Sui
SUI#22SUI pays network fees and is staked to secure Sui, a fast proof-of-stake blockchain for apps and payments.
- Market cap
- $4.84B
- Volume 24h
- $968.63M
- All-time high
- —
- Circulating supply
- 4.12B of 10B
Passes our 8 Shariah criteria. Needs caution: excessive uncertainty (gharar).
- 7 pass
- 1 caution
- 0 fail
Verdict history
- HalalCurrent
First publication
Fundamentals, market picture and news will appear here.
Halal analysis
Can a Muslim hold Sui?8 Shariah criteria
7 pass · 1 caution · 0 failHolding SUI pays nothing; staking rewards come from fees and a fixed subsidy fund and are paid for validating the network, not as interest on a loan.
Riba means interest or any guaranteed increase on a loan. Simply holding SUI earns nothing. The native return is staking: holders delegate SUI to a validator, the coins are wrapped in a stake object that stays in the holder's own wallet, and rewards are paid for each full daily epoch from transaction fees and from a stake subsidy fund. That fund held about 234 million SUI on 27 September 2026 and paid about 282,000 SUI a day, a fixed amount that falls by 10% every 90 days, so it is a pre-set payout rather than a rate on a loan.
Validators that perform poorly lose their rewards for the epoch, and the docs describe no slashing of principal; the reward still varies with fees, stake and validator performance, so it is not a guaranteed return on money. Because delegators can earn passively without running a validator and principal is not at risk, the score is just below the maximum. Sharlife marks Sui's staking rewards 'Grey'; CryptoUmmah calls native staking permissible because rewards come from validator work rather than a guaranteed return, and ShariaQuant rates native staking halal.
Sui is a working network and SUI has clear uses for fees, staking and voting.
Mal is property that Islamic law recognises as having value and that can be owned and traded. Sui works: it has run since April 2023 with daily epochs, and SUI is needed to pay computation and storage fees, to stake for consensus and to vote on upgrades. Malaysia's Securities Commission Shariah Advisory Council (2020), for assets under its supervision, treats digital currency without an underlying asset as goods ('urudh) that may be traded on registered exchanges.
Other tier-1 bodies disagree: Egypt's Dar al-Ifta (2017), the UAE General Authority of Islamic Affairs (2018), Turkey's Diyanet (2017) and Indonesia's MUI (2021) prohibit dealing in cryptocurrencies, and the OIC Fiqh Academy (2019) deferred a ruling. None of them names Sui. ShariaQuant, an automated screening with no named scholar, adds a Sui-specific doubt: it says the validator set has shown it can freeze and seize user funds through protocol upgrades, which in its view weakens the holder's exclusive control that property requires. That concern about control is scored under gharar, not here. Islamic Finance Guru, the authoritative source, rates SUI permissible, and the general dispute among religious bodies is reflected in confidence, not in this score, so the criterion gets the full score.
- Resolutions of the Shariah Advisory Council of the SC - Securities Commission Malaysia
- Ruling on trading and dealing in Bitcoin - Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyyah
- Kripto paraların kullanımının dini hükmü nedir? - Din İşleri Yüksek Kurulu (Diyanet)
- Keputusan Ijtima' Ulama Komisi Fatwa se-Indonesia VII tentang Hukum Cryptocurrency - Majelis Ulama Indonesia
SUI is not a gambling token, but most of its trading is in futures.
Maysir is gambling: winning or losing by chance rather than through productive exchange. Ordinary price swings are not maysir, and SUI has no chance-based payout of its own. The market around it is heavily speculative, though: on 27 September 2026 perpetual futures made up about 85% of SUI/USDT turnover on Binance and Bybit combined (about $645 million against $118 million spot, a single-day snapshot).
A real function exists alongside this, since SUI is needed to pay fees and to stake on a working network, so the asset is not built for gambling; the futures-heavy market lowers the score only within pass.
No issuer earns on behalf of holders: fees go to validators, stakers and the storage fund.
This criterion asks how the issuer or protocol earns, and whether any of that income is impermissible. Sui charges computation fees, which go to validators and their stakers, and storage fees, which go into a storage fund that is itself staked and pays validators for keeping data; deleting data returns part of the storage fee. These are service fees for processing and storing transactions. SUI holders receive no share of any company's revenue.
