TL;DR: Bybit says the latest snapshot of its proof-of-reserves system covered $17.3 billion in customer assets across 50 cryptocurrencies. The exchange’s November 3 announcement describes its 41st report, with figures independently checked by security firm Hacken against an October 27 snapshot.
Bybit says the latest snapshot of its proof-of-reserves system covered $17.3 billion in customer assets across 50 cryptocurrencies. The exchange’s November 3 announcement describes its 41st report, with figures independently checked by security firm Hacken against an October 27 snapshot. The exercise offers a view of assets and customer balances at a specific moment, but it should not be mistaken for an all-purpose guarantee that an exchange could meet every liability under every scenario.
The ratios behind the headline
Bybit says its reserve ratios exceeded 100% across all 50 covered assets, including 112% for USDT, 405% for USDC, 102% for Bitcoin and 101% for Ether. Those percentages compare identified reserves with customer balances under the stated methodology. An unusually high ratio for one token does not mean the business has the same excess in every asset or that reserves could be freely moved between customer pools. Readers should also distinguish a token-by-token reserve ratio from consolidated corporate solvency, which incorporates obligations that may not appear in a proof-of-reserves snapshot.
Why the snapshot date matters
The release identifies the audit point as October 27 at 06:00 UTC. Reserve balances, withdrawals, borrowing, market prices and off-exchange exposures may have changed after that time. The value of recurring disclosures lies partly in their comparability: users can look for persistent gaps or unexpected movements rather than treating a single publication as permanent reassurance. Bybit says the checks covered the 50 listed crypto assets, but the exact perimeter, included customer categories and handling of institutional arrangements are questions worth reviewing in the detailed report.
What an independent check can and cannot establish
The exchange says Hacken carried out the verification. Third-party involvement is useful, particularly when the reviewer explains its methods and limitations, but the word ‘audit’ can be interpreted too broadly. A Merkle-tree exercise may allow customers to verify that a balance was included while proving possession of identified onchain assets. It does not, by itself, necessarily establish that there are no undisclosed debts, encumbrances, affiliated-party claims or operational weaknesses. The scope of work therefore deserves as much attention as the name of the verifier.
Customer protection still has other layers
Asset backing is a fundamental question for custodial exchanges because users depend on the firm to return assets they cannot directly control. Yet security controls, market surveillance, legal ownership of customer property, segregation practices and withdrawal resilience also matter. A fully funded snapshot is only one component of a broader risk picture. The report can be especially informative when combined with clear explanations of liabilities, independent financial statements where available and timely incident reporting. It should not substitute for personal decisions about custodial concentration.
How readers should use the results
Bybit users can inspect the methodology and verify balances if the relevant tool supports that check. External analysts should compare successive reports and look for consistency between claimed assets and observable onchain holdings. Markets benefit from more systematic disclosures, but transparent limitations are an important part of credible transparency. The milestone is the reporting process, not a declaration that counterparty risk has disappeared.
Primary source: Bybit proof-of-reserves announcement. For additional context, see NewsBTC’s analysis of earnings and stablecoin activity at another major exchange.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.