OKX And Mantra Clash Over OM Token Price Manipulation Allegations

OKX and Mantra clash over OM token manipulation claims as token migration and regulatory investigations intensify.

A dispute between cryptocurrency exchange OKX and the Mantra project has escalated following allegations of price manipulation involving the OM token. The conflict centers on claims that coordinated accounts manipulated OM’s value using it as collateral for large USDT loans.

OKX claims to have acted in response to irregular trading behavior, while Mantra’s leadership demands complete transparency regarding token holdings and transaction practices.

Mantra CEO Seeks Token Transparency

Mantra CEO John Patrick Mullin responded to OKX’s allegations with an open letter, published on Twitter, requesting full disclosure from the exchange.

Mullin asked OKX to provide details on how many OM tokens belong to users versus what remains on the company’s balance sheet. He also addressed confusion over the upcoming OM token migration.

According to Mullin, the existing ERC-20 version of OM will be deprecated on January 15, 2026. After that, the token will undergo a protocol-level upgrade and a 1:4 token split.

Mullin clarified that users will not need to take action during this process, aiming to dispel concerns among token holders.

OKX Claims Coordinated Manipulation and Defends Actions

In its response, OKX rejected the claims made in Mullin’s letter and stated that it had acted to protect market integrity.

The exchange accused several accounts of coordinating to use OM as collateral for USDT borrowing, which it says led to artificial inflation of OM’s price. OKX’s internal risk team flagged the behavior and requested that the account holders adjust their positions, but received no cooperation.

Following these developments, OKX intervened by taking control of the involved accounts. The OM token experienced a sharp price drop soon after.

OKX stated that it had liquidated only a limited amount of OM and absorbed related losses using its Security Fund. The exchange also noted that external perpetual trading activity on OKX contributed to the price crash.

Related Reading: OKX Seychelles Settles with U.S. DOJ, Pays $84M Fine

Legal and Regulatory Actions Underway

OKX confirmed that it has submitted its findings and documentation to regulatory authorities and law enforcement.

It maintained that it followed all internal protocols and acted responsibly in response to suspicious activity. The exchange also questioned the origin of extensive OM holdings by some entities involved in the situation.

Despite OKX’s stance, Mullin has continued to call for further transparency. He believes the dispute stems from a lack of clarity around the OM token migration process and maintains that the public deserves more insight into OKX’s OM token management.

The matter remains under investigation, with both parties holding their positions amid ongoing legal processes.