Mysten Labs, which built Sui, is a separate company that holds a SUI treasury allocation and builds other products, and the Sui Foundation is an independent organisation supporting the ecosystem; neither publishes its revenue mix, which is recorded as a data gap rather than evidence of impermissible income, so the criterion gets the full score.
Supply and code are public, but most SUI is still locked and unlocking for years, and validators showed they can jointly freeze addresses.
Gharar is excessive uncertainty or hidden information in a deal. Sui's rules are public: supply is capped at 10 billion SUI, the code is open source and the subsidy schedule is visible on-chain. Two disclosed concerns keep this at caution. First, only about 41% of supply was circulating on 27 September 2026; locked SUI is released in stages to the community reserve, early contributors, investors and Mysten Labs, with about half of all supply reported by Tokenomist as released only after 2030, which means large pending unlocks.
Second, after the May 2025 Cetus exploit validators blacklisted the attacker's addresses, freezing about $162 million, and a governance vote (90.9% in favour) then approved a network upgrade moving those funds to a multisig trust jointly controlled by Cetus, OtterSec and the Sui Foundation. That protected victims, but it shows that validators can block addresses and, with a vote, move funds out of them; some decentralisation advocates criticised this power. Stake is moderately spread: 127 validators, with the 18 largest holding just over one third. Islamic Finance Guru, the authoritative source, rates SUI permissible without addressing this power; this criterion departs from a pass because the freezing and moving of funds is a documented, Sui-specific fact, which ShariaQuant also cites. Both points are disclosed, so the status is caution, not fail.
Sui runs general apps and some stablecoin payments; interest-based lending holds about half of the money deposited in its DeFi apps.
This criterion looks at what the network is actually used for. SUI pays for computation and storage on a general-purpose network that hosts exchanges, games, storage (Walrus) and about $483 million of stablecoins. A large share of on-chain money, however, is in interest-based lending: on 27 September 2026 lending protocols such as NAVI, Suilend and Current held about $447 million according to DefiLlama, the largest DeFi category on Sui and about half of the roughly $850 million held across all its DeFi categories excluding exchange wallets (liquid staking about $165 million, DEXs about $75
million; the categories overlap in part, and DefiLlama's headline DeFi TVL was about $560 million). Lending pays depositors interest from borrowers, which is riba. Lending is not the network's main purpose and DeFi is a small part of SUI's value, so the criterion passes, but the large lending share keeps the score well below the maximum.
Fully paid spot SUI is widely available, and it can be held in one's own wallet.
This criterion asks whether the asset can be owned in a permissible way. SUI trades spot, with full payment and delivery, on major exchanges such as Binance and Bybit, and it can be withdrawn to a self-custody wallet. Since 18 February 2026 it is also held by US spot funds such as Canary's SUIS. Ownership therefore does not depend on derivatives or leveraged wrappers, so the criterion gets the full score. How specific funds are structured is assessed separately under trading mechanisms.
Sui offers a fast, cheap platform for apps and payments; the main harm was the 2025 Cetus hack, where most stolen funds were recovered.
Maslahah weighs public benefit against harm. The benefit is a working, low-cost network for applications, stablecoin transfers and data storage. The most serious harm was the May 2025 exploit of the Cetus exchange, which drained about $223 million from users; about $162 million was frozen and, after a validator vote, placed in a trust for return to victims. The exploit was a bug in one application rather than a use of Sui for fraud, and no pattern of Sui being mainly a tool for fraud or sanctions evasion was found.
Speculative trading and lending are counted under maysir and usage, and the freezing power under gharar, not again here; the hack keeps the score just below the maximum.
How you can use it
Tap a card for the ruling and sourcesBuying SUI with full payment and immediate delivery is widely available on major exchanges, and coins can be moved to a self-custody wallet. Spot is the acceptable way to hold SUI.
US spot SUI funds hold SUI: Canary SUIS and Grayscale GSUI (both from 18 February 2026) stake it and aim to reflect staking rewards in their value, and a 21Shares fund (TSUI) followed on 24 February 2026. Whether any of them lends SUI or borrows under a credit facility was not verified. Leveraged SUI products, such as 21Shares' 2x product built on derivatives, fail.
