CFTC seeks public comment on 24/7 trading of standard futures contracts and perpetual contracts on energy commodities

Summary

On June 22, 2026, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued a Request for Comment on two distinct but related matters of relevance to energy derivatives markets: (i) the extension of standard futures contracts to a 24/7 trading schedule; and (ii) the listing of perpetual contracts that reference physically delivered or storable energy commodities, such as crude oil.¹ The Request for Comment invites public feedback on all aspects of 24/7 trading and perpetuals in energy derivatives markets and also includes 67 specific questions that commenters may address. Commenters are encouraged to support their responses with "data, empirical analysis, transaction- or market-level statistics, and supporting documents."²

To allow interested persons additional time to analyze the questions posed in the Request for Comment and to prepare responses, the CFTC extended the original comment period for an additional 30 days.³ The comment period now closes on August 26, 2026. 

CFTC actions prior to the issuance of the Request for Comment 

The Request for Comment builds upon two prior staff-level requests for comment, both issued last year,⁴ that solicited public feedback to better inform staff on the potential uses, benefits and risks of perpetual contracts and 24/7 trading, respectively. These prior solicitations were not focused exclusively on energy derivatives markets but instead addressed 24/7 trading and perpetuals in the context of CFTC-regulated derivatives markets more generally. 

In addition to building upon these prior, staff-level solicitations, the Request for Comment was issued in recognition of the announcement, by certain CFTC-registered entities, of the intent to offer trading in certain energy futures contracts on a continuous basis.⁵ On June 11, 2026, the CME Group Inc. (CME Group) announced that it was aiming to launch, by the end of the summer, a “micro” 10-barrel West Texas Intermediate (WTI) Crude Oil futures contract—a futures contract 1/100th of the size of the standard WTI benchmark futures contract—that was designed to trade 24 hours per day, seven days per week, except for limited maintenance windows.⁶

The CFTC’s issuance of the Request for Comment also appears to have been driven by questions raised by market participants about the implications, for energy derivatives markets, of the CFTC’s recent approval of a perpetual contract on bitcoin. On May 29, 2026, the CFTC issued an order approving the listing for trading as a futures contract, by designated contract market (DCM)⁷ KalshiEX LLC (Kalshi), of a cash-settled perpetual contract on the spot price of bitcoin.⁸ In the approval order, the CFTC stated that its approval of the contract was informed in part by certain characteristics of the bitcoin spot market, including the deep and liquid trading that exists in that market, and the fact that the market trades on a 24/7 basis across broadly distributed spot trading venues.⁹

In the approval order, the CFTC also stated that the listing by DCMs for trading, as futures contracts, of other similarly structured perpetual contracts “that reference the spot price of bitcoin or other digital commodities that have deep, active, and continuous spot market trading” would not violate the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) or the CFTC’s regulations thereunder.¹⁰ The CFTC emphasized in the approval order that this position did not extend to perpetual contracts on asset classes other than digital commodities.¹¹ To further underscore this point, concurrently with its approval order the CFTC issued a policy statement (Perpetuals Policy Statement) conveying the CFTC’s view that, since perpetual contracts tend to vary based on the asset underlying the contract, it would be appropriate for perpetual contracts involving asset classes not contemplated in the approval order to be submitted to the CFTC for approval on a case-by-case basis.¹²

On June 18, 2026, Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (CME), a subsidiary of CME Group that is registered with the CFTC as a DCM, brought suit against the CFTC, arguing that Kalshi’s bitcoin perpetual contract and similar digital commodity perpetual contracts are swaps, rather than futures contracts, under the CEA.¹³ CME’s suit seeks to vacate the CFTC’s approval order and the Perpetuals Policy Statement, and alleges that their issuance by the CFTC was arbitrary and capricious for purposes of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Developments following the issuance of the request for comment 

On July 8, 2026, the New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (NYMEX), a subsidiary of CME Group that is registered with the CFTC as a DCM, self-certified for trading on a 24/7 basis the 10-barrel WTI Crude Oil futures contract that had previously been announced by CME Group. 

On July 9, 2026, the CFTC, citing its examination, through the Request for Comment, of “whether the extension of standard energy futures to continuous around-the-clock trading is consistent with the DCM Core Principles, including with the reliability and manipulation-resistance of reference prices and with a contract market’s capacity to surveil trading, particularly for physically delivered commodities such as crude oil whose cash markets are assessed only during defined windows,” issued an order staying the listing for trading of the NYMEX contract during the pendency of proceedings to: (i) determine whether NYMEX’s certification that the contract complied with the CEA and CFTC regulations was false; and (ii) request that NYMEX alter the contract’s terms and conditions to discontinue continuous trading and limit trading to conventional trading hours.¹⁴

Request for comment part 1: extension of standard futures contracts to 24/7 trading 

The first part of the Request for Comment poses a number of questions relating to the extension of standard futures contracts to 24/7 trading, without any change to the contract’s fixed expiration, delivery or settlement terms. 

