ICON (ICX) is currently marked questionable - not a clean pass or a confirmed fail, per our own multi-standard crypto screen. Our full reasoning, the standards behind it and the facts it rests on are below.
Pinch or scroll to zoom · drag to pan — both axes move · double-click to reset
Classic floor-trader pivots from the last completed daily bar. Highlighted pills are the levels bracketing the current price.
The range is measured volatility (ATR over the horizon), not a target — a wider band means a more volatile asset, not a stronger view. The direction is the indicator tally above. Every forecast is recorded when made and scored against the real price when it comes due, including the wrong ones. Not a recommendation, and not a fatwa.
The disagreement is about STAKING. Some standards treat validation rewards as payment for a real service performed for the network; others treat a return accruing to a holding as too close to a return on capital. Both positions are seriously held and neither is fringe.
2 of 6 permit it; 4 do not. We report that as unsettled rather than picking a side for you.
Independently corroborated. 2 separate models read this coin and agreed on every fact the verdict turns on, though 1 minor field could not be established by all of them.
Not established: enables haram activity, transparent governance. Our verdict does not assume anything about these — where they would change the answer, we say so rather than guessing.
A return accruing to a currency-like holding sits close to the riba rulings this framework imports in full; the fatwa does not address staking directly.
Fiqh Council of North America, “Regarding the Islamic Ruling on Bitcoins” — default permissibility; treated as fiat currency, so all riba rulings and bai’ al-sarf apply
No clear evidence of prohibition: no riba, no impermissible underlying activity, and a real function.
Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America — Dr. Salah Al-Sawy (Secretary General) and Dr. Yasir Qadhi: transactions are permissible unless clear evidence prohibits them
This standard requires transparent governance to be established, and we could not establish it. An unestablished requirement is not a satisfied one, so this reads as unresolved rather than as a pass.
Securities Commission Malaysia, Shariah Advisory Council, 233rd-234th meetings, June-July 2020
Staking layer: rewards accrue for holding rather than for a clearly-priced service, which this framework treats as unresolved.
Amanah Advisors, Crypto Shariah Screening Framework (Mufti Faraz Adam)
Validation and fee-sharing are compensation for a real service rendered to the network, not a return on capital — the position under which this firm certified Ethereum staking.
Amanie Advisors (Dr. Daud Bakar) — Shariah certification of Ethereum staking; validation treated as a real service rendered to the network rather than a return on capital
A return for holding, without a clearly-identified service, is not distinguishable from a return on capital under these principles.
AAOIFI Shariah Standards - riba and non-permissible income, applied to the token's return mechanism (no dedicated crypto standard exists)
No intrinsic backing and no issuing authority; excessive gharar under this position, which applies to most digital assets including Bitcoin.
Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani (crypto trading and investment impermissible); Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyyah (Egypt, 2018); Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi (Turkey, 2017)
The restrictive position above is shown but excluded from our own verdict: it rejects most digital assets including Bitcoin on gharar alone, so letting it decide would mark nearly everything non-compliant — which is neither our conclusion nor a defensible reading of the evidence. Hiding it would be worse.
This is our own screening verdict, reached by applying each named standard ourselves to the facts above, last established 2026-08-29. Research, not a fatwa — for a decision that binds you, ask a scholar you trust.
| Indicator | Value | Signal |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 13.80 | BUY |
| Stochastic %K (14) | 8.45 | BUY |
| CCI (20) | -158.59 | BUY |
| Williams %R (14) | -91.55 | BUY |
| MACD (12,26,9) | -0.00 | SELL |
| ROC (10) | -50.27 | SELL |
| Momentum (10) | -0.01 | SELL |
| EMA (10) | 0.01 | SELL |
| SMA (10) | 0.01 | SELL |
| EMA (20) | 0.01 | SELL |
| SMA (20) | 0.01 | SELL |
| EMA (30) | 0.02 | SELL |
| SMA (30) | 0.02 | SELL |
| EMA (50) | 0.02 | SELL |
| SMA (50) | 0.02 | SELL |
| EMA (100) | 0.02 | SELL |
| SMA (100) | 0.02 | SELL |
| EMA (200) | 0.03 | SELL |
| SMA (200) | 0.03 | SELL |
Standard indicator thresholds (RSI 30/70, Stochastic 20/80, CCI ±100, Williams %R −80/−20, MACD histogram sign, price vs. average) computed on daily bars. A summary of what common indicators say — not a recommendation, and not this site's own trading verdict.
ICON (ICX) is a decentralized network that aims to connect different blockchain communities, enabling them to interact and share data seamlessly. It utilizes a unique consensus algorithm called Loop Fault Tolerance to enhance scalability and interoperability. Source: CoinPaprika.com
PlatformDecentralized ApplicationsDelegated Proof Of StakeLoop Fault ToleranceCross-chain
Background via CoinPaprika — informational, not part of the verdict.
Aggressive buy (inflow) vs sell (outflow) volume from the recent Binance tape, by trade size. Market context only — not a signal.
From the last 1000 aggregate trades · via Binance.
Peer movement computing — it will appear here on its own.
Plain-language summary of the evidence already on this page — the Sharia screen, structure, momentum, and order flow above. It explains the read; it doesn't make the call. Generated on demand (a live AI call), never run automatically.