Addressing the Latest Short Report on Abaxx

A new short report from Viceroy Research has hit the market with bold claims against Abaxx. Some of which I believe to materially misrepresent the truth. I will be doing my best to address each claim as best as I can. I may miss some as I do not have all the information they report to claim.

I have been holding this stock for several years now so I like to believe I have an intimate knowledge of the stock. My disclosures are found at the bottom.

Material Misrepresentation of Abaxx's Financials

From the report, Viceroy Research makes a material misrepresentation of Abaxx's financials claiming Abaxx burns $20-30 million per quarter at an accelerating rate.

It is not until page 5 where they actually link their financials.

Claiming Abaxx burns $20-30 million in cash per quarter is very specific. So from the financials if we remove the biggest expenditure, the share based compensation (which isn't cash burn), Abaxx highest cash burn is $17.2 million in Q4 and $15 million in Q1 of 2026. About half of the upper limit claimed. You cannot say they are burning upwards of 20-30 million when their highest cash burn doesn't even reach your lower bounds. This is a serious misrepresentation.

Not only this, their cashburn In Q1 of 2026 is lower then Q4. Even though volume had significantly increased during that quarter countering the narrative the market activity is heavily subsidized.

The Magical Pivot

I do find it hilarious that they are saying Abaxx is pivoting away from the exchange to digital title. I have been an investor in this stock since when they first went public. Even then Josh was talking about their technology. In fact throughout the years Josh has always tweeted and indicated that the Exchange and Clearinghouse was the "thing that gets us to the thing". Here is a tweet from two years ago referencing that the exchange and Clearinghouse was only the stepping stone to their technology.

Insider selling but no mention of insider buying?

I do find it curious they mention that a Director sold off their Exchange subsidiary holdings but make no mention that he still owns Millions worth of the Abaxx shares in the public company? Why was it not also mentioned that insiders have continued to buy Abaxx on the public market?

I have no idea why Thomas McManon sold his Exchange subsidiary holdings while keeping his Pubco Holdings of Abaxx. Maybe it was due to personal matters? But I find it disgusting to not mention all of the insider buying that has occured in the past year for Abaxx while the Josh has been personally buying himself on the public market as recently as today and yesterday. I do find this very reckless and ignores the facts.

What Happened with CBOE?

This appears to be their "smoking gun".

Their claim appears to be that Abaxx still materially advertises a relationship to investors in conferences and on social media after CBOE has walked away.

Their proof appears to be a 7 second clip of Joe Raia speaking behind closed doors to a group of LNG traders when discussing their LNG contracts.

The smoking gun quote: "Some of the firms that have invested in us along the way, ummm Blackrock, obviously people know. CBOE, we were listed on CBOE - Cut Audio"

This is a factual statement that discusses Abaxx's history. I do not believe this rises to the strong claim they were advertising their relationship with CBOE to investors for the purpose to mislead.

Josh even tweeted that CBOE is no longer connected to Abaxx before the raise.

For those are not aware of the CBOE history. They purchased a $1 million stake in Abaxx more than 2 years ago and were partnered in launching a global listing across their global exchanges. It got hung up in regulatory review because Nasdaq filed a challenge (unrelated to Abaxx) and eventually it was scrapped. CBOE CEO was caught doing some not so good things with a staff member and left. Over time that relationship dropped off. Eventually the new CBOE leadership sold off their Canadian and Australian exchanges. In March of this year they seem to have excited their position in Abaxx.

I am not quite sure what they expect from Abaxx as it relates to the disclosure. The relationship naturally fizzled out in terms of strategy with CBOE finally exiting their $1 million position. Should Abaxx have announced

"You know that company we partnered with 2+ years ago, well that relationship finally died" when it hasn't been a focus at all?

Were there any investors who bought into the Abaxx thesis within the last year because of a mention of CBOE? I haven't recalled seeing any promotion of them in any of the recent years. Viceroy's claim they mention CBOE as a current strategic partner but lacks any evidence. Their recording of Joe Raia only indicates they were an investor at one point in time.

Viceroy puts a lot of focus on CBOE as if it's significant. I haven't even mentioned CBOE in my research reports except for my first one back in January 1, 2025 and mention them in passing as an investor.

I believe they are making a mountain out of a mole hill of a relationship that naturally fizzled away over a long period of time.

The magical "faucet" turning off

Viceroy Research goes to great lengths proving that a faucet exists. They claim when the "faucet" turns off, volumes crater. So lets compare the volumes to when they drop, and the end of the months. I have highlighted in red roughly where the end of the month and start of the month is.

It's obvious, the magical "faucet" happens to coincide with the end of the month and the start of a new month. In fact the peaks align with the midle of the month mostly.

In fact, Viceroy implies they only turn on the faucet in relation to capital raises. Even though we can clearly see its follows a monthly trading pattern.

