Single-stock perpetual futures face regulatory hurdle to wider adoption

Regulatory uncertainty is the biggest hurdle to wider adoption of single-stock perpetual futures, according to a survey highlighted by the Financial Times. The finding puts the rules governing these equity-linked derivatives at the centre of the debate over whether they can reach a broader audience.

The available FT summary does not identify the survey’s publisher, respondents or methodology, limiting how precisely its conclusion can be assessed. It nevertheless highlights a distinction important to the market’s development: making a trading product available does not establish that its regulatory treatment is settled.

Single-stock perpetual futures, often called stock perps, give traders exposure to an individual company’s share price without ownership of the underlying shares. Coinbase’s product documentation describes contracts settled in USDC that offer leveraged exposure and continuous trading, including weekends. Unlike conventional futures with scheduled maturities, perpetual contracts have no fixed expiry.

That structure removes the need to replace an expiring contract to maintain exposure, but it does not eliminate ongoing costs. Periodic funding payments help keep a perpetual contract’s price aligned with its reference value. Coinbase says its stock-perpetual funding framework also helps reflect dividends and carrying costs where applicable, making contract design an important consideration alongside the direction of the underlying shares.

Continuous trading creates another distinction from the cash equity market. Coinbase says its pricing draws on direct equity-market data during regular weekday sessions, while weekends and certain off-hours incorporate an internal index and tokenized-equity feeds. The implication is that investors need to understand how a platform values exposure when the underlying stock market is closed, rather than assume every trading hour operates identically.

Leverage adds a separate layer of risk. Coinbase’s published parameters specify maximum launch leverage of up to 10 times for single-name stock perpetuals, alongside position limits and open-interest caps. Its documentation also warns that sharing collateral across stock and cryptocurrency perpetual positions can allow losses in one contract to affect margin requirements and liquidation risk elsewhere in a portfolio.

European regulators have stressed that a product’s label does not put it outside existing safeguards. In a February 24, 2026 statement, the European Securities and Markets Authority said firms must assess whether derivatives marketed as perpetual futures fall within existing national restrictions on contracts for differences. Where they meet that definition, requirements include leverage limits, risk warnings, margin close-out provisions and negative balance protection.

ESMA also highlighted the need for a narrowly defined target market, appropriate distribution and assessments of customers’ understanding of complex instruments. Those obligations help explain why regulatory treatment matters beyond the initial decision to list a contract. The outlook for broader adoption therefore rests not only on trading demand, but on how firms classify, distribute and manage the products under applicable rules.