That breadth is useful when a token is difficult to find elsewhere. It also changes what users need to check before trading. A market being listed does not mean it has deep liquidity, inexpensive withdrawals or enough buyers to absorb a large exit.
XT.COM also has a security event that belongs in any serious review of the exchange. On November 28, 2024, the company disclosed an abnormal transfer involving roughly $1 million across 12 assets from one of its platform wallets. External blockchain analysis at the time estimated the loss at around $1.7 million. Withdrawals were temporarily suspended while the incident was investigated.
Since then, XT.COM has expanded its proof-of-reserves system and says customer assets are backed 1:1. That is useful information, but the important question is what users can independently verify: which assets are included, when the snapshot was taken and whether their own balance appears in the Merkle-tree data.
For active traders, three areas deserve particular attention before using XT.COM: the actual fee for the market, the depth behind the displayed price and the scope of its reserve evidence.
Why traders use XT.COM
XT.COM is not built around a small selection of highly liquid markets.
Its product range includes:
- spot trading;
- perpetual and other derivatives;
- margin trading;
- copy trading;
- trading bots;
- P2P transactions;
- Earn products;
- leveraged and ETF-style products;
- a large selection of smaller crypto assets.
For some users, the attraction is simply that XT.COM lists a token they cannot trade on a larger venue.
That can be a legitimate use case. But it also means the quality of the experience varies significantly from one market to another.
BTC/USDT and a recently listed microcap token should not be evaluated as if they were the same product. The exchange may provide the infrastructure for both, while liquidity, spreads, withdrawal support and counterparty activity can be completely different.
That makes market-level due diligence more important on XT.COM than a simple exchange-level judgment.
The standard 0.20% spot fee can add up quickly
XT.COM's general spot guidance states that completed maker and taker trades are charged 0.20%, although VIP tiers and certain markets can have different rates.
The exchange's live fee system also adjusts VIP status according to criteria including account assets and 30-day trading activity.
For an ordinary trader paying 0.20%, the cost is easy to underestimate.
A $10,000 purchase would generate:
$10,000 × 0.20% = $20
Selling another $10,000 at the same fee would bring the explicit round-trip trading cost to approximately:
$20 + $20 = $40
That is before:
- bid-ask spread;
- slippage;
- withdrawal fees;
- network fees where applicable.
The difference becomes more important for frequent trading.
A trader turning over $100,000 of spot volume at a 0.20% fee would generate $200 in trading fees for that volume before considering execution costs.
XT.COM does offer VIP pricing, so 0.20% should not be treated as the rate every customer will always pay. Some assets also have their own fee mechanisms, while promotional markets can temporarily trade at lower or zero fees.
The useful number is therefore the fee displayed for the specific account and trading pair immediately before execution.
Futures use a different cost structure
The 0.20% spot figure should not be carried over to futures.
XT.COM's standard USDT-margined futures documentation lists lower maker and taker rates, while VIP schedules can change those rates further.
More importantly, trading commission is only one component of a perpetual-futures position.
A futures trader also needs to consider:
- funding payments;
- leverage;
- maintenance margin;
- liquidation price;
- liquidation costs;
- spread and slippage.
A low futures fee can therefore coexist with a very expensive trade.
For example, a highly leveraged position can be liquidated after a relatively small move in the underlying asset. Repeated funding payments can also matter far more than the difference between two exchanges' headline maker fees.
Fee comparisons should therefore keep spot and derivatives separate.
What happened to XT.COM on November 28, 2024？
On November 28, 2024, XT.COM disclosed an abnormal transfer from one of its platform wallets.
The exchange said the transfer involved approximately $1 million worth of assets across 12 currencies and stated that the affected assets belonged to XT.COM rather than its customers.
Blockchain-security firm PeckShield produced a higher external estimate of approximately $1.7 million based on observed on-chain movements.
The difference is worth preserving rather than forcing the incident into one number.
XT.COM's figure is the amount disclosed by the exchange. The larger figure came from external blockchain analysis.
Withdrawals were suspended during the response while the exchange investigated and worked on its wallet infrastructure.
That temporary suspension matters even if customers ultimately did not bear the reported loss.
It demonstrates an important feature of centralized-exchange custody:
A platform-wallet incident can affect customer access even when customer balances themselves are not the assets stolen.
If withdrawals are paused, a user cannot necessarily move assets simply because their account balance remains intact.
The $146.8 million reserve figure was a 2024 snapshot, not a current balance sheet
Immediately after the incident, XT.COM published wallet information intended to demonstrate that it had sufficient reserves.
