Binance Annual Revenue Dispute: CZ Rebuts Forbes Wealth Estimate

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) has publicly responded to Forbes' estimate of his personal wealth, pointing out that the company's annual revenue is approximately $5 billion, far lower than the $15 billion to $16.8 billion cited by some market analysts. This discrepancy not only affects public perception of Binance's profitability but also directly impacts the logic behind assessing its founder's wealth. It is important to clarify that company revenue does not equal personal assets. CZ's wealth is also highly dependent on BNB token holdings and undisclosed equity structure, and the liquidity and volatility of these assets lead to significant deviations in external estimates.

Currently, there are huge differences in the revenue estimates of Binance by mainstream institutions, mainly due to different model assumptions. Most analyses are based on publicly available trading volume data and published fee schedules, but do not consider three key variables: exclusive discounts for VIP clients, fee reductions from BNB payments, and changes in the proportion of spot and derivatives trading volumes. For example, spot trading fees are low but trading volume is high, while futures trading fees are high but the proportion fluctuates dramatically. If it is assumed that the proportion of high-net-worth users increases, the effective fee rate may be significantly reduced, resulting in a revenue forecast dropping sharply from $5 billion to $3 billion, while conversely, it may push it up to over $16 billion.

Another core issue is the lack of audited financial statements. As a private company, Binance is not required to disclose detailed financial data. Analysts can only rely on third-party transaction data sources and industry experience to reverse engineer estimates, resulting in dual differences in model inputs and methodologies. Therefore, all current revenue figures are estimated ranges, not confirmed values. Forbes previously based CZ's net worth primarily on BNB's market capitalization and the market's valuation of Binance's private equity. CZ pointed out that such valuations are extremely prone to distortion during periods of extreme market volatility—short-term plunges in token prices can severely distort asset values, while private equity lacks a secondary market pricing mechanism. In contrast, institutions such as Fortune use conservative models, estimating revenue below $5 billion; while Martini.ai and others, based on higher fee rates and lower discount assumptions, estimate close to $16.8 billion. The difference between the two is not due to data errors, but to fundamental differences in methodology and underlying assumptions. In the absence of an official audit report, any single numerical judgment on Binance's revenue or CZ's wealth is subject to considerable uncertainty. The real consensus may only be formed after the company proactively discloses information or regulatory authorities intervene to review it.