MantraDAO Blames Centralized Exchanges for OM Token Crash, CEXs Respond with Risk Control Clarifications

Tensions are escalating between the core project teams and several major centralized exchanges after a devastating 80% crash in the price of OM, the native token of the MantraDAO ecosystem, sank to an all-time low late last week.

In a public statement, MantraDAO has attributed the dramatic price collapse to what it describes as “reckless forced closures” executed by centralized platforms. Heated debate is now set over the responsibility, timing, and transparency in today’s crypto markets.

The price crash, which unfolded swiftly across exchanges starting on April 14, brought about over $68 million in liquidations in just 12 hours, mowing down many heavily leveraged positions. MantraDAO contends that these liquidations were not a byproduct of standard market behavior and that the market was not behaving in an organic fashion. Instead, it says, the market was moved down by a cascade of forced liquidations that were executed by centralized exchanges and that started during low liquidity hours. The organization specifically blames the timing on a Sunday evening in UTC.

The timing of this crash—during one of the quietest trading windows—raises serious concerns.

MantraDAO wrote in its official statement: “This points to either negligence or, worse, strategic positioning by exchanges that took advantage of weakened liquidity to force liquidations and manipulate price levels.”

CEXs Defend Risk Controls, Flag Tokenomic Changes

Top centralized exchanges swiftly released their own statements, providing insight into the situation from their vantage points. OKX, one of the main trading venues for OM, confirmed that the token took a huge hit, with a market-wide decline of over 80%, that started on other platforms and rapidly rippled through the broader trading ecosystem.

Also, OKX has indicated that it has identified a number of “suspicious, large-scale activities” involving similar on-chain addresses since March. This suggests that maybe a bunch of people working together could be causing the price of this token to move. But the exchange really doubles down on OM’s part in this situation—and it’s not because they’re a rival exchange, but because they may well be a rival pumphouse.

In reaction to the incident, OKX has fine-tuned its internal risk controls and has warned users publicly regarding the possible market risks tied to OM. While the platform did not cop to causing the crash directly, it seemed to concede that it could use some greater caution, given that the token’s volatility and fundamental shifts have been making for a pretty dangerous cocktail.

Another major exchange that hosts OM trading pairs, Binance, echoed similar sentiments. In a statement, the company said that its initial investigations indicate the price action was a result of

• NO single platform being responsible.

• Cross platform liquidations of multiple exchanges all triggered at the same time.

• Liquidations of a large number of leveraged long positions (i.e., margin calls that were triggered and that cascaded down) and no massive short positions to counter them.

Binance emphasized that it had already taken several preventive measures—including as early as October 2024, reducing leverage limits for OM trades. Moreover, since January 2025, on its OM spot trading interface, Binance has implemented a prominent pop-up warning, alerting users that the token had experienced “significant changes to its tokenomics, including an increase in supply.

Liquidity, Leverage, and a Fragile DeFi-CeFi Bridge

The OM crash highlights deeper issues at the intersection of DeFi and CeFi. Even as decentralized projects bubble up and dominate the conversation, they are still largely reliant on centralized trading venues to actually function. This is true for most tokens, including OM.

Several things are said to be behind the collapse of OM. Market analysts argue that supply increase, excessive derivatives leverage, and the appearance of several large new whale entities—most of whom were buying up OM in late March—created a perfect storm. When the price started to fall, the liquidation of those apparently huge long positions knocked the price down even faster.

The potential for more action and investigation has by no means been eliminated by MantraDAO. The organization has instead emphasized, in its missives and communications, the need for centralized exchanges to be more transparent and well-coordinated—especially when they are implementing what might be regarded as major, and potentially very disruptive, changes at the protocol level itself.

The OM collapse will lead to regulatory examination or impetus for widespread reforms of the practices of centralized exchanges; this is uncertain. But the incident demonstrates once again how swiftly trust and money can evaporate in crypto’s volatile, and usually interconnected, markets.

Disclosure: This is not trading or investment advice. Always do your research before buying any cryptocurrency or investing in any services.

Follow us on Twitter @themerklehash to stay updated with the latest Crypto, NFT, AI, Cybersecurity, and Metaverse news!