🚨 U.S. BITMART USERS — PLEASE CONTACT US
We are building a verified U.S. affected-user group for BitMart users whose assets cannot be withdrawn normally.
Our international network is expanding rapidly. Verified cases already include users from multiple countries, including two Japanese users with approximately 8,000,000 USDT each.
If you currently live in the United States, completed BitMart KYC in the U.S., or can report the case through a U.S. jurisdiction—and have more than 10,000 USDT-equivalent inaccessible—please DM me.
For initial verification, please provide:
• U.S. state of residence
• Approximate affected amount and asset type
• Withdrawal submission date and current status
• A redacted balance/withdrawal screenshot or screen recording showing the current time
• The time shown must closely match the time your DM is sent
Your UID, email, phone number and wallet address may be redacted. After verification, we may privately request your name and phone number for group coordination and lawful evidence submissions.
⚠️ No fees
⚠️ No transfers or account authorization
⚠️ Never send passwords, 2FA codes, private keys or seed phrases
⚠️ Personal information will not be publicly disclosed
The purpose is to consolidate evidence, organize affected users by jurisdiction and coordinate lawful reporting through relevant U.S. law-enforcement, regulatory and legal channels.
Please repost this so more affected American users can find us.
Do not remain isolated. Do not allow affected users to be divided one by one.
@BitMartExchange @BitMart_zh @sheldonbitmart
#BitMart# #Crypto# #USDT# #Withdrawal# #CryptoNews#
Show more
BITMART USERS DEMAND IMMEDIATE ACTION
@BitMartExchange @sheldonbitmart
We currently represent 27 affected BitMart users, reporting a combined 3,704,214 USDT-equivalent in assets that cannot be withdrawn normally. The number is still increasing.
Many high-balance users were attracted by BitMart’s high-yield USDG and PYUSD Earn products.
According to screenshots and account records preserved by our group:
All available USDG withdrawal networks were marked “Suspended”;
Users report that USDG/USDT and PYUSD/USDT exit routes became unavailable;
Larger USDT withdrawals remain pending or are returned;
Some users can withdraw only two or three transactions of around 100 USDT;
Customer support repeatedly says cases have been “expedited,” but provides no real timetable.
Seven preserved account screenshots alone show displayed balances totaling 1,692,203.67 USDT.
This is not an isolated delay.
A withdrawal button that releases a few 100-USDT transactions while tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars remain inaccessible is not a functioning withdrawal service.
We call on major exchanges, stablecoin issuers, market makers, custodians and Web3 leaders to collectively oppose this conduct.
If the industry remains silent while a platform attracts stablecoin deposits through Earn products and then removes practical exit routes, trust in every centralized exchange will be damaged. This could set the entire Web3 industry back by years.
@POTUS @realDonaldTrump
@cz_binance @heyibinance
@GracyBitget @xiejiayinBitget
@justinsuntron
Mr. President, you have consistently supported the digital-asset industry. But no industry can survive if users cannot recover their own assets.
We demand that BitMart:
Disclose the status of customer assets.
Publish a verifiable withdrawal timetable.
Restore workable exit routes.
Return 100% of user funds.
An authorized senior BitMart executive must contact our representative within 24 hours.
Generic support replies are not a response.
The 24-hour countdown is already running.
Show more
Theories can only tell us that vol carry does exist, but a frictionless market doesn't. Welcome to the brave new world to face the reality.
**✅ 期权Carry的真相：Gamma=0、Theta=500，真的能每天稳收500吗？**
很多人以为：
**Gamma≈0 + Theta=500** → 一天就能躺收500 Carry；
**Gamma=0.0005 + Theta=0** → Carry ≈ ½×Gamma×S²×σ²×dt 就行了。
**但现实远没这么简单。**
这背后的坑，比初看深得多：
**1. 卖出虚值期权临近到期，Deltaness越来越虚，IV反而趋势性上涨**
这不是均值回复，而是**系统性drift**。BS公式算的Theta衰减，会被这个漂移大幅侵蚀，必须提前扣除。
**2. 明明Long Gamma，对冲却经常高吸低抛？**
很大可能是 **Vanna在作祟**（Delta随IV变化而漂移）。如果对冲程序执行不够精细，没考虑Vanna、Charm等高阶Greeks，就很容易把本该通过Gamma scalping赚到的利润亏掉。
**你有没有注意到这些异常？** 这些执行偏差，也要从MTM Carry中扣除。
**3. 真实交易成本无处不在**
期权/期货re-hedge时的**滑点 + 手续费**，在高频调整下会持续侵蚀理论Carry，尤其在crypto流动性碎片化的市场。
---
**真正的Carry应该这么算：**
**True Carry = MTM Carry（逐笔Mark-to-Market累积盈亏）**
**- Shape TS Roll（波动率期限结构滚动损益）**
**- Directional（残余方向性暴露损益）**
**- (Fees + Slippage)（手续费+滑点）**
只有把**理论 snapshot** 还原成**真实逐帧MTM**，再扣除期限结构漂移、方向性泄漏和摩擦成本后，你才能看到策略的**净边际**到底是正还是负。
**简单Greeks看一眼舒服，但真金白银要靠MTM+全维度分解。**
GreeksLive的新系统即将上线，帮大家把这一切算清楚——从tick级回放、到真实Carry拆解，一站式搞定。
**Special thanks to our Quant！@StochAlex07 **
Show more
For modern vol traders, it's crutial to understand these definitions, so that adjustments and hedging decisions are correctly made. As for advanced analytics based on stochastic volatility (SABR), visit to explore more.
