Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

https://www.dlnews.com/articles/markets/hyperliquid-protocol-cranks-up-the-risk-with-1000x-leverage/

Hyperliquid plans to implement ticker-level fee controls on its HIP-3 markets, potentially doubling the annualized revenue from $70 million to $140 million, according to estimates by Ryan Watkins. This move involves reducing the current fee discount from 90% to 80%. The success of this strategy hinges on the stability of volumes, as a reduction in the discount could lead to higher fee revenue if the volume remains consistent. The planned changes reflect a strategic revenue enhancement initiative by Hyperliquid, a decentralized perpetuals exchange, which allows market deployers to set fee structures within specified limits.

Advertisement

Market participants appear to view this potential revenue increase as a positive indicator for Hyperliquid’s price trajectory. The current pricing in prediction markets suggests consistent support for the potential price increase scenarios. As of now, the odds of Hyperliquid reaching $100 by the end of 2026 are priced at 18% YES, unchanged from the previous day but down from 22% a week ago.

Key Takeaways Markets suggest that Hyperliquid’s plan to reduce fee discounts may indicate a strategic move to enhance revenue. The potential doubling of HIP-3 revenue is consistent with support for price increase scenarios if volume holds steady. Current market pricing reflects a stable view of Hyperliquid’s potential to hit its price targets by the end of 2026. What to Watch Monitoring the impact of fee structure changes on volumes will be crucial to assess the success of Hyperliquid’s revenue strategy. Any significant shifts in volume could affect the projected revenue outcomes. Additionally, market participants will be observing any reactions from major players and stakeholders within the exchange. Developments in volume and market sentiment will be key indicators to watch, as they could influence the pricing in prediction markets related to Hyperliquid’s future price targets.

Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h December 31 18% — — View market → January 1 2027 4.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.9% — — View market → January 1 2027 33.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 11.3% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.8% — — View market →

The Hyperliquid (HYPE) token trades at around $55, up roughly +5% in 24 hours, a bounce that still leaves it well off the highs that once made it one of crypto’s standout performers. The uncomfortable truth is that the rally was never built on earnings power, and the market is now seemingly pricing that in.

HYPE’s price surge was engineered by concentrated treasury buying, not by accelerating DeFi revenue or expanding protocol fundamentals, and once that bid stopped, unwinding was inevitable.

This drawback has left investors wondering whether HYPE really is the future of decentralized finance or if it will become the latest casualty in this brutal bear market, which has seen many utility-backed projects fall more than 90% from their all-time highs.

Hyperliquid is about to unlock a whole new wave of American hedge funds.

Lazersays explains how Perp platforms have mostly been fighting over the same crypto-native whales.

And how Hyperliquid is bringing regulated perpetuals onshore to the US—especially with the rise of Real… https://t.co/8ch0QQS23l pic.twitter.com/RVWskdi3lh

— 👽 (@AlienW3b) August 4, 2026

How the Hyperliquid Treasury Bid Drove the Rally Shaunda Devens, an analyst at Blockworks Research, identified Hyperliquid Strategies (PURR) as the main driver behind a significant increase in HYPE token prices.

PURR accumulated 11.12 million HYPE tokens, exceeding $100 million weekly, and holding nearly 10% of HYPE’s circulating supply, making it the largest digital-asset treasury position in crypto by percentage of float.

Devens highlighted that the rally was influenced by PURR’s buying campaign and the AQAv2 upgrade, which directs stablecoin reserve-yield revenue to fund HYPE buybacks.

This created artificial scarcity and price momentum, decoupling HYPE’s price from its underlying business performance. As the accumulation was not fundamentally driven, she cautioned that traders would likely take profits once buying slowed.

(SOURCE: Yahoo Finance)

The Revenue Gap the Price Is Now Reflecting The fundamental picture backing that skepticism is direct: Hyperliquid’s July 2026 revenue came in at $43M, compared to $92 million in July 2025, a year-over-year decline of more than 50%, according to Devens’ analysis. For a token whose valuation was partly premised on dominant market share in on-chain perpetuals trading, that revenue halving is a material reset.

The core business remains heavily tied to crypto market activity. When volumes compress across the broader derivatives landscape, Hyperliquid’s fee generation compresses with it, and the protocol’s DeFi revenue trajectory becomes the primary justification for where HYPE trades. At $52, Devens argued, valuation has returned to a more realistic level, though she stopped short of calling it a definitive floor.

Spot exchange flow data from CoinGlass shows approximately $22.34M in net HYPE outflows from exchanges over the past 30 days. Coins leaving exchanges typically indicate holders moving assets to self-custody rather than preparing to sell – a pattern consistent with accumulation. The signal is narrow, however, and falls short of the sustained outflow magnitude needed to confirm a price floor is forming.

What Comes Next for HYPE Price My plan for $HYPE in long-term

You can call me crazy if you want but remember I was shorted it at $74 and making 40%

A project having a good product doesn't mean its price will be good too.

I've been investing in crypto for over 7 years and have seen many projects with good… pic.twitter.com/Fd6ob1RoJN

— Ryker 🇯🇵 (@Ryker_Crypto) August 2, 2026

Technical analysis identifies $52 as the immediate support level, with a retest of $56 resistance the likely next move if that support holds. A break below $50 opens the path toward $48, with price direction closely correlated with Bitcoin’s near-term trajectory.

On August 4, HYPE’s 3.57% bounce to $54.07, outpacing Bitcoin’s 1% gain on the day, suggested some rotation capital was returning to the altcoin.

  Bull case: HYPE holds $52 support, closes a daily candle above $56 on elevated volume, and reignites momentum toward $60 as altcoin rotation broadens.

Base case: Price consolidates in the $52–$56 range while the market waits on evidence that core perps revenue can recover from the July trough.

Bear case: A break below $50 triggers the next leg down toward $48, with $41–$43 cited as a secondary target by technical analysts if that level fails.

Institutional interest in HYPE remains, as Japan-listed Eole Inc. has established a corporate treasury position, indicating some buyers view current prices as an entry point.

