Cantor Fitzgerald: Tether’s Mysterious $39 Billion Fund Manager

• A report by the Wall Street Journal revealed that Cantor Fitzgerald oversees Tether’s bond portfolio.
• The $39 billion bond portfolio backs more than half the USDT stablecoin in circulation.
• The firm has maintained secrecy around the management and investment of its reserves.
• A New York court recently blocked the USDT issuer’s attempt to block a request for records of its stablecoin reserves.

Tether, the firm behind the world’s largest stablecoin, has historically maintained secrecy around the investment and management of the $67 billion reserve that backs its USDT stablecoin. Over the years, the firm has made several attempts to avoid answering questions about its holdings, ownership, and even its headquarters. However, a recent report by the Wall Street Journal revealed the identity of the investment bank that oversees more than half of the USDT issuer’s reserves.

Tether tapped Cantor Fitzgerald in 2021

According to the report by WSJTether uses New York-based Cantor Fitzgerald to help oversee its $39 billion bond portfolio. The USDT issuer’s reserves are dominated by U.S Treasury Bills, which account for more than 50% of its reserve.

People familiar with the matter revealed that the stablecoin firm started moving its reserves into the Wall Street giant in late 2021. This was around the same time that the firm shelled out $61 million to settle multiple investigations into the claims made regarding its reserves between 2016 and 2019. As reported before, Tether holds more than $39 billion worth of Treasury Bills, and affiliation with Cantor Fitzgerald pushed it further into the Treasury market.

Earlier today, The New York Supreme Court rejected Tether’s attempt to block a request by CoinDesk for information regarding the reserves backing the USDT stablecoin. New York Supreme Court Justice Laurence Love said in his ruling that Tether’s petition to block CoinDesk’s inquiry was denied and dismissed.

Petitioners having failed to establish a that substantive competitive injury requirement under FOIL has been here met, the Court notes that there is a strong public interest in the disclosure of the requested information.”