Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Ethan (@ethanzhang_web3)

Late one night not long ago, I saw an interesting debate in a cryptocurrency trader group.

The catalyst was someone posting a screenshot of Nvidia's stock price breaking $190, with the caption: "I told you to invest in U.S. stocks, now you regret it, right?" The group instantly erupted. Some complained about the hassle of opening brokerage accounts, others grumbled about the painfully slow cross-border fund transfers, and some flatly stated, "My USDT is sitting in my wallet, but I can't buy anything."

Behind this debate lies a deeper contradiction: when the macro market experiences extreme volatility, with U.S. stocks and gold hitting new highs, traders holding cryptocurrency assets are trapped in the crypto ecosystem by an invisible wall called the "accounting system."

This is not an isolated case. Over the past two months, I have spoken with dozens of crypto traders, and almost everyone mentioned similar pain points. The traditional "cross-border" process is utterly torturous: selling coins, withdrawing fiat (T+1), exchanging currencies, remitting to the broker, waiting for the funds to clear— the entire process takes at least three to five days, and at most a week. Each step involves transaction fees and exchange rate fluctuations. By the time the funds arrive, the market has already turned.

But recently, the tide seems to be turning. Before Binance re-entered the stock contract battlefield, leading exchanges raced to enter the "multi-asset trading" fast lane. From U.S. stock contracts to RWA, this competition also confirms an industry consensus that Web3 platforms are evolving into "super accounts" connecting global financial markets, with the boundaries for trading assets being completely erased.

In this competition, one exchange's actions stand out—Gate.

Unlike competitors who adopt a "just launch and see" strategy, Gate's multi-asset layout resembles a systematic project with a plan. Starting last year, it has gradually launched assets like metals, indices, and stocks, and recently introduced a TradFi section integrating traditional financial CFD trading. Gate is constructing a complete trading ecosystem that covers both Crypto and TradFi.

According to one user: "The macro environment is madly chasing after stocks and gold due to uncertainty, and all major exchanges are actively integrating. But so far, Gate is the most comprehensive and the fastest."

Is this evaluation objective? To what extent has Gate achieved multi-asset trading? As a journalist who has long followed Web3 infrastructure, I decided to delve deeper into the experience.

Industry Observation: Three Major Barriers to Multi-Asset Trading

Before diving deeper into Gate, I conducted an industry survey.

From the product form perspective, current "multi-asset trading" solutions can be roughly divided into three categories:

• Tokenized asset spot: Mapping traditional assets (like stocks, gold) by issuing tokens to allow users to trade on-chain. The advantage is 24/7 trading and fractional shares support, but the depth generally is poor, and prices can easily deviate.
• Expansion of crypto derivatives: Adding perpetual contracts for stocks and others on existing contract systems. The advantage is a familiar trading interface for users, but it remains a crypto market play and may deviate from real market prices.
• Direct access to traditional CFDs: Directly linking to traditional financial market CFDs, offering trading based on real market prices. The advantage is accurate pricing and good depth, allowing simultaneous long and short positions, but it requires handling traditional financial rules like trading hours and swap fees.

Most exchanges choose one of these paths, while Gate's strategy is to do all three, and build a complete ecological system.

This may sound a bit radical, but from actual experience, this "full coverage" strategy truly meets users' needs in different scenarios. Next, I will analyze Gate's multi-asset trading capacity from three key dimensions.

Dimension One: the "Breadth" and "Depth" of Asset Coverage

Let's start with an interesting discovery.

When I searched for "gold" on Gate, I found 12 different trading entrances: including 4 different spot tokens like XAUT and PAXG, 4 different perpetual contracts like XAUUSDT and XAUTUSDT, and 4 different leverage types of gold CFDs in the TradFi section. Initially, I thought this was product redundancy, but through actual experience, I realized each method has its specific use case.

For instance, holding XAUT token is equivalent to holding "on-chain gold," suitable for long-term allocation; perpetual contracts support 24/7 trading and leverage, suitable for short-term speculation; while the TradFi gold CFD is based on real market prices, closer to traditional financial strategies.

This design of "the same asset, multiple plays" is rarely seen in other exchanges. Most platforms have either tokenized spot only or contracts without a complete trading chain.

