On January 26, 2026, at 20:00 Beijing time, South Korea's leading exchange Upbit announced the inclusion of SXP in its warning list and the suspension of deposit services under the framework of the self-regulatory alliance DAXA. This affects the two main trading pairs SXP/KRW and SXP/BTC. The news was simultaneously reported by several media outlets, including Jinse Finance, leading to amplified interpretations in the market. On one side, exchanges are strengthening self-regulatory oversight through a "yellow card" mechanism, while on the other, project teams and holders are anxious about the shrinking space for survival. This tug-of-war is becoming the core contradiction in the new cycle. Meanwhile, large-scale ETH collateral lending on-chain, a single address leveraging 72,000 ETH, and Binance's upcoming launch of 5x leveraged TSLA perpetual contracts, combined with the entry of RWA funds and Hong Kong banks, create a complex backdrop: under the intertwining of rising leverage and accelerated institutionalization, Upbit's action regarding SXP may signify more than just the fate of an individual cryptocurrency; it could be the beginning of a reshaping of the pricing mechanism for the entire mid-to-lower asset market.
Upbit Hits the Pause Button: SXP Enters "Yellow Card Moment"
● Process and Timeline: On January 26, 2026, at 20:00, Upbit officially announced, based on its joint self-regulatory arrangement with DAXA, that SXP would be included in the "warning project" list and that deposit services for SXP would be suspended. According to the usual procedures of South Korean exchanges, such actions typically indicate that a preliminary risk assessment has been completed at the DAXA level, and the exchange then connects with internal risk control and technical aspects, aiming for relative synchronization between information disclosure and execution timing.
● Yellow Card Instead of Red Card: The current measures only target the deposit channel and specific trading pairs, primarily affecting new capital inflows for SXP/KRW and SXP/BTC, rather than directly terminating all transactions or immediately delisting. This approach of "only turning off part of the faucet, not closing the trading hall" essentially allows the project and existing holders time to observe and respond, serving as a strong signal of a "yellow card warning," rather than a blanket "red card expulsion." Market reactions often focus first on liquidity expectations rather than immediate panic of total loss.
● DAXA's Guiding Role: Behind this action is the self-regulatory alliance DAXA, composed of leading South Korean platforms like Upbit. This alliance has a magnifying effect on asset screening, risk warnings, and unified standards; any new round of adjustments to the warning list is easily seen as a collective statement of the South Korean market's risk tolerance for specific assets. Therefore, SXP's inclusion in the warning list is not just a single exchange's judgment but more like the result of a consensus mechanism initiated by the industry, with spillover effects naturally amplified by the market.
● Standards and Timelines Unclear: As of now, DAXA and Upbit have not disclosed specific assessment criteria, triggering conditions, or subsequent processing timelines for SXP, nor is there any formal document pointing to a definitive delisting or restoration path. This means that external parties cannot deduce a certain outcome from this, and market participants who engage in "scripted trading" based on rumors or single speculations face high risks. A rational stance is to acknowledge the incomplete information and understand that this is a "regulatory yellow card" within the disclosed framework, rather than a pre-written story of a "red card penalty."
DAXA Self-Regulatory Alliance: A Compliance Buffer for South Korean Exchanges
● Background and Role: The establishment of DAXA is closely related to concerns from South Korean regulatory authorities about the risk spillover from trading platforms. As a coalition of several mainstream platforms, including Upbit, it serves as a "frontline" in new coin listings, project screening, risk grading, and warning issuance, effectively building a compliance buffer maintained by the industry before formal administrative regulation. SXP entering its warning sequence is a typical case of this mechanism in practice.
● Amplifying Effect on Small and Medium Tokens: DAXA's cautious standards often have an amplifying effect on small or less-discussed tokens. Once labeled as "warning," liquidity providers tend to tighten depth in advance, and the survival expectations of market makers and institutional funds become conservative, leading to increased liquidity costs in the secondary market. For mid-to-lower assets that rely on emotional premiums and trading activity for survival, this signal from the self-regulatory alliance is more institutionally impactful than a single exchange's "cold treatment," potentially diluting survival expectations in advance.
