Binance delists 19 margin pairs on Feb 26, citing liquidity, volume, and risk controls.

Cryptocurrency exchange Binance announced plans to remove 19 margin trading pairs from its platform, effective February 26 at 09:00 UTC, according to a statement posted on the company’s official website.

The delisting will affect 10 cross margin trading pairs and nine isolated margin trading pairs, the exchange stated.

The decision follows periodic evaluations of criteria including liquidity, trading volume, and risk factors associated with the affected pairs, according to the announcement. Binance conducts regular listing reviews aimed at protecting user security and maintaining market stability in margin markets, the company said.

Users holding open positions in the affected trading pairs must close their positions or make necessary adjustments before the specified deadline, the exchange warned. Failure to do so may result in automatic liquidation processes being activated by the system, according to the announcement.

The statement did not provide information regarding any changes to spot markets. The exchange advised investors to monitor official announcements for updates.

Binance operates as one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges globally by trading volume.

The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is rapidly emerging as one of the world’s most structured environments for regulated digital asset markets. Regulated hubs like the UAE, alongside fast-growing grassroots adoption across North Africa, create a $250B addressible market. According to the World Crypto Rankings 2025 report released by DL and Bybit, the UAE ranks #1 in MENA and 5th globally for crypto adoption. The country recorded $56 billion in crypto inflows between 2024-25, reflecting a 33% YoY growth, with institutional transfers accounting for roughly half of the activity. In December 2024, the MENA-wide digital asset transaction volumes also reached their monthly peak at $60B, indicating a robust regional demand beyond the Gulf hubs.

This rapid expansion of regulated digital asset activity is driving demand for compliant crypto exchange software development tailored to regional licensing, banking integrations, and asset-issuance requirements. Across the Gulf, crypto trading platforms are evolving beyond retail exchanges into regulated financial infrastructure supporting custody, brokerage, tokenized-asset issuance, and cross-border digital-asset settlement within unified venues.

For institutions, fintech operators, and market entrants, launching cryptocurrency exchange software in the MENA region, therefore, requires architecture and features aligned with both market demand and regulatory frameworks. The guide outlines the core architecture, essential features, regulatory requirements, and step-by-step process needed to deploy crypto exchange software across the MENA region.

Why the MENA Region Is Becoming a Global Crypto Exchange Hub?

• Regulatory clarity led by the UAE and Bahrain

VARA (UAE), ADGM (Abu Dhabi), CBB (Bahrain), and emerging Saudi regulatory frameworks provide licensing pathways for crypto exchange software, custodians, and brokers across the region.

• Rapid growth in regulated digital-asset activity

As stated earlier, the UAE processed tens of billions in crypto flows and ranks among the leading global adoption markets.

• Institutional and high-value transaction dominance

According to Chainanalysis, institutional and VIP-sized transfers accounted for a substantial share of regional crypto activity in 2024-2025, reinforcing demand for custody-integrated and OTC-capable exchange infrastructure.

• Expansion of tokenized real-world asset markets

GCC economies are advancing regulated tokenization initiatives, including national real-estate tokenization programs and large-scale asset-issuance pilots.

• High cross-border capital and remittance flows

GCC countries collectively processed over USD 131.5 billion in outbound remittances annually in 2023. Stablecoin settlement and digital-asset transfers have captured more than 10-20% of the remittance market globally over the past year.

• Adoption beyond regulated hubs

MENA crypto exchange development opportunity isn’t limited to the UAE or middle east. North African markets, such as Egypt and Morocco, rank among the world’s top crypto-adoption economies, despite having restrictive regimes, indicating latent exchange demand across the broader region.

• Institutional capital entering digital assets

Several banks, brokers, and investment firms are launching regulated crypto trading services. Over the past few years, the following regional banks and institutions in the UAE have embedded regulated digital asset offerings into their existing services.

Core Architecture & Essential Features for MENA-Ready Crypto Exchange Development

Launching crypto exchange software in the MENA region requires an architecture that supports regulated trading, tokenized asset issuance, compliance controls, and financial integration aligned with regional markets. Core infrastructure components and essential features must, therefore, include:

1. Multi-Asset Trading and OTC Execution Engine

As mentioned above, the MENA markets show significant demand for high-value, specific and institutional-size transactions. Cryptocurrency exchange software must therefore support spot, OTC and block-trade execution with configurable spreads, competitive pricing, and broker-assisted workflows.

2. RWA Tokenization and Listing Infrastructure

Observing the pace of regional tokenization initiatives, no crypto exchange software can afford to exclude asset issuance and listing. Crypto trading platforms must build infrastructure to onboard, list and support secondary trading of tokenized RWAs such as real estate, funds, and structured investments within the same venue as crypto assets.

3. Institutional Custody and Settlement Controls

Cryptocurrency exchange development requires custody controls such as segregated wallets, managed accounts, settlement approvals, and reporting suitable for regulated financial entities to support increasing institutional participation in MENA.

4. Stablecoin Transfer and Settlement Capability

Given the region’s massive remittance flows and stablecoin adoption, cryptocurrency exchanges should facilitate deposits, withdrawals, and on-platform cross-border value transfers alongside trading functionality.

