he sees the dispute as proof that traditional markets are catching up to crypto. A product invented by an offshore crypto exchange is now offered on regulated American exchanges, defended by Coinbase and challenged by the institutions that dominate stock trading.

The expiry question: future or security-based swap

At the heart of the CMAA stock perpetuals lawsuit is a simple question: does a contract with no expiry date count as a future at all? The CMAA says it does not. Its argument is that a future involves an obligation to buy or sell at a future date, and a contract that never expires has no future date. On that reading, a single-stock perpetual is not a future but a security-based swap, a derivative that sits mainly under the SEC and carries stricter limits on retail trading. If the court accepts that argument, the CFTC’s approval would be undone.

Coinbase and its allies say the opposite. They argue that nothing requires a security future to expire, and that a perpetual contract on a single stock can sit under joint CFTC and SEC oversight, AMBCrypto reported. Security futures, unlike security-based swaps, are already governed by a joint framework shared between the two agencies, and can be offered more broadly, including to retail traders. The firms’ argument is that the law’s definition of a security future does not include an expiry requirement, so a contract without one can still qualify, and the CFTC was within its authority when it approved the products.

The stakes are enormous. If perps are security futures, they can trade on exchanges registered with both agencies, with retail access and the lighter-touch regime the CFTC and SEC have built for those products. If they are security-based swaps, they fall mainly under the SEC, where the rules are stricter and retail access is far more limited. The same contract could face two entirely different regulatory worlds depending on which label the court applies. That is why the case is being watched far beyond the firms directly involved.

What is at stake for retail access and the wider market

The CMAA’s own filings show how quickly stock perps have grown. The group cited about 375 million dollars in reported 24-hour notional volume for Kalshi’s stock perpetuals shortly after launch, arguing the products were already drawing business from traditional stock markets. Notional volume is the total value of the underlying assets referenced, and a figure of that size within days of launch suggests genuine demand. The CMAA presents that growth as evidence of harm to traditional markets. The defenders present it as evidence that traders want the product.

The SEC has also weighed in, submitting a proposed court brief on Monday opposing the request to pause trading, and saying it was reviewing the exchanges’ listing rules. The position is significant because the SEC is the regulator that would gain authority if the CMAA’s argument prevails. Its opposition to pausing trading suggests it does not see an emergency requiring the products to be halted. The agency’s stance complicates the CMAA’s case, since the regulator most likely to benefit from a ruling in the group’s favour has declined to support its request for immediate relief.

For retail traders, the outcome will decide whether stock perps become mainstream or remain a niche offering for professionals. Perpetual futures are attractive to retail traders because they offer leverage, continuous trading and the ability to bet on falling prices as easily as rising ones. They are also risky, because leverage amplifies losses as well as gains. Regulators have traditionally restricted retail access to complex derivatives for exactly that reason. The court’s decision will determine whether those restrictions apply to stock perps, or whether the products can reach the retail audience that already trades options and leveraged exchange-traded funds. Either way, the case is a landmark for the convergence of crypto and traditional finance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a perpetual future? A perpetual future is a derivative contract that lets a trader bet on an asset’s price without owning it and without the contract ever expiring, using funding payments to track the underlying asset.

Who filed the brief backing the CFTC? Coinbase, Kalshi, Kraken parent Payward, DRW Holdings, Jump Trading and Paradigm asked a federal judge on November 9 to file a brief backing the CFTC, accepted by the court on Tuesday, November 10.

Why did Arthur Hayes say he was flattered? Hayes, the BitMEX co-founder whose exchange launched the first Bitcoin perpetual swap in 2016, said on November 11 he was flattered by the support for stock perpetual futures a decade later.

What does the CMAA argue? The CMAA argues a contract with no expiry is not a future but a security-based swap, which would sit mainly under the SEC and carry stricter limits on retail trading.

What do Coinbase and its allies argue? They say nothing requires a security future to expire, which would leave the contracts under joint CFTC and SEC oversight; the SEC has opposed pausing trading while reviewing the listing rules.

Source: CryptoCompass

MM Crypto Analysis Web