In terms of asset categories, Gate currently covers:

• Metals: 10 metal contracts (gold, silver, platinum, palladium, aluminum, copper, etc.), making it one of the platforms with the most categories in the industry.
• Stocks: 72 tokenized stocks + 45 stock contracts, covering mainstream sectors like technology, consumer goods, finance.
• Indices: 19 global indices, including NASDAQ 100, S&P 500, Hang Seng Index etc. Notably, Gate is the world's first platform to offer index perpetual contracts, introducing traditional market sentiment indicators into crypto derivatives.
• Forex: 48 forex trading pairs covering major currency pairs.
• Commodities: Energy assets like crude oil and natural gas.

From the data, Gate's asset coverage indeed leads the industry.

However, it is important to point out a problem: a large number of assets does not mean good liquidity for each asset. I tested several niche contracts and found that some targets had low daily trading volumes, with larger bid-ask spreads compared to mainstream contracts. For large traders, it is still advisable to prioritize frequently traded products like gold, NASDAQ, and mainstream stocks.

Dimension Two: Actual Measurement of Capital Efficiency

To test the capital turnover efficiency, I did a simple comparison experiment.

Assuming I have 10,000 USDT, I want to quickly build a position when the gold price breaks a certain key level. If using a traditional broker, the process is: selling USDT for fiat → withdrawing to a bank card (T+1) → remitting to the broker's account → waiting for funds to be cleared and purchasing a gold ETF or futures. Conservatively estimate, the entire cycle requires at least 3-5 working days.

With Gate, I only need to: open the App → choose gold contract or TradFi CFD → directly open a position with USDT (the account shows as USDx balance, fixed 1:1). The whole process takes less than 30 seconds.

More crucially is the "reusability" of capital. In Gate's multi-asset system, USDT serves as both the pricing unit in the crypto market and the margin for traditional asset trading. When you transfer USDT to the TradFi sub-account, the system automatically converts it to USDx (1:1 pegged to USDT), without the need for additional exchange, and without custody fees.

This means, in the morning, you might be trading BTC contracts, and by the afternoon, you could easily switch to Nvidia stock or gold, with funds being transferred between different accounts in a matter of seconds. This efficiency is something traditional financial accounts cannot compare with.

However, it should also be noted: the TradFi section adopts a full margin model, and different assets have fixed leverage (up to 500x for forex and indices, up to 5x for stocks). This means you cannot freely adjust leverage as you would with crypto contracts. For users accustomed to flexible leverage, it may take some time to adapt.

Dimension Three: The Devil is in the Details of Trading Costs

Transaction fees are the main concern for most traders. I spent some time comparing Gate's fee structure with several major platforms.

First, the conclusion: Gate's fees are indeed competitive in the industry, especially for VIP users and large traders.

For example, for VIP 5 and above users (usually requiring a minimum trading volume over 30 days or holding platform tokens), the trading fee for forex TradFi contracts is $5.4 per lot, while competitive platforms generally charge over $6; the trading fee for U.S. stock CFDs is only $0.018 per lot, while competitors require $0.02.

Looking at just this disparity might not seem significant, but for high-frequency traders, the savings in costs can be considerable over dozens or hundreds of trades in a day. (For details, seeannouncement document)

However, during the testing process, I discovered a more noteworthy point: the cost differences between TradFi and traditional contract trading. I conducted a simple calculation. Assume trading 1 lot of gold (at current prices, approximately 500,000 USDT in trading volume):

• Using TradFi: only pay the opening fee of $5.4, no charge when closing.
• Using traditional contracts (even for VIP users with a fee rate of 0.03%): opening $150 + closing $150, totaling $300.

$300 vs $5.4—a difference of over 50 times. I thought I had made a mistake at first and double-checked several times. This cost difference is almost a dimensional blow for day traders. If you trade 10 lots a day, you could save nearly $3,000 just in transaction fees.

The table below summarizes the fee comparisons (Gate VIP5+ vs competitors):

However, there are several important details to note:

1. Swap fees (overnight holding fees)

TradFi contracts have trading hours (unlike the 24/7 crypto market). If you hold a position during the off-hours, you will incur swap fees. The calculation method for this fee is quite complex, with three different formulas according to contract types. I tested several products and found that positions held over the weekend will be settled at once for three days(as weekends are non-trading days). This has little impact on short-term traders, but if you plan to hold positions long-term, you must account for this cost. (For more details, seeannouncement document)

1. Liquidity differences

Although Gate's asset coverage is broad, not every asset has the same liquidity. Popular products like gold, NASDAQ, and mainstream stocks have good trading volume and depth (for instance, the XAUT gold contract had a trading volume exceeding $489 million in 24 hours, ranking third globally), but some niche contracts may have significantly larger bid-ask spreads. It is advisable to prioritize frequently traded products.