Devens believes Hyperliquid can recover its crypto perpetuals business and monetize new products, though she notes short-term predictions are challenging. The market’s key questions focus on whether Hyperliquid’s core perp’s business can regain lost ground and if AQAv2-driven buybacks can compensate for the absence of PURR treasury support.

Until monthly revenue shows improvement from July’s $43M, the bullish narrative remains unproven. Analysts like Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan advocate for HYPE’s long-term potential, but immediate price support depends on fundamental performance.

EXPLORE: Best Crypto Presales With Asymmetric Upside in the Current Market

#Altcoin News Today

Why you can trust 99Bitcoins

10+ Years

Established in 2013, 99Bitcoin’s team members have been crypto experts since Bitcoin’s Early days.

90hr+

Weekly Research

100k+

Monthly readers

50+

Expert contributors

2000+

Crypto Projects Reviewed

Follow 99Bitcoins on your Google News Feed

Get the latest updates, trends, and insights delivered straight to your fingertips. Subscribe now!

Subscribe now

Alex Ioannou

On-Chain Journalist

Alex is a seasoned cryptocurrency trader and market analyst with over seven years of active experience in the digital asset space. Since entering the markets in 2017, Alex has specialized in identifying emerging "meta" trends and high-volatility narratives. Notably, Alex... Read More

Free Bitcoin Crash Course Enjoyed by over 100,000 students. One email a day, 7 days in a row. Short and educational, guaranteed!

HIP-4 permissionless deployments are live on testnet. Hyperliquid should make sure they get to mainnet by the midterms.

Listen

0

0:00 0:00

Subscribe to Bankless or sign in

Hyperliquid's HIP-4 markets have had their largest success stem from the World Cup.

I didn’t expect this. When HIP-4 launched, I argued that Hyperliquid was not really coming for Polymarket or Kalshi. That outcome markets rather looked more like an extension of its trading stack: daily crypto binaries for hedging perps, options-like exposure, and another way to keep every leg of a position inside Hyperliquid.

Breaking Down Hyperliquid’s Prediction Play on Bankless

The HIP-4 upgrade brings “outcome markets” to the much-hyped exchange, adding binary trading alongside perps.

BanklessDavid Christopher

Instead, Hyperliquid launched markets for the NBA Finals, individual World Cup matches, and the tournament winner. Those three categories, though overwhelmingly the latter two, have accounted for roughly 48% of HIP-4 volume to date.

Since the height of the tournament, open interest is down more than 90%. To be clear though, HIP-4 has not failed. It’s simply run out of things to trade for the time being.

The system is still permissioned, so validators currently deploy every market. What remains is a thin book of price-related questions pulling trivial amounts of volume compared to that spurred by sports.

That constraint is what Hyperliquid is now trying to remove. On July 31st, permissionless HIP-4 deployments went live on testnet, paving the way for teams to create and operate outcome markets on their own, while showing what it will take to do so.

How Permissionless HIP-4 WorksNote that permissionless deployments will not mean unlimited deployments.

Under the preliminary mainnet design, validators first approve market templates, i.e. reusable structures that define how a market can be created and settled. A deployer then uses an approved template to launch a specific market, supplying details like the question, possible outcomes, expiration, and resolution criteria.

Take politics for example — you’ll see why in a minute — where an approved binary-event template could potentially support a market on whether a candidate wins an election. But Hyperliquid hasn't disclosed how broad each template will be, so it is unclear whether one could cover Senate, House, and governor races, or whether different structures would be needed for party-control, seat-count, or multi-candidate questions.

Enjoying this article?

Subscribe to Bankless or sign in

What is clear is that deployers will launch markets by instantiating templates validators have already approved, rather than seeking approval for each individual market.

As in HIP-3, deployers are responsible for defining and settling markets correctly, and validators can slash their stake if they get it wrong.

That proposed stake is 500,000 HYPE (same as HIP-3), locked for six months and withdrawable only when no outstanding markets exist. Each deployer will initially receive capacity for 100 outcomes, reusable once markets settle, with an auction for additional capacity planned later. Deployers will eventually be able to receive up to 50% of the trading fees from their markets.

What’s Next After the World Cup?The most obvious target is the U.S. midterms.

Prediction markets first broke into the mainstream through politics, and both Kalshi and Polymarket already run broad election dashboards covering congressional control, individual races, and seat totals. HIP-4 currently offers none.

Whether outside deployers can go ahead and fill that gap depends on how quickly permissionless HIP-4 moves to mainnet. HIP-3 took 164 days from its first permissionless testnet MVP to mainnet, though only 18 days from publishing its initial mainnet specification and making HIP-3 eligible for mainnet-level bug bounties.

HIP-4 sits somewhere between those points. Its preliminary mainnet structure is public and deployer actions are live on testnet, but there are no mainnet-level bug bounties. We’re in limbo for now.

If this system arrives in time, a deployer could use the midterms to build an entire election venue rather than launch isolated questions, so long as validators also approve templates supporting elections.

If permissionless deployment misses that window, validators could still list midterm markets themselves. HIP-4 could recover activity either way. What it would lose is its first major opportunity to prove that outside deployers can keep it supplied with timely markets.

The World Cup proved Hyperliquid users will trade major real-world events. It also proved that, when these events end, there’s not much else to go on. The intensity of this midterms cycle would be a strong opportunity for HIP-4 to act on, helping it simultaneously stay relevant and jumpstart permissionless deployments. Keep an eye on this in the weeks ahead.

0

According to data from Onchain Lens, Hyperliquid burned approximately $760,210 worth of HYPE tokens in the past 24 hours. The data shows that in the latest reporting period, Hyperliquid generated around $777,200 in revenue, which was allocated to the Assistance Fund and HYPE holders. To date, Hyperliquid’s cumulative HYPE token burn has reached 46.19 million units, valued at roughly $2.5 billion at current prices, accounting for 4.62% of HYPE’s maximum total supply of 1 billion units.

Relevant content

Analysis: After multiple threats and concessions from Trump, Iran’s leadership believes he does not want to escalate the war.

