Overview On the question of which exchange has the best liquidity, the major public rankings available in 2026 give different answers, and the source of the disagreement is not data quality but the meOverview On the question of which exchange has the best liquidity, the major public rankings available in 2026 give different answers, and the source of the disagreement is not data quality but the me

Crypto Exchange Liquidity Ranking 2026: Best Exchanges for Bitcoin & Ethereum (Spot vs. Futures)

#CEX

BTC$80,289.96-1.54%

ETH$2,326.81-1.79%

ORDER$0.0341-8.82%

Author: James Mitchell

2026/10/29 17:43

Overview

On the question of which exchange has the best liquidity, the major public rankings available in 2026 give different answers, and the source of the disagreement is not data quality but the measurement band.

TokenInsight's monthly report places MEXC's combined BTC and ETH futures depth first among nine surveyed exchanges at the near-touch 0.03% band. CoinGlass, using two-sided depth within ±1% of the mid price, has Binance leading its BTC futures table at $236 million for a 44.0% share. CoinGecko, measuring eight exchanges by absolute price bands, puts Binance at 25.3% of BTC liquidity while MEXC leads SOL at market price with $934,000, ahead of Binance.

These conclusions do not conflict, because they measure different things. The narrowest band is one basis point and the widest is 500, a spread of 500 times. The exchange with the most resting size within one basis point and the exchange that can absorb the largest order before price moves 1% need not be the same venue.

More direct evidence comes from within a single dataset. CoinGecko's figures show MEXC leading SOL at market price but overtaken by Bitget and Coinbase beyond ±$0.20, and Binance leading XRP at market price but overtaken by Coinbase at ±$0.0025. The same data, the same moment, a different band and a different leader.

The useful question is therefore not which venue is best but which band applies at your order size. This article sets out each ranking by band from narrowest to widest and gives the basis for choosing a reference measure by order size.

Key Takeaways

Four principal data sources use four different bands, ranging from one basis point to 500, a spread of 500 times, so differing rankings are expected rather than anomalous.

Near-touch bands (0.01% to 0.05%): in TokenInsight's September report, MEXC's combined BTC and ETH futures depth of $21.03 million at the 0.03% band was deepest among nine.

Intermediate bands (roughly 12.5 to 15 basis points): in CoinGecko's eight-exchange comparison Binance holds 25.3% of BTC liquidity and also leads ETH, where MEXC sits at roughly $450,000.

Wide band (±1%): CoinGlass's BTC futures depth table runs Binance $236M, OKX $112M, Bybit $74.36M, Bitget $71.70M and Gate $42.64M.

Band-driven leadership change is verifiable within one dataset: MEXC leads SOL at market price and is overtaken by Bitget and Coinbase beyond ±$0.20.

Market-wide depth has recovered substantially: per CoinDesk Research, BTC depth within 1% stood at roughly $11.7 million on October 7, about 75% above the level on the October 10, 2025 flash crash day.

Altcoins moved the other way: in the same work, the altcoin basket's depth within 5% is down roughly one third from the start of 2025.

Choosing a band by order size: below $1 million read the 0.01% to 0.03% bands, around several million read 0.03% to 0.05%, and only above tens of millions does ±1% apply.

Four Bands, Four Answers

Placing the measurement approaches side by side locates the source of disagreement.

Source	Measurement band	In basis points	Coverage	Named exchanges
TokenInsight monthly reports	0.01%, 0.03%, 0.05%	1 to 5	BTC and ETH combined, spot and futures separated	9 surveyed, 1 named
CoinGecko CEX liquidity report	Absolute bands such as BTC ±$100, ETH ±$3	Roughly 12.5 to 15	By asset, covering BTC, ETH, XRP, SOL, DOGE	8 surveyed, 7 named
CoinGlass derivatives reports	Two-sided within ±1% of mid	100	BTC and ETH separated, spot and futures separated	5, all named
CoinDesk Research	0.5%, 1%, 5%	50 to 500	BTC, ETH and an altcoin basket	None, aggregate only

The narrowest and widest differ by 500 times. Near-touch bands measure how much sits immediately at the best prices, governing the execution cost of small and mid-size orders, while wide bands measure total absorbable size before price moves a given distance, governing whether a large order completes within acceptable impact. They answer different questions.

