What is this about?
Three separate stories have recently converged around Bybit, and at first glance they seem unrelated. One is about data: a joint analytical report from the Bybit exchange and on-chain firm Glassnode describes how the structure of the crypto derivatives market has changed. The second is local: Bybit is building a European (MiCA-compliant) branch and is talking about launching futures for European clients. The third is reputational: Bybit's name has surfaced in US court filings concerning the financing of Hamas's armed wing.
Charliedesk ties these three threads into a single overview, admits for each claim where it comes from, and clearly separates what is proven from what is not. You will find no buy or sell recommendation here.
What does the Glassnode and Bybit report say about derivatives?
A derivative is a financial instrument whose value is derived from another asset (for example bitcoin). Among the most common are futures (an agreement about a future trade) and options (the right, not the obligation, to buy or sell at a given price). A key metric is open interest, meaning the volume of open, as-yet unsettled contracts.
According to the joint report by Glassnode and Bybit, the structure of the market on crypto-native exchanges has changed significantly. According to source [1]:
- The share of options has grown from a marginal role to almost half of nominal open interest.
- Dated futures have practically disappeared.
- Every chart in the report draws on Glassnode's derivatives and market data across the tracked exchanges.
- The entire report is free to download as a PDF.
In one sentence: on crypto-native platforms options have stopped being a sideline discipline and have become a segment comparable in size to futures. The precise figures, time range, and methodology are in the PDF report itself, which we have not reproduced in detail.
Why does it matter?
When the share of options rises, it changes what information you read from the market. Options carry information about expected volatility and about how market participants price risk on both sides. A shift from dated futures toward options is therefore not just a technical detail but a change in the structure of how bets are placed in the market. What exactly this structure "prices in" is discussed in the third part of the report. We do not preempt any price scenario here.
What is happening with Bybit in Europe and in the Czech Republic?
For local readers, the European branch is relevant. David Zábranský, who according to an interview for Kryptomagazín.sk is in charge of key European markets including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Slovenia, said that the main task is to develop Bybit's local presence and that the exchange plans to launch futures for the EU by the end of this year (source [3]).
For now this is a declaration of intent, not a done deal. Exactly when, under what licensing conditions, and in what scope EU futures will run does not follow from the source.
Part of the European push was also a marketing campaign. According to Kryptonovinky.cz, Bybit EU launched an autumn campaign called Back on Track, in which a total of 150,000 USDC was to be distributed. USDC is a stablecoin pegged to the US dollar, so its value stays at roughly one dollar and does not show volatility like bitcoin. According to source [4], the campaign was to run from August 27 to the 15th (the month is not stated unambiguously in the available excerpt, probably September, but we do not present this as certain).
What to take away from this?
EU expansion and consumer campaigns are a standard part of building a brand in a regulated market under MiCA rules. With campaigns like this, readers should always read the terms of participation, because the content, eligibility, and dates are decided by the operator's official page, not by a forwarded version.
Why did Bybit's name appear in court filings?
The third thread is the most sensitive. According to CoinDesk (source [2]), US Department of Justice documents state that Hamas's armed wing advised donors not to use Binance but instead Bybit, OKX, Kast, and Redotpay to manage funds.
Caution is needed here. The fact that some actor recommends using a particular exchange does not mean that the exchange cooperated with them or knew about it. Source [2] describes a recommendation stated in court documents, not proven wrongdoing by the exchanges. How Bybit and the other named platforms responded, and whether any proceedings against them followed, does not follow from the available source.
How do these three stories connect?
Together they paint a picture of an exchange that is simultaneously growing in data and products (derivatives, options, planned EU futures) while also facing the typical pressures of a big player: regulation, reputation, and questions about who uses its infrastructure. This is a common tension for large crypto-native platforms. Charliedesk does not judge who is "right" here, but sticks to what is documented.
| Thread | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Options rose to almost half of OI, dated futures vanished | [1] | Documented by the Glassnode + Bybit report |
| Launch of EU futures by year-end | [3] | Declared intent of a manager |
| Back on Track campaign, 150,000 USDC | [4] | Documented, exact end date unclear |
| Bybit's name in DOJ documents on Hamas | [2] | Third-party recommendation, not proven exchange wrongdoing |
What to watch for with this type of news?
- With data reports from exchanges it is good to read the methodology too: "crypto-native venues" do not include regulated products such as CME, so the picture may differ depending on the definition of the sample.
- With announcements about product launches in the EU, it is key to distinguish intent from an actual start and from the licensing framework.
- With reputational news there is a difference between "someone recommended using a platform" and "a platform did something wrong." That difference often gets lost in headlines.
Once Bybit actually launches EU futures, or once the exchanges' response to the court documents appears, we will update this overview and compare it with what we wrote here.

