ZachXBT Issues Urgent Warnings About JuCoin Amid Withdrawal Issues and Transparency Concerns

ZachXBT Issues Stark Warnings About JuCoin Amid Withdrawal Issues and Transparency Concerns

In a troubling development for the cryptocurrency community, ZachXBT, a prominent on-chain researcher, has raised alarms about JuCoin, an East Asian cryptocurrency exchange, following reports of widespread withdrawal problems affecting users over the past week. This situation has ignited serious concerns regarding the exchange’s financial reserves and its commitment to institutional transparency.

ZachXBT first flagged potential risks associated with JuCoin back in March 2025, despite the exchange’s status as a platinum sponsor at the Token2049 event in Singapore. At that time, the researcher highlighted various red flags that suggested the platform might not be as secure as it appeared. A recent analysis has further compounded these concerns, revealing that JuCoin’s claimed total reserves of $511 million may be misleading. A significant portion of these reserves reportedly consists of USDC and USDT tokens issued on JuCoin’s proprietary blockchain, JuChain, with unclear collateral backing.

The opacity surrounding JuCoin’s ownership structure has also come under scrutiny. ZachXBT noted that the publicly disclosed team does not seem to exert genuine control over the exchange, drawing parallels to offshore exchange models where actual management remains concealed from public view.

In response to the withdrawal issues, JuCoin attributed the delays to ongoing platform upgrades and a restructuring process. However, the exchange’s history of rebranding—having previously operated under names such as Jubi and Joy Universe/Ju—has only fueled skepticism among users and investors.

Adding to the controversy, JuDAO, an entity linked to the JuCoin ecosystem, has faced its own share of security incidents. Reports indicate that approximately $225,000 worth of assets were lost in April 2026 due to a smart contract vulnerability, while a misconfigured proxy contract rendered around $20 million in assets inaccessible in September 2025.

ZachXBT further claimed that at least $5 million in funds related to a 2025 Bybit attack, allegedly connected to North Korea, were funneled through JuCoin. This revelation is particularly concerning given JuCoin’s recent announcement of its intention to provide financial support to Bybit, pledging up to 1,000 BTC.

In evaluating centralized cryptocurrency exchanges, ZachXBT emphasized the importance of transparency in ownership and operations within robust regulatory frameworks. He argues that JuCoin falls short on both counts, raising significant red flags for potential users and investors.

As the situation unfolds, JuCoin has yet to issue a comprehensive response to these serious allegations, leaving many in the crypto community on edge.

This is not investment advice.