ExchangeDEX+

Buy Crypto Markets Spot FuturesGOLD Earn Event Center

TLDR: Silver crashed 32% in largest intraday drop since 1980, erasing $2.5 trillion as manipulation claims surface. JPMorgan issued 633 February silver contractsTLDR: Silver crashed 32% in largest intraday drop since 1980, erasing $2.5 trillion as manipulation claims surface. JPMorgan issued 633 February silver contracts

JPMorgan Faces Silver Manipulation Claims After Historic 32% Crash Wipes Out $2.5 Trillion

Author: Blockonomi

Source: Blockonomi

2026/02/02 07:01

Silver crashed 32% in largest intraday drop since 1980, erasing $2.5 trillion as manipulation claims surface.
JPMorgan issued 633 February silver contracts during crash after $920 million fine for past manipulation.
Shanghai physical silver traded higher than U.S. futures, indicating paper selling drove collapse not supply.
Margin hikes forced leveraged traders to liquidate while JPMorgan’s balance sheet weathered the storm.

JPMorgan faces renewed manipulation accusations after silver experienced its largest intraday crash since 1980, plunging 32% and wiping out $2.5 trillion in market value within two days.

The bank’s documented history of precious metals manipulation between 2008 and 2016 has intensified scrutiny over its role in recent market turmoil.

Bull Theory raised questions about JPMorgan’s positioning during the collapse as COMEX data reveals strategic contract activity during the sharp downturn.

Historical Precedent and Current Market Structure

The U.S. Department of Justice and CFTC previously fined JPMorgan $920 million for manipulating gold and silver prices over eight years.

That case involved hundreds of thousands of fake orders designed to move prices before cancellation. Several JPMorgan traders faced criminal convictions for their roles in the scheme.

Modern silver trading operates primarily through futures contracts rather than physical metal transactions. For every ounce of actual silver, hundreds of paper contracts exist in the market. JPMorgan maintains a position as one of the largest bullion banks operating on COMEX.

According to COMEX data, JPMorgan holds substantial amounts of both registered and eligible physical silver. This dual positioning grants the bank influence over both paper markets and physical supply.

The structure creates opportunities for participants with large balance sheets to capitalize during volatile periods.

Bull Theory’s analysis points to this framework as enabling disproportionate advantages for major institutions. Market observers note that leverage-dependent traders are subject to automatic liquidation during sharp price moves.

Meanwhile, institutions with substantial capital reserves can withstand margin calls and acquire positions from forced sellers.

Forced Liquidations and Strategic Positioning During Crash

Silver prices were rising rapidly before the crash as many traders held long positions using borrowed capital. When prices reversed, exchanges raised margin requirements sharply. Traders suddenly needed much more cash to maintain open positions.

Most leveraged participants could not meet the increased margin demands. Their positions closed automatically through forced liquidation mechanisms. This created cascading selling pressure as stop-losses triggered across the market.

COMEX delivery reports show JPMorgan issued 633 February silver contracts during the crash period. Issued contracts indicate JPMorgan held short positions on those agreements.

Market participants claim the bank opened shorts near the $120 peak and closed them around $78 during delivery.

The price divergence between U.S. paper markets and Shanghai physical trading reveals additional market dynamics. Physical silver in Shanghai traded substantially higher than U.S. futures prices during the collapse.

Real buyers continued paying premium prices for actual metal while paper prices plummeted. This gap indicates the crash stemmed from paper selling rather than sudden physical supply increases, according to Bull Theory’s assessment on the matter.

The post JPMorgan Faces Silver Manipulation Claims After Historic 32% Crash Wipes Out $2.5 Trillion appeared first on Blockonomi.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

The gaming industry is in the midst of a historic shift, driven by the rise of Web3. Unlike traditional games, where developers and publishers control assets and dictate in-game economies, Web3 gaming empowers players with ownership and influence. Built on blockchain technology, these ecosystems are decentralized by design, enabling true digital asset ownership, transparent economies, and a future where players help shape the games they play. However, as Web3 gaming grows, security becomes a focal point. The range of security concerns, from hacking to asset theft to vulnerabilities in smart contracts, is a significant issue that will undermine or erode trust in this ecosystem, limiting or stopping adoption. Blockchain technology could be used to create security processes around secure, transparent, and fair Web3 gaming ecosystems. We will explore how security is increasing within gaming ecosystems, which challenges are being overcome, and what the future of security looks like. Why is Security Important in Web3 Gaming? Web3 gaming differs from traditional gaming in that players engage with both the game and assets with real value attached. Players own in-game assets that exist as tokens or NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens), and can trade and sell them. These game assets usually represent significant financial value, meaning security failure could represent real monetary loss. In essence, without security, the promises of owning “something” in Web3, decentralized economies within games, and all that comes with the term “fair” gameplay can easily be eroded by fraud, hacking, and exploitation. This is precisely why the uniqueness of blockchain should be emphasized in securing Web3 gaming. How Blockchain Ensures Security in Web3 Gaming?

