Canton CEO Calls Sui a Market Making Scam on X

Steady attention without excessive speculation.

Rooz posted a screenshot of the $SUI price chart on May 19. The chart showed a sharp pump from around $0.9 to $1.4, followed by a quick pullback to the $1.05 range. He used it as evidence of what he called manipulative market making in crypto.

What Rooz Said About Sui

The post came after users asked Rooz why Canton’s native token $CC has low trading volume. His response was blunt.

“People ask me why is $CC volume so low. Because we don’t partake in ‘market making’ scams like this,” Rooz wrote on X, attaching the $SUI chart.

In a follow-up post, he expanded on the accusation. “The ‘market making’ deals in this industry is a known practice that should be called out louder,” Rooz said. He argued that projects deliberately keep token float low so that paid market makers can create the illusion of organic demand.

Sui Co-Founder Fires Back

Adeniyi Abiodun, co-founder and Chief Product Officer at Mysten Labs, responded directly. He called the comment “classless,” especially given their prior professional relationship.

“Sui has zero VC allocations still vesting. Happy to revisit this conversation when your unlocks start,” Abiodun wrote. He also pushed for a “less toxic industry” and noted that both sides benefit from building rather than attacking.

Abiodun’s response highlighted two key points. First, Sui claims its venture capital token unlocks are already complete. Second, he implied that Canton’s own token unlocks have not yet begun, which could create similar selling pressure in the future.

The Market Making Problem in Crypto

Rooz’s accusation taps into a well-documented problem across the industry. Crypto market making deals often involve projects paying firms to generate artificial volume and price movement. According to CoinGecko research, one in five top cryptocurrencies are low-float tokens with large future unlocks.

The practice works like this: projects launch tokens with limited circulating supply. That gives market makers outsized control over price action. Paid firms then create buy pressure that mimics organic demand. Once prices rise, insiders and market makers can exit at higher levels.

Regulators have started cracking down. Binance tightened its market making rules in March 2026, banning revenue-sharing models between projects and market makers. The U.S. Department of Justice also charged 10 individuals linked to four crypto market-making firms for wash trading and price manipulation earlier this year.

Canton vs. Sui: Two Different Models

The exchange underscores a fundamental divide in how blockchain projects approach trading volume and tokenomics.

Canton Network positions itself as an institutional-grade blockchain. It processes over $1.5 trillion in monthly production transactions across more than 600 institutions. Partners include JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, BNP Paribas, and DTCC. According to CoinMarketCap, $CC trades at roughly $0.15 with a market cap of $5.77 billion and daily volume around $17.8 million.

Canton’s tokenomics reflect its institutional focus. The project had zero pre-mine and zero pre-sale. Half of all token minting rights go to application providers who drive actual network usage.

Sui takes a different approach. Built by former Meta engineers at Mysten Labs, Sui is a high-throughput Layer 1 targeting consumer and DeFi use cases. $SUI trades around $1.06 to $1.22 with a market cap near $4.9 billion. Its daily trading volume sits around $550 million, roughly 30 times Canton’s volume.

Sui has 4.01 billion tokens in circulation out of a 10 billion maximum supply. The token hit an all-time high of $5.35 in January 2025 and has since dropped about 80%.

Rooz’s TradFi Credentials Add Weight

Rooz’s criticism carries extra weight because of his background. He has referenced past roles at Citadel and DRW/Cumberland in older posts. Both are major traditional finance market-making firms where legitimate market making follows strict regulatory oversight.

That experience gives Rooz firsthand knowledge of how proper market making works. Legitimate market makers provide liquidity and tighten spreads. They do not manufacture fake demand to pump token prices.

Rooz has positioned Canton as the opposite of speculative crypto projects. In a March 2026 interview with CoinDesk, he argued that smart contract blockchains face a “reckoning” over the gap between their token valuations and actual utility.

Community Reactions Split Along Familiar Lines

The exchange quickly spread across crypto Twitter. Reactions split along community lines, as expected.

Sui supporters pointed to the network’s technical progress, high transactions per second, and growing DeFi ecosystem. They argued that price volatility alone does not prove market manipulation.

Those siding with Rooz echoed broader frustration with low-float token launches and paid market making arrangements. Some noted that the practice is common across dozens of projects, not just Sui.

Several non-English crypto accounts, including Vietnamese community channels, summarized the exchange as Canton’s co-founder “calling out” Sui as a scam. No major English-language news outlets had covered the exchange as of May 20, 2026.

What This Means Going Forward

This clash did not happen in a vacuum. It reflects a broader tension between institutional-focused blockchains and high-velocity retail chains.

Canton’s model prioritizes real-world asset tokenization and institutional adoption. Sui’s model prioritizes speed, DeFi composability, and consumer apps. Both are valid approaches, but their token markets tell very different stories.

Rooz’s specific accusation against Sui remains unverified. No independent investigation has confirmed that Sui’s price movements result from paid market-making deals. The $SUI chart he shared shows volatility, but volatility alone is not proof of manipulation.

Abiodun’s counter, that Sui’s VC unlocks are complete while Canton’s have not started, is also worth watching. If Canton faces significant unlock-driven selling pressure in the future, Rooz’s moral high ground could erode.

For now, the exchange serves as a reminder that crypto’s market structure problems are far from solved. Regulators are closing in, but the industry still lacks universal standards for what counts as legitimate market making versus manipulation.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Always do your own research before making investment decisions.