1. Leverage is a double-edged sword

The TradFi section offers up to 500x leverage, which is an attractive tool for professional traders. However, high leverage means high risk — even slight market fluctuations can trigger forced liquidation. During my testing, I encountered a significant fluctuation in U.S. stocks, and several high-leverage positions were on the brink of liquidation. If you are a newcomer, it’s recommended to start with low leverage and gradually increase once you are familiar with the rules.

Practical Test: How I Traded Gold with USDT

Theoretical knowledge always feels shallow. To truly understand Gate's multi-asset trading experience, I decided to do some practical operations.

Choosing gold as a testing target was mainly because: 1) gold is one of the most liquid products among traditional assets; 2) Gate provides various trading methods for gold, perfect for a comprehensive experience; 3) the recent gold market has seen significant fluctuations, suitable for short-term operations.

Step One: Selection - Various Ways to Trade Gold

I found that Gate offers multiple ways to trade gold, suitable for different risk preferences:

• Spot tokens: Gold tokens like XAUT, PAXG, each token fully backed by corresponding physical gold, suitable for long-term holding.
• Perpetual contracts: Metal perpetual contracts like XAU/USDT, XAUT/USDT, allowing 24/7 trading with a maximum leverage of 100x ^[a], suitable for users who wish to take advantage of price fluctuations for short-term trades.
• TradFi CFD: Contracts for difference based on real traditional financial market gold prices, offering a maximum of 500x leverage, with trading following TradFi market time rules (they include off-hours), suitable for advanced traders.

It is important to clarify the differences between perpetual contracts and TradFi CFDs: The former are USDT-based crypto contracts, allowing 24/7 trading with moderate leverage (maximum 100x) ^[b]; the latter are contracts for difference based on real traditional financial market gold prices, trading under TradFi time rules, allowing higher leverage (maximum of 500x), more suitable for professional traders with a deep understanding of traditional financial markets.

Step Two: Placing the Order – Surprises and Minor Pitfalls

I selected the TradFi section's gold CFD for my first attempt (mainly to experience this new feature).

The operational process was indeed very simple:

• Open the Gate App → Go to the TradFi tab → Complete KYC (the process was quick, I had done it before, so I skipped this) → Transfer USDT from the spot account to the TradFi sub-account.

There’s a small detail worth mentioning here: When USDT is transferred to the TradFi account, it shows as USDx balance (1:1 pegged). Initially, I worried about potential exchange losses, but later found I was overthinking; it’s merely an internal conversion of the pricing unit without any actual change in asset value.

Next was selecting the trading target. The interface design of the TradFi section followed Gate's consistent style—candlestick chart, depth chart, order area, almost identical to the standard contract trading interface. For veterans of the crypto space, there’s zero learning curve.

However, here I encountered the first "minor pitfall": The leverage in TradFi is fixed (gold is 500x), and cannot be adjusted as freely as in crypto contracts. For someone like me who is used to flexible leverage, it did take some adjustment initially—I needed to calculate the position size based on margin ratios rather than setting the leverage first and then deciding on the position.

However, after adapting, I found this "fixed leverage" design actually aligns more closely with traditional financial market logic. For users operating with both traditional brokers and Gate, it can actually reduce mental burden.

Placing the order itself was very smooth. I opened a small position when the gold price was around $5030 (going long), and the order was almost immediately executed. The smoothness of the candlestick and depth were good, with no noticeable slippage.

Step Three: Settlement – Fast but Attention to Detail Required

I held the position for about 6 hours, and the gold price rose about $15, netting a small profit. The closing operation was just as simple as opening—it was an immediate transaction when I clicked the close button.

Profits were directly transferred back to the USDx balance, after which I transferred them back to my spot account's USDT. The speed of the entire capital closure was indeed very quick—from placing the order to closing it and then to the funds returning to the account was less than 10 seconds.

This efficiency is on a different level compared to traditional brokers. In traditional brokerages, even if you make a profit, withdrawing to a bank card could require waiting for T+1 or longer; whereas on Gate, capital can be immediately injected into the next trade or withdrawn to a wallet.

