OKX Breaks Silence on MANTRA Incident as Evidence Points to Coordinated Market Manipulation

OKX has issued a detailed public statement addressing the events surrounding the MANTRA (OM) market incident, pushing back forcefully against what it describes as a misleading narrative promoted by the MANTRA team.

According to OKX, the incident was not the result of exchange failure or misconduct, but of coordinated market manipulation involving multiple related accounts. The exchange says it has already submitted extensive evidence to regulators and law enforcement agencies, with multiple lawsuits now underway.

The announcement, published by OKX ➝

, outlines a chain of events that raises serious questions about OM’s supply distribution, leveraged trading behavior, and the origins of the collateral used.

At the center of the issue is a pattern OKX says it recognized early and acted on decisively.

How the Scheme Unfolded

OKX states that its internal monitoring systems identified multiple connected and colluding accounts engaging in abnormal behavior. These accounts allegedly used large quantities of OM tokens as collateral to borrow significant amounts of USDT, creating artificial buying pressure and driving OM’s price upward.

This was not a retail phenomenon.

The scale of collateral involved immediately triggered risk alerts. According to OKX, its risk team flagged the activity, reached out to the account holders, and requested corrective measures to reduce exposure and mitigate systemic risk.

Those requests were refused.

At that point, OKX says it had no option but to take control of the related accounts in order to protect the broader market and its users.

Shortly afterward, OM’s price collapsed.

Liquidations Were Minimal, Losses Were Not

One of the most contentious claims surrounding the incident has been the role OKX allegedly played in triggering the price crash. The exchange disputes this directly.

OKX states that it liquidated only a very small portion of OM holdings after taking control of the accounts. Despite this, the token experienced a sharp and sudden decline.

According to OKX, the losses that resulted were substantial , but every dollar was fully absorbed by the OKX Security Fund.

This point is critical.

The exchange emphasizes that the insurance mechanism worked exactly as intended. Users were protected. Counterparty risk was contained. No socialized losses were imposed.

In other words, OKX claims the system held, even under extreme stress.

External Analysis Points Elsewhere

OKX also references multiple third-party analyses that examined trading activity surrounding the OM crash. Those analyses reportedly indicate that the majority of the price collapse was driven by perpetual futures trading activity not occurring on OKX.

This distinction matters.

If the bulk of the selling pressure originated off-exchange, it challenges the narrative that OKX actions were the primary catalyst. Instead, it points toward broader leveraged positioning across the market and aggressive derivatives exposure amplifying downside moves.

In volatile, thinly distributed assets, those dynamics can overwhelm spot liquidity quickly.

OKX argues that this context has been ignored by critics.

Unanswered Questions Around OM Supply

Perhaps the most damaging aspect of OKX’s statement is not what it claims, but what it says remains unexplained.

According to the exchange, there has been no clear explanation for:

1.  Where the unusually large quantities of OM used as collateral originated
2.  Why a small group of connected individuals controlled such a substantial portion of the token supply
3.  How those holdings were accumulated without triggering earlier scrutiny

These questions go to the heart of the issue.

In markets where supply is concentrated, leverage becomes a force multiplier. When price appreciation is fueled by borrowing against that same concentrated supply, fragility is inevitable.

OKX suggests that the failure to address these concerns , while continuing to publicly blame the exchange , is deeply problematic.

Regulators, Law Enforcement, and the Courts

OKX confirms that it has already submitted full documentation and evidence to regulators and law enforcement agencies. The matter is no longer confined to public statements or social media disputes.

According to the exchange, multiple legal proceedings are now in progress, signaling that the incident is entering a formal investigative and judicial phase.

OKX says it will continue to cooperate fully with authorities and stands by its actions throughout the event.

The exchange also frames its response as consistent with its broader responsibility as a centralized trading venue operating under increasing regulatory scrutiny.

Risk controls were triggered. Users were protected. Losses were absorbed internally.

A Breakdown in Accountability

Despite the evidence outlined, OKX says the MANTRA team has continued to deflect responsibility, publicly accusing the exchange rather than addressing the suspicious on-chain and trading activity tied to OM.

OKX describes this behavior as unprofessional, particularly given the seriousness of the allegations and the ongoing legal process.

The exchange argues that accountability in crypto markets cannot be selective. When abnormal activity occurs, it must be investigated , even when that investigation produces uncomfortable conclusions.

This incident, OKX suggests, highlights a broader structural issue in the industry. Market integrity depends not just on exchange safeguards, but on transparent token distribution, responsible leverage, and honest communication when things go wrong.

 What This Means Going Forward

The MANTRA incident underscores how quickly leverage, concentrated supply, and opaque practices can collide.

OKX’s position is clear. It believes it identified manipulation early, acted within its risk framework, protected users through its insurance fund, and escalated the matter appropriately to regulators.

Whether the courts ultimately agree will take time.

But the implications are already visible.

Exchanges are under pressure to demonstrate that their risk systems work in real-world stress scenarios. Token teams are under pressure to explain supply dynamics and large holder behavior. And regulators are watching closely.

In this case, OKX is betting that transparency, documentation, and institutional processes will matter more than narratives.

The legal process will now decide the rest.

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!