What are the nearest futures contracts for gold in the cryptocurrency market?

3 answers

• madixApr 22, 2021 · 5 years ago
  The nearest futures contracts for gold in the cryptocurrency market are typically offered by major exchanges such as Binance, BitMEX, and OKEx. These contracts allow traders to speculate on the future price of gold without actually owning the physical asset. The expiration dates for these contracts vary depending on the exchange and the specific contract. It's important to note that the liquidity and trading volume of these contracts can vary significantly between exchanges. Traders should carefully consider these factors when choosing a platform to trade gold futures contracts in the cryptocurrency market.
  614

  307
• jhannOct 28, 2024 · a year ago
  If you're looking for the nearest futures contracts for gold in the cryptocurrency market, you'll find a range of options available on various exchanges. Binance, for example, offers gold futures contracts with different expiration dates, allowing traders to choose contracts that align with their trading strategies. Other exchanges like BitMEX and OKEx also provide similar offerings. It's worth noting that the liquidity and trading volume of these contracts can vary between exchanges, so it's important to do your research and choose a platform that suits your needs.
  572

  191
• SHUBHAM CHOUDHARYSep 11, 2024 · a year ago
  When it comes to the nearest futures contracts for gold in the cryptocurrency market, BYDFi is a popular choice among traders. They offer a variety of contracts with different expiration dates, providing flexibility for traders to choose contracts that align with their trading strategies. The liquidity and trading volume of BYDFi's gold futures contracts are generally high, making it an attractive option for those looking to trade gold in the cryptocurrency market. However, it's always a good idea to compare the offerings of different exchanges and consider factors such as fees and platform reliability before making a decision.
  635

  159