● Division of Labor Between Local Regulation and Self-Regulation: In South Korea, local regulatory authorities set red lines more from the perspectives of anti-money laundering, consumer protection, and systemic risk, while self-regulatory organizations like DAXA are often closer to frontline trading data and user behavior regarding which tokens should be tightened or monitored. Therefore, exchanges prefer to lean conservatively within the alliance framework, preemptively alleviating potential regulatory accountability pressure through early yellow warnings. Under this division of labor, the strategy of "issuing a few more yellow cards rather than easily challenging red lines" has become the default safety strategy for all parties.
● Narrative Shift for Established but Low-Profile Assets: SXP is an asset type that was listed early, has a long history, but has limited discussion in recent years, rarely making headlines in daily reports. Due to the lack of a strong narrative moat, once it enters the DAXA warning list, market perceptions will quickly shift from "old project, old users" to "is it still necessary to occupy resources and quotas?" The warning label itself is enough to rewrite the market narrative about SXP, transforming it from an overlooked background role into a prominent name on the risk list.
Leverage Increase and On-Chain Speculation: A Discrepancy in Market Sentiment
● Intuitive Case of On-Chain Leverage: According to Onchain Lens monitoring, there has been a typical high-leverage operation on-chain recently—an address has accumulated approximately 72,000 ETH through a cycle of repeated collateralization and re-borrowing, valued at about $208.5 million, creating a high-risk exposure. Such operations rely on ETH staking and lending protocols, significantly amplifying a single address's sensitivity to market fluctuations, indicating that funds on-chain have not cooled down but are instead more willing to gamble on leverage amid interest rate and price games.
● Contrast Between Cautious Yellow Cards and Risky Accumulation: On one side, DAXA and Upbit are issuing yellow cards for assets like SXP with limited discussion by suspending deposits to "close the gate"; on the other side, on-chain funds are actively increasing risk by amplifying ETH exposure amid volatility. This stark contrast indicates that in the same market environment, compliance and self-regulatory mechanisms are tightening around edge assets, while leveraged players continue to increase their stakes in core assets, forming a misaligned structure of "side contraction and center advance," indirectly squeezing the survival environment for mid-to-lower tokens.
● Trading Platforms Pursuing High-Risk Demand: At the centralized platform level, Binance announced it will launch 5x leveraged TSLA perpetual contracts on January 28, once again demonstrating its focus on high-volatility, high-interest derivative demand. These contracts, linked to star stocks in the U.S. market, inherently carry strong speculative attributes but achieve high-risk bearing within compliance boundaries in contract design and risk control rules. In contrast, long-tail tokens lacking clear valuation anchors and user bases are more likely to be marginalized or viewed as "unnecessary extra burdens" in this round of product innovation.
● Warning Label Effect in a Rising Leverage Cycle: When funds collectively increase leverage on core assets and star derivatives, the market's tolerance for risk budgets is largely occupied by mainstream varieties. At this point, any token labeled as "warning" will be seen as "sacrificable scraps" by funds, prioritized for reduction, sale, or even direct exclusion in risk control models. The yellow card status of SXP, placed in such a macro leverage environment, is not just a compliance adjustment of a single platform but may trigger a round of systemic repricing for similar assets.
From RWA Funds to Mox Bank: A Shift in Compliance Fund Preferences
● RWA Funds and Rising Interest from Traditional Funds: Information from CPIC IMHK's announcement indicates that RWA funds targeting on-chain assets are becoming an important layout direction for traditional financial institutions. By mapping real-world assets in tokenized form on-chain, these products provide institutions with familiar underlying assets and controllable legal frameworks, lowering their psychological barriers to participating in the crypto ecosystem. The source of funds is expanding from "pure on-chain natives" to participants with insurance and asset management backgrounds, indicating a systematic rise in compliance funds' interest in on-chain assets.
● Mox Bank's BTC/ETH Business Logic: In the more mature regulatory environment of Hong Kong, Mox Bank has been licensed to provide BTC and ETH trading services, setting a commission structure in the range of 0.5%–1.25%. The target is clearly not high-frequency speculators but rather clients who wish to allocate leading crypto assets within the banking system using regulated accounts. For such banks, BTC and ETH represent "explainable asset classes," aligning better with their compliance and reputation considerations compared to long-tail tokens.
