Binance's recent delistings, which include Flamingo (FLM), Kadena (KDA), and Perpetual Protocol (PERP), have stirred quite a bit of conversation and anxiety. The reasons for these actions stem from a review process meant to ensure compliance, adequate liquidity, and project commitment. The delisting process was initiated on October 28, 2025, and the public announcement followed shortly after, with withdrawals closing on November 19, 2025.
Why do delistings occur?
The delisting of assets is not unprecedented. They can happen due to low trading volumes, stagnant development, and failure to comply with exchange regulations. When Binance decided to remove these tokens, we saw immediate price movements—some tokens plummeted while others experienced surges fueled by panic buying. Such volatility is a characteristic of the cryptocurrency market, but it also highlights the power major exchanges like Binance hold over trader perceptions.
How does this impact the market?
The immediate aftermath of a delisting can be chaotic. Following the Binance announcement, the affected tokens exhibited pronounced price fluctuations. KDA and PERP encountered downward pressure, exacerbated by investors' worries. Conversely, FLM saw some upward movement, possibly due to frantic buying as traders rushed to take advantage of what they thought was an opportunity.
But beyond immediate impacts, the consequences are more profound. A delisted project may find itself in a liquidity desert, unable to attract new users or investors, with possible cascading effects on broader market sentiment.
What measures can fintech startups take?
For fintech startups, particularly in Asia, the effects of such sudden delistings can be mitigated through a few strategies.
Maintaining compliance with regulations and exchange requirements should be paramount. Adopting rigorous AML and KYC procedures can engender trust among investors and regulators alike.
Diversity in exchange listings is also vital. Startups that have their tokens on multiple platforms, including decentralized exchanges (DEXs), are less susceptible to the fallout of any individual exchange delisting.
Community engagement is equally essential. Keeping stakeholders informed and updated during crises can maintain investor confidence.
Vigilance regarding trading volumes and liquidity levels is another practical approach. By sustaining a healthy level of market activity, startups can decrease the risk of being flagged for delisting.
Finally, as funding becomes tighter, focusing on sustainable unit economics and demonstrating tangible economic value is crucial for retaining investor interest.
What does this mean for DeFi projects?
The long-term repercussions for DeFi projects are complex. On one side, the delisting process may serve as a market filter, favoring projects with strong fundamentals and active communities. This could contribute to a more robust DeFi ecosystem.
However, these challenges could be daunting for smaller projects. Without the exposure and liquidity from major exchanges, their relevance may wane. The DeFi landscape could experience a consolidation, with only the strongest projects standing out.
Delistings can also prompt investors to reconsider project values, leading to capital reallocations towards more resilient projects and hastening the maturation of the DeFi space.
Are there examples of success after delisting?
There are cases where projects have managed to rebound post-delisting. Monero (XMR) is a prime example, recovering its value through a devoted community and ongoing development.
Other projects, like Waves (WAVES) and OMG Network (OMG), have had varied results. Their recovery depended on their adaptability and the strength of their community.
Projects able to pivot their business models or tap into new markets have fared better. The ability to sustain development and nurture a loyal community often dictates the success of a project in the shadow of a delisting.