For how the bands themselves work, see is volume the same as liquidity, order book depth explained from 0.01% to 0.10% bands.

Near-Touch Bands: 0.01% to 0.05%

TokenInsight's monthly liquidity reports use the narrowest set of bands across a sample of eight to nine major exchanges. Venues other than MEXC are unnamed in the July and September editions, while third-party coverage of the May edition listed them as Binance, Bitget, OKX, KuCoin, Bybit, MEXC and HTX.

Futures Depth

Report month	Band	MEXC figure	Rank	Sample
September 2026	0.03%	$21.03M	First	9
July 2026	0.03%	$15.71M	First	9
July 2026	0.05%	$20.83M	Third, within 2.1% of the leader	9
May 2026	0.05% and 0.1%	Not separately disclosed	Bitget, OKX and Binance led	8

This set demonstrates the band effect on its own. Within the same July report, MEXC ranked first at the 0.03% band and third at 0.05%. The May report, measuring futures at the wider 0.05% and 0.1% bands, had Bitget, OKX and Binance leading, with Bybit narrowing the gap at the wider band.

One internal comparison also measures the change without relying on rank: depth at a wider band necessarily contains everything within a narrower one, and September's $21.03 million at the 0.03% band exceeds July's $20.83 million measured out to 0.05%.

Spot Depth

Report month	Band	MEXC figure	Rank
September 2026	0.01%	About $1.35M	Described as tied for first
September 2026	0.03%	$3.58M	Second
July 2026	0.01%	$0.91M	Second, leader at $0.92M
July 2026	0.03%	$1.76M	Third
May 2026	0.03% and 0.05%	Not separately disclosed	Binance led, Bitget second, KuCoin and OKX next tier

The band effect appears on the spot side as well. In September MEXC was described as tied for first at 0.01% and placed second at 0.03%; in July it placed second at 0.01% and third at 0.03%. The May report had Binance leading at the 0.03% and 0.05% bands.

Slippage

Market and order size	Median slippage	P90 slippage	Report month	Rank wording
BTC spot $500K sell	0.005%	Not disclosed	September	Lowest median in the report
ETH futures $500K sell	0.003%	0.007%	September	Among the best
ETH futures $1M sell	0.008%	0.013%	September	Among the best
BTC spot $100K sell	0.004%	0.013%	July	P90 lowest in sample
BTC futures $500K sell	0.003%	Not disclosed	July	Second
BTC futures $1M sell	0.009%	Not disclosed	July	Second
ETH futures $1M sell	0.015%	0.022%	July	P90 lowest in sample
BTC spot $1M sell	0.022%	Not disclosed	May	Binance lowest
BTC futures $1M sell	0.008%	Not disclosed	May	Bitget lowest
BTC futures $5M sell	0.033%	Not disclosed	May	Bitget lowest

The median describes the typical case while P90 describes the worst of every ten executions. A median that improves while P90 holds still indicates depth that thickens in calm conditions but not under stress; both improving together indicates the improvement holds in the tail. Note that at magnitudes such as 0.003% these figures carry only one significant digit, so ratios should not be computed between them.

On the relationship between order size and slippage, see why a 100K order fills worse than a 10K order.

Intermediate Bands: Eight Exchanges by Absolute Price Range

CoinGecko's CEX liquidity report uses absolute price bands rather than percentages across a sample of eight exchanges, seven of them named: Binance, Bitget, OKX, MEXC, Coinbase, Bybit and Kraken. The page was updated on September 30.