They then claim there is an undisclosed market maker program. Even though Josh tweets about it publicly and is a very normal thing for early markets. I am not sure any investor in Abaxx believes there isn't some incentive program.

This along with the secret recording with the CMO to suggest they are paying between 8 and 10 cargoes to use their index price? Why not release the full context instead of a small text clipping?

By the way, a cargo of LNG is worth $30-60 million. Are they suggesting Abaxx is paying upwards of $300 million to reference Abaxx's LNG futures price?

I really don't quite understand what their angle is. Are they upset Abaxx doesn't better properly disclose (even though Josh talks about it openly and I believe they have mentioned it on quarterly updates) a totally normal market strategy for an exchange?

Attack of Iced Tea (Jeff Lipton)

Honestly, I had no idea about this. So props to finding something I didn't. I can't comment on this as it appears to be active and have no idea about this. They do kinda leave out the dates, such as Infinity Mutual funds is from 1999 and Argyle is is from 2016. No idea what is behind either of those.

Where are the patents

Those patents were filed back in 2020. I believe the technology has gone through multiple iterations before landing on the current implementation. So some of it might still be related, others not. I really don't put much weight on if a patent gets rejected and the intricacies of everything. By their own admission they hold 9 patents (hidden in page 38). Why not mention that here on page 7? They also have many more patents pending.

I know nothing about the co inventor lawsuit. Seems like they know more, but are not sharing. Again, why do they leave this info out? Also not defending the eagle instance as clearly that was wrong if that happened. This is my first time hearing about it as well, but what does that have to do with Abaxx in a short report?

If you can’t beat ‘em, copy ‘em.

I think this is a very weak connection. So much has happened to Abaxx from April 17, 2025 and has included significantly more onboarding from locations like India and they even got their CFTC License during this time.

In fact if you look at the open interest, a major complaint in this research, you will see it often exceeded the daily trading volumes at times early in the exchange trading. Which aligns with Josh's claim. They focused on building exchange connected to industry participants. It was not until further onboarding in March of this year that we saw more market makers and day traders. As such the ratio between open interest skewed significantly.

Then there is the claim of volume promotion. I remember that time quite fondly. It was the first time real volumes started to pick up and we saw a heartbeat of a live exchange. If me as an investor was excited, I don't think it's crazy that the CEO started to post daily volume figures as something he built over the past 5+ years started to really form. Gold was the first contract getting volumes at the time. Then the connection to raising money 2.5 months later when Abaxx is running on fumes and needing cash is really far fetched.

Again here, I really don't think Viceroy understands what is being said here. Abaxx revenue wasn't going to be that high in 2026 compared to years like next year when they have the weight of the full onboarding from USA and China. The network effect amplifies the trading. It is "pilot" trading right now. This isn't a secret or gotcha.

"Two days earlier, the same CEO had posted the "liquidity faucet apology" admitting a roughly 50,000-lot ADV miss (30 April 202614)"

Make up your mind. Either Abaxx "controls" a faucet and should have easily hit the 50k via manipulation or they simply have market maker incentives and it's up to the traders to decide how much they want to trade on Abaxx. Josh thought they would have 50k because they were so close, but in the end didn't. Hence the apology for tweeting too soon.

Missed Milestones

As an investor during those years I will say it was discouraging. Hence the joke of "Soon (TM)" because it was so iconic of Abaxx to constantly have delays. Building an exchange and clearinghouse is very complex and often have delays outside of their control. You can't force FCM's to onboard. One major reason for a delay was they ended up rebuilding their clearinghouse from the ground up instead of licensing the tech. This pushed everything back but now it has paid off significantly. They are fully licensed and they can quickly launch their own products without external parties. I'm grateful they went that route. I don't think this report gives any credit to that. It has been 10+ years since the last one was made.

The Black Hole in the Numbers

There are two time periods Viceroy's report. June 2025 and before and January 2026 and onward. Nothing exists between July and December of 2025. They claim wash trading was active the ENTIRE time. So why would Viceroy ignore such a large time period? Why on earth?

In fact, they go as far to say it is fraud and no open interest. "volume having no effect".

Why are they focusing on Jan 6 to Mar 31? Why are they not running simulations on the entire trading window?

That is curious. Here again, what are these dates? June 2025 their analysis ends?

Why do they not cover July to December 2025?

I propose they do not cover that time range because it shows days in which Open interest was at times 50% or more and even exceeding the daily trading on Abaxx exchange. Aligning with real exchange activity.

Why are they neglecting this?

Then again they claim the faucet goes on and off for company events with no evidence. Even I showed earlier the trading dies down near the end of the months. This would be typical for physical contracts as traders don't want the risk of being exposed to delivery.

Abaxx had very real open interest ratio between July and December before trading firms and market makers surged trading volumes in 2026. Why is there a black hole here in their research report?

