OG.com files with CFTC to list 24/5 cash-settled single-stock perpetual futures
The Crypto.com spin-out joins a Sept. 18 wave of similar filings from Coinbase, Kalshi, and Payward’s Bitnomial.
OG.com Markets has filed proposed rules with the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission to list cash-settled perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks, designed to trade 24 hours a day, five days a week. The move lands days after Coinbase, Kalshi, and Kraken parent Payward filed for similar products, testing how far recent SEC and CFTC relief can stretch crypto-style perps into equities.
Key Takeaways
- OG.com Markets submitted proposed rules to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for cash-settled single-stock perpetual futures that never expire and trade 24/5.
- OG.com has been described as a recent Crypto.com spin-out valued at $5 billion, positioning the filing as part of a broader build-out beyond prediction markets.
- A Sept. 18 cluster of filings from Coinbase, Kalshi, and Kraken parent Payward (via Bitnomial) signaled that multiple venues are pursuing the same CFTC pathway for equity-linked perps.
- Robinhood took an equity stake in OG.com under a multi-year deal tied to OG.com’s CFTC-regulated derivatives exchange and clearinghouse for prediction markets.
OG.com Asks the CFTC to Greenlight 24/5 Single-Stock Perps
OG.com Markets has asked the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to approve proposed rules that would let the venue list cash-settled perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks. The filing describes contracts that never expire and can trade 24 hours a day, five days a week, a structure that mirrors the “perp” format crypto-native traders have used for years to keep exposure without rolling dated futures.
The mechanics matter for how these products would sit inside US market plumbing. Cash settlement means profits and losses are paid in cash rather than delivering the underlying shares, which keeps the contract in derivatives land even when the reference is a single stock. The 24/5 schedule also implies a market that is open beyond standard US equity hours, which is part of the appeal for traders and part of the regulatory tension for agencies that have historically treated equities and futures as separate lanes.
OG.com’s filing is a request, not an approval, and it does not establish a launch date. What it does establish is that another major platform is now willing to put a single-stock perp rulebook in front of the CFTC, at a moment when the agency has already started building a process for non-expiring contracts.
The Sept. 18 Cohort: Coinbase, Kalshi, and Payward/Bitnomial Are on the Same Track
OG.com is not moving alone. On Sept. 18, Coinbase, prediction market Kalshi, and Kraken parent Payward, through its Bitnomial exchange, filed to offer perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks. The timing is tight enough that traders should read this less as a one-off product experiment and more as an industry push to normalize “non-expiring” equity exposure through CFTC-regulated venues.
That clustering changes the incentive landscape. A single filing can be dismissed as a bespoke request that dies quietly in review. Multiple parallel filings, close in time and similar in structure, force the question regulators have been trying to answer since perps became the dominant crypto derivatives format: whether perpetuals can be made operationally and legally compatible with registered US market infrastructure.
It also sets up a race that is not just about who lists first, but about whose contract design becomes the template. If one venue gets a workable set of terms through the CFTC’s process, competitors can iterate around it, and the regulatory conversation shifts from “should this exist” to “what constraints apply,” which is usually the point where market structure hardens.
Why This Is Happening Now: Post-CLARITY Act Stalemate Meets Targeted SEC/CFTC Relief
The filings are landing in a narrow policy window. The CLARITY Act failed to advance in the US Senate on Sept. 15, and the days that followed still produced movement, just not through Congress. Shortly after the vote, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) cleared limited onchain trading of tokenized US stocks under its Innovation Exemption, while the CFTC expanded regulatory relief for software providers connecting users to regulated derivatives platforms, including those offering perpetual contracts.
That sequencing matters because it suggests the agencies are willing to carve out bounded pathways even without a new statute, and firms are responding by filing into those pathways while the contours are still being defined. The SEC’s Innovation Exemption reference is not an endorsement of single-stock perps, but it is a signal that tokenized-stock and equity-adjacent experiments are being handled through exemptions and conditions rather than blanket prohibitions.
On the CFTC side, the agency has already been laying track for perps in a way that makes this week’s OG.com filing feel less like a regulatory moonshot. In May, the CFTC established a case-by-case review process for perpetual contracts and approved Kalshi’s Bitcoin perpetual futures product. In June, it granted temporary relief allowing certain registered exchanges to convert existing crypto futures into contracts without expiration dates. Those steps do not answer the single-stock question directly, but they make “non-expiring” futures a live category inside the CFTC’s own procedural toolkit.
OG.com’s corporate setup also fits the timing. The platform was described as recently spun out of Crypto.com into an independent prediction markets and derivatives business valued at $5 billion. At the time of the spin-off, CEO Kris Marszalek said the platform planned to expand “beyond prediction markets into futures and perpetual contracts.” Shortly after, Robinhood took an equity stake in OG.com as part of a multi-year deal to use OG.com’s CFTC-regulated derivatives exchange and clearinghouse for prediction markets, linking a major retail brokerage to the same regulated infrastructure OG.com is now positioning for equity-linked perps.
Approval Is Not a Launch: The Missing Contract Specs Traders Need
The immediate question is procedural: how the CFTC treats OG.com’s proposed rules, and whether the agency routes single-stock perps through the same case-by-case framework it referenced for perpetual contracts earlier this year. The next signals are mundane but decisive, including whether the CFTC requests amendments, opens a public comment step, or moves toward approval or denial.
The second question is product reality. None of the filings described here, including OG.com’s, resolves the contract-level details traders will need to evaluate risk and market quality: which tickers are eligible, what margin and leverage parameters apply, how any funding or price-link mechanism is implemented to keep a non-expiring contract anchored to the underlying stock, and what the effective trading hours look like in practice.
The third variable sits with the SEC, not the CFTC. The Innovation Exemption clearance for limited onchain trading of tokenized US stocks arrived close to this filing wave, and any additional SEC guidance, expansion, or constraints on that exemption could shape how equity-linked products are distributed and marketed, even when the contract itself is a CFTC-regulated future.
Finally, the CFTC’s expanded relief for software providers connecting users to regulated derivatives platforms could end up being the quiet distribution lever. If that relief broadens access rails for perp-style products, it changes who can reach end users and under what compliance wrapper, which is often where “approved” products either scale or stall.
My Read: Single-Stock Perps Are Becoming the Next US Market-Structure Battleground
The filing is being read in some corners as a product launch, and that framing skips the part that usually decides these stories: whether the CFTC is willing to let single-stock exposure live in a perpetual wrapper under registered rules, and whether it will do that consistently across multiple venues rather than as a one-off exception.
The threshold that matters is whether the agency’s case-by-case perp framework, plus the targeted relief it has already granted for non-expiring contracts, can be extended from crypto-linked futures into equity-linked contracts without forcing a redesign that makes them “perps in name only.” If that holds, the setup starts to look structural rather than narrative-driven, because the first workable approval becomes precedent that competitors can copy into a standardized US single-stock perp market.