According to a report by U.S. broadcaster CBS, Iran appears to be growing increasingly skeptical of former President Donald Trump’s “carrot and stick” diplomatic strategy. In April this year, Trump warned Tehran it must agree to a ceasefire or “the entire civilization will perish,” but later extended the deadline. He repeated similar tactics in May and June. Internal Iranian sources stated this approach has instead reinforced the country’s leadership’s view that Trump is not seeking to escalate the conflict, but rather bargaining chips in negotiations. They believe Iran can withstand pressure and raise the costs for the U.S. via proxies such as Yemen’s Houthi movement and threats to global shipping, until Washington concludes there is no military solution to the conflict. Tehran’s current assessment is that time is on its side.

14 minutes ago

Trump says Strait of Hormuz may reopen at the latest tomorrow, Iran negotiations enter second phase.

US President Donald Trump said that U.S.-Iran talks are advancing rapidly, with both sides discussing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which "could reopen by tomorrow at the latest." Trump noted that the first phase of the talks aims to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, while the second phase will focus on Iran's "denuclearization" issue. He stated that if anyone tries to charge fees in the Strait of Hormuz, "the U.S. will collect the fees," emphasizing that Iran will not be allowed to charge fees in the waterway. Trump also said this is Iran's "last chance," adding that the talks are being held at Iran's request, and relevant results could be announced today or tomorrow. Prior to this, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz have remained high, and markets are closely monitoring its impact on global energy supplies and oil price trends.

14 minutes ago

Michael Saylor: I have never sold any Bitcoin. MicroStrategy's BTC trading is part of the company's capital management activities.

Strategy founder Michael Saylor posted a statement clarifying that his earlier "Never Sell Your Bitcoin" stance was shared with other Bitcoin holders in his capacity as an individual investor. Saylor said he has never sold any Bitcoin, "not even a single satoshi". He emphasized that Strategy is a public company, not a personal wallet, and has publicly disclosed since 2020 that it may buy or sell BTC for capital management purposes. Saylor noted that Strategy and its investors’ long-term conviction in Bitcoin remains unchanged, adding that the company’s related operations are part of its corporate financial strategy, while his personal stance on holding Bitcoin stays consistent. Previously, the market had been monitoring whether Strategy would adjust its Bitcoin holding strategy; Saylor’s latest remarks aim to clearly distinguish between personal Bitcoin holding behavior and public company asset management decisions.

14 minutes ago

Head of Amazon Cloud Business: AI Business Has Enormous Potential Scale

Amazon (AMZN.O)’s cloud unit head said clients are shifting from using its services to train AI models to integrating these models into their own business processes, a trend driving surging demand for inference computing. Matt Garman, CEO of Amazon’s Cloud Computing Division, said on Monday: “We still see some companies using large training clusters, but as these models grow more popular and powerful, more firms are integrating this inference capability into their own workloads.” He noted that the potential of the AI business is “extremely huge,” adding that the company will continue to increase capital expenditure to meet growing demand. As the world’s largest provider of computing power and data rental services, Amazon said last week it projects capital expenditure will reach $220 billion in 2026, up from its prior forecast of $200 billion. The spending hike reflects rising prices of storage chips and other components required for data centers.

14 minutes ago

The US military stated that it will continue its maritime blockade of Iran, and has altered the routes of 44 merchant ships.

US Central Command stated local time on August 3 that the U.S. military remains strictly enforcing the maritime blockade against Iran. As of that day, the U.S. military has altered the routes of 44 commercial vessels, disabled two vessels, and boarded and inspected two others.

14 minutes ago

US officials said there are currently no plans to hold new negotiations with Iran.

According to U.S. network CBS, citing a U.S. official, despite Trump’s earlier announcement that negotiations with Iran would begin Monday afternoon (local time), no new talks are currently scheduled. Instead, ongoing discussions are underway between U.S. Middle East envoy Witkoff, Kushner, and the U.S. negotiating team and Iran via intermediaries.

14 minutes ago

Hyperliquid just made it significantly harder for centralized exchanges to claim they offer superior order tooling. The Layer 1 blockchain built for decentralized trading rolled out a sweeping upgrade to its Time-Weighted Average Price (TWAP) order system, adding trigger prices, min/max price boundaries, durations up to seven days, and dynamic suborder intervals.

What changed, and why traders should care Previously, Hyperliquid’s TWAP implementation was functional but rigid. Traders were stuck with fixed 30-second suborder intervals, a maximum slippage cap of 3% per suborder, and relatively high minimum order sizes.

Trigger prices now allow TWAP orders to activate only when the mark price reaches a specified level. You can set a TWAP to start executing only if Bitcoin hits $65K, rather than having it fire immediately upon submission.

Max and min price boundaries add another layer of protection. If you’re running a buy order and the price spikes above your maximum threshold, the order terminates automatically. Same logic applies in reverse for sells.

Advertisement

Duration has been extended to seven days. This went into effect on August 1, 2026, at 09:00 UTC.

Dynamic suborder intervals allow the system to calculate intervals based on the total order size and duration. The minimum interval remains 30 seconds for new orders, but the spacing can stretch longer depending on how the order is configured.

Minimum order size dropped to $100 notional, with individual suborders requiring just $10 notional.

The institutional angle Hyperliquid now supports over 300 perpetual and spot markets with sub-second finality, alongside advanced order types including both TWAP and Chase orders. The fully onchain nature of these orders means the execution logic lives on the blockchain itself, replacing trust with transparency rather than relying on a centralized exchange’s matching engine.

What this means for the competitive landscape The trigger price feature is a good example of Hyperliquid moving beyond standard CEX functionality. Many centralized exchanges offer basic TWAP functionality, but conditional activation based on mark price is less common. Pairing that with onchain transparency and self-custody creates a value proposition that’s genuinely difficult for centralized platforms to replicate.

The $100 minimum order size lowers the barrier to entry for TWAP orders beyond institutional participants. A retail trader running a seven-day TWAP on a $500 position, multiplied across thousands of users, produces a meaningful liquidity impact.

The risk, as always with onchain systems, is smart contract vulnerability. More complex order logic means more potential attack surface. That said, Hyperliquid’s track record of operating at scale with sub-second finality across hundreds of markets provides some reassurance that the infrastructure is battle-tested.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Ondo Finance officially launched its perps DEX trading platform less than a month ago. However, it is slowly cementing its place as a top perps DEX platform, even though its price is lagging.