5. GCC Banking and Fiat Integration

Cryptocurrency exchange software must connect to regional banking rails for deposits and withdrawals in local currencies and stablecoins redemptions, enabling compliant treasury and settlement operations.

6. Compliance, Surveillance, and Reporting Systems

For MENA-based cryptocurrency exchange development, businesses must integrate AML/KYC onboarding, transaction monitoring and regulatory reporting workflows required by VARA and other frameworks. 

7. Sharia-Aligned Asset and Market Configuration

Islamic-finance-alligned markets require configurable screening of assets, trading rules and product structures to support Sharia-compliant digital-asset offerings. Cryptocurrency exchange software targeting middle east markets must integrate such controls to enhance authorities and peoples’ confidence in their platforms.

8. Privacy and Data Governance Controls

Apart from the Sharia regime, various regional data protection and AML frameworks govern crypto activity in the region. Crypto exchange software built for the MENA markets must, therefore, implement user-data governance, permissioned visibility and transaction monitoring controls to comply with such requirements.

Antier recently introduced VARA-ready white label crypto exchange infrastructure for UAE and MENA markets, reflecting growing demand for regulated digital-asset venues capable of supporting both trading and compliant asset issuance within unified exchange environments. For institutions planning early entry into the region, it combines remittance, asset issuance, banking connectivity, robust custody and other region-relevant functionalities.

What are the Regulatory Requirements for Launching a Crypto Exchange in MENA?

Since regulatory requirements differ across MENA jurisdictions, exchange operator must collaborate with legal council at cryptocurrency exchange development company to pursue country-specific licensing strategies while deploying adaptable exchange infrastructure.

How Antier Enables MENA Crypto Exchange Software Launches

It is clear that launching a regulated crypto exchange software in the MENA region requires fool-proof infrastructures embedded with regional-specific architecture and feature components. Those building crypto exchange software must now build crypto exchange superapps with features that resonate with the target region’s demand.

Antier’s VARA-ready white label crypto exchange infrastructure supports the regional evolution by combining regulated trading, RWA tokenization, institutional custody, banking connectivity, and compliance controls aligned with MENA regulatory frameworks. This enables financial institutions, fintech operators, and market entrants to deploy crypto exchange software tailored to regional licensing and market requirements without building from scratch.

For organizations planning entry into MENA digital-asset markets, adopting jurisdiction-aligned exchange architecture early provides a structural advantage in licensing readiness and banking integration. As the region continues to formalize regulated digital-asset ecosystems, cryptocurrency exchange software built on compliant and adaptable infrastructure will be best positioned to scale across multiple MENA jurisdictions.

Talk to our experts to get started with MENA-alligned crypto exchange development.

The Governance Exploit Nobody Is Pricing In. Bridges get hacked. That’s old news. We’ve seen the carnage: nine-figure exploits, drained liquidity, emergency shutdowns, Twitter threads filled with “funds are safu” copium.

From Ronin Network to Wormhole, bridge exploits have become a recurring tax on innovation. But here’s the uncomfortable truth. The next systemic risk in crypto probably won’t be a bridge exploit. It’ll be a governance exploit enabled by cross-chain voting power. And almost nobody is pricing it in.

The Shift: From Asset Bridges to Power Bridges

Cross-chain infrastructure has evolved.

We’re no longer just bridging tokens for yield. We’re bridging:

Protocols increasingly allow governance tokens to exist on multiple chains simultaneously — often via wrapped representations or omnichain token standards (like those enabled by LayerZero Labs).

This improves capital efficiency and participation.

But it also introduces a new attack surface:

The separation of voting power from finality.

The Core Problem: Governance Is Local. Voting Power Is Not.

Governance contracts typically live on a single “home” chain.

But voting power can be represented across multiple chains.

This creates a dangerous gap:

1. Tokens are locked on Chain A

2. Voting power is mirrored on Chain B

3. Governance decisions are executed on Chain A

If the system relies on cross-chain messaging to sync voting balances, any delay, exploit, or manipulation in that messaging layer becomes a governance vector.

You don’t need to drain liquidity.

You just need to distort voting power long enough.

And governance proposals often pass with shockingly low turnout.

The Attack Path Nobody Talks About

Let’s walk through a hypothetical.

Step 1: Acquire or Manipulate Voting Power Cross-Chain

An attacker:

• Borrows governance tokens

• Bridges them to a secondary chain

• Exploits a delay in balance updates

• Or abuses inconsistencies in wrapped token accounting

In poorly designed systems, the same underlying tokens may temporarily influence voting in multiple domains.

Even if briefly.

Even if “just a bug.”

Governance doesn’t need hours. It needs one block.

Step 2: Flash Governance

We’ve already seen governance flash-loan exploits in DeFi.

The most infamous example? The attack on Beanstalk in 2022.

The attacker used flash loans to acquire massive voting power, passed a malicious proposal, and drained ~$182M.

Now imagine that dynamic — but across chains.

Flash-loaned tokens → bridged representation → governance vote → malicious proposal executed → unwind.

