The removal of the Aster exchange from the DefiLlama database has sparked a new debate about data reliability and cast doubt on the transparency of trading volumes in the DeFi sector.
The Aster Scandal and the Question of Data Trust
At the end of the week, data aggregator DefiLlama removed Aster—a decentralized derivatives exchange backed by YZi Labs (formerly Binance Labs)—from its listings. The reason was suspicion of inflated trading volumes.
Previously, Aster unexpectedly surged to the top of the market, surpassing Hyperliquid in trading volume and claiming over $41 billion in daily trades, according to CoinMarketCap. However, DefiLlama co-founder 0xngmi stated that the reported figures suspiciously matched Binance’s trading volumes, raising doubts about their authenticity.
The removal of Aster sparked a heated reaction in the community. Project supporters accused DefiLlama of ‘data centralization,’ while critics questioned whether Aster’s figures were simply artificially inflated.
Volume Falsification — An Old DeFi Problem
Most of the trading volume in the crypto market comes from perpetual futures.
According to Greg Magadini, director of derivatives at Amberdata, about a quarter of crypto exchanges face the problem of inflated volumes. There are two main schemes:
- Users who massively conduct fake trades for points and airdrops,
- And exchanges that artificially boost activity to attract real traders.
Analyst Dethective found that just five wallets generated $85 billion in trading volume on Aster over 30 days—likely in anticipation of rewards. While some activity looked organic, several addresses, according to him, showed signs of sybil behavior typical of airdrop farmers.
Such distortion is possible with high-frequency bots that instantly open and close positions, creating the illusion of liquidity. By comparison, the open interest indicator (open positions with collateral and funding payments) reflects real trading activity and is not subject to such manipulation.
At the time of the incident, Hyperliquid had $14.6 billion in open positions, Aster had $4.8 billion, and Lighter had $2 billion.
The Community Criticizes DefiLlama but Acknowledges the Problem
After the delisting, many users accused DefiLlama of bias and ‘censorship.’ Some traders switched to Dune Analytics, creating their own dashboards with Aster metrics. However, ironically, many of these dashboards still use DefiLlama data.
0xngmi himself denied allegations that the delisting decision was paid for:
‘We didn’t get paid for this. We have already removed Lighter and a number of other DEXs due to obvious wash trading,’ he emphasized.
Such cases are no longer rare. During the NFT boom, Blur users also inflated volumes to receive airdrop tokens, allowing the marketplace to temporarily overtake OpenSea.
The Transparency Problem in DeFi
In traditional finance, wash trading is prohibited, but in the crypto industry, regulation remains limited. Analytical companies have to identify suspicious schemes by tracking so-called ’round-trip’ trades—instant buys and sells between the same addresses.
As Magadini noted, a sign of inflated volumes is when a significant portion of volume consists of identical trades over short periods and across many trading pairs.
The Main Question Is Not Numbers, but Trust
The Aster story showed that even in decentralized systems, trust in data remains critical. Market participants are increasingly demanding transparency and standards in measuring volumes, which often determine who is considered a leader.
Even if Aster’s growth turns out to be real, the incident highlighted how fragile trust in DeFi metrics remains. Trading volume still shapes perceptions of success, even if it does not reflect real activity.
Read more: Altseason 2025 is happening on Wall Street, not in tokens. Why institutions are changing the rules of the game