Because of these factors, the native token, ONDO, commands a market cap of $1.87 billion even in a bearish market. Its daily perps DEX volume has been growing alongside its Open Interest (OI), suggesting it could soon compete with established platforms.

What’s fueling Ondo’s Perps volume and OI growth? Ondo’s perps volume has doubled from the launch volume recorded on July 7. The volume rose from $128 million to over $300 million, which is equivalent to more than a 2x increase.

As a result, the cumulative Ondo perps volume hit a new high of $5.996 billion three weeks after its launch.

On July 31, it was fourth among all perp DEXs in terms of the volume of tokenized equities traded, ahead of Lighter [LIT] and AsterDEX [ASTER].

Additionally, its OI hit a new peak level of $74.77 million. This was an indication that Ondo perps DEX was becoming traders’ preferred platform.

Source: DeFiLlama Tokenized equities, indices, and commodities fueled the sharp increase in perps volume. They included instruments like Nvidia, Tesla, oil, gold, and the S&P 500 with up to 20x leverage traded 24/7.

For instance, trading of tokenized US oil on Ondo increased by 59.3% over the past 30 days. More assets, like the iShares Systematic Bond ETF, were slowly being added on to the platform.

Source: Ondo Finance As a result, these additions may help the price of ONDO stabilize and move higher. Worth noting, its price remains in a bear market structure, just like the rest of crypto.

All of Ondo’s growth was happening on the backdrop of declining perps and DEX volume for the broader crypto market.

The month of July closed as another red month for on-chain activity. As per DefiLlama, both DEX volume and Perps volume hit new yearly lows, down over 60% from their peaks in October.

In October, most of the popular perps DEXs, like Aster and Lighter, joined Hyperliquid, which was already established.

Source: DeFiLlama As Ondo’s perps volume diverged from the trend in the broader crypto market, it posed a serious threat to Aster and Lighter if growth at this speed continues. Eventually, it could challenge Hyperliquid, which has Normalized Daily Volume of $10.74 billion.

Hyperliquid’s volume is almost 6x bigger than that of Aster and Lighter at $1.85 billion and $1.35 billion. Still, it calls for consistent trading on Ondo Finance’s perps product.

Final Summary Ondo’s daily perps volume exploded to $300 million per day, with cumulative volume reaching nearly $6 billion.  Ondo’s perps volume was growing while the whole crypto market was declining, suggesting that Ondo was slowly dominating the perps DEX volumes. 

Bob Diamond has a reputation for calling institutional shifts early. The former Barclays CEO and current head of Atlas Merchant Capital used a CNBC appearance on July 31, 2026, to make a pointed prediction: the CLARITY Act is coming, and Circle and Hyperliquid will be its biggest infrastructure beneficiaries.

That is not a casual observation from a casual observer. Diamond’s firm has existing investments in digital payment infrastructure, including exposure to Circle, the company behind the USDC stablecoin.

What the CLARITY Act actually does The bipartisan CLARITY Act, formally H.R. 3633, cleared the Senate Banking Committee with a 15-9 vote. Diamond put the odds of full passage by the end of 2026 at somewhere between 50% and 75%.

The act’s most consequential provision for markets is the regulatory framework it creates around stablecoin yields, telling issuers and platforms exactly what they can and cannot do with yield-bearing stablecoins.

Advertisement

Circle’s stock on the NYSE, trading under the ticker CRCL, already gave investors a preview of what the market thinks about this dynamic. Shares surged nearly 20% in early May 2026 following the announcement of CLARITY Act rule compromises.

The Hyperliquid angle is more interesting than it looks On August 1, 2026, Hyperliquid announced a partnership with Coinbase to integrate USDC as its canonical stablecoin, replacing the platform’s former native USDH.

As part of that deal, Circle staked 500,000 HYPE tokens on the Hyperliquid network. HYPE is the platform’s native token, trading around $52 with a circulating supply of approximately 220 to 252 million tokens as of early August 2026.

Diamond’s explicit mention of Hyperliquid alongside Circle on a mainstream financial television platform is notable for another reason. Hyperliquid has largely been a crypto-native story until now, well known inside the ecosystem and largely invisible outside it. Having a former Barclays CEO name-check it on CNBC changes the audience that is paying attention.

What this means for investors watching the regulatory cycle Circle sits at the center of the compliant infrastructure tier almost by definition. USDC is already the dominant stablecoin in institutional and DeFi settings where compliance matters, and a formal regulatory framework around stablecoin yields would give Circle a product expansion path that is currently legally uncertain.

Hyperliquid’s bet is that best-in-class trading performance plus regulatory-grade stablecoin rails equals a platform that institutional desks can actually use. The Coinbase partnership provides USDC’s compliance credibility. The HYPE token stake from Circle creates alignment between the two companies at the network level.

The risk here is timeline. Diamond’s 50-75% passage estimate by end of 2026 implies a real chance this bill does not make it through. There is also a competitive risk for Hyperliquid specifically: the on-chain perpetuals and spot trading space is crowded and moving fast, and USDC integration and a Circle alliance do not create a permanent moat on their own.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

TLDR Hyperliquid HIP-4 now lets testnet developers deploy standardized outcome markets after staking 100 HYPE, without auctions or gas charges. HYPE price slipped below $55 and tested the $52 to $54 support zone as lower highs, lower lows, and whale transfers increased selling concerns. Hyperliquid burned about 26,080 HYPE worth nearly $1.43 million in 24 hours while protocol fees reached approximately $1.47 million. The preliminary mainnet model still proposes a 500,000 HYPE stake, six-month lock, validator slashing, and approved templates for market creation. Hyperliquid HIP-4 has entered a new testnet phase, allowing developers to deploy outcome markets through approved templates. The rollout expands Hyperliquid’s prediction-market framework beyond validator-created contracts while keeping settlement rules standardized. Developers currently stake 100 HYPE to register as deployers and can launch markets without auctions or gas charges. 

