Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
#WCTCTradingKingPK
Unraveling the WLFI Crisis: Governance, Trust, and Liquidity
WLFI’s 7.85 percentage point drop over the last ~25 hours is being driven mainly by a deeply controversial 62 billion token governance proposal, severe trust issues, and almost nonexistent real liquidity.
Controversial 62B-Token Governance Vote And Unlock Plan
The clearest direct catalyst is the ongoing governance proposal around locking or effectively re-locking more than 62 billion WLFI tokens.
Multiple outlets report that a proposal opened for voting around April 29 to place 62.2–62.3 billion locked WLFI (out of a 100 billion supply) into strict multi-year vesting schedules for insiders and early supporters, with a 2-year cliff and another 2–3 years of vesting, plus a 10 percent burn on some insider allocations. This is described as “one of the most significant governance proposals in WLFI history” and immediately coincided with daily price drops of roughly 13–17 percent and a move to new all-time lows around 0.06 dollars.1234
The terms are seen as coercive. Holders who do not explicitly vote “yes” risk having their tokens locked indefinitely, while insiders can commit to long vesting with just a 10 percent burn. Coverage and X posts highlight that this effectively forces presale buyers into accepting a new 4-year schedule or being stuck in limbo, which many interpret as governance abuse rather than “long-term alignment”.13
Voting outcomes reinforce centralization fears. Reports note that roughly 99.9 percent of votes are “yes” with over 6 billion tokens in favor and only a few million against, implying that a very small set of large wallets controls almost all governance power.135