The exchange stated that its total reserve value was $146,792,780.07 as of November 28, 2024 at 08:23:43.
The summarized reserve set disclosed by XT.COM was dominated by bitcoin:
| Asset | Share of disclosed reserve set |
|---|---|
| BTC | 97.79% |
| USDT | 2.21% |
XT.COM also published several Bitcoin addresses and a USDT address.
This was useful because wallet addresses can be independently inspected on-chain.
But the date matters.
The $146.8 million figure describes assets disclosed around the time of the 2024 incident. It should not be presented as XT.COM's current reserve balance in 2026.
Crypto wallet values, customer liabilities and asset composition can change rapidly.
Anyone evaluating XT.COM today should use the latest proof-of-reserves report rather than relying on the wallet snapshot published after the incident.
XT.COM now has a Merkle-tree proof-of-reserves system
XT.COM subsequently introduced the Merkle-tree verification system it had announced after the wallet incident.
Its current proof-of-reserves page says that the platform maintains user assets on a 1:1 basis.
The system compares reported XT wallet assets with the user balances included in a reserve snapshot. Users can also use Merkle-tree verification to check whether eligible account balances were included.
Those are meaningful improvements over simply publishing a statement that funds are safe.
A useful proof-of-reserves system can answer two separate questions:
Assets: Does the exchange control the reported on-chain assets？
Liabilities: Was the user's balance included in the liability dataset used for the reserve calculation？
The combination is more informative than a wallet list alone.
But proof of reserves has a defined scope
XT.COM's proof-of-reserves page also contains an important qualification: reserve ratios are presented for mainstream assets, and the company says additional cryptocurrencies will be added to the audit scope.
That distinction matters for an exchange with a very large token catalog.
A platform-level statement of 1:1 backing should not automatically be interpreted as proof that every listed token is currently visible in the same publicly verifiable reserve report.
Before relying on a reserve ratio, check:
- which cryptocurrency is covered;
- the snapshot date;
- reported customer liabilities;
- reported wallet assets;
- the reserve ratio;
- whether user-level Merkle verification is available.
- corporate debt unrelated to customer balances;
- obligations at other legal entities;
- pledged or encumbered assets unless disclosed;
- liabilities excluded from the snapshot;
- future liquidity after the snapshot date.
- a current price;
- recent trades;
- 24-hour volume;
- hundreds of thousands of dollars in reported activity;
- bid-ask spread;
- total bids within 1% of the current price;
- total bids within 2%;
- size of individual orders;
- frequency of recent trades;
- whether volume is continuous or concentrated in short bursts.
- migrate to a new smart contract;
- move to another blockchain;
- support multiple bridged versions;
- suspend one network while keeping another open.
- listing announcements;
- launch campaigns;
- trading competitions;
- airdrops;
- market-maker incentives;
- short-term speculation.
- contracting company;
- governing law;
- restricted jurisdictions;
- dispute process;
- product restrictions.
- new regulation;
- licensing changes;
- sanctions requirements;
- banking changes;
- internal compliance decisions.
- deposit a small amount;
- make the intended trade;
- check the withdrawal network;
- send a small withdrawal;
- confirm receipt at the destination.
- authenticator-based 2FA;
- a unique password;
- a secured email account;
- withdrawal-address controls where available;
- restricted API permissions;
- verification of alleged XT.COM representatives.
- the leader's exact entry;
- the same slippage;
- the same account exposure;
- outside hedges the leader may hold elsewhere.
- fees;
- liquidity;
- withdrawal support;
- reserve coverage;
- legal eligibility.
- Check the exact spot or futures fee.
Do not assume every market uses the headline standard rate.
- Inspect real order-book depth.
Look at the amount that can actually be sold near the current price.
- Verify the token contract and blockchain.
Tickers alone are not sufficient.
- Check withdrawals before buying.
Confirm the network, minimum amount and fee.
- Review the latest proof-of-reserves report.
Confirm that the relevant asset is included and note the snapshot date.
- Identify the legal terms applying to the account.
Product availability does not automatically establish local regulatory eligibility.
- Run a small withdrawal test.
Verify the entire path before increasing the balance.
Proof of reserves also does not automatically reveal every part of a company's financial position.
It may not show:
PoR should therefore be treated as custody evidence with a defined scope, not as a replacement for a full financial audit.
The reserve ratio is more useful than a headline dollar amount
For users, the percentage relationship between assets and included liabilities is usually more informative than the exchange's total wallet value.
Suppose an exchange publishes $500 million of assets.
That number looks impressive on its own.
But if the corresponding customer liabilities are $600 million, those assets would not fully cover the included balances.
