Bitfinex Users Can Now Trade Tether Gold Stablecoin Against Bitcoin

31 Jan 2020, 12:54 by Helen Partz

After launching trading of gold-pegged stablecoin Tether Gold (XAU₮) last week, Bitfinex now allows users to trade Tether Gold against Bitcoin (BTC).

On Jan. 30, Bitfinex has rolled out three margin trading pairs for Tether Gold, a digital asset backed by physical gold, which was introduced by Bitfinex’s affiliate firm Tether on Jan. 23.

The crypto exchange exchange now allows traders to trade Tether Gold against Bitcoin as well as the U.S. dollar and dollar-pegged stablecoin Tether (USDT).

Margin trading — a feature that enables traders to borrow funds to increase leverage — will require an initial equity of 20% and provide a maximum leverage of 5x, Bitfinex noted.

Tether has been accused of not backing its USDT token with enough dollars

Tether Gold is one of the stablecoins launched by major cryptocurrency firm Tether alongside the controversial stablecoin USDT. Known as the world’s leading stablecoin, USDT has been subject to multiple controversies as some reports suggested that Tether does not have enough dollars to back the token. The company has been struggling to convince the public that USDT is backed by the appropriate amount of dollar holdings.

Meanwhile, Tether Gold is claimed to be the “best way to hold gold” as its physical gold storage backing is purportedly held in a Swiss vault, adopting “best in class security and anti-threat measures.”

Tether and Bitfinex are facing a lawsuit on crypto market manipulation

On top of the controversy around Tether’s USDT, both Tether and Bitfinex have been accused of cryptocurrency market manipulation, with some ongoing lawsuits alleging that the companies caused Bitcoin’s 2017 bull run that lead up to the all-time-high of $20,000 per coin.

As the companies have faced multiple suits on the matter, a court in New York ordered on Jan. 24 to merge four lawsuits against Tether and Bitfinex. As recently reported by Cointelegraph, the consolidation of suits has raised questions regarding the plaintiff’s leadership.