Bybit CEO Ben Zhou stated that a single MiCA license is not enough to build a profitable business in Europe. According to him, the basic authorization opens access to the market but does not give platforms the full set of products that exchanges usually earn from. Additional licenses are needed for derivatives, tokenized assets, and payment services.
This is an important signal for the European market. MiCA was often seen as a universal key to operating in the region, but in practice, it has become more of a first level of access. The next stage is a more expensive and complex part of regulation.
MiCA Opens the Market but Not the Full Product Line
MiCA allows crypto companies to work with basic areas: exchanging fiat for cryptocurrency and cryptocurrency for cryptocurrency. This is enough for market presence but not always enough for a sustainable business economy. The most profitable products are often outside this regime.
According to Zhou, a full-fledged model requires MiFID II and EMI licenses. The first is important for financial instruments and derivatives, the second for electronic money and payment services. Without them, the exchange gets a limited set of opportunities and weaker margins.
Bybit Is Not Yet Profitable in Europe
Even Bybit, one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges by trading volume, has not yet become profitable in Europe. Zhou directly stated that with the current MiCA license, the company is not making money in the region. For Bybit, this is a long-term investment that a large platform can afford due to its global scale.
Expectations for timing are also cautious. According to Zhou, reaching profitability may take about two years if the company obtains the necessary additional permits. A longer scenario is also possible, but the logic is clear: the European market requires time, capital, and a large compliance budget.
Small Companies May Not Survive the New Rules
The strongest effect of MiCA may not be growth but market consolidation. The transition period for companies ends at the end of June, and from July 1, operating without authorization will become significantly more difficult. For many small and medium-sized players, this may be the exit point from the region.
The reason is not only the cost of the license itself. Companies understand that after MiCA, they may need MiFID, EMI, and additional investments in control, reporting, and legal infrastructure. For small platforms, this burden may be too high.
Europe Gains Order but Loses Some Competition
MiCA was supposed to create unified rules for the crypto market in Europe. In this sense, the law really reduces uncertainty and gives large companies a clear path. But the flip side is higher entry barriers.
The more expensive compliance becomes, the more the market shifts in favor of large players. Bybit, Kraken, Bitpanda, and other platforms with capital and experience will be able to pass this stage. Small companies are likely to seek partnerships, sell, or leave certain countries.
Different Countries Interpret MiCA Differently
Another problem is inconsistent regulatory practices. The MiCA license formally gives access to the entire European Economic Area, but national regulators’ approaches differ. Some countries see the law as a way to attract business, others choose a stricter oversight model.
Bybit chose Austria and the FMA regulator, which Zhou describes as strict. This may complicate the start but provide more trust in the long term. For a large exchange, this choice looks like a bet on reputation rather than the fastest path to a license.
ESMA May Gain More Power
There is already discussion in Europe about strengthening the role of the pan-European regulator ESMA. Supporters of this approach believe it will create more equal conditions for all companies. If control remains too different across countries, some platforms may choose the softest jurisdictions.
But centralization has its downsides. According to Zhou, it is easier to reach a local regulator and resolve operational issues faster. If everything goes through a single center, companies may face more bureaucracy and slower communication.
Derivatives Remain a Key Problem
The market for perpetual futures and other complex products holds a special place. These often provide exchanges with a significant share of revenue, but in Europe, their regulation goes beyond a simple crypto license. ESMA has already reminded companies that some of these products may not fall under MiCA.
This puts exchanges at a crossroads. Either they limit themselves to basic operations and accept a weaker economy, or they obtain additional licenses and build a heavier infrastructure. For Bybit, the second path is obvious, but it takes time.
What This Means for the Market
Zhou’s comment shows that European regulation is entering its second phase. The first stage was about legalizing presence. The second is about who can build a profitable and broad product model within the rules.
For users, this may mean fewer gray platforms and more regulated services. For companies, it means higher costs and a fight for licenses. For the market as a whole, it means consolidation around large players.
What’s Next?
The next milestone is the end of June, when the MiCA transition period ends. After that, it will become clear how many companies are really ready to work under the new rules and how many will leave the market. At the same time, large exchanges will be obtaining MiFID, EMI, and other permits to expand their product lines.
Bybit is betting on a long cycle. The company is ready to tolerate losses in Europe if it gives them a place in the regulated market. But Zhou’s statement clearly shows the main point: MiCA is not the final destination. It is only a ticket in, and the real struggle begins after it.
Read More: CFTC Loses 24% of Staff and Cedes Market Control