BTC at ±$100

Median cumulative depth across the eight exchanges runs $29 million on the buy side and $37 million on the sell side, an increase of almost 50% over 2025. Binance posts $7.3 million buy and $8.3 million sell for 25.3% of total liquidity across the eight, with Bitget and OKX at roughly $4 million to $5 million each.

At current BTC price levels, ±$100 corresponds to roughly 12.5 basis points, sitting between TokenInsight's 0.05% band and CoinGlass's ±1%.

ETH at ±$3

That band corresponds to roughly 0.15%. Median liquidity across the eight runs $13 million to $14 million, roughly 35% to 45% of BTC's at the same band, against at least 60% in 2025. Seven of the eight exceed $1 million per side, while MEXC sits at roughly $450,000. Binance leads, followed by Bitget and OKX, with Bitget's depth rising sharply at the ±$10 interval.

Direct Evidence of the Band Effect

The report's results for other assets illustrate most clearly how the band changes the ranking.

Asset	Leader at market price	Change at wider bands
XRP	Binance	Overtaken by Coinbase at ±$0.0025, roughly 0.1%
SOL	MEXC at $934,000, ahead of Binance	Overtaken by Bitget and Coinbase beyond ±$0.20; across ±2% Coinbase exceeds $6M buy and $4M sell
DOGE	Only Binance, MEXC and OKX exceed $200,000 at market price, with MEXC above $443,000	MEXC regains the lead beyond ±$0.0006 but tapers to roughly $2M per side beyond ±1%

These rank changes occur within the same dataset at the same moment, involving no cross-source methodological difference whatsoever. They establish directly that rankings move with the band rather than with disagreement between providers.

The report also records one change in scale: SOL's combined single-sided liquidity across the eight fell from roughly $28 million in 2025 to roughly $20 million in 2026, a decline of over 28.5%. XRP at the ±$0.025 band shows a median of roughly $18 million in bids against roughly $14 million in asks for total depth near $30 million, close to 2025, though with less symmetry between the two sides than in 2025.

The Wide Band: Two-Sided Depth Within ±1%

CoinGlass's derivatives reports use two-sided depth within ±1% of the mid price as their only depth measure, covering the first half of 2026 with all sampled venues named.

BTC Futures, Two-Sided Depth Within ±1%

Exchange	Depth	Share
Binance	$236M	44.0%
OKX	$112M	20.8%
Bybit	$74.36M	13.9%
Bitget	$71.70M	13.4%
Gate	$42.64M	7.9%

The five total roughly $537 million, with Binance and OKX together at 64.8%. The report's own wording is that executable liquidity for large BTC orders remained concentrated on a small number of leading venues.

ETH Futures, Two-Sided Depth Within ±1%

Exchange	Depth	Share
Binance	$109M	28.7%
Bitget	$81.37M	21.4%
OKX	$73.35M	19.2%
Bybit	$62.61M	16.4%
Gate	$54.35M	14.3%

ETH's top two total 50.1%, which is 14.8 percentage points below BTC, indicating that wide-band ETH liquidity is more dispersed than BTC's.

Spot Against Futures

The same firm's first-quarter 2026 report also uses the ±1% measure, with its depth table listing three venues.

Market	Binance	OKX	Bybit
BTC futures	About $284M	About $160M	About $76.55M
BTC spot	About $37.54M	About $20.18M	About $26.82M
ETH futures	About $139M	About $117M	About $90.15M
ETH spot	About $16.84M	About $10.57M	About $11.58M

Futures depth at the same venue generally runs several times spot depth. Taking Binance's BTC, futures at roughly $284 million against spot at roughly $37.54 million is a gap of roughly 7.6 times. Spot and futures liquidity rankings therefore need reading separately and cannot be inferred from one another.