The update arrives as HYPE price trades near $53.50 after losing the $55 level. Large token transfers to institutional trading platforms have also raised supply concerns. Meanwhile, Hyperliquid burned about 26,080 HYPE during the past day. Protocol fees reached roughly $1.47 million, supporting its continuing buyback-and-burn mechanism during the reported period.

Hyperliquid Price (HYPE/USD) Hyperliquid HIP-4 Expands Permissionless Testnet Markets Hyperliquid HIP-4 lets registered builders select validator-approved templates, then define an underlying asset, target level, and expiry. Each template fixes important wording, side names, and keywords. That structure reduces duplicate markets carrying slightly different language or settlement conditions.

The current testnet limits each deployer to 10 active outcomes and 50 deployments daily. Hyperliquid plans to add configurable fees and additional templates after developers test market creation and settlement. Its updated documentation now exposes outcome metadata through a testnet-only application programming interface.

Hyperliquid first introduced HIP-4 outcome contracts as fully collateralized products that settle within a fixed range. They do not use leverage or liquidations. Initial contracts focused on recurring binary outcomes tied to HyperCore mark prices.

The wider permissionless design follows a preliminary framework announced on July 20. Hyperliquid proposed a 500,000 HYPE stake for mainnet deployers, a six-month lock, and validator-controlled slashing. Validators could penalize poorly defined markets, incorrect settlements, or contracts left unsettled beyond one week. Those mainnet terms remain preliminary and differ from the lower testnet requirement.

HIP-4 activity remains small after sports-related contracts lost demand following the World Cup. Market data placed open interest near $182,000 and notional volume around $881,000. Permissionless creation could broaden listings toward economic data, elections, crypto prices, and other measurable events.

HYPE Price Holds $52 to $54 as Whale Transfers Increase Meanwhile, the HYPE price has formed lower highs and lower lows after retreating from the $60 region. The token traded near $53.50, placing the $52 to $54 support band under pressure. That area also matches a June swing low.

A four-hour close below $52 would weaken the current structure. A failed recovery above that level could expose $48 to $50. Further selling could return attention to the earlier $44 to $46 demand zone. However, a rebound above $58 to $60, followed by a higher low, would reduce immediate downside pressure.

Large transfers have complicated the short-term HYPE price setup. Lookonchain previously recorded institutional unstaking and exchange-related movements during July, including deposits to Coinbase Prime. The tracker also reported 1.96 million HYPE unstaked across three Multicoin Capital wallets. Multicoin later said wallet rotation, rather than selling, motivated at least part of its activity.

Separate wallet movements included HYPE deposits to FalconX and Coinbase Prime. Transfers to brokerage or custody platforms can support over-the-counter execution, asset rotation, or sales. Blockchain movements alone cannot confirm a disposal.

Hyperliquid’s fee system continues removing tokens from the circulating supply. A tracker read the protocol’s assistance-fund address on July 27. It showed about 46.05 million HYPE at the burn address. That balance represented roughly 4.6% of the original one-billion-token maximum supply.

The latest reported daily burn added about 26,080 HYPE, valued near $1.43 million at the recorded price. Protocol fees reached about $1.47 million during the same period. The burn reduces supply, while whale transfers increase the amount potentially available for institutional execution. Mainnet still lacks a confirmed launch date, leaving broader developer participation dependent on future testnet results and validator feedback.

Hyperliquid has traded within a descending channel since it faced rejection at $72 three weeks ago.

Over this period, all attempted rebounds have failed, reflecting sustained bearish pressure after every slight gain.

As of this writing, Hyperliquid traded around $54, up 0.65% on the daily chart. However, it remained down 7.3% weekly. The altcoin has continued to decline, largely driven by rising sell pressure from major investors.

Why are Hyperliquid whales selling? As Hyperliquid’s [HYPE] downtrend continued, some whales turned bearish and started selling.

According to Lookonchain, one whale returned to the market and unstaked its HYPE holdings. The whale unstaked 1.02 million HYPE, worth $57.6 million, and deposited it into FalconX and Coinbase Prime.

The investor purchased these tokens 17 months ago at an average price of $18.

Therefore, the position carried more than $39 million in unrealized profit before any confirmed sale.

Source: Arkham That was not all. The whale also unstaked 1.89 million HYPE, worth $105.9 million, from another wallet. The decision could reflect skepticism or asset reorganization. However, unstaking alone does not confirm an immediate sale.

The second tranche had not been deposited into any exchange at press time.

Even so, the whale activity captured the market’s attention and could spark fear among smaller traders.

Why are more investors unstaking? Notably, the whale was not an isolated case. Unstaking has become increasingly common among individual and institutional investors.

A week ago, AMBCrypto reported that 4.09 million HYPE, worth $241 million, was pending unstaking. Since then, that figure has more than doubled to 9.1 million HYPE, worth $496.6 million.

Source: Hyperscreener Additionally, Total Staked HYPE dropped from 438.7 million to 435.9 million. Rising pending unstakes and declining staked HYPE suggested that some long-term holders were reducing their exposure.

However, unstaking does not confirm that every holder intends to sell.

Could HYPE fall to $52? Investors were either selling unstaked HYPE or waiting after unstaking, adding uncertainty around future supply.

As a result, the Aroon Down line climbed to 92%, while the Aroon Up line declined to 28%. This setup indicated that HYPE formed lower lows more frequently than higher highs, reflecting strong downside pressure.

Source: TradingView The Relative Strength Index (RSI) also dropped deeper into bearish territory, reinforcing the weakness.

Together, both indicators suggested that the downtrend could continue. If selling pressure persists, Hyperliquid may drop toward the next support at $52.

Final Summary One whale deposited $57.6 million in HYPE into FalconX and Coinbase Prime. The same whale unstaked another $105.9 million, although those tokens had not reached exchanges.

Hyperliquid, a decentralized trading platform, has seen its native token HYPE undergo a notable market correction as traders monitor a significant support level for potential accumulation. The platform has recently surpassed Uniswap V3 in daily protocol fees, indicating a rise in adoption and reinforcing its growing influence in the decentralized finance sector.