All before the watchers even understand what happened.

Step 3: Proposal Payloads as Weapons

Governance proposals can:

If cross-chain voting power is compromised, the proposal payload becomes the exploit.

No bridge drain required.

Just governance “working as designed.”

Why Markets Aren’t Pricing This Risk

Three reasons.

1. Everyone Is Still Fighting the Last War

After major bridge hacks, teams hardened signature validation and multisig thresholds.

But governance-layer risk is subtler.

It doesn’t show up as “TVL at risk” on dashboards.

It shows up as “who controls protocol direction.”

That’s harder to quantify.

2. Voting Participation Is Low

Many DAOs struggle to get 10–20% participation.

Which means:

You don’t need 51%.

You need slightly more than apathy.

Cross-chain voting power distortions don’t need to be massive. They just need to be decisive.

3. Composability Multiplies Complexity

Modern governance stacks combine:

• Delegation contracts

• Token wrappers

• Cross-chain messaging

• Snapshot systems

• Execution timelocks

Each layer introduces potential inconsistencies.

And composability means failures cascade.

Where the Real Risk Lives

This isn’t about one protocol.

It’s systemic.

The more governance tokens become:

The more fragile governance assumptions become.

If a governance token is:

You’ve built a multi-dimensional voting derivative.

And derivatives break under stress.

Ask TradFi. They have scars.

The Governance Exploit Nobody Is Pricing In

Markets price:

• Smart contract risk

• Bridge exploit risk

• Oracle manipulation risk

But they do not price:

Cross-domain voting synchronization risk.

No dashboards are tracking:

• Governance message latency

• Cross-chain vote desync windows

• Wrapped-token vote inflation

• Double-counted delegation

Yet these variables may determine who controls billion-dollar treasuries.

What Builders Should Be Doing (Now)

If you’re designing cross-chain governance:

1. Separate Voting Power from Bridged Liquidity

Avoid naïve 1:1 mirroring without strict finality checks.

2. Introduce Vote Finality Windows

Require:

• Cross-chain state verification

• Message settlement delays

• Proof-of-lock confirmations

Before votes are counted.

3. Use Decay or Cooldowns on Newly Bridged Tokens

Voting power shouldn’t activate instantly after bridging.

If tokens just moved chains 5 seconds ago, maybe they shouldn’t decide protocol destiny.

4. Simulate Governance Stress Scenarios

Run adversarial simulations:

If your governance model breaks under simulation, it will break in production.

What Investors Should Be Asking

Before allocating to a multi-chain DAO:

• Where does governance live?

• How is voting power mirrored?

• Can voting power be double-counted during bridge latency?

• What happens if the messaging layer stalls?

• Is there a time lock between the vote and execution?

If the answers are vague, the risk is real.

And it’s not priced in.

The Inevitable Wake-Up Call

Crypto learns through catastrophe.

• Smart contract exploits → audits became standard.

• Oracle exploits → TWAP and redundancy

• Bridge hacks → validator hardening

Governance-layer cross-chain exploits are likely next.

And when it happens, it won’t look like a hack.

It’ll look like a proposal that “passed.”

That’s the scary part.

Final Thought

Cross-chain infrastructure is powerful. It enables capital mobility, global participation, and modular design.

But it also decouples authority from location.

And when authority becomes fluid across chains, attackers don’t need to steal funds.

They just need to win a vote.

That’s the governance exploit nobody is pricing in.

And by the time the market does, it’ll already be too late.

REQUEST AN ARTICLE

Global financial services firm Payoneer is the latest in a growing number of companies that have filed for a national trust banking charter in the US, which could enable it to issue a stablecoin and provide various crypto services.

Payoneer said on Tuesday it filed with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to form PAYO Digital Bank, a week after it partnered with stablecoin infrastructure firm Bridge to add stablecoin capabilities to its platform that is mainly focused on cross-border transactions.

Payoneer said that it is seeking to issue a GENIUS Act-compliant stablecoin, PAYO-USD, to serve as the holding currency in Payoneer wallets, in addition to allowing customers to pay and receive stablecoins.

OCC approval would also enable Payoneer to manage PAYO-USD reserves, offer custodial services and enable customers to convert between the stablecoins into their local currency.

“We believe stablecoins will play a meaningful role in the future of global trade,” said Payoneer CEO John Caplan.

The OCC gave conditional approval to Crypto.com for a charter on Monday, adding to the banking charters won by crypto companies Circle, Ripple, Fidelity Digital Assets, BitGo and Paxos in December.

Related: Better, Framework Ventures reach $500M stablecoin mortgage financing deal

The Trump family’s World Liberty Financial also applied for one in January to expand the use of its USD1 (USD1) stablecoin, but is still awaiting a decision. 

Crypto trading platform Laser Platform also submitted an application in January, while Coinbase has been awaiting a decision on its application since October.

Stablecoins ideal for business cross-border transfers: Payoneer

Payoneer said OCC approval would allow it to offer its nearly two million customers, which are mostly small and medium-sized businesses, a regulated stablecoin solution to simplify cross-border trade.