Volume and Open Interest Distribution

Per the same first-half report, derivatives volume share runs Binance 26.6%, OKX 11.9%, Bybit 7.7%, MEXC 7.7%, Gate 7.2%, Bitget 4.8% and CME 4.1%, while average daily open interest share runs Binance 21.3%, CME 12.0%, Gate 9.1%, MEXC 7.9%, OKX 5.9% and Bitget 5.7%.

Neither ordering matches the ±1% depth table. The three sets measure trading activity, position size and executable depth respectively, and none substitutes for another.

Market-Wide Depth Recovery

Beyond comparisons between exchanges, the market's overall depth level also affects real execution costs. On the first anniversary of the October 10, 2025 flash crash, CoinDesk Research compared market depth across four dates at the 0.5%, 1% and 5% bands, covering major centralized exchanges in aggregate rather than by venue.

Measure	Start of 2025	October 10, 2025	Start of 2026	October 7, 2026
BTC depth within 1%	About $6.9M	Baseline	About $9M	About $11.7M
BTC depth within 5%	About $24M	Not disclosed	Not disclosed	About $24M
ETH depth within 0.5%	Not disclosed	Baseline	Not disclosed	About $4.2M
ETH depth within 1%	Not disclosed	Baseline	Not disclosed	About $5.3M

BTC depth within 1% sits roughly 75% above the level on crash day, while ETH depth within 0.5% has more than doubled from that day and depth within 1% has risen roughly three quarters. Since BTC trades roughly one third below its pre-crash level, the dollar increase reflects more committed capital rather than price effects.

The opposing signal comes from altcoins. In the same firm's altcoin basket, dollar depth peaked on January 1, 2025 and has declined at every measured date since, with depth within 5% down roughly one third from the start of 2025 to roughly $2 million and depth within 1% down roughly one sixth.

Short-term variability also warrants attention: during a sell-off between October 7 and 8, BTC depth within 1% fell roughly 12%. Any depth figure is a snapshot at a specific moment rather than a persistent state.

On spot volume, centralized exchanges averaged roughly $279 billion weekly over the four weeks to September 27, nearly two thirds below the $801 billion traded in the crash week, after bottoming near $135 billion in August.

Choosing a Reference Band by Order Size

The disagreement among rankings has a usable answer for anyone actually placing orders: which band applies depends on how far the order pushes price, and the measured slippage data in these reports maps the relationship.

Order size and market	Measured median slippage	In basis points	Band that governs
$100K BTC spot	0.004%	0.4	Inside the 0.01% band
$500K ETH futures	0.003%	0.3	Inside the 0.01% band
$500K BTC spot	0.005%	0.5	Inside the 0.01% band
$1M BTC futures	0.008%	0.8	Inside the 0.01% band
$1M ETH futures	0.008%, P90 0.013%	0.8 and 1.3	Median inside 0.01%, P90 into 0.03%
$1M BTC spot	0.022%	2.2	Inside the 0.03% band
$5M BTC futures	0.033%	3.3	At the edge of the 0.03% band

The resulting gradient runs as follows. Orders below $1 million generally show median impact inside one basis point, so the 0.01% band governs cost. Around $5 million impact advances toward three basis points and the 0.03% to 0.05% bands begin to bind. For ±1%, meaning 100 basis points, to become the constraint, an order must be large enough to move price close to a full percent. Against CoinGlass's figures of roughly $537 million aggregate ±1% BTC futures depth across five venues and $236 million at Binance alone, that generally implies tens of millions.

Three limits apply when using this mapping. Each row is the best value for that metric in its report, representing the strongest venue that period rather than a sample average, so it reads as a floor on cost. All are sell-side data, and depth can be asymmetric between the two sides. At magnitudes such as 0.003% the figures carry one significant digit, so ratios should not be computed between them.

Execution cost also includes fees and funding beyond slippage. On the composition of total cost, see does zero fee mean free, how to calculate your total trading cost.