HYPE price correction draws trader interestAt present, HYPE trades near $53.77, with a 24-hour trading volume of $370.43 million and a total market capitalization of $13.58 billion. The token dropped by 2.01% in the past day, continuing a decline from its recent high around $77. Nevertheless, both its structural price trend and increasing network activity have led some analysts to suggest a bullish reversal may be forming.

Analyst Crypto Patel noted that HYPE entered a sharp correction after climbing above $70, a range he had previously identified as risky for new buyers. With the latest decline, market participants are now watching the $53 price level and considering whether it could provide a foundation for longer-term growth.

Technical analysis currently highlights the 0.5-0.618 Fibonacci zone, with support between $40 and $34, as a likely area for accumulation. If HYPE maintains its price above this zone, the upward trend could continue, with the potential to revisit its all-time high and possibly move toward the $100 to $150 range.

Technical analysts point to the $40–$34 range as a strategic support zone, suggesting that sustained buying pressure here could pave the way for HYPE to challenge previous highs and explore new price territories.

Protocol fees surge as adoption growsHyperliquid has expanded its presence within decentralized finance, supported by data from MSB Intel. Over the past 24 hours, Hyperliquid Perps generated approximately $2.6 million in protocol fees, outpacing Uniswap V3, which recorded $2.5 million in the same period.

This milestone highlights the shifting landscape in decentralized trading, with an increasing number of users opting for platforms that offer high liquidity and active trading features. The achievement is regarded by some industry observers as an indication of Hyperliquid’s strengthening market position compared to longstanding competitors.

Mini dictionary: Hyperliquid, founded as a decentralized derivatives exchange, specializes in perpetual futures contracts, enabling users to trade with leverage and high liquidity across various crypto assets while maintaining full custody of their funds.

Platform24h Protocol FeesHyperliquid Perps$2.6 millionUniswap V3$2.5 millionOutlook for HYPE price and network momentumAlthough HYPE’s price trajectory remains downward, the broader cryptocurrency market is showing signs of improvement. A recovery in HYPE may depend on its ability to maintain current support levels, combined with continued protocol income and heightened user adoption.

If positive market trends persist, HYPE could aim to regain its previous peak and possibly advance further. The pattern of rising protocol fees and growing interest from traders suggests the platform is well positioned to expand its footprint in the sector.

Momentum in protocol revenue and increased user activity are seen as key contributors to future price appreciation, should market conditions remain stable.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

On-chain data flagged by Lookonchain shows two prominent institutional players moving significant amounts of Hyperliquid's native $HYPE token to Coinbase Prime within a 15-hour window, adding to a growing pattern of large exchange deposits from major holders.

Multicoin Capital deposited another 137,100 HYPE, worth approximately $7.51 million, into Coinbase Prime. Bitwise followed with a transfer of 22,463 HYPE, valued at roughly $1.23 million. The moves are the latest in a series of institutional transfers that have kept $HYPE under selling pressure in recent weeks.

A Pattern of Institutional OutflowsThe latest transfers are not isolated. Multicoin Capital unstaked a large HYPE position on July 22, 2026, with on-chain analysts tracking approximately 1.96 million HYPE worth $120 million leaving staking across three wallets associated with the firm. One labeled wallet sent 395,570 HYPE to Coinbase Prime as part of that earlier wave.

Bitwise has also been an active mover. Bitwise's BHYP Hyperliquid ETF transferred 39.31K HYPE tokens valued at roughly $2.13 million to Coinbase in one recent move, bringing cumulative outflows to 280.69K HYPE over recent weeks.

The optics are complicated by Multicoin's own published research. On June 25, barely a month before these deposits began, Multicoin published a valuation report projecting a base-case price of $319 for HYPE by 2028, implying over 400% upside from trading levels at the time.

Selling Signal or Portfolio Management?Large deposits to a centralized exchange are widely read as a precursor to selling, but analysts urge caution. The Coinbase Prime deposit is a stronger selling signal than unstaking alone, but it still falls short of proof. Coinbase markets Prime as a platform combining trading, financing, and qualified custody, meaning an institutional deposit can support execution or custody without revealing which function the client intends to use.

Large wallet movements to exchanges often precede sell-offs, but on-chain analysts have cautioned that a Coinbase deposit and an unstaking request alone are not definitive proof of an actual sale. The tokens could be moved for purposes such as collateral management, custody changes, or liquidity provisioning.

Despite the pressure, some firms remain constructive on $HYPE. Grayscale said that HYPE is undervalued at a 15x to 18x valuation multiple compared to Circle and Coinbase stocks, and that the token still looks cheap compared to fintech equities despite its gains this year.

Sources:
Memeburn: Multicoin Capital Unstakes $120M HYPE
Crypto Briefing: Institutions Sell HYPE as Multicoin Capital Deposits $8M into Coinbase Prime
AMBCrypto: Why Grayscale Thinks Hyperliquid's HYPE Is Still Cheap Despite Institutional Sell-Off

https://news.bitcoin.com/hyperliquid-explained-a-deep-dive-into-the-perp-dex-that-reshaped-crypto-in-2025/

Hyperliquid, a decentralized perpetuals exchange, has reported a significant shift in its dynamics, with real-world assets (RWAs) surpassing crypto transactions for the first time in a single week. According to a tweet by @laurashin, individual stocks accounted for 61% of the RWA volume. This transition is largely attributed to the platform’s HIP-3 mechanism, which governs tokenized stock-style markets. During the week of July 13 to 19, 2026, Hyperliquid’s RWA activity generated $25.1 billion out of a total $48.2 billion in weekly volume. This development reflects a broader trend in decentralized exchanges, where Hyperliquid captured a significant portion of the market.

Advertisement

Key Takeaways Hyperliquid’s shift towards RWAs appears consistent with increased interest in non-crypto assets, suggesting potential for growth in this sector. Market pricing for Hyperliquid’s price prediction for 2026 currently reflects a 19.5% probability of reaching $100 by the end of the year, suggesting some optimism despite recent declines. The exchange’s emphasis on individual stocks within its RWA offerings indicates strong participant interest in these assets, supportive of a diversified environment. What to Watch Observers should monitor Hyperliquid’s future announcements and partnerships, which could further influence market dynamics and pricing. Key developments, such as potential partnerships with Fortune 500 companies or increased institutional participation, may indicate support for a higher valuation. Conversely, any security breaches or regulatory challenges could negatively affect market sentiment. The coming months will likely provide further clarity on Hyperliquid’s strategic direction and its impact on the broader decentralized exchange landscape.

Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h December 31 19.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 6.2% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.9% — — View market → January 1 2027 41% — — View market → January 1 2027 8.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 3.1% — — View market →

Liquidity begets liquidity, so the saying goes.

Hyperliquid, as its name suggests, has become the decentralized exchange of choice for many traders, particularly those who want to trade perpetual futures or “perps,” blockchain-based derivatives contracts that allow users to speculate on the price of an asset with leverage and no expiration date.

Created by Harvard classmates Jeff Yan and a pseudonymous developer known as iliensinc, Hyperliquid, which went live at the start of 2023, is capitalizing on its volume and depth of order book by offering firms something akin to composibility: the concept from decentralized finance (DeFi), whereby permissionless smart contracts can slot together like money LEGOs, the building blocks of new tokenized financial products.

Hyperliquid’s Ethereum-compatible HyperEVM connects directly to its super-fast homegrown HyperCore blockchain, allowing other applications to compose atop the platform’s shared liquidity rather than fragmenting it. In other words, applications like wallets or even other exchanges can piggyback on Hyperliquid, using it as a backend to offer perps trading and other services.

As more builders deploy on and integrate Hyperliquid, liquidity deepens, the variety of assets expands, and network effects compound. There are now hundreds of developers — including big names like MetaMask, Phantom wallet and South African exchange VALR — using Hyperliquid’s system of “builder codes.” Builders have generated some $90 million in revenue so far, according to Flowscan.

A growing army of acolytes can’t praise the platform enough.

“Hyperliquid is not just a perpetuals exchange, it’s more like the AWS for finance,” said Hansu Jian, CEO of Hyperion DeFi, the first U.S.-listed treasury company focused on Hyperliquid’s native token HYPE.

“The perps part is great, but this is really a layer-one blockchain infrastructure. The service on offer is actually liquidity, and having all these markets work well, and allowing anyone to build things on top of them,” Jian said in an interview.

Similar to AWS for cloud infrastructure, builders own their users and fully control the user interface, while Hyperliquid provides the underlying liquidity and execution. Builder code integrators charge fees on the notional size of their users’ trades without developing the backend or maintaining liquidity.

“Builder codes let integrators focus on what they do best, delivering a great user experience, while Hyperliquid serves as the backend for liquidity and execution,” said Sterling Barnett, business development lead at Hyperliquid Labs, via email. “Integrators can offer their users best-in-class onchain liquidity and institutional-grade infrastructure, and earn fees on every trade.”

For an app like MetaMask, the Ethereum-based wallet that reports over 100 million users worldwide, it makes perfect sense to fuse with Hyperliquid’s EVM module. MetaMask has given its users self-custodial access to perps directly from the wallet since October of 2025.

Being a wallet has the advantage that there’s no decentralized app (dApp) to connect to, while fund transfers are streamlined to the point where users can trade directly with the tokens they already hold, said Matthieu Saint Olive, Staff Product Manager at MetaMask. It plugs into MetaMask’s money account, social login, and follow trading and leaves Hyperliquid to handle matching, the oracle, and the margin engine, he said.

“Matching orders is genuinely hard, and Hyperliquid is excellent at it, so we don’t try to rebuild it,” said Saint Olive via email. “By routing orders straight to the Hyperliquid order book, MetaMask Perps offers some of the best liquidity and execution quality available anywhere. ”

MetaMask said it’s seeing growth beyond crypto towards things like commodities and equities, according to Saint Olive. “Real-world-asset markets have gone from a small slice of perp volume at the start of 2026 to roughly a quarter of it today,” he said.

When it comes to fees, MetaMask charges a flat 0.1% builder fee, disclosed up front, with no hidden spread and nothing buried in execution, so a trader can verify exactly what they paid. “We think that transparency is the real advantage, and we’re actively exploring more innovative pricing models, because we want the economics to be a reason people choose MetaMask, not a source of friction,” Saint Olive added.

It’s more surprising to find a large centralized exchange handing over liquidity requirements to Hyperliquid’s perps order book. But taking the Hyperliquid route has proved a good option for South Africa-based exchange VALR, ranked among the largest exchanges in Africa with close to two million retail customers and about 2,000 corporate institutional customers, according to the exchange’s CEO and co-founder, Farzam Ehsani.

Having started out offering customers spot market, spot margin, and then perpetuals, the team at VALR built all the infrastructure in-house, including risk and liquidation engines, Ehsani said. Despite all the hard work that went into launching perpetual futures, Ehsani said candidly that it was difficult to get volume and liquidity.

“So perpetual futures on our own books didn't take off as we had hoped they would, predominantly because of the liquidity and volume,” Ehsani said in an interview. “Our volume is our volume; we are truthful and transparent and don’t do any wash trading or anything like that. We saw Hyperliquid bringing a huge amount of volume and market participants from all over the world together and thought, ‘Why don't we plug into that?’”

Looking ahead, when the likes of Robinhood, Coinbase, Intercontinental Exchange and others go full throttle into offering perps, there will be opportunities for cross-venue arbitrage, according to Jian of Hyperion.

“Say you are maintaining one position on Robinhood, for example, and the other side of the position on Hyperliquid,” Jian said. “Then, because you have a lot of what's called non-toxic flow, which is when more retail users are just purely entering and exiting the market, you'll be able to see more organic mechanisms for funding rates.”

https://www.dlnews.com/articles/markets/hyperliquid-protocol-cranks-up-the-risk-with-1000x-leverage/

Hyperliquid, a decentralized perpetual futures exchange operating on its own Layer-1 blockchain, is reportedly preparing for a significant shift in its volume towards real-world assets (RWAs). According to a recent statement on social media, there is a strong possibility that by 2027, 75% of Hyperliquid’s activity could be dominated by RWAs, including commodities, indices, and single stocks. This comes as the platform has already seen RWAs account for 52% of its volume during the week of July 13-19, 2026. The transition indicates a growing focus on diversifying asset classes beyond traditional cryptocurrencies.

