FinTech Strategy | Institutional UX | Trading Systems | Compliance & Risk Frameworks
Bullish: Institutional OTC Trade Builder
Architecting a high-throughput negotiation and execution engine for institutional-scale digital asset transactions.Key Objective: To build a bespoke "request-for-quote" (RFQ) and trade-building environment that allows institutional counterparties to execute large-block orders with minimal slippage and maximum privacy.
Challenge: How might we design a high-precision tool for pro-traders that facilitates over-the-counter (OTC) trading, enabling the seamless execution of high-volume transactions while maintaining the rigorous transparency and risk management standards of a regulated exchange?
My Role:
Senior Product Designer
Responsible for translating complex institutional trading workflows into a streamlined, compliant OTC negotiation interface.
Senior Product Designer
Responsible for translating complex institutional trading workflows into a streamlined, compliant OTC negotiation interface.
The Delivery:
- Strategic UX Flow:
End-to-end negotiation-to-settlement journey for complex OTC products.
- Pro-Trader Interface (Responsive):
A high-density, low-latency UI optimized for rapid decision-making.
- System Validation: Collaborative refinement of business and technical requirements with institutional stakeholders to ensure SOC2 and regulatory alignment.
The Impact:
🚀 Institutional Scaling: Supported a platform that reached $244.8 billion in annual digital asset sales (FY 2025), catering specifically to institutional-grade trading requirements.
🚀Rapid Adoption: Supported a product environment that enabled Bullish to become a Top 5 global venue by BTC volume and the #2 exchange for BTC options open interest ($4B as of Jan 2026).
🚀 Proven Reliability: Designed for a platform trusted by the world's largest liquidity providers (e.g., B2C2), facilitating seamless 24/7/365 institutional execution.
🚀 Institutional Scaling: Supported a platform that reached $244.8 billion in annual digital asset sales (FY 2025), catering specifically to institutional-grade trading requirements.
🚀Rapid Adoption: Supported a product environment that enabled Bullish to become a Top 5 global venue by BTC volume and the #2 exchange for BTC options open interest ($4B as of Jan 2026).
🚀 Proven Reliability: Designed for a platform trusted by the world's largest liquidity providers (e.g., B2C2), facilitating seamless 24/7/365 institutional execution.
Feature Brief
The OTC UI provides a user interface to all the functionality provided by the OTC Trade facility. The primary features are:
- OTC Booking UI: Provides an interface for users to book an OTC trade
- OTC Match Blotter: View a live blotter of users’ OTC trades and status
- OTC Positions: View all OTC positions held at Bullish
- OTC Trades: View the history of OTC trade bookings and trade legs
1. Market Research
OTC vs RFQ Trading -
Market Insight:
In the current market, tools for Over-The-Counter (OTC) trading are limited, especially for pro traders. Instead, Request for Quote (RFQ) systems are more commonly used—particularly by retail clients.
Below is a comparison highlighting the key differences between OTC trading and RFQ:
2. Competitive Analysis
Derbit & Binance flow, features, UIUX analysis -
I analyzed the RFQ functions of two key industry players: Deribit (a leader in options and futures trading) and Binance (a leading retail crypto exchange). The review focused on their trading flows, feature sets, and included a UI/UX analysis to identify best practices and gaps.
3. Design Approach
Existing modal Audition(Bullish) -
Identifying reusable design patterns to implement new functions across the platform — ensuring UI/UX consistency while reducing development effort and improving scalability.
4. Design Process:
Ecosystem Flow Design Process -
I began by designing the overall user flow to understand how the ecosystem functions when a trade order is initiated within the OTC Trade Builder.
Trader Builder Flow Design Process -
I conducted a deep dive into the Cornea flow, detailing how users can construct a trade, add legs, simulate amount and risk, submit, and cancel orders within the interface.
Wireframe Exploration:
Builder structure -
I designed multiple wireframe options to help the business and development teams evaluate different structural approaches for the OTC Trade Builder:
- Option 1: "Partial Reveal" – Optimized for a more engaging experience by progressively disclosing information, helping users manage complexity and reduce information overload.
- Option 2: "Parallel Design" – Focused on efficiency, allowing traders to view and compare multiple trade components side by side to support faster decision-making.