Conversely, a smaller exchange with $100 million in verifiable assets against $90 million of included liabilities would show a stronger ratio for that snapshot.
This is why XT.COM's current reserve reports are more useful than repeating the $146.8 million wallet figure from November 2024.
The relevant questions are:
How much does XT report holding now, and what customer liabilities is that amount being compared with？
XT.COM's biggest trading advantage also creates its biggest execution problem
The exchange's broad token selection is one of its clearest differentiators.
But the presence of a token on the platform says very little about its tradable depth.
A small market can display:
while still having relatively little liquidity close to the midpoint.
For a trader, exit liquidity is more important than the last traded price.
Before entering a smaller XT.COM market, inspect the order book rather than relying on the headline volume.
Useful checks include:
If selling $5,000 would materially move the market, a displayed portfolio value based on the last price may overstate what the position is actually worth on exit.
Market orders are especially dangerous in thin books
A market order prioritizes execution rather than price.
On a deep BTC/USDT order book, that distinction may be relatively small for an ordinary retail transaction.
On an illiquid altcoin, it can be substantial.
Consider a simplified sell book:
| Available bid | Quantity |
|---|---|
| $1.00 | $500 |
| $0.97 | $700 |
| $0.91 | $1,000 |
| $0.82 | $2,000 |
The displayed price may still be close to $1.00.
But a large market sell would consume progressively lower bids. The realized exit price could be far below the number shown beside the token in the account.
That loss is slippage, not an exchange trading fee.
On a thin market, it can dwarf a 0.20% commission.
This is why fee comparisons alone are particularly weak when evaluating altcoin-heavy exchanges.
Check the token contract, not just the ticker
Breadth creates another problem: asset identification.
Two tokens can share a ticker while representing entirely different contracts.
A project may also:
Before depositing or withdrawing a smaller token on XT.COM, compare the contract address and supported network with information from the project's official channels.
Do this before buying if the intention is to withdraw the asset.
Discovering after the trade that the required network is unavailable can leave the user dependent on the exchange's remaining withdrawal options.
New-listing volume can disappear quickly
XT.COM frequently provides access to smaller and newly listed assets.
Early trading can produce unusually high volume because of:
That volume may not persist.
A market that appears liquid during its launch period can become significantly thinner after incentives end or trader attention moves elsewhere.
Anyone building a meaningful position should therefore look beyond the latest 24-hour volume.
Several days of order-book behavior provide more useful information about whether a position can realistically be exited.
Regulatory claims need to be checked at entity level
XT.COM operates globally and has referenced corporate entities and registrations in different jurisdictions.
For users, the existence of a registration somewhere in the group is less important than the legal entity actually providing their service.
Before depositing significant funds, check the current user agreement for:
Regulatory terminology also needs to be read carefully.
An AML, money-services or virtual-asset registration does not automatically mean the entity has comprehensive authorization for every activity shown on the platform.
Spot trading, custody, P2P services, Earn products and leveraged derivatives can raise different regulatory questions.
This is especially important for futures.
The fact that an account can technically open a derivatives screen does not establish that retail derivatives trading is permitted in the user's country.
Geographic restrictions can become a withdrawal issue
Eligibility is not only an account-opening question.
An exchange may change regional restrictions after:
That can result in product restrictions, position-closing deadlines or withdrawal-only periods.
Using inaccurate residency information or a VPN to bypass geographic controls can create a much more serious problem later if identity verification is triggered during a withdrawal.
The account should be opened and operated under information that can actually be verified.
Test the withdrawal path before building a position
For smaller assets, there are four separate questions:
Can you buy it？
Can you sell it with acceptable slippage？
Can you withdraw it？
Can the receiving wallet or exchange accept the same network？
These questions should be answered before a large position is created.
A practical test is simple:
This reveals several things that a review cannot guarantee in advance: current network availability, minimum withdrawals, fees and the actual account-level withdrawal process.
The 2024 incident makes withdrawal testing more relevant
Withdrawal testing cannot protect against every exchange-wide suspension.
The November 2024 event itself demonstrated that.
But it does reduce another risk: discovering only during a stressful event that the user's account, destination address or network configuration is not ready.
For active exchange balances, users should also consider whether they need immediate access to all of the assets stored there.
A trading venue and a long-term wallet solve different problems.
Keeping working capital on an exchange can be operationally necessary. Keeping assets there that are not required for trading creates additional custody exposure without necessarily providing additional trading value.
Account security matters separately from platform security
A wallet incident at an exchange and an individual account takeover are different risks.
Users can reduce the second category even though they cannot control the first.
