U.S. Push for Perpetual Futures Faces Global Competition from UAE and Offshore Markets

A looming regulatory shift in the United States could redraw the global map of crypto derivatives trading, as major exchanges position themselves for the potential approval of perpetual futures—one of the most widely used yet controversial instruments in digital asset markets.

While much of the narrative has focused on product expansion, the deeper shift lies in whether the U.S. can successfully “onshore” a market that has historically thrived offshore, often beyond the reach of domestic regulators.

From Offshore Dominance to U.S. Ambitions

Perpetual futures, or “perps,” allow traders to hold leveraged positions indefinitely without expiration—making them structurally different from traditional futures. Their flexibility and high leverage have made them the dominant form of crypto derivatives globally.

In 2025 alone, perpetual futures trading volume reached $61.7 trillion, significantly outpacing spot markets at $18.6 trillion, according to CryptoQuant data.

Yet, most of this activity remains concentrated on offshore or decentralized platforms, including emerging venues like Hyperliquid, which restrict U.S. participation.

The U.S. now appears to be moving toward reclaiming part of that market.

Exchanges Position Ahead of Regulatory Clarity

Major industry players are already taking strategic steps, according to a Reuters report. Kraken is acquiring derivatives platform Bitnomial for up to $550 million, gaining access to a U.S.-based perpetual futures infrastructure. Coinbase has introduced long-dated futures designed to replicate perpetual exposure, signaling demand within regulatory constraints. Robinhood is exploring a U.S. rollout, building on its existing European offering. Gemini is evaluating expansion into perpetual contracts domestically.

These moves reflect a broader expectation that the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) will provide clearer approval pathways in the near term.

CFTC Chair Michael Selig has already indicated that regulatory clarity on such products is forthcoming, suggesting a shift from ambiguity to formal oversight.

Regulatory Strategy: Contain Risk or Compete Globally

The core tension facing regulators is not simply whether to allow perpetual futures—but how to regulate them without driving activity back offshore.

Currently, platforms like Bitnomial rely on a “self-certification” mechanism, allowing exchanges to launch products if they meet CFTC requirements, unless explicitly challenged. However, some firms view this as an interim solution rather than a durable regulatory framework.

Industry participants argue that only full regulatory clarity will allow U.S. platforms to compete with offshore exchanges that offer higher leverage and fewer restrictions.

At the same time, investor advocates warn that bringing perps onshore without strict safeguards could amplify retail risk, given the combination of high leverage and no expiration.

UAE Emerges as a Regulated Alternative

The push to onshore perpetual futures in the United States also comes as other jurisdictions move ahead with structured frameworks for crypto derivatives. In the UAE, Dubai’s Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority has already introduced a dedicated regulatory regime for virtual asset derivatives, while exchanges including Crypto.com have secured licenses to operate in the segment. T

his positions the UAE as a potential middle ground—offering regulatory clarity without the constraints seen in the U.S.—and raises the competitive stakes as liquidity increasingly flows toward jurisdictions that balance oversight with market flexibility.

The Real Risk: Retail Access Meets Institutional Infrastructure

Unlike previous crypto cycles, the current shift comes as retail access channels are more integrated into regulated platforms, including brokerages and major exchanges.

This raises a structural question: will regulatory approval legitimize perpetual futures—or normalize higher-risk behavior within a broader investor base?

Some platforms are already experimenting with mitigations. For example, Robinhood requires European users to pass knowledge tests before accessing perpetual futures. Others are considering leverage caps and enhanced disclosures.

Still, stricter rules may reduce competitiveness. As some executives note, when given a choice, traders often migrate toward higher leverage and fewer constraints.

A Turning Point for Market Structure

The potential approval of perpetual futures in the U.S. represents more than product expansion—it signals a shift in how regulators engage with complex crypto-native instruments.

If successfully implemented, it could bring significant derivatives volume back onshore, increase transparency and oversight, and reduce reliance on offshore venues

However, if regulatory frameworks are perceived as too restrictive, liquidity may continue to concentrate outside the U.S., reinforcing the fragmented nature of global crypto markets.

What Comes Next

With regulators actively engaging industry participants, the coming months are likely to determine whether perpetual futures become a regulated cornerstone of the U.S. crypto market—or remain primarily an offshore phenomenon.

At the same time, competition from jurisdictions like the UAE suggests that the future of crypto derivatives will not be shaped by regulation alone, but by how effectively different markets balance innovation, risk, and accessibility.