KuCoin has implemented a volume-based automatic ST (Special Treatment) tagging system that flags small-cap projects falling into the bottom 20% by trading volume. This system indirectly pressures projects to sustain or boost trading activity through self-funded trading competitions, in order to avoid delisting.
This proposal seeks to initiate an open discussion and a DAO vote on whether to continue funding Hydra’s pair on KuCoin at an estimated cost of $4,000/month ($48,000/year), or to shift strategy and liquidity focus toward more strategic initiatives.
Objectives
Evaluate the cost-benefit of maintaining the KuCoin pair under the current ST system.
Consider the psychological and liquidity impact of a potential KuCoin delisting.
Discuss alternative allocation of funds for greater ROI and long-term liquidity resilience.
Protect the Hydra community and treasury from extractive CEX dynamics.
Context
KuCoin has historically been important to Hydra (early staking, community access).
As of 2025, the situation has changed:
KuCoin’s support has diminished, staking was removed without notice.
KuCoin has been slow in resolving the legacy HYDRA reverse swap process.
Their trading infrastructure has become increasingly restrictive to small-caps.
Communication is minimal, with little value-added engagement.
Maintaining KuCoin presence via a monthly re-curring trading competition will cost approximately $4,000/month, mostly used for:
Funding trading activity (via community competitions)
Attempting to avoid further ST tag impact and delisting
These funds are essentially a “grant” to KuCoin, without long-term value to Hydra’s growth or ecosystem. Their purpose is to improve the volumes of Hydra and to comply with the unilateral criteria of the Exchange management.
Pros of Maintaining KuCoin
Preserves legacy user access and sentiment.
Avoids potential reputational impact of a delisting.
Maintains listing visibility for users not yet migrated to MEXC or DEX.
Cons of Maintaining KuCoin
Resources diverted from more responsive and open platforms like MEXC and/or for own liquidity mining on Hydradex.org. For comparison, the HydraDex has a total of ~ $1500 per month grant program now for HYDRA/USDC and HYDRA/WBTC pairs : Launch Incentive Budget for HydraGon DEX – Phase 1
KuCoin’s ST policy encourages short-term inflationary behaviors, misaligning with Hydra’s long-term deflationary principles.
High opportunity cost — funds could be used for:
MEXC growth campaigns
New market-making on DEX
Developer grants or ecosystem bounties
KuCoin is becoming less globally accessible due to jurisdictional restrictions.
Additional Considerations
Something to worth notice is that the ST tag itself has very aggressive optics when it comes to project reputation.
When tagged, the project is presented as “high risk” and users are warned with a “Please take the potential risks into consideration”. Effectively turning it into an anti-ad for the entire duration of the ST tag (currently lasting more than a month)
Given how aggressive their ST program is, and considering the recent delisting Kucoin is making on other projects, failure to secure budget for increasing trading activity will most likely lead to a project delisting.
On the other hand, securing that budget does not guarantee retention of the pair as it comes down to the centralized management of the exchange.
Our community must decide whether it wants to retain the pair at the expense of inflationary pressure for Hydra, or focus the resources elsewhere.
Great topic! $4k per month? Let’s not do anything and see how it goes.
Hydra is not a pump and dump project, so I find it hard to understand the need to produce fake volume just to clear a tag, or eventually keep being listed on a CeX.
Let’s hope it gets fixed by itself, and organically, due to a natural increase of transactional volume.
On the surface, doing nothing might seem like the safe option — but based on how KuCoin has treated other small projects, inaction could very well lead to a delisting.
As much as I dislike it, we’re faced with a tough choice: either accept the risk of potentially being delisted or commit to inflationary spending just to stay listed……which paradoxically is not guaranteed as the entire ST program is obscured as a backend system and there’s very little human communication in the way.
As mentioned, the ST tag may look like a neutral risk flag, but in practice, it acts as a tool to pressure projects into generating volume only to the benefit of the exchange — effectively generating more fees for their business.
In principle I also find it wrong as it comes pretty close to inflation due to coercion.
Perhaps doing it within a limited range (e.g. 3 month timeframe) to use it as a bridge until potential organic volumes improve if sentiment improves overall. At least to have some cap on the emissions that arise of it.
Mainnet is still very young (9 months) – adoption and ecosystem projects are only just starting to gain traction. This is not the right moment to risk losing a major CEX listing.
Current market = all-time lows – with market cap and trading volume at historic lows, a full delisting would hit visibility and reputation at the worst possible time.
Listings are limited and expensive – especially Tier-1 exchanges. Paying ~$4k/month to sustain KuCoin is modest compared to the real costs of securing or regaining listings elsewhere.
