Inside Bitget: Gracy Chen on the Mantra collapse, copy trading risks and crypto transparency

• The Mantra collapse exposed industry-wide structural risks ranging from poor liquidity to aggressive liquidation, according to Bitget CEO Gracy Chen.
• Proof of reserves remains a core pillar of transparency but requires continuous improvement on disclosures, liabilities and asset backing.
• Bitget reports deep order books amid notable growth in institutional spot trading and retail-focused services, including copy trading and AI-driven setups.

In an exclusive interview with FXStreet, Bitget CEO Gracy Chen addresses one of the crypto industry’s cautionary tales: the roughly 90% crash of the Mantra (OM) token on April 13, 2025. Billions in market value were erased within hours as OM crashed from highs above $6.00 to approximately $0.35 during a period of thin liquidity.

John Patrick Mullin, co-founder and CEO of Mantra, attributed the collapse largely to “reckless forced closures initiated by centralized exchanges (CEXs) on OM account holders.”

Asked about Mullin's claim that forced liquidations by centralized exchanges triggered the crash, Chen said the incident revealed structural gaps that cut across the board, highlighting “poor liquidity, opaque market‑maker behavior, and aggressive liquidation mechanics that can hit hardest during low‑liquidity hours.”

“We’re using incidents like this to sharpen our own internal rules. That’s why we recently launched an enhanced Market Integrity and Token Accountability Framework: stricter standards for projects and market makers, deeper spot‑risk analysis, faster escalation paths, and a clearer process for flagging or reporting high‑risk situations,” Ched explained.

Copy trading, reserves and institutional shift

The copy trading social feature continues to gain momentum across exchanges, attracting novice investors while democratizing professional strategies. However, the same feature carries significant risks, particularly in moments when exits are delayed.

Question: Bitget’s copy trading is a flagship product, and followers can get hurt if exits are delayed. What does the on-chain data say?

Answer: On‑chain data can show wallet movements, liquidity stress, and unusual flows, but it cannot automatically prevent slippage or delayed exits when many followers try to execute the same position at once. The core challenge in copy trading is crowd‑risk: large numbers of users reacting to the same signal, which can strain execution and widen spreads.

We treat copy trading as a risk‑managed product. Followers use dedicated sub‑accounts or MT5‑linked CFD accounts, and they can set maximum position sizes, profit‑sharing caps, and stop‑loss levels so they do not blindly mirror the lead‑trader’s exact exposure.

The crypto market has grown beyond spot and derivatives, with Bitget expanding its product suite, which currently spans copy trading, decentralized wallet, tokenized equities and even a launchpad for new projects. That said, data and information separate successful investors from loss-making traders. At the same time, it can lead to malicious activity and harm users, particularly by exploiting structural information advantages.

Question: Bitget now offers spot, futures, copy trading, a DEX wallet, tokenized stocks, and launchpad under one roof. How do you ringfence data flows to avoid structural information advantage?

Answer: We enforce strict internal separation and graded access controls over data. Trading behavior, order‑flow analytics, and user‑level signals are segmented so no product line can directly benefit from another’s privileged view. Governance over data use is centralized, and any cross‑product analytics must pass through predefined, auditable rules.

Exchanges are increasingly becoming super applications offering services that appeal to both retail and institutional investors. The need to institutionalize platforms, however, presents a significant challenge in balancing retail-focused and institutional-oriented needs.

Question: Bitget’s user mix shifted from mostly retail to roughly 50/50 retail and institutional over the past year. What does that mean for a retail trader in terms of depth, slippage, and whether the exchange is still optimized for them?
Answer: That shift has deepened order books, tightened spreads, and improved price stability in normal conditions, which has reduced average slippage for retail traders.

The platform remains optimized around simplicity and clear risk boundaries. We keep the interface straightforward, put risk disclosures where users must see them, and ensure advanced tools - copy trading, futures, and AI‑driven setups - do not quietly push retail into exposures they do not fully understand.

Pushing beyond proof of reserves

Proof of reserves (PoRs) have become the gold standard for CEXs to demonstrate they hold sufficient assets to back user platform deposits, with most aiming for 1:1 or higher backing. However, transparency issues quickly arise, particularly when exchanges only show assets, leaving out liabilities. Third-party audits increase transparency through verifications, but implementation remains low across the market.

Question: Bitget’s February 2026 PoR showed a 352% BTC reserve ratio and 169% total reserve ratio, but PoR only shows assets, not liabilities. Is Bitget moving toward full Proof of Solvency with third-party verification of both sides of the balance sheet?

Answer: Indeed, PoR alone does not cover liabilities or the full balance‑sheet picture, and that gap is exactly why the industry needs to move toward stronger proof‑of‑solvency‑style standards.

We call on the wider industry to continue improving their reporting and transparency, with clearer disclosure of funding structures, how liabilities are managed, and how different products are backed across the balance sheet. Bitget is using our current PoR framework as a solid foundation, and we will continue to raise our own standards in line with broader expectations.

The Mantra collapse, although a scar for many, marks a turning point for the crypto industry. It prompts deep evaluation from industry leaders, especially stakeholders and decision-makers across centralized exchanges, to prioritize transparency, improve platform safety and safeguard all users, from institutions to retail.