The CFTC asks whether prices formed during overnight, weekend and holiday periods are sufficiently liquid, reliable and manipulation-resistant to support orderly markets and efficient price formation, taking into account, among other things, that the cash market for energy commodities is generally assessed during defined windows and is not traded on a 24/7 basis. The CFTC also asks about the expected impact of weekend price formation on leveraged market participants—including “the potential for additional variation margin obligations, collateral demands, forced liquidations, and liquidity pressures arising from price movement occurring outside the traditional trading week.”¹⁵

The CFTC asks how institutional investors would need to adapt to 24/7 trading, given that existing risk management, governance, compliance and oversight frameworks may not be set up to manage weekend price formation. The CFTC also asks how DCMs should be prepared to address disruptions during weekend or holiday trading. 

Because traditional payment systems, including Fedwire and CHIPS, do not operate on a 24/7 basis, the CFTC asks how DCMs and derivatives clearing organizations could ensure robust margin call and settlement during overnight, weekend and holiday periods. The CFTC asks how real-time or tokenized payment infrastructure could be integrated into the clearing process to support margin payment during off-hours, and what forms of collateral should be eligible to satisfy margin obligations arising when traditional payment systems are unavailable. The CFTC also asks whether contracts traded on a 24/7 basis should require additional initial-margin buffers in advance of weekend or extended-holiday closures, and whether—and if so, how—margin levels should be adjusted during weekend or holiday periods in response to changes in volatility or events affecting the underlying market. 

The CFTC asks whether futures prices established during weekends or extended trading hours would trigger contractual provisions within over-the-counter derivatives markets in a manner that could create unintended economic outcomes, disputes, liquidity demands or risk transfers. The CFTC also asks how futures prices established during weekends or extended trading hours would affect options markets, cleared and uncleared swaps markets, physical commercial contracts that incorporate futures prices and benchmark and index pricing. The CFTC asks how investment managers, asset managers, pension funds and insurance companies would incorporate changing valuations based on extended hours trading into their portfolio management, performance measurements and governance frameworks. Additionally, the CFTC asks what safeguards a DCM should have in place to protect the interests of commercial users in benchmark futures contracts, given that many of the futures contracts being proposed for 24/7 trading appear to be smaller-version contracts designed to cater to the needs of retail traders but may still influence the larger benchmark contract trading during traditional hours. 

Request for comment part 2: perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities

The second part of the Request for Comment poses a number of questions regarding perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities. 
The CFTC asks about use cases for such perpetual contracts, including whether they would serve identifiable risk management needs not served by existing derivatives instruments, and whether commercial market participants—"for example, producers, refiners, merchants, transporters, and end-users"—anticipate using such contracts to hedge cash-market exposure.¹⁶ The CFTC also asks how listing an energy perpetual contract could affect the "volatility, margin requirements, or reliability" of the standard futures contracts that commercial hedgers rely upon to hedge cash-market exposure, and what safeguards would be appropriate to address any adverse effect on commercial hedgers.¹⁷

On reference-price integrity, the CFTC asks whether a cash price series for crude oil (or specific grades) exists that could serve, for a perpetual contract, as a reference price observable at every funding interval and that, consistent with the CFTC’s guidance on compliance with DCM Core Principle 3, is reliable, acceptable, publicly available, timely and is computed from a cash market that is sufficiently liquid and not itself readily susceptible to manipulation.

The CFTC asks about the extent to which price discovery for crude oil and other energy commodities is located “in the futures market rather than in a continuously traded physical cash market."¹⁸ The CFTC asks how the availability of a 24/7-traded energy futures price would impact a DCM's ability to self-certify that an energy perpetual contract is not readily susceptible to manipulation, consistent with DCM Core Principle 3. The CFTC asks how trading in an energy perpetual contract—including during overnight and weekend periods—could affect price formation in the standard futures contract the perpetual references, including for purposes of front-month price discovery. 