Short-term support can pay off – if Hydra gains momentum in 3–4 months through adoption and new community projects, keeping KuCoin access could prove a smart investment rather than a sunk cost.
While ST is not ideal, I believe bridging this period is strategically safer than risking a full delisting.
This is an important topic that I’m glad to see being discussed here, here’s my two cents.
Hydra really is a strong Layer 1 with real tech and real collaborations, even if it’s at an early stage we’re making continuous progress. At this stage, I think it’s crucial that we don’t waste resources just for optics, but instead focus on building real, sustainable value. Kucoins ST tag already gives the wrong impression — it makes Hydra look risky, and spending $4k/month to fight it doesn’t build real value. It would help to see some data of users on Kucoin, but considering the ST tag, not much is happening there for us.
MEXC on the other hand is growing, has higher trust ratings, and there’s a big overlap with KuCoin users, (since none of them can operate in the US for example). If we guide and incentivize people to move to Mexc, we don’t really have to lose anyone if we get delisted. Instead of splitting focus, we could go all-in on MEXC.
I don’t know how easy/hard this will be, but if we can communicate with Mexc our plans It would be great if we in the coming months can:
activate HYDRA Earn
Run competitions and co-marketing on their homepage.
Actively push everyone over to Mexc
This way, we build visibility and liquidity in one strong place, and from there we can look to expand to new exchanges, in other markets like the U.S. That way we build from strength, not from fear.
I’m with HydraSuperMan on this one. For as much as KuCoin is a crappy exchange, it’s still considered a Tier 1 exchange and a delisting from them is pretty much death for the project. Most top 100 crypto are on multiple exchanges, we cannot be taken seriously if we are just on one or two exchanges. We can’t afford to be delisted, we should be actively being listed on more exchanges. Not less.
The $4k a month isn’t perpetual either. Only until activity catches on. So we should be considering what else can be done to make adoption catch on.
Letting Hydra die is literally going to kill Hydra.
We could adjust this proposal to be valid for 3 months and have a fixed budget of $12,000.
I also agree that a delisting would not be optimal at this point as it could have short term cascading effect.
I think we are all aligned in disliking the idea of the DAO inflating HYDRA for the benefit of a single CEX, however if we perceive it as a bump that we must overcome to get to a better outcome, then it makes sense to do it.
Based on this I would argue mildly in favor for a 3-month allocation as a short term bridge. If the issue persists beyond those 3 months, and/or Kucoin continues to lose ground to other exchanges, the risk/reward will tilt more in favor for abstaining from future allocations afterward.
The vote is not warranted to pass, and the listing is not warranted to be preserved even if do it, which is why I would recommend to focus on speed of execution of the vote.
@planetoid given the time urgency and, I think it is worth structuring a DAO vote for 3 month allocation * 4k budget as soon as possible. I am a fan of wider debate, but in this case the pressure comes from Kucoin and we don’t have the luxury to wait more.
My thoughts are more in moving forward with the project and do not stick with Kucoin anymore and buy trading volume for Kucoin fees. KuCoin took way to long about the migration to HydraGon. They do not support HydraGon in Earn and Stake programs anymore. Let’s focus more on a new CEX that is positive about our strong L1 project and is eager to collaborate with us and willing to implement Stake and Earn programs e.g. We don’t need Kucoin, we should act/take action from our own strength and find new opportunities regarding CEX.
Allocate a $12,000 budget over 3 Months towards funding Kucoin specific trading competitions like the one we had recently
Activity from competitions to help with volumes of Hydra and to comply with the unilateral criteria of the Exchange management.
If well received by the community, this activity will help towards mitigating a potential delisting from Kucoin, although not a guarantee.
If during this 3 month term, Kucoin decides to delist despite the activity, funding to this initiative will be stopped at the earliest.
To help with ensuring that the trading competitions do not stop midway abruptly, we will have it as a Monthly rolling activity with 4k per month for 3 months.
Will prepare for Voting starting today and ending Sunday
Drop kucoin, then get listed on some good top 20-30 exchanges (ex.Ascendex), that will also adapt Hydra staking. Might cost cheaper than Kucoin’s. Since HYDRA already has good support from MEXC.
It is a difficult one. How much did we gain from the tading competition? Still volume is not a lot. I didnt see a lot of difference with or without a trading competition. I am leaning towards a goodbye to Kucoin, and focus on Mecx and DEX. I dont know how far we are with some bigger projects, and would it have an impact on projects to come if you are not listed on Kucoin ? So with a stay I would be okay, but also if we dont and built from the ground up.
Summary
Objectives
Context
Financial Implication
Pros of Maintaining KuCoin
Cons of Maintaining KuCoin