> According to CoinMarketCap, the distribution of institutional investors is primarily correlated
with the exchange volume than its regulatory status. We also find no significant difference regarding
the volume and distribution of transactions on regulated exchanges compared to unregulated
exchanges around the time they became regulated. For example, Coinbase received Bitlicense in
2017. But there is no exodus of traders. If anything, its volume grew significantly.
Does anyone have any thoughts on why or how this is the case? I'm having trouble wrapping my head around how there is no departure if fraudulent trading is so rampant pre-regulation. I suppose it's worth noting that this largely seems to be speculation on their part anyway. Their data sample is comprised of only roughly one quarter of 2019. Meanwhile, Coinbase received their bitlicense in 2017. It's unclear to me how they can even be sure of the claim they're making at all. I wish they had included a citation here.
The paragraphs following appeal to Benford's law and Power law to explain away any concerns, but it's also unclear to me how it's directly applicable. The premises seem sound, but the conclusion doesn't seem all that cogent to me.
Does anyone have any thoughts on why or how this is the case? I'm having trouble wrapping my head around how there is no departure if fraudulent trading is so rampant pre-regulation. I suppose it's worth noting that this largely seems to be speculation on their part anyway. Their data sample is comprised of only roughly one quarter of 2019. Meanwhile, Coinbase received their bitlicense in 2017. It's unclear to me how they can even be sure of the claim they're making at all. I wish they had included a citation here.
The paragraphs following appeal to Benford's law and Power law to explain away any concerns, but it's also unclear to me how it's directly applicable. The premises seem sound, but the conclusion doesn't seem all that cogent to me.