For more detailed rankings by market with methodology notes, see the most liquid crypto exchanges in 2026 ranked by order book depth and slippage. To check live conditions rather than relying on any historical report, the order book can be expanded level by level on MEXC, and platform-side liquidity data alongside third-party reports is compiled in how deep is MEXC liquidity, order book depth, slippage and what third-party reports show.

Exclusive View from James Mitchell

For James Mitchell, the first thing to correct about exchange liquidity rankings is the question itself.

Set the four principal 2026 data sources side by side and the bands run from one basis point to 500, a spread of 500 times. The exchange with the most resting size within one basis point and the exchange that can absorb the largest order before price moves 1% have no reason to be the same venue. Different rankings producing different leaders is therefore the necessary consequence of different measures, not evidence that one provider's data is wrong.

That judgement needs no cross-source comparison to verify, because CoinGecko's own dataset supplies the evidence. MEXC leads SOL at market price with $934,000, ahead of Binance, and is overtaken by Bitget and Coinbase beyond ±$0.20. Binance leads XRP at market price and is overtaken by Coinbase at ±$0.0025, roughly 0.1%. The same data, the same moment, a different band and a different leader. If rank changes occur inside a single dataset, differences between datasets are even less of a contradiction.

The same effect appears within a single TokenInsight edition. In the July report MEXC ranked first at the 0.03% futures band and third at 0.05%, within 2.1% of the leader. One report, one month, two adjacent bands, two different placings.

The wide-band side is by contrast quite stable. Under CoinGlass's ±1% measure, Binance holds 44.0% of BTC futures depth and OKX 20.8%, the two together 64.8%. ETH is less concentrated, with the top two at 50.1%, which is 14.8 percentage points below BTC. Executable liquidity for large orders genuinely does concentrate on a small number of venues, and that does not conflict with the near-touch conclusions because it answers a different question.

One comparison is worth retaining. In CoinGlass's first-quarter data, Binance's BTC futures depth within ±1% runs roughly $284 million against roughly $37.54 million for BTC spot, a gap of roughly 7.6 times. Spot and futures liquidity must be read separately, and inferring one from the other produces errors measured in multiples. The same applies to volume and open interest, whose orderings already differ from the depth table.

Market-wide depth forms another layer of context. Per CoinDesk Research, BTC depth within 1% stood at roughly $11.7 million on October 7, roughly 75% above the level on crash day, and since BTC trades roughly one third below its pre-crash level the dollar increase reflects more committed capital. ETH depth within 0.5% has more than doubled from that day. Altcoins moved the other way, with the basket's depth within 5% down roughly one third from the start of 2025.

One detail here is easily overlooked: during a sell-off between October 7 and 8, BTC depth within 1% fell roughly 12%. All depth figures are point-in-time snapshots rather than persistent states, and how much depth thins under stress determines what is available at precisely the moment it is most needed. This is also why P90 deserves reading alongside the median.

Returning to practice, the measured slippage in these reports already maps order size to band. Below $1 million, median impact generally sits inside one basis point and the 0.01% band governs. Around $5 million, impact reaches roughly three basis points and the 0.03% to 0.05% bands begin to bind. For ±1% to become the constraint, an order has to run into tens of millions. So if you trade tens to hundreds of thousands at a time, the near-touch rankings are relevant to you; if you trade fifty million at a time, they are not.

A closing note on method. These slippage figures carry one significant digit at magnitudes such as 0.003%, where the true value could be anything between 0.0025% and 0.0035%. Computing ratios between such numbers and inferring distributional structure from the result exceeds the precision of the data. Any liquidity ranking is meaningless detached from its band, its date and its sample, and those three are precisely what gets omitted most often.

FAQ

Which exchange has the best liquidity?