Duplicated Pages

Seriously? They posted a research report with almost duplicated pages? Is that supposed to make it look bigger than it is? They literally just rearranged it.

The duplication continues for several pages. I have noticed a trend where they often repeat things in a slightly changed toned. For example they dive twice into Jeff Lipton and their patents. Often repeating the same thing.

The Big Bad Scary Competitors

LNG

Unfortunately I can no longer screenshot here as I used up the max amount of media.

On page 35 they reference a CME Gulf Coast LNG export futures contract as a competitor to Abaxx physically delivered contract. What they fail to mention is that that contract has literally zero volume and zero trades. Why on earth would they neglect that?

Abaxx at times has priced 9 LNG cargoes in daily trading activity on their exchange compared to the years of no trades on the CME contract.

And I wrote a whole article already on why financially settled contracts are inferior to physically settled contracts. Abaxx has already exceeded JKM volumes on some days. And then they mention TTF? A pipeline gas? Give me a break.

Carbon Futures

Once again, why do they not list the carbon futures contract volume on CME and ICE and compare it with Abaxx? Why not mention competitor contracts have no trading despite launching in 2022 for ICE? Abaxx has volume, the competitors do not.

Nickel

By their own admission, LME is slow to reform but "can" launch a contract. Thats weak. Anyone can, but they don't. Because it's difficult.

Lithium

Lithium hydroxide on CME is financially settled. Again, I went into detail that financially settled is bad in comparison to physically settled. But it is also different then Abaxx's Lithium Carbonate. What is this amateur hour?

Gold

Again I wrote articles on this. Abaxx gold futures contract is colocated with their spot market. This is a significant improvement compared to the LME and COMEX. SGX is locked behind the China firewall.

Wind Futures

This is an additive contract and haven't done much research here. I believe it was done to support hedging against Abaxx's other contracts. Haven't researched CME or other equivalents.

Hydrogen

Really? They mention hydrogen which is barely talked about and not even launched but they don't mention Silver? Why is that?

The JPMorgan and Alta

Viceroy spent so much time talking about CBOE lack of proper disclosure but now decided to focus on too much disclosure when it comes to Alta? Make it make sense.

Are they just repeating the press release?

"Beyond the headline: this press release announced a letter of engagement to one day establish a Singapore VCC umbrella structure, with a sub-fund that does not yet exist, to invest in money market instruments, subject to regulatory approval and a functioning VCC approval process that have not yet been obtained, the units of which would, eventually, with everyone's permission, be eligible as collateral at Abaxx Clearing."

That is what the press release said. Why are they repeating it? Thanks I guess?

They then go into comparing JPMorgan's blockchain collateral settlement against Abaxx's non blockchain settlement. In fact they mention another competitor called BUIDL which is also blockchain based.

Josh has been very clear their technology will be able to do T+0 without blockchain. In fact constantly repeats "When the asset lives in the law, legal finality matters". The whole point of Abaxx tech is they can achieve T+0 without the blockchain.

It's clear to me they have a big misunderstanding of what Abaxx's tech really is.

Undisclosed Related Parties

I can't comment here. I think only Abaxx is able to comment on what's happening there. That's out of my wheelhouse.

The Timing

The report was released at 8AM, 1.5 hours before market open at exactly the 200 DMA line. A line that traders know will cause panic selling if broken. The report was then 45 pages long, not giving any one time to read it to make an informed decision. It gave no time for anyone to properly refute or dissect it. The report itself was littered with duplication giving the appearance of a much longer report with more substance. It also had in my opinion material misrepresentation of Abaxx's financials and trading on the exchange.

That's it from me. I spent 4 hours on this already and have a life so I cut it off here. Probably some typos. Wish I could dive more in depth into it. It seems like they claim to have more secret information which they are holding back on. So gotta make time for that. They likely will release it tomorrow at 8am again to try and drive the stock further down. Posting after hours tomorrow would give people too much time to address it after all.

Thank you for your attention on this matter.

Disclosures

I hold a long position.

I have not been paid nor have I received any compensation in the past, present, or future for any of my posts concerning Abaxx or any companies involved with Abaxx.

I have no relation, direct or indirect to anyone in the Abaxx company or any companies involved with Abaxx.

I love the stock.

This report was generated without the use of AI.

(And again just to be clear and yes this part was AI generated)

The author of this report holds positions in Abaxx Technologies, which is mentioned within this analysis. These holdings represent the author’s personal investments and may reflect biases in the evaluation presented.

This report is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice. The analysis and opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and were not influenced by any outside party. The author has not received any compensation, monetary or otherwise, for the preparation or publication of this report.

Projections and valuations are based on assumptions that are subject to market risks, uncertainties, and changes in circumstances. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investors should conduct their own research and consult with a financial advisor before making investment decisions.