A limited number of recurring trade volumes formed the majority of the financial activity across Kalshi’s ether and bitcoin perpetual swap markets, according to an examination of the platform’s public logs conducted by CoinDesk.
Transactions valued within $2 of $5,499 constituted $7.7 million, representing 57% of the overall $13.5 million in ether perpetual transactions evaluated by CoinDesk across the span of September 17 to September 20. Regarding bitcoin, two repeating order volumes valued near $2,500 and $5,000 represented 54% of the $8.5 million dataset reviewed throughout that identical timeframe.
Trading volume serves as an initial metric utilized by market participants to evaluate the activity and liquidity of an asset class—meaning whether participants can execute purchases or sales absent causing severe price fluctuations.
Substantial volume can likewise create the impression that a fresh market enjoys widespread adoption. Consequently, if an extensive portion of that turnover originates from identical repeating trade sizes, determining who or what drives those orders becomes vital for evaluating the true meaning of the figures.
As an illustration, when a publicly traded equity displays millions in daily transaction value, observers might presume that active buyers and sellers operate on both fronts, rendering the asset appropriate for speculation.
Yet, those metrics alone fail to disclose the exact count of individual participants responsible for generating the activity. In this scenario, a substantial portion of Kalshi’s volume stemmed from identical recurring trade sizes, prompting a need to understand the underlying drivers of the trend.
This behavioral pattern predates that four-day monitoring window.
Out of 46 hourly datasets assessed by CoinDesk between June 19 and September 20, ether transactions consistently gathered around specific recurring dollar figures on 43 occasions. The dominant order size represented roughly 45% of the total value across those checks and exceeded half the aggregate value on 15 distinct days.
The aggregate contract count adjusted alongside ether price movements, whereas the financial valuation of the orders remained virtually constant. This behavior aligns with one or more algorithmic trading scripts executing fixed cash targets, a mechanism referred to by traders as clips.
Kalshi operates as a United States derivatives platform supervised by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, widely recognized for its event contracts. The venue introduced bitcoin perpetual futures—instruments tracking the underlying token perpetually without expiration dates—in late May.
Information provided by Kalshi segregates exposure into compact agreements that exchanged hands close to $2.70 each on Monday. CoinDesk evaluated 3,450 ether perpetual orders distributed over 23 hourly intervals across the four-day span utilizing public API records from the exchange. Out of those, 1,406 transactions fell within $2 of the $5,499 mark.
That repeated $5,499 capital target held remarkably steady even as the necessary quantity of contracts required to fulfill it fluctuated alongside the asset valuation. Ether climbed from approximately $1,700 up to $2,500 spanning June through September, forcing the contract count inside every order to adjust constantly while the cash threshold stayed nearly static. A transaction captured within the July monitoring bracket held roughly 2,800 units, compared to about 2,200 units during September.
The target parameter itself shifted over time.
Orders congregated near $4,999 in initial samples reviewed by CoinDesk, whereas positions close to $9,999 made up 72% of the recorded value on June 28. A repeating threshold of $3,999 emerged on August 10, succeeded by $4,499 on August 18 and $5,499 on August 24.
By June 19, three weeks subsequent to Kalshi rolling out crypto perpetual contracts, transactions valued almost identically at $4,999 represented 37% of the ether contract volume observed by CoinDesk during that hour.
Bitcoin exhibited a comparable transaction structure as well.
Two recurring sizes moved synchronously as bitcoin values fluctuated, with the larger transaction maintaining a valuation roughly double that of the smaller one. The larger tier equaled precisely twice the smaller counterpart in 9 out of 22 analytical windows containing both. Across the remaining 13 instances, the larger order exceeded double the smaller baseline by merely a single contract, a variance attributable to mathematical rounding.
During periods when bitcoin hovered near $76,300, the pairing measured 327 and 655 units, whereas on Monday those figures stood at 307 and 614.
Kalshi’s ether perpetual facility likewise demonstrated abnormally elevated trading activity relative to its outstanding position inventory. A snapshot on Monday recorded approximately 93 million contracts of 24-hour volume against 1.5 million units of open interest—representing unclosed positions—yielding a volume-to-open interest metric of 61. This means roughly 61 contracts changed hands daily for every single unit left open by speculators.
That reading represented the second-greatest proportion among the 20 Kalshi perpetual markets maintaining open positions, contrasting with a median level near eight. The bitcoin contract registered a ratio of 26. Even so, high turnover on its own does not definitively indicate illicit operational practices.
CoinDesk reached out to Kalshi to inquire whether an individual or a group of actors generated the repeating ether and bitcoin order sizes, if any participants operated under market-making or promotional agreements, and whether the venue detected self-matching or shared control among the profiles. Kalshi had not issued a reply prior to publication.
Such recurring order profiles typically characterize automated strategies aimed at a fixed monetary goal and continuously recalculating unit quantities as valuations shift—an execution mechanic outlined in academic literature regarding dynamic exposure sizing such as Cartea, Jaimungal, and Ricci’s Algorithmic and High-Frequency Trading.
Bots modify their quoting prices and order magnitudes dynamically to guard against adverse market fluctuations and manage risk exposure, a principle validated via the foundational Avellaneda-Stoikov Model.
In the case of Kalshi, alterations transitioning from roughly $4,999 toward $3,999, $4,499, and $5,499 indicate that the parameters governing notional size for the strategy underwent periodic adjustments.
Nonetheless, public order book data cannot definitively prove whether the activity represented genuine speculative engagement or incentive optimization.
Trading conditions turned exceptionally inexpensive for specific entities settling transactions directly with Kalshi shortly before CoinDesk’s four-day review commenced.
An incentive structure submitted to the CFTC became operational on September 16, lowering transaction expenses for those participants down to 0.003% while distributing an equivalent financial rebate to market makers. Implementation occurred one day before the four-day review period, though nearly a month subsequent to the initial appearance of the $5,499 orders. Consequently, the incentive framework does not account for the genesis of the repeating order volumes, though it could influence the financial viability of executing transactions during the later observation window.
Pseudonymous market participant ‘Beni’ highlighted the repetitive scales across X over the weekend, accusing Kalshi of artificially boosting its digital asset turnover metrics. “Kalshi fakes their crypto volume and I can prove it,” he claimed.
Kalshi’s head of digital assets, publishing under the handle IcoBeast, contested elements of Beni’s argument, noting that a volume distribution graphic referenced by Beni pertained to prediction contracts rather than perpetual swaps. He noted further that Kalshi refrains from distributing rebates across its crypto prediction products and must publicly disclose any promotions deployed on the regulated platform.
The statement failed to clarify the identity behind the repeating ether perpetual transactions or explain why the designated cash thresholds shifted over time.
Originally published at https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/09/21/bitcoin-ether-perpetual-volumes-on-kalshi-are-dominated-by-an-unusual-repetitive-trade-data-shows.