It depends on the measurement band. At the near-touch 0.03% band, TokenInsight's September report places MEXC's combined BTC and ETH futures depth of $21.03 million deepest among nine surveyed exchanges. Under the wide ±1% measure, CoinGlass's BTC futures table has Binance leading at $236 million for a 44.0% share. In CoinGecko's eight-exchange comparison by absolute price band, Binance holds 25.3% of BTC liquidity while MEXC leads SOL at market price. The bands differ by up to 500 times, so differing conclusions are expected.

Why do different rankings disagree?

Principally because the measurement bands differ. The narrowest is one basis point and the widest is 500, measuring resting size immediately at the best prices and total absorbable size before a given price move respectively. The effect is verifiable within a single dataset: CoinGecko's figures show MEXC leading SOL at market price but overtaken beyond ±$0.20, and Binance leading XRP at market price but overtaken by Coinbase around 0.1%. Sample ranges, measurement periods and whether spot and futures are separated also differ between rankings.

What is the difference between near-touch depth and depth within ±1%?

Near-touch depth measures how much sits within a very narrow window of the best bid and offer, governing the immediate execution cost of small and mid-size orders. Depth within ±1% measures how much can be absorbed before price moves a full percent, governing whether a large order completes within acceptable impact. Taking 0.03% against ±1%, the latter window is roughly 33 times wider. A venue leading the former while ranking lower on the latter involves no contradiction.

Can spot and futures liquidity be inferred from one another?

No, as the magnitudes differ substantially. Per CoinGlass's first-quarter 2026 ±1% figures, Binance's BTC futures depth runs roughly $284 million against roughly $37.54 million for BTC spot, a gap of roughly 7.6 times, with OKX at roughly $160 million and roughly $20.18 million. ETH shows a similar pattern. Spot and futures liquidity rankings therefore need checking separately.

Which band applies to my order size?

Per the measured slippage data in these reports, orders below $1 million generally show median impact inside one basis point, so the 0.01% band governs cost. Orders around $5 million push impact toward three basis points, where the 0.03% to 0.05% bands begin to bind. For ±1%, meaning 100 basis points, to become the binding constraint, an order must be large enough to move price close to a full percent, which against roughly $537 million of aggregate ±1% BTC futures depth across five venues and $236 million at Binance alone generally implies tens of millions.

Why read both median and P90 slippage?

The median describes the typical case while P90 describes the worst of every ten executions. A median that improves while P90 stays flat indicates depth that thickens in calm conditions but not under stress, an intermittent improvement, whereas both improving together indicates the improvement holds in the tail of the distribution. Depth falls materially under stress: CoinDesk Research's work shows BTC depth within 1% falling roughly 12% during a sell-off between October 7 and 8.

How far have BTC and ETH liquidity recovered?

Per CoinDesk Research, BTC depth within 1% stood at roughly $11.7 million on October 7, 2026, roughly 75% above the level on the October 10, 2025 crash day and above both the roughly $9 million at the start of 2026 and the roughly $6.9 million at the start of 2025. ETH depth within 0.5% has more than doubled from crash day to roughly $4.2 million, and depth within 1% has risen roughly three quarters to roughly $5.3 million. Since BTC trades roughly one third below its pre-crash level, the dollar increase reflects more committed capital.

How does altcoin liquidity compare?

It has moved in the opposite direction to BTC and ETH. In CoinDesk Research's altcoin basket, dollar depth peaked on January 1, 2025 and has declined at every measured date since, with depth within 5% down roughly one third from the start of 2025 to roughly $2 million and depth within 1% down roughly one sixth. CoinGecko's data likewise shows SOL's combined single-sided liquidity across eight exchanges falling from roughly $28 million in 2025 to roughly $20 million in 2026, a decline of over 28.5%.

Disclaimer

This article is for general information only and does not constitute investment, financial, legal or tax advice, nor a recommendation of any trading platform. Figures are current as of October 29, 2026, and the sources cited use different measurement bands, sample ranges and periods that are not directly comparable; order book depth and slippage change continuously with market conditions, and historical snapshots do not represent current or future execution conditions. Crypto assets and leveraged products are highly volatile and can produce losses exceeding the initial outlay. Readers should verify exchanges' live data themselves and judge independently, consulting a qualified professional where appropriate.

