Crypto Twitter user goes viral after a Kalshi employee insults him. He pulled Kalshi's CFTC filings and trade API and claims most of their crypto perp volume is fake.

Kalshi is a CFTC-regulated prediction market that launched US-legal crypto perpetual futures this year. Over the weekend a former quant, Beni (@beniduboss), published a thread accusing Kalshi of fabricating its crypto volume. It was triggered by a reply from IcoBeast (@icobeast), who built Kalshi's crypto markets program and works there. The thread has around 1.5M views and has been covered by CoinDesk and others. Here is what was claimed, what Kalshi has said in response, and where things stand as of September 21.

How it started

On September 19, IcoBeast posted an Artemis chart showing Kalshi with 96.7% of crypto prediction-market volume versus Polymarket at 3.3%. When wash trading was raised in the replies, he wrote:

cope. seethe. rage
why the fuck would anyone try to wash trade when we have trading fees
incredible intellect on display

Beni's thread opened: "This thread is 100% gonna blow up and I am gonna look like a salty c*** again but '@icobeast pissed me off so now it's gonna get ugly. Kalshi fakes their crypto volume and I can prove it."

The allegations

1. Volume vs open interest on ETH-PERP. Kalshi's own interface showed $3.1M open interest against $538.6M in 24-hour volume, a ratio of 174x, meaning the entire open interest would turn over roughly every 8 minutes. The largest visible position on Kalshi's leaderboard was $17,598.
2. Repeated $5,500 trades. In a follow-up on September 21, Beni posted tables showing the same ~$5,500 trade size accounting for 47-58% of all ETH-PERP volume across four separate days (Sep 16: 47.2%, Sep 18: 58.5%, Sep 19-20: 51.6%, Sep 20: 47.8%). He called this "undeniable proof."
3. A larger API pull. He later cited 529k trades totaling $2.22B notional over 7 days, with 55% coming from ~$5,500-sized trades, and on that basis claimed 99% of perp volume is fabricated.
4. The fee rebate filing. A September 2 CFTC filing (Appendix B) sets perp fees for Self-Clearing Members at a 0.3 bp maker rebate offset by a 0.3 bp taker fee, netting to zero. Beni's argument is that this removes the cost barrier IcoBeast cited as the reason nobody would wash trade.
5. Jump Trading. Bloomberg reported in February that Jump has a deal to supply Kalshi liquidity. Beni framed the arrangement as an incentive to inflate numbers.
6. Kalshi Trading LLC. A related entity permitted to trade on the platform. Beni raised it in connection with CFTC guidance on conflicts of interest.
7. Prediction-market volume convention. Kalshi counts each contract at its $1 maximum payout, so a $30k cash outlay can be reported as $100k in volume. Beni argued parlays amplify this further. A separate user estimated $136M actually traded against $1.91B reported (roughly 7%); that figure has not been independently reproduced.

Kalshi's response

IcoBeast's substantive reply on September 20:

Your original claim was that Kalshi's crypto prediction market volume was fake. The chart from Artemis shows prediction market volume share, not perps. We don't do rebates for crypto prediction markets. Also, the way that contracts notional $ is calculated is universal amongst prediction markets and same with poly so it's apple-to-apples.

Anyone can become a Self-Clearing Member of a CFTC regulated exchange as long as they meet the regulatory requirements. "Fair access" is a reg requirement for us.

All exchanges run rebate and incentive programs... CME does it. So does Hyperliquid and Binance... we need to file our incentive programs publicly and so what you see is truly what you get.

John Wang, Kalshi's Head of Crypto, added: "this is referring to crypto prediction market volume share and its entirely real," and posted a meme referencing "a regulated exchange where incentives are publicly filed, there is self trade prevention, washtrading is illegal, and no airdrop farming."

Kalshi's position, summarized: the Artemis chart was about prediction markets, not perps; the notional convention is the same one Polymarket uses; there are no rebates on event contracts; incentive programs are public filings; self-trade prevention exists; and perps are an early-stage product.

The 174x ratio and the $5,500 clustering have not been addressed directly in the Kalshi-side posts that remain public.

Where it stands

• Beni says he has received nonpublic information, is consulting lawyers, and has been contacted by Bloomberg and other outlets. He posted a screenshot of Coffeezilla reaching out. No investigation has been announced.
• He is collecting evidence at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) and says more is coming on short-duration contracts.
• Several IcoBeast posts were deleted after the thread went viral. Beni said he offered IcoBeast the chance to delete the original reply before escalating.
• No public CFTC enforcement action exists on these allegations as of September 21. The CFTC did publish a staff advisory on August 12 on incentive programs and wash-trading risk; it predates this dispute and does not mention Kalshi.
• Independent API checks have reproduced the $5,500 concentration. That confirms the pattern exists; it does not by itself establish who placed the trades or whether Kalshi directed or incentivized them.

Get out your popcorn, because this is going to be juicy.