Immutable Ownership of Assets Blockchain records can be manipulated by anyone. If a player owns a sword, skin, or plot of land as an NFT, it is verifiably in their ownership, and it cannot be altered or deleted by the developer or even hacked. This has created a proven track record of ownership, providing control back to the players, unlike any centralised gaming platform where assets can be revoked.
Decentralized Infrastructure Blockchain networks also have a distributed architecture where game data is stored in a worldwide network of nodes, making them much less susceptible to centralised points of failure and attacks. This decentralised approach makes it exponentially more difficult to hijack systems or even shut off the game’s economy.
Secure Transactions with Cryptography Whether a player buys an NFT or trades their in-game tokens for other items or tokens, the transactions are enforced by cryptographic algorithms, ensuring secure, verifiable, and irreversible transactions and eliminating the risks of double-spending or fraudulent trades.
Smart Contract Automation Smart contracts automate the enforcement of game rules and players’ economic exchanges for the developer, eliminating the need for intermediaries or middlemen, and trust for the developer. For example, if a player completes a quest that promises a reward, the smart contract will execute and distribute what was promised.
Anti-Cheating and Fair Gameplay The naturally transparent nature of blockchain makes it extremely simple for anyone to examine a specific instance of gameplay and verify the economic outcomes from that play. Furthermore, multi-player games that enforce smart contracts on things like loot sharing or win sharing can automate and measure trustlessness and avoid cheating, manipulations, and fraud by developers.
Cross-Platform Security Many Web3 games feature asset interoperability across platforms. This interoperability is made viable by blockchain, which guarantees ownership is maintained whenever assets transition from one game or marketplace to another, thereby offering protection to players who rely on transfers for security against fraud. Key Security Dangers in Web3 Gaming Although blockchain provides sound first principles of security, the Web3 gaming ecosystem is susceptible to threats. Some of the most serious threats include:

Smart Contract Vulnerabilities: Smart contracts that are poorly written or lack auditing will leave openings for exploitation and thereby result in asset loss. Phishing Attacks: Unintentionally exposing or revealing private keys or signing transactions that are not possible to reverse, under the assumption they were genuine transaction requests. Bridge Hacks: Cross-chain bridges, which allow players to move their assets between their respective blockchains, continually face hacks, requiring vigilance from players and developers. Scams and Rug Pulls: Rug pulls occur when a game project raises money and leaves, leaving player assets worthless. Regulatory Ambiguity: Global regulations remain unclear; risks exist for players and developers alike. While blockchain alone won’t resolve every issue, it remediates the responsibility of the first principles, more so when joined by processes such as auditing, education, and the right governance, which can improve their contribution to the security landscapes in game ecosystems. Real Life Examples of Blockchain Security in Web3 Gaming Axie Infinity (Ronin Hack): The Axie Infinity game and several projects suffered one of the biggest hacks thus far on its Ronin bridge; however, it demonstrated the effectiveness of multi-sig security and the effective utilization of decentralization. The industry benefited through learning and reflection, thus, as projects have implemented changes to reduce the risks of future hacks or misappropriation. Immutable X: This Ethereum scaling solution aims to ensure secure NFT transactions for gaming, allowing players to trade an asset without the burden of exorbitant fees and fears of being a victim of fraud. Enjin: Enjin is providing a trusted infrastructure for Web3 games, offering secure NFT creation and transfer while reiterating that ownership and an asset securely belong to the player. These examples indubitably illustrate that despite challenges to overcome, blockchain remains the foundational layer on which to build more secure Web3 gaming environments. Benefits of Blockchain Security for Players and Developers For Players: Confidence in true ownership of assets Transparency in in-game economies Protection against nefarious trades/scams For Developers: More trust between players and the platform Less reliance on centralized infrastructure Ability to attract wealth and players based on provable fairness By incorporating blockchain security within the mechanics of game design, developers can create and enforce resilient ecosystems where players feel reassured in investing time, money, and ownership within virtual worlds. The Future of Secure Web3 Gaming Ecosystems As the wisdom of blockchain technology and industry knowledge improves, the future for secure Web3 gaming looks bright. New growing trends include: Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs): A new wave of protocols that enable private transactions and secure smart contracts while managing user privacy with an element of transparency. Decentralized Identity Solutions (DID): Helping players control their identities and decrease account theft risks. AI-Enhanced Security: Identifying irregularities in user interactions by sampling pattern anomalies to avert hacks and fraud by time-stamping critical events. Interoperable Security Standards: Allowing secured and seamless asset transfers across blockchains and games. With these innovations, blockchain will not only secure gaming assets but also enhance the overall trust and longevity of Web3 gaming ecosystems. Conclusion Blockchain is more than a buzzword in Web3; it is the only way to host security, fairness, and transparency. With blockchain, players confirm immutable ownership of digital assets, there is a decentralized infrastructure, and finally, it supports smart contracts to automate code that protects players and developers from the challenges of digital economies. The threats, vulnerabilities, and scams that come from smart contracts still persist, but the industry is maturing with better security practices, cross-chain solutions, and increased formal cryptographic tools. In the coming years, blockchain will remain the base to digital economies and drive Web3 gaming environments that allow players to safely own, trade, and enjoy their digital experiences free from fraud and exploitation. While blockchain and gaming alone entertain, we will usher in an era of secure digital worlds where trust complements innovation. The Role of Blockchain in Building Safer Web3 Gaming Ecosystems was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story