Cboe weighs converting BTC, ETH continuous futures into perpetual futures: report
Cboe Global Markets is reportedly considering converting its exchange-listed continuous Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH) futures into perpetual futures, a shift that would align its product set with formats that have become dominant on crypto-native venues. The move, reported by Cointelegraph on June 23, 2026, comes as U.S. regulatory changes have accelerated adoption of crypto perpetuals and as rivals including Coinbase and Kalshi expand their derivatives offerings.
What the conversion would mean in practice
Perpetual futures differ from traditional exchange-listed continuous or expiring futures primarily in two ways: they have no fixed expiry and they typically use a funding-rate mechanism to tether futures prices to the underlying spot market. Continuous futures, by contrast, are constructed to provide a continuous price series from a sequence of expiring contracts and are settled through established clearinghouses under existing futures frameworks.
Converting exchange-listed continuous futures into perpetuals would likely require changes to trading mechanics, notably the introduction of a funding payment between long and short positions and adjustments to margining and risk-management processes. It could also alter settlement conventions and the way exchanges and clearinghouses handle intraday and overnight exposures. Those operational shifts would be material for firms that provide custody, prime brokerage and clearing services for institutional participants.
Why this matters for market structure and liquidity
Adopting perpetual contracts on an established venue such as Cboe could reshape liquidity distribution across exchanges. Perpetuals have become the liquid instrument of choice on many retail and institutional trading desks because of their continuous nature and often tighter spreads around spot price. If Cboe migrates volumes into perpetual formats, liquidity that currently resides on crypto-native venues could flow to regulated exchange order books, changing market-making strategies and potentially narrowing futures–spot bases.
Competition among venues may intensify. The report notes expansion of perpetual-like offerings by Coinbase and Kalshi; a Cboe conversion could prompt further product innovation and fee/clearing competition as venues seek to attract institutional flow. Market makers would need to recalibrate hedging, as funding-rate dynamics can create recurrent carry costs or income that affect dealers’ quotes and inventories.
There are also implications for ETF arbitrage and institutional hedging. Perpetual funding mechanics can influence the cost of holding hedge positions compared with fixed-expiry futures or spot exposure, which in turn can affect the economics of trades used by asset managers and arbitrage desks. Any sustained changes to futures pricing dynamics would be observed closely by participants executing cross-market strategies.
Regulatory and clearing considerations will be central. Futures on registered exchanges are subject to Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) oversight and clearing through regulated clearinghouses; converting product type could prompt dialogue with regulators and counterparties about margin models, default management and the interaction of funding payments with existing rules. Market infrastructure providers—from custody to clearing—would need to assess operational impacts.
Market participants will be watching for formal announcements from Cboe, updates from competing venues such as Coinbase and Kalshi, and any regulatory guidance from the CFTC or other authorities. Key indicators to monitor include volumes and open interest migration across venues, funding-rate levels on new contracts, spreads versus spot, and any changes in clearinghouse margin requirements.