Show more
我和Quant Alex @StochAlex07的讨论：Vega*∂Sigma/∂F是否可以被称为Vanna项？
**Compressed Summary: Jeff & Alex Wu Discussion on “whether Vega × ∂Sigma/∂F is a Vanna term?”**
### Core Question (Jeff)
Jeff asks why many traders call **Vega × ∂Sigma/∂F** (Smile Delta / Shadow Delta) a “Vanna term” under implied vol surface context.
He notes this term represents **spot-induced IV change due to moneyness shift**, but it differs from the classic cross-derivative ∂²P/(∂F ∂Σ). He wants to know if this broader usage is valid.
### Alex’s Clear Verdict
**No — it should not be called Vanna.**
The “broad interpretation” is **sloppy and mixes two different concepts**:
- **Classical BS Vanna**: Second-order Greek — how Vega changes with Spot, or how Delta changes with IV (inside BS PDE).
- **Vega × ∂Sigma/∂F (Smile Delta)**: Describes **realized spot–IV dynamics** (how the implied volatility surface itself moves when spot moves).
Alex: “They are not the same thing — their explanatory targets are completely different.”
### Why the Confusion Exists
- In pure BS, Vanna and Volga were introduced to handle Greeks sensitivity to spot/IV moves.
- Spot-induced IV changes are a **separate phenomenon**, addressed by market conventions:
- Sticky Strike / Sticky Delta / Sticky Local Vol
- Implied Skew (quick proxy for spot-vol linkage)
- Calculating full strike-by-strike spot-IV correlations is impractical, so desks focus on **Spot vs ATM IV dynamics**.
### Modern Practical Approaches (Beyond BS Vanna)
1. **Parametric Vol Dynamics** (SEPP / SVI / Vola Dynamics path)
Regress dSpot & dATM Vol → derive each strike’s dIV/dF.
Focuses on **smile shape**, not stochastic dynamics. Naturally compatible with sticky rules.
2. **Stochastic Volatility Models** (e.g. SABR)
Directly links implied skew to **spot-vol covariance**.
A Vanna-like term appears in the PDE, but **Bartlett Delta contains no Vanna**.
### Key Takeaways
- Smile Delta’s essence is **spot-vol covariance + smile shape**, unrelated to classical BS Vanna.
- The popular “Vanna = Smile Delta” shorthand is convenient market talk but **technically inaccurate**.
- Real trading desks have long moved beyond pure BS Greeks precisely because BS Vanna alone cannot capture actual vol-surface behavior.
**Conclusion**: The terminology is misleading. Vega*∂Sigma/∂F and Vanna explain different objects and should not be conflated.
Show more
According to Stochastic Volatility Modeling by Lorenzo Bergomi, β=1 SABR theta decomposition is the key to decouple volatility risk premium into 3 dimensions: atm vol, skew, convexity.
Show more
和公司Quant Alex @Vladimir114514 讨论SABR Theta vs Spot Theta+Cross Theta+Vol Theta的差异。
附上英语浓缩，方便英语读者。
English Summary (Compressed)
The chat discusses the key differences between SABR Theta and the granular Spot Theta + Vol Theta + Cross Theta in the SABR model, mainly for P&L attribution and risk management.
Main Points:
Relationship: SABR Theta − SABR Gamma ≈ Spot Theta + Vol Theta + Cross Theta − Spot Gamma − Volga − Vanna. They are mathematically related but not the same.
Definitions:
SABR Theta (dC/dt): Directly calculated from Hagan’s implied volatility approximation formula (closed-form).
Spot + Vol + Cross Theta: Derived from the SABR PDE, offering a detailed 3-dimensional time decay breakdown.
Key Differences:
SABR Theta is a quick, formula-based total theta.
Spot/Vol/Cross Theta is PDE-consistent and provides better economic interpretability.
SABR Theta does not explicitly separate certain cross terms (e.g. ∂B/∂σ × ∂σ_imp/∂τ).
Practical Usage:
Current P&L systems require Spot + Vol + Cross Theta for full 3D risk explanation.
Using pure SABR Theta + SABR Gamma reverts to Hagan’s original simpler framework (“another story”).
With SABR Theta, time decay is largely absorbed into the gamma/theta pair.
Conclusion:
SABR Theta is a convenient approximation, while Spot + Vol + Cross Theta is preferred for precise, granular P&L attribution. They serve different analytical needs.
Show more
