The debate over whether perpetual futures belong in regulated markets is increasingly focused on the wrong issue, according to Chris Tyrer, president of Bullish Exchange.
In a CoinDesk opinion piece, Tyrer argues that perpetual contracts themselves are not the main source of systemic risk. Instead, he says, the real risk comes from venue design choices such as leverage limits, margin rules, index construction and the way defaults are handled.
That framing matters as perpetuals gain broader acceptance across more regulated venues. Critics have warned that the instruments, which do not expire like traditional futures, could import market stress or amplify risk if they become more deeply embedded in mainstream trading infrastructure. Tyrer’s view is that the contract structure is being blamed for problems that are more likely to arise from how exchanges manage the market.
The distinction is important for regulators and market operators evaluating how to support derivatives trading without increasing fragility. If risk is driven by venue rules rather than the perpetual format itself, then the policy question shifts from whether the product should exist to how it should be governed.
Perpetual futures have long been a core product in crypto markets, where they are used for leverage and hedging. Their expansion into regulated environments has revived scrutiny around whether the products are compatible with the safeguards expected in more traditional market settings. Tyrer’s argument suggests that the answer may depend less on the instrument label and more on the operational standards around it.
The broader debate reflects a familiar pattern in crypto market structure: products often draw criticism when the underlying controls are not designed to account for their behavior under stress. In Tyrer’s view, that is the lesson regulators should take from perpetuals. The focus, he says, should be on the mechanics of market supervision and default management, not on treating the contract itself as inherently dangerous.
CoinDesk published Tyrer’s comments as an opinion contribution on July 29, 2026. While the piece does not provide a regulatory roadmap, it underscores a growing view among some market participants that systemic risk is shaped as much by venue design as by product design.
For now, the debate appears set to continue as perpetual futures move further into regulated markets and policymakers decide where the real vulnerabilities lie.