However, two points need to be highlighted:

• The impact of swap fees: Since I closed the position within the same day without crossing into off-hours, I didn't incur any swap fees. However, if you plan to hold positions overnight or over the weekend, you must calculate swap fee costs in advance—especially if you hold a position over the weekend, as it will incur three days of swap fees.
• Limitations of off-hours trading: TradFi contracts follow real market trading hours, with clearly defined off-hours. During my testing, I happened to encounter an off-hours period for U.S. stocks and found I couldn't place orders for some U.S. stock CFDs. This significantly differs from the 24/7 trading in the crypto market, and users need to familiarize themselves with each market's trading hours in advance.

Overall, the multi-asset trading experience on Gate is smooth, especially in terms of capital turnover efficiency and user-friendliness of the interface. Yet, as a newly launched feature section, it still requires users to invest some time to understand the rules—especially the characteristics of swap fees, off-hours trading, and leverage mechanisms in traditional financial markets.

A Question: How Were 144 Asset Classes Achieved?

After experiencing the entire process, I’ve been pondering a question.

It's essential to understand that multi-asset trading is not just a simple "listing of coins"—adding a new asset class means integrating different data sources, handling different trading rules, and taking on different risk exposures. Binance has gone through cautious iterative compliance work in the restart of stock perpetual contracts, while OKX still primarily explores crypto derivatives and RWA, covering TradFi assets conservatively. Yet, Gate launched 144 TradFi asset classes all at once, covering forex, stocks, indices, metals, and commodities.

This can either be a sign of blind confidence or well-prepared strategy. I looked into Gate's historical actions and discovered some interesting clues.

Firstly, Gate did not suddenly jump into the multi-asset track. As early as early 2025, it gradually launched metal perpetual contracts (10 types of metals), index contracts (19 global indices), and even pioneered the category of index perpetual contracts—during this time, many people didn't realize the significance of this move.

By December last year, when the TradFi section went online, Gate had completed the structural transition from a "crypto derivatives platform" to a "multi-asset trading platform." This was not a whim but a systematic engineering project planned in advance.

Secondly, Gate chose a "lighter" path.

The TradFi section operates on the MT5 (MetaTrader 5) trading system—a mature system that has been validated in traditional forex markets for over a decade. By integrating MT5, Gate avoided the immense costs of building a traditional asset trading system from scratch and could rapidly interface with major global liquidity providers’ data and orders.

This is a smart choice, but it's also a double-edged sword. The benefits include fast rollout speed, controllable costs, and mature risk control (the margin and liquidation logic of MT5 has been tested through countless market scenarios). The downside is limited flexibility—such as fixed leverage ratios (which cannot be adjusted as in crypto contracts), mandatory adherence to traditional market trading hours (with off-hour rules), and complex swap fee calculations. These characteristics are familiar to traditional forex traders, but users from the crypto space need time to adapt.

The third point, which is often overlooked, is liquidity.

According to official data, the total trading volume for Gate TradFi has reached $33 billion, with daily trading volumes exceeding $6 billion in a single day. Among these, gold (XAUUSD) has the highest cumulative trading volume, followed by silver (XAGUSD) and the NASDAQ 100 index (NAS100).

What does this figure indicate? It indicates that Gate is not just "running in place" in multi-asset trading — there are real users trading with real money.

Interestingly, Gate's gold contract (XAUT) ranks third in global exchanges according to Coinglass statistics, with a 24-hour trading volume of $489 million. Behind this ranking is real liquidity support. I tested the order placement and found that even a few thousand dollars could be executed immediately, with minimal slippage.

However, there is an issue: uneven liquidity. While popular products (gold, silver, NASDAQ, mainstream stocks) have good depth, the trading volumes for some niche products can be lackluster. I randomly tested several obscure forex pairs and small-cap stock CFDs and discovered that the bid-ask spreads were considerably larger, and there were times when the orders took several minutes to execute.

This is normal—any platform will face this challenge when expanding into new categories. The key question is whether Gate can improve the liquidity of these long-tail assets in the coming months. If not, the "full coverage" of 144 asset classes will just be an attractive number, with only a dozen or two that can actually be used.

Lastly, a personal observation: Gate's fee structure is very friendly to large users.

Taking VIP 5+ users as an example (generally requiring a minimum trading volume over 30 days or holding platform tokens), the trading fee for forex TradFi contracts is $5.4 per lot, while competing products usually charge over $6; the fee for U.S. stock CFDs is only $0.018 per lot, while competitors charge $0.02.