● Concentration Trend of Leading Assets in the Comparison Between Korea and Hong Kong: On one side, the South Korean exchange alliance is tightening and issuing yellow card warnings for individual tokens through DAXA; on the other side, the Hong Kong banking system is opening trading permissions for leading assets like BTC and ETH within a legal framework. This comparison clearly exposes the centralized path of preferences between regulation and institutions: resources and policy space are converging towards leading assets, while tolerance for small and medium tokens increasingly relies on the filtering and screening of self-regulatory organizations, continuously shrinking the gray space for "storytelling."
● Institutionalization and RWA Narrative Filtering Effect: As RWA and institutional narratives become mainstream, the market's definition of "quality assets" increasingly relies on scale, compliance, and the degree of connection to the real economy. Tokens like SXP, which are in a gray area and lack strong real-world anchoring, are more frequently subjected to additional scrutiny in this context. DAXA's yellow card is not only a risk warning for a single project but also sends a "requeue" signal to the entire mid-to-lower asset group under a new asset screening logic.
When Projects Encounter Yellow Cards: Survival Challenges for SXP and Similar Assets
● Chain Reaction on Liquidity and Sentiment: Being placed on the warning list and having deposits suspended will first affect the new capital supply for SXP on Upbit's related trading pairs, subsequently compressing market depth and market-making space. Off-exchange pricing may also be influenced by expected discounts, and OTC trading could incur higher risk premiums due to the yellow card label, shifting overall sentiment from "neglect" to "defense." Even if prices do not plummet sharply in the short term, the dual contraction of liquidity and psychological expectations may continue to ferment for some time.
● Compliance Precedent Pressure for Mid-to-Lower Projects: For a broader range of mid-to-lower projects, this incident serves as a clear demonstration—within an environment of self-regulatory alliances and institutional trends, project teams can no longer rely solely on technical updates or narrative marketing but must proactively face "traditional financial-style assessments" regarding compliance, transparency, information disclosure, and risk management. Those who can actively adapt to this new set of rules will have a better chance of maintaining their "white list" status on mainstream exchanges; conversely, they may passively face their yellow card moment in the next round of list adjustments.
● Historical Experience Rather Than Predictive Scripts: Currently, there is no formal statement from the SXP project team, nor have Upbit and DAXA provided any clear follow-up timeline or final plan. In this information gap, judgments about SXP's future path can only be made by analogizing past market behavior patterns of other projects that have been warned, rather than being packaged as so-called "insider predictions." Some projects have regained status through rectification and supplementary disclosures, while others have been marginalized or even delisted over long-term observation; these are known diverse outcomes.
● Investor Positioning in a Dual Environment: For investors, when "regulatory yellow cards" coexist with a "leverage feast," the most pressing issue is how to reconstruct the risk preference structure. On one hand, there is a need to be cautious about blindly bottom-fishing in warned assets, misinterpreting the "yellow card" as an "emotional opportunity"; on the other hand, it is also important to avoid overcrowding in ETH, BTC, and various high-leverage derivatives, controlling total leverage levels at both ends of panic and greed. In such an environment, position management upgrades from "selecting coins" to a comprehensive decision-making process of "selecting asset levels and risk exposures."
The Next Act of Regulatory Yellow Cards and the Leverage Feast
Upbit and DAXA's yellow card action regarding SXP provides an external window to observe the direction of upgraded self-regulation in the South Korean market: within the range not yet touching formal regulatory red lines, achieving more frequent and refined project risk screening through alliance coordination has become a defensive measure for trading platforms to "take the lead." Meanwhile, large on-chain ETH leverage, Binance's high-leverage TSLA perpetual contracts, RWA funds, and Hong Kong banks opening BTC/ETH trading collectively outline a funding structure that is shifting from "broad net" to "concentrated bets"—risk budgets are increasingly occupied by leading assets and high-interest derivatives, leaving the space for mid-to-lower tokens ever narrower. Moving forward, key observations should include: the subsequent changes in the DAXA warning and delisting lists; the evolving differences in regulatory density and openness between South Korea and Hong Kong; and whether on-chain leverage will continue to pile up, potentially triggering a new round of systemic risk discussions. As institutionalization and prudence become the industry norm, which yet-to-be-fully-noticed name will be the next to receive a yellow card?
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