The CFTC asks how the absence, in a perpetual contract, of a fixed expiration date could affect convergence for a commodity whose term structure reflects storage costs and convenience yield. The CFTC asks whether distortions could arise over extended holding periods due to the interaction of accumulated funding payments with the physical fundamentals of a storable energy commodity, including storage cycles, seasonal demand and term structure. The Commission expressly invokes the April 20, 2020, negative-settlement episode for the NYMEX WTI futures contract, and asks about the implications of such "physical-market dislocations" for the design and resilience of a perpetual contract referencing crude oil.¹⁹

On position limits, the CFTC asks how a perpetual contract referencing a core referenced futures contract—such as the NYMEX WTI contract—would be integrated into the federal speculative position limits framework, given that it has no delivery or expiration. The CFTC asks whether such a perpetual contract should be considered economically equivalent to the referenced futures contract and subject to the same limits. The CFTC notes that the spot month limit for a core referenced futures contract is set as a percentage of estimated deliverable supply, and asks how, if at all, a spot month limit can or should be applied to a perpetual contract that has no expiration—and therefore no spot month—and makes no delivery. The CFTC also notes that, where a perpetual contract references the price of a core referenced futures contract, a large perpetual position may create incentives to influence the referenced contract’s spot-month price without the perpetual contract itself participating in delivery. The CFTC asks whether an uncapped or differently capped perpetual position could amplify that incentive, and whether it could facilitate the spot-month manipulation that position limits are designed to prevent. 

Key takeaways

The Request for Comment makes clear that the CFTC is continuing to evaluate the market and compliance implications of perpetual contracts referencing energy commodities, and the extension of 24/7 trading to energy derivatives markets. With respect to 24/7 trading, the CFTC’s order staying the listing of the NYMEX 10-barrel WTI contract signals that the CFTC intends to set the pace for, and terms of, any developments. 

That said, the detail and extensiveness of the questions posed in the Request for Comment suggest that the CFTC may be interested in taking further action to clarify its positions with respect to these matters. Energy market participants should treat the Request for Comment as an opportunity to inform the CFTC's understanding of the operational, benchmark and market-integrity implications of 24/7 trading and perpetuals, as the agency considers potential future action.

Additionally, energy market participants should assess whether futures prices formed during weekend and off-hours sessions may have implications for pricing, averaging, and index-reference provisions in their supply, procurement, transportation and financing agreements. Participants with over-the-counter derivatives exposures that reference futures benchmarks—including barrier options, structured products, collateral agreements and other contingent exposures—should assess how weekend and off-hours pricing and price movements may impact existing documentation. 

With respect to energy perpetual contracts, the Request for Comment reinforces the CFTC’s view, articulated in the Perpetuals Policy Statement, that the trading framework that the agency has started to establish for digital commodity perpetual contracts is not automatically translatable to other asset classes, including energy commodities. The questions that the CFTC poses in the Request for Comment relating to DCM Core Principle compliance, including questions relating to susceptibility to manipulation, market monitoring and position limits, provide insight into the types of attributes that would factor into the agency’s evaluation of a perpetual contract referencing energy commodities that is submitted to the CFTC for review and approval. 

_{1 Request for Comment on the Extension of Standard Futures Contracts to 24/7 Trading and on Perpetual Contracts Referencing Physically Delivered or Storable Energy Commodities, 91 FR 38334 (June 25, 2026).}

_{2 Id. at 38335.}

_{3 Request for Comment on the Extension of Standard Futures Contracts to 24/7 Trading and on Perpetual Contracts Referencing Physically Delivered or Storable Energy Commodities, 91 FR 47158 (July 28, 2026).}

_{4 See CFTC Staff Seek Public Comment on 24/7 Trading | CFTC; see also CFTC Staff Seek Public Comment Regarding Perpetual Contracts in Derivatives Markets | CFTC.} 

_{5 91 FR at 38335.}

_{6 See CME Group to Expand 24/7 Trading for WTI Crude Oil and Gold | CME Group Inc.}

_{7 DCMs are a category of CFTC-registered derivatives exchange that can offer trading in commodity futures, options and swaps (including to retail market participants).}

_{8 In the Matter of the Request for Approval by KalshiEX LLC of the PTCPERP Futures Contract (May 29, 2026).}

_{9 Id. at 6-8.}

_{10 Id. at 8.}

_{11 Id. at 8-9.}

_{12 Policy Statement Concerning the Listing of Perpetual Contracts, 91 FR 33160, 33161 (June 3, 2026).} 

_{13 Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. v. Selig, No. 1:26-cv-02157 (D.D.C.).}

_{14 In the Matter of the 10-Barrel WTI Crude Oil futures contract self-certified by the New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. under Commission Regulation 40.2 (July 9, 2026).}

_{15 91 FR at 38336.}

_{16 Id. at 38337.}

_17 Id.

_{18 Id. at 38338.}

_19 Id.