
Key Points
- $38M Market Maker Controversy Triggers Binance Crackdown
- Web3port accused of making $38M from one token via market-making
- Binance froze funds and demanded user compensation after investigation
- Questions arise over Binanceโs 4-month delay in taking action
Market makers are supposed to be the unsung heroes of crypto tradingโensuring smooth transactions, providing liquidity, and reducing price swings. In theory, they make trading better for everyone.
But the recent market maker controversy surrounding Web3port has sparked serious questions. Is this system helping retail traders, or quietly bleeding them dry?
Web3port, a name tied to multiple tokens listed on Binanceโlike GoPlus Security (GPS), Myshell (SHELL), and Movement (MOVE)โis under fire after reports revealed it made a staggering $38 million profit on just one project.
Source – ้ๅJason – Techtoken
Crypto analyst Jason Chen blew the whistle, alleging that while retail investors watched their tokens plunge, Web3port quietly raked in profits through suspicious trading behavior.
โItโs basically confirmed that Web3port is behind the market making for several recent projectsโand they made $38 million from just one,โ Chen said.
This claim shook the crypto world. Not only did it expose the immense power a market maker can hold over token prices, but it also suggested that they might be manipulating trades for personal gainโleaving everyday users to bear the losses.
This isnโt the first time market manipulation has raised alarms. Earlier this year, market fears were triggered when Trumpโs crypto corruption warning surfaced, further amplifying concerns about deep-pocketed actors tilting the market for profit.
Source – Colin Wu – Techtoken
Binance Responds, But Was It Too Late?
When the accusations became public, Binance, the worldโs largest crypto exchange, took action. It froze Web3portโs earnings, delisted them from its Market Maker Program, and demanded the MOVE project compensate harmed users.
Binance admitted that the market maker offloaded 66 million MOVE tokens a day after launch with barely any buy-side support. The result? A brutal crash in price, affecting thousands of unsuspecting investors.
How market makers make money. Source: B2Broker – Techtoken
That might sound like justiceโbut many in the community think it came too late.
Respected journalist Colin Wu pointed out a major red flag: the dump happened back in December 2024, but Binance didnโt act until March 2025.
โHow could Binance not have noticed this in December? Why the delay?โ Wu questioned.
The crypto community is wonderingโwas Binance complicit? Or did it simply turn a blind eye because the heightened trading volume meant more fee revenue?
Adding fuel to the fire, Binance has already faced scrutiny over market-making practices. In 2023, the U.S. SEC accused Binance of enabling wash trading through its associated firm Sigma Chain. That case ended with a $4.3 billion fineโone of the largest in crypto history.
More recently, Binance has been under pressure amid BNB Chain stablecoin rumors, making the timing of this crackdown appear even more strategic. It could be an effort to protect its image during increasing regulatory scrutiny.
Are Market Makers the Good Guysโor Cryptoโs Hidden Villains?
Market makers are supposed to keep crypto trading efficient. They place constant buy and sell orders to ensure thereโs always someone on the other side of your trade.
Without them, weโd have massive slippage, wide spreads, and chaotic price swings. But as this market maker controversy shows, they also wield immense powerโpower that can be abused.
Hereโs how the Web3port situation played out:
-
A project launches with hype and listing support
-
The market maker accumulates tokens at low prices
-
It then dumps massive volumes post-launch
-
Prices crash, and retail traders suffer
-
Meanwhile, the market maker walks away with millions
And the cycle repeats.
This isnโt just about one company. Web3port is simply the latest name in a long list of suspicious actors. Many now believe that the โliquidity supportโ from market makers is just a cover for price manipulation.
The biggest concern? Itโs all happening on the platforms we trust most. Exchanges like Binance create the rules for market makers, reward them, and provide the tools they need. But when these same entities are slow to reactโor benefit from the chaosโit undermines trust across the board.
Even worse, history tells us that market makers mightโve played roles in bigger collapses too. The Terra Luna disaster, which saw its stablecoin UST depeg and crash, was rumored to have involved large coordinated sell-offs by major players.
In similar fashion, large moves like the Mt. Gox Bitcoin payout have recently shaken market confidence, proving that massive whale activity still has a huge impact on prices.
Meanwhile, smaller projects like Pumpswap are showing explosive growthโbut the fear remains: are market makers inflating the numbers, only to dump later?
This ongoing market maker controversy also echoes broader legal battles, such as the Ripple vs SEC lawsuit that highlighted how opaque trading practices can hurt ordinary investors.
So now, a critical question looms for the industry:
Are market makers stabilizers or saboteurs?
Until better transparency and stricter oversight exist, retail investors may continue to bear the risk while a few powerful entities walk away with millions.