About the Author

James Mitchell specializes in technical analysis, market trends, and trading strategies for both Bitcoin and altcoins. Based in London, he has over 10 years of experience in financial markets. Before joining MEXC Learn, James worked as a senior analyst at a leading European investment firm, where he developed expertise in risk management and quantitative trading. His transition to cryptocurrency markets began in 2017, and he has since become recognized for his data-driven approach. He holds a Master's degree in Financial Economics from the London School of Economics. His analytical approach combines traditional technical analysis with on-chain metrics to provide readers with actionable insights.

Areas of Expertise: Technical Analysis, Market Trends and Cycles, Trading Strategies, Bitcoin and Altcoin Analysis, Risk Management.

Research References

MEXC

TokenInsight Crypto Exchange Liquidity Report Sep 2026

TokenInsight Crypto Exchange Liquidity Report Jul 2026

TokenInsight Maps Liquidity Across Eight Major CEXs

CoinGecko 2026 Crypto Liquidity on CEXes

CoinGlass 2026 Semi-Annual Cryptocurrency Derivatives Market Report

CoinGlass 2026 Q1 Cryptocurrency Market Share Research Report

CoinDesk One Year After 10-10 Bitcoin and Ether Liquidity Have Rebuilt

Most Liquid Crypto Exchanges in 2026

Is Volume the Same as Liquidity Order Book Depth Explained

Why Does a 100K Order Fill Worse Than 10K

Does 0 Fee Mean Free How to Calculate Your Total Trading Cost

How Deep Is MEXC Liquidity Order Book Depth Slippage and Third Party Reports

Want the fastest access to MEXC's latest updates? Join our official Telegram group now!

MEXC Platform: Download App | Zero Fee Trading | Buy USDT Now

Join MEXC Community: X (Twitter) | Telegram | Discord

Get Insights: MEXC Learn | Terms of Service | MEXC Blog | MEXC News

Account Verification: Understand KYC | How to Complete KYC

External Content Platforms: Substack | Medium | Paragraph | LinkedIn | X(News)

Market Opportunity

Bitcoin Price(BTC)

$80,274.51

$80,274.51$80,274.51

USD

Bitcoin (BTC) Live Price Chart

The articles shared on this page are sourced from public platforms and are provided for reference only. They do not represent the position or views of MEXC. All rights belong to James Mitchell. If you believe any content infringes upon the rights of a third party, please contact service@support.mexc.com for prompt removal. MEXC does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of any content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be interpreted as a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC. For expert insights and in-depth analysis, visit MEXC Learn.

Learn More About Bitcoin

[Complete Guide to Crypto Trading] Beginner's Guide: How to Safely Buy Your First Cryptocurrency?

Dear MEXC Users, Welcome to the new series from MEXC Beginner's Academy—“The Complete Guide to Mastering Crypto Trading.” Over the next four weeks, we will guide you in building a trading system from

2026/10/25

US Stocks Weekly on October.17-22 | Nasdaq Plunges 2.6% in One Day, Goldman Says AI Capex Is About Half of S&P 500 Earnings Growth

Weekly Market Recap Thursday's selling centered on AI and the chip supply chain. Chip equipment maker Lam Research (LRCX) said on its earnings call that supply chain limits kept its revenue guidance

2026/10/23

MEXC Alpha Trader Weekly Research Report | Inflation Exceeds Expectations Across the Board as ETFs See $228M in Weekly Outflows — Is the Rate-Cut Narrative Facing a "Stress Test"?

Week 3 of October 2026 Statistics period: October 14 – October 20, 2026 Data cutoff: October 20, 2026 Core Narrative Over the past week, the crypto market remained weak and range-bound, weighed down

2026/10/21

Latest Updates on Bitcoin