Tier-1 bodies such as Indonesia's MUI rule that using cryptocurrency as currency is not permissible, and paying with crypto is restricted in several countries. Most payments on Sui are made in stablecoins rather than SUI.
Native staking, where you delegate SUI from your own wallet to a working validator and keep the stake object yourself, pays rewards from fees and a fixed subsidy fund for validation work, so it is rated pass. Principal is not slashed, which some scholars see as making the return closer to risk-free, and Sharlife marks Sui staking 'Grey'. Liquid staking tokens (such as those from SpringSui, Haedal or Volo) and exchange staking are caution: they pool stake through an intermediary, and the receipt tokens are often deposited into interest-based lending.
Margin trading in SUI is widely offered but is never acceptable: it is a deferred exchange with borrowed money and leverage (AAOIFI SS 20).
SUI perpetual futures are most of its trading volume, but futures, perpetuals and options always fail under AAOIFI SS 20: deferred exchange without delivery, usually with leverage.
Lending SUI on platforms such as NAVI, Suilend or Current, or through exchange lending programmes, pays depositors interest from borrowers. This is riba.
SUI yield products built on lending, leveraged looping or basis trading pay interest or interest-like returns and fail. Native staking is assessed separately above; products that only pass on staking rewards are closer to the staking assessment, but their source must be checked product by product.
Scholars quotes
The opinion on this is the same as doing the same with any halal assets such as shares – 1) is permissible, 2) is more debatable and there are differing opinions on short-term trading.Based on and subject to the foregoing information, and for the purposes of this conclusion, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that SUI token’s utility is in breach of Shariah* principles and rulings as adopted by the scholars conducting this research.As of now, the projects run by Sui appear to be in accordance with Shariah principles.As I mentioned at the beginning of this article it is not necessary to substantiate the permissibility of something as long as there are no prohibited factors involved in it or surrounding it.Penggunaan cryptocurrency sebagai mata uang hukumnya haram, karena mengandung gharar (ketidakjelasan), dharar (bahaya) dan bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang nomor 7 tahun 2011 tentang Mata Uang dan Peraturan Bank Indonesia nomor 17 tahun 2015 tentang Kewajiban Penggunaan Rupiah di Wilayah Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia.Sebagaimana mata wang yang lain, mata wang digital hendaklah tidak digunakan sebagai bayaran kepada barangan, perkhidmatan dan aktiviti tidak patuh Syariah seperti pembelian dadah, pelacuran, perjudian dan pendanaan aktiviti keganasan serta penggubahan wang haram.The SAC has also resolved that investment and trading of Digital Assets that fulfil the above requirements and which are traded on Digital Asset Exchange (DAX) registered with SC are permissible.Third: In light of the above and given the significant risks associated with this type of currencies and the instability of their transactions, the Council of the Academy recommends pursuing research and studies on issues affecting its ruling.Bitcoin is a digital currency that does not meet the legal and Sharia criteria that make it a currency subject to the rulings of dealing with official legal currencies recognized internationally.بناءً على ذلك: فلا يجوز شرعًا تداول عملة "البتكوين" والتعامل من خلالها بالبيعِ والشراءِ والإجارةِ وغيرها، بل يُمنع من الاشتراكِ فيها؛ لعدمِ اعتبارِها كوسيطٍ مقبولٍ للتبادلِ من الجهاتِ المخُتصَّةِ، ولِمَا تشتمل عليه من الضررِ الناشئ عن الغررِ والجهالةِ والغشِّ في مَصْرِفها ومِعْيارها وقِيمتها، فضلًا عما تؤدي إليه ممارستُها من مخاطرَ عاليةٍ على الأفراد والدول.However, the holding is rated Doubtful because the validator set has demonstrated the discretionary power to freeze and seize user funds without a court order, compromising the holder's exclusive control over their assets.According to research and opinion of experts so far, cryptocurrency is not considered ‘ maal ’ (wealth) in Sharia.Muhammadiyah memandang transaksi dan investasi kripto pada dasarnya mubah (boleh) tetapi dengan syarat tertentu.Our current position is 'tawaquf'; we can't say it is halal or haram, but we say it is better not to engage in itAI-assisted analysis checked against sources. Not a fatwa or investment advice.
Where it trades
Section in preparation
Similar halal assets
Halal verdict, same category
