Presumably there would be value for users in knowing that their deposits are covered. Therefore, users who perceive value in this way would be willing to pay a

Presumably there would be value for users in knowing that their deposits are covered. Therefore, users who perceive value in this way would be willing to pay a premium. There's also the possibility of exchange insiders trading against user's on-platform stop losses to profit. >So sure you can have assets that cover all your liabilities one day, then due to a re-valuation, not have enough. I understood this as a proposal to verify customers could withdraw their deposited coins. If they have traded into another asset, then they would still be able to withdraw. Not sure what you meant here? >But, all of this neatly misses the point of crypto. If its a practical payment system, rather than an investment, you wouldn't hold your crypto at an exchange. You hold it yourself and move it when you need to convert/liquidate. Agree about the speculative nature. It would still create more trust for traders or frequent users of an exchange. Keeping coins off-exchange eliminates the risk entirely. However if users expect to trade on a CEX, they would still have to expose themselves to that risk for the duration of their trade.