XT.COM provides security tools including two-factor authentication, anti-phishing protections and official-contact verification.
Good account hygiene includes:
The exchange also provides an official verification tool for checking email addresses, business-development contacts and payment addresses.
That is particularly useful because crypto exchange users are frequently targeted through Telegram, Discord and other messaging services by people impersonating platform staff.
No legitimate support process should require a seed phrase or private key.
Copy trading and bots do not remove market risk
XT.COM's product range extends beyond manual spot trading.
Trading bots can automate execution rules, but they cannot create liquidity that does not exist.
A grid strategy on a thin token, for example, can repeatedly trade inside a range and still suffer heavily if the market breaks below that range and buyers disappear.
Copy trading creates a different problem.
A follower does not necessarily receive:
High historical returns can also reflect high leverage.
Users should therefore inspect maximum drawdown, leverage, trading duration and current positions rather than selecting a trader solely by return or win rate.
What XT.COM is actually useful for
XT.COM makes the most sense when its breadth solves a specific problem.
A trader may want access to a token that is unavailable on preferred larger exchanges. Another user may specifically want its bots, copy-trading tools or derivatives markets.
In those situations, the platform can be useful without needing to become the user's primary place for long-term custody.
The more important question is whether the feature being used justifies the additional work required to verify:
For someone trading only major assets, XT.COM's enormous listing catalog may offer little practical advantage over a venue with deeper regulatory or institutional infrastructure.
For an altcoin trader, that catalog can be the main reason to use it.
Those are very different use cases.
What to check before depositing
The most useful XT.COM review is ultimately a checklist that can be verified against the market being used.
Before depositing significant funds:
XT.COM's broad market coverage is real, but so is the due-diligence burden that comes with it.
The November 2024 wallet incident is relevant because it showed that a platform-level security event can temporarily affect access even when the exchange says customer assets were not directly lost. The proof-of-reserves system introduced afterward gives users more information to examine, but its scope still needs to be read carefully.
For active traders, XT.COM can be treated as a trading venue whose individual markets should be evaluated one by one rather than assuming every listed asset has the same liquidity, fee profile or custody evidence.
Frequently asked questions
Was XT.COM hacked in 2024？
XT.COM confirmed an abnormal transfer from a platform wallet on November 28, 2024. The exchange said approximately $1 million across 12 assets was involved and stated that the affected assets belonged to XT.COM rather than customers.
External blockchain-security analysis estimated the loss at approximately $1.7 million. Withdrawals were temporarily suspended during the response.
Were XT.COM customer funds lost in the 2024 incident？
XT.COM said the affected wallet assets belonged to the exchange and that customer funds were not affected.
That does not mean the incident had no impact on users: withdrawals were temporarily suspended while the platform investigated the abnormal transfer.
What are XT.COM spot trading fees？
XT.COM's general spot guidance states a standard 0.20% fee for maker and taker transactions. VIP users and certain trading pairs can receive different rates, while promotions may temporarily reduce fees.
The live rate for the specific account and pair should be checked before trading.
Why can XT.COM cost more than the trading fee suggests？
The trading commission is only one cost.
A trader may also incur spread, slippage and withdrawal fees. On a thin altcoin order book, slippage can be substantially larger than the 0.20% trading fee.
Does XT.COM have proof of reserves？
Yes. XT.COM operates a Merkle-tree proof-of-reserves system and states that user assets are backed 1:1.
Its current PoR page provides reserve ratios for assets within the reporting scope and allows eligible users to verify inclusion of their balances.
Does 1:1 proof of reserves mean every XT.COM token has been audited？
Not necessarily.
XT.COM's proof-of-reserves page refers to reserve reporting for mainstream assets and states that more cryptocurrencies will be added to the audit scope.
Users should check whether the specific asset they hold appears in the latest report.
Is XT.COM proof of reserves a financial audit？
No. Proof of reserves can provide evidence that reported wallet assets cover included customer balances at a particular snapshot.
It does not necessarily disclose all corporate debts, obligations, encumbrances or liabilities outside the published scope.
Is XT.COM good for small-cap altcoins？
Its broad token selection is one of the main reasons traders use XT.COM. However, liquidity differs substantially between markets.
For smaller tokens, traders should inspect spreads, executable order-book depth, contract addresses and withdrawal availability rather than relying on listing status or 24-hour volume alone.
Should I keep long-term crypto on XT.COM？
Exchange balances expose users to platform custody and withdrawal-availability risk. Assets needed for active trading may need to remain on an exchange, while assets not required for trading can be evaluated separately based on the user's preferred custody approach.