A review of more than 150 major crypto protocols has found that disclosure of market-making arrangements is virtually nonexistent, despite their key role in token trading.
The study, conducted by crypto advisory firm Novora, revealed that fewer than 1% of protocols share any details about their agreements with market makers. Across the entire dataset, only one project — the decentralized liquidity platform Meteora — was identified as publicly disclosing such information, referencing its 2025 Annual Token Holder Report.
The research spanned a wide range of sectors, including decentralized exchanges, lending platforms, perpetual futures, layer-1 and layer-2 networks, bridges, and centralized exchange tokens. The protocols analyzed ranged in size from around $40 million to $45 billion in fully diluted valuation.
Novora said it used a binary transparency framework to assess disclosure practices and cross-checked findings against public data sources such as Artemis, Token Terminal, Dune, DefiLlama, and Blockworks Research.
Calling it “the single most consequential transparency gap in the industry,” Novora founder Connor King said on X that, unlike traditional markets where such agreements are routinely disclosed, crypto participants are largely operating without access to this information.
Crypto’s investor reporting gap
The findings highlight a broader gap in investor relations across the crypto sector. Novora noted that while 91% of the protocols analyzed generate trackable revenue, only 18% provide quarterly updates and just 8% publish token holder reports — indicating that while data exists, it is rarely organized into structured investor communications.
At the same time, third-party analytics tools have become more robust, with coverage exceeding 85% across major platforms. This suggests that although the underlying data is widely available, it is seldom formalized into consistent, transparent reporting for investors.
Sector-level data shows uneven transparency across the industry. Perpetual futures protocols and decentralized exchanges tend to lead in disclosure and value-accrual practices, while layer-1 and infrastructure projects lag behind despite having larger market capitalizations.
Market-maker deals draw scrutiny
Opaque market-maker arrangements have long been a source of concern in crypto, particularly around token loan structures that critics say can incentivize the selling of borrowed tokens into the market. The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has previously taken action against certain crypto market makers over alleged price manipulation.
As previously reported, some of these arrangements are poorly designed and can quickly become harmful. A common structure, known as the “loan option model,” involves projects lending tokens to market makers, who then use them to provide liquidity and facilitate trading — often tied to exchange listing agreements.
Critics argue that this setup can create strong incentives for market makers to sell borrowed tokens, potentially driving prices down. While this may benefit the market maker, it can leave early-stage projects facing weakened liquidity and underperforming tokens.