Does it seem like the disparity is not significant? But for high-frequency traders who perform dozens or hundreds of trades daily, this cost difference can create substantial compounding effects over long-term trading.

In other words, Gate's multi-asset trading is more like a tool designed for "professional players," rather than an entry-level product for novices.

If you're an occasional trader, not trading large amounts, Gate's multi-asset trading may not be very meaningful to you—since the fee differences for small transactions are not significant, and you will need to spend time learning about swap fees, off-hours trading, and other traditional financial rules.

But if you are a mature trader with significant capital seeking to allocate assets across global markets, Gate's multi-asset ecosystem is indeed worth your serious exploration.

Final Thoughts: The Reconstructed Exchange

After experiencing Gate's multi-asset trading, I've been pondering a question: What is the ultimate fate of cryptocurrency exchanges?

Five years ago, an exchange's core competitive edge was "listing speed" — whoever could list popular projects the fastest would reap the traffic benefits. Three years ago, the focus shifted to "derivatives" — perpetual contracts, options, leveraged tokens, and a variety of financial instruments flourished. Now, the game rules have changed once again.

From Binance, OKX to Gate, leading exchanges are fiercely pushing in one direction: to become "financial supermarkets." Crypto, stocks, forex, gold, crude oil... any tradable asset is being shoved into their platforms.

The business logic behind this is clear: the best way to retain users is to give them no reason to leave.

When a user is trading cryptocurrencies, U.S. stocks, and gold all on your platform, their funds are settled within your ecosystem, and their dependency on other platforms decreases. More importantly, multi-asset trading can significantly enhance the user's LTV (lifetime value)— a user who trades only spots may conduct a few transactions a year, but a user trading cryptocurrencies, stocks, and gold can have transaction frequencies and fee contributions several times or even dozens of times that of the former.

However, there's a fatal question: When a cryptocurrency exchange starts selling stocks, gold, and forex, is it still a "cryptocurrency exchange"?

Furthermore, if traditional brokers begin to support USDT deposits and open cryptocurrency asset trading, where will the boundaries be?

This is no alarmist talk. Robinhood has long been engaging in crypto trading, and eToro supports BTC and ETH. The barrier for traditional financial institutions to enter the crypto market is rapidly lowering, while the compliance hurdles for crypto exchanges to enter traditional markets remain high.

Gate's TradFi section employs the CFD (Contract for Difference) model—the user is not trading real stocks or gold, but contracts reflecting price fluctuations. The advantage of this model is low compliance costs and speed of going live, but the disadvantages also stand out: it essentially remains an "internal crypto ecosystem" without truly bridging the capital flows of TradFi.

In other words, the current multi-asset trading appears more like "simulated" traditional financial markets within the crypto arena, rather than a true integration.

So here comes the question: If this is merely a product of a transitional phase, what comes next?

I can think of two directions:

First, waiting for a clearer regulatory framework to emerge that would allow cryptocurrency exchanges to legally offer real asset trading (not CFDs, but true stocks, bonds, ETFs). But this path may take 5-10 years, or even longer.

Second, cryptocurrency exchanges should abandon the fantasy of being "all-inclusive" and return to their core strengths—becoming "trading hubs for on-chain assets." The focus should not be on replicating traditional financial plays, but rather on promoting the tokenization of more traditional assets (RWA), enabling real on-chain assets to circulate.

Gate's current strategy clearly seeks a balance between the first and second paths. It offers both tokenized assets (stock tokens, gold tokens) and CFD-based TradFi as well as pure crypto derivatives.

This "doing everything" strategy can benefit from the multi-asset trading boom in the short term, but whether it can sustain in the long run, depends on three factors:

• Will the regulatory stance become more lenient (or stricter)?
• How long will users accept "simulated asset trading"?
• When will traditional financial institutions enter the crypto market in large numbers, and how much living space will they leave for Gate and others?

Ultimately, multi-asset trading is not an end point but a signal— it marks the transition of the crypto market from a "closed subcultural circle" to "a part of the global financial system."

Is this transition good or bad? I don’t know.

But what I do know is, the moment you use USDT to buy gold or trade U.S. stocks on Gate, you are no longer just a "crypto person"—you are merely an ordinary trader searching for opportunities in the global financial market.

And perhaps, that is the deepest meaning of multi-asset trading.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。