Final Structure Design Decision:
The final approach reflects a constructive trade-off between business goals and stakeholder feedback, with a clear priority placed on streamlining the trade construction process to best support user needs and strategic objectives.
UI design:
Screen Flow Design-
I designed responsive desktop, tablet, and mobile versions of the OTC Trade Builder to ensure seamless Day 1 adoption across all key platforms and user environments.
Extreme Case Design -
Button and Data Overload in One Row
Objective
To test the limits of usability and visual clarity when an interface row must display:- Multiple action buttons
- High-volume data fields
- Limited horizontal space in mobile
Design Considerations
-
Action Prioritization
- Use of space-saving patterns (iconography)
-
Use of a long-press gesture for the device
Agile Collaboration:
Future version (Adding trade with strategies) -
Following an agile approach, I typically provide multiple design versions to support the development team’s adaptation, aligning with their implementation timelines and sprint goals.
Launched: Sep 2025 | Product Link
Further Reading:
Option Trading Reward Program Dashboard
Strategy:
Scales institutional liquidity by transforming complex incentive structures into a transparent, gamified performance ecosystem. By tracking real-time market share and leaderboards, it leverages behavioral psychology to stimulate high-volume trading among top-tier participants.
Scales institutional liquidity by transforming complex incentive structures into a transparent, gamified performance ecosystem. By tracking real-time market share and leaderboards, it leverages behavioral psychology to stimulate high-volume trading among top-tier participants.
UX:
Reduces cognitive load by distilling multi-variable financial math into a skimmable, top-down hierarchy. Clear metric anchors provide instant performance validation, while a clear three-step calculation breakdown removes ambiguity for busy traders.
Reduces cognitive load by distilling multi-variable financial math into a skimmable, top-down hierarchy. Clear metric anchors provide instant performance validation, while a clear three-step calculation breakdown removes ambiguity for busy traders.
UI:
Utilizes a premium, high-contrast dark-mode theme engineered for high-density terminal screens. Complex data—like margin thresholds and reward pool distributions—is communicated via clean, minimal data visualizations that maximize readability under pressure.
Utilizes a premium, high-contrast dark-mode theme engineered for high-density terminal screens. Complex data—like margin thresholds and reward pool distributions—is communicated via clean, minimal data visualizations that maximize readability under pressure.
Further Reading:
How do I balance business goals with user needs when conflicts arise?
Case: Options Ladder — Order Panel Direction (Left or Right)
Business Goals:🎯 Consistency with existing left-side navigation drawer pattern
🎯 Reduce additional development effort
🎯 Keep primary actions (Buy/Sell) predictable across the platform
🎯 Reduce additional development effort
🎯 Keep primary actions (Buy/Sell) predictable across the platform
User Needs:
👤 Natural thumb reach — right-hand dominant users swipe from the right
👤 Clear distinction between navigation and action panels
👤 Intuitive access without losing context of the ladder data
👤 Natural thumb reach — right-hand dominant users swipe from the right
👤 Clear distinction between navigation and action panels
👤 Intuitive access without losing context of the ladder data
The Conflict
“Business preferred left for pattern consistency, while users found right more natural and thumb-friendly.”
How did I frame the tradeoff?
Rather than choosing one side, I reframed it — two drawers from the same direction create confusion.
Usability testing showed users hesitated, swiped incorrectly, and missed the panel when it came from the left. The data made the conversation objective, not opinionated.
The Decision
- Left = Navigation & Menu
- Right = Order Panel & Actions
The directional difference became intentional spatial logic, not an inconsistency.
The Outcome
- Business retained a distinguishable, consistent navigation pattern
- Users gained an intuitive, one-handed interaction that matched their expectations
✨ The Takeaway
"The best resolution isn't always a compromise — sometimes reframing the problem reveals a solution that serves both sides better."
Instead of framing it as "left vs right" (a binary choice), I shifted the question to "how do two drawers coexist without confusing users?"
This changes the nature of the conversation from a debate about preference to a design systems question about spatial logic.
Instead of framing it as "left vs right" (a binary choice), I shifted the question to "how do two drawers coexist without confusing users?"
This changes the nature of the conversation from a debate about preference to a design systems question about spatial logic.