OKX Accuses Mantra Over OM Holdings Transparency in Ongoing Dispute

• OKX and MANTRA clash over OM migration, reviving scrutiny from April’s $5B price collapse.
• MANTRA confirms January 2026 ERC-20 OM deprecation amid claims of market confusion.
• Token concentration and alleged coordinated trading raise fresh market integrity concerns.

A public conflict between cryptocurrency exchange OKX and layer-1 blockchain project MANTRA has flared up again over the planned transfer of the OM token. The disagreement has gone beyond technicalities and has now extended to the claims of market manipulation and demands for transparency. The conflict also has revived scrutiny from April, when OM suffered a rapid collapse that wiped out more than $5 billion in market value.

The dispute revolves around the transition of MANTRA from the ERC-20 version of OM to a native blockchain token. The migration consists of a protocol-level chain upgrade and a 1:4 token split. The process will not require any user action, says MANTRA. OKX has cast doubt over how the timeline and mechanics were passed on to the public.

MANTRA founder and chief executive John Patrick “JP” Mullin spoke on the issue in an open letter written on X. He confirmed that the ERC 20 OM token will be deprecated on January 15, 2026. He said the upgrade of the network would follow soon after. Mullin stressed that the process is treated at the protocol level.

Migration Timeline Dispute Triggers Transparency Demands

Mullin criticized the lack of coordination in the publication of migration dates by OKX. He mentioned such statements caused unnecessary confusion in the market. He also wrote about an OKX post from 8 December calling the information inaccurate. According to Mullin, the exchange exchanged information that did not reflect the official timeline of MANTRA.

The MANTRA CEO also urged OKX to reveal its OM holdings. He asked for the exchange for user-owned tokens to be separated from tokens held on its balance sheet. Mullin presented the request as part of regulatory and compliance requirements. He added that large movements of tokens need to be checked.

OKX responded by denying the accusations. The exchange said it was setting the record straight after MANTRA put out a misleading narrative. Before the April crash, OKX claimed to have noticed unusual trading activity involving OM. It said the activity posed a risk to the platform and its users.

Also Read: MANTRA (OM) Signals a Potential Upswing as Technicals Point Toward $0.34

According to OKX, various linked accounts used heavy holdings of OM as collateral. The accounts are borrowing large amounts of USDT using margin trading. The exchange said those funds were then used to buy more OM. This activity allegedly drove up prices artificially.

OKX Says Risk Controls Triggered Before OM Price Collapse

OKX said that its risk team flagged the behavior and requested the account holders to take corrective action. The exchange reported that the account holders ignored these requests. To limit exposure, OKX said it took control of the related accounts. Soon after, OM prices collapsed across markets.

The exchange claimed to have liquidated only a small portion of OM. The exchange stated that its Security Fund absorbed the losses from the crash. OKX added that it has filed evidence with regulators and law enforcement agencies. It also said several legal proceedings are underway.

OKX raised additional questions around the token concentration. It asked where extraordinarily large OM balances came from. The exchange said some groups seemed to own a significant percentage of the circulating supply. It suggested that concentration increased the systemic risk.

Outside analysis has provided some insight into the April collapse. Taran Sabharwal, chief executive of crypto trading firm STIX, explained a possible scenario of the crash. He said margin borrowing against OM collateral probably amplified the price increase. Automatic liquidations then ordered a cascading sell-off on exchanges.

Sabharwal speculated that legal pressure might be on unfreezing accounts. Mullin came out publicly at the time and denied the claim. He said that neither MANTRA nor he has any pending legal action against OKX. Mullin said the dispute includes other big OM traders and became public after confusion over the migration timeline.

Also Read: OKX Launches App-Integrated DEX Trading for U.S. Users Amid Surging On-Chain Volumes