The current market odds for Hyperliquid’s price trajectory reflect a cautious yet optimistic outlook. For instance, the market question “Will Hyperliquid reach $100 by December 31, 2026?” shows a 20.5% probability of a YES outcome. This figure has seen a slight decline from 29% a week ago, suggesting tempered enthusiasm among market participants despite the exchange’s evolving focus. Additionally, Hyperliquid’s expansion into RWAs has been accompanied by a notable increase in open interest, hitting record highs this year and strengthening its market presence.

Advertisement

Market observers appear to be weighing the potential impact of this strategic pivot on Hyperliquid’s price forecasts. The platform’s growing emphasis on RWAs could enhance its market perception and volume, possibly influencing future price movements.

Key Takeaways The shift towards RWAs on Hyperliquid appears to be gaining momentum, with projections indicating a possible 75% volume share within a year. Market pricing suggests a cautious outlook for Hyperliquid’s price reaching $100 by the end of 2026, currently at 20.5% YES probability. The expansion into RWAs is consistent with increased open interest and diversification, potentially impacting Hyperliquid’s market valuation. What to Watch Market participants will be closely monitoring Hyperliquid’s ability to sustain and grow its RWA segment, which could influence its price outlook into 2027. Key developments such as partnerships with major financial institutions or technological innovations could align with scenarios where Hyperliquid reaches higher price targets. Conversely, any setbacks like regulatory challenges or security issues could affect its competitive position. As the year progresses, the interplay between these factors will be critical in shaping market expectations.

Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h December 31 20.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 6.4% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 42.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 8.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 4% — — View market →

A venue clearing more than $200 billion a month, holding roughly 70% of on-chain perpetuals volume, is secured by 27 validators. Its foundation ran every one of them at launch. Both the critics and the defenders are working from stale numbers, so here is the audit: what the set looks like now, which powers actually exist, and where the honest gap remains.

Summary

Hyperliquid’s validator set has grown from 4 at launch to 16, then 21, 24, and 27 as of June, with registration permissionless and the largest stakes forming the active set. The decisive number moved this year: foundation-run validators now hold about 49.3% of staked HYPE, with the remaining 50.7% spread across 22 other operators, down from a reported 81% concentration in early 2025. The loudest criticism, that the foundation can jail validators at will, does not match the documentation, which describes jailing as peer-triggered for latency and reliability failures, with no automatic slashing anywhere in the system. The genuine gap is scale, not malice: 27 validators against roughly 1,800 on Solana and hundreds of thousands on Ethereum, securing a venue whose monthly volume exceeds $200 billion, with node software still closed and a delegation program that applies identity checks to participants. Singapore’s regulator added Hyperliquid to its Investor Alert List in June, which converts the decentralization argument from a philosophical debate into a question with legal consequences. The most valuable thing about a decentralization argument is usually the data it forces into the open, and the Hyperliquid version has been running on stale data for eighteen months. In January 2025 a node operator published a letter noting that five foundation validators controlled more than 81% of staked HYPE across a set of sixteen, and that number entered the discourse and never left it. In June 2026, a prominent investor declared the network not permissionless at all, citing validators concentrated in a single building, node software that remains closed, and a foundation that can jail operators and force upgrades on them. Both interventions were treated as verdicts. Neither reflected the current state of the network, which had by then expanded to 27 validators with foundation-run nodes holding slightly less than half the stake, and neither engaged with what the protocol’s own documentation says about the powers in dispute. Meanwhile the thing being argued over kept growing: a venue processing more than $200 billion a month, holding roughly 70% of decentralized perpetuals volume, generating on the order of a billion dollars a year in fees, with an order book, a matching engine, and a liquidation system all running on those 27 machines. This piece is the audit both sides have been arguing without: the set as it stands, the powers as documented, the precedent where those powers actually fired, and the gap that survives every correction.

The set, counted Start with the trajectory, because the direction is the part the standing critique omits.

Hyperliquid launched with a handful of validators, all run by the foundation, in what amounted to a permissioned network wearing a public ticker. The set expanded to 16 in January 2025, the moment that produced the original decentralization letter and the 81% concentration figure. In April 2025 the foundation restructured registration itself: the set moved to 21 nodes, with registration open to anyone and the 21 largest by stake forming the active set, which converted validator status from an appointment into an auction. Growth continued through 24 to 27 as of June 2026, with a stake threshold to enter that has run above a million HYPE, a number that itself functions as the network’s real admission price.

The concentration figure moved with it. Following a round of redelegations from foundation validators in June, foundation-run nodes hold approximately 49.3% of staked HYPE, with about 50.7% distributed across 22 independent operators. The foundation runs five validators of the 27. That is a materially different network from the one described by the 81% figure still circulating in criticism, and any honest audit has to lead with the improvement before cataloguing what remains.

The mechanics underneath are worth stating precisely, because they define who can participate. Consensus is delegated proof of stake: validators require a minimum self-delegation of 10,000 HYPE locked for a year, delegators face a one-day lock and a seven-day unstaking queue, and rewards accrue continuously with automatic recompounding. There is no automatic slashing anywhere in the system, which is unusual and cuts both ways: no operator loses stake for a mistake, and no operator loses stake for misbehavior either, leaving the unstaking queue and social consequences as the enforcement layer. Governance runs on delegated stake weight, with validators declaring positions and outcomes determined by the tokens behind them, not by validator headcount, which means the concentration number is the governance number, not a trivium.

The three powers, examined Now the specific allegations, taken one at a time against the documentation, because two of the three survive and one does not.

Jailing. The claim that has traveled furthest is that the foundation can jail a validator for any reason and remove it from the active set. The protocol documentation describes something different: validators can be jailed through peer voting for latency and reliability failures, and a jailed validator stops producing rewards for its delegators until unjailed, with no slashing attached. Peer-triggered removal for performance is standard practice across proof-of-stake networks and is not foundation discretion. The residual concern is real but narrower than the accusation: when foundation-affiliated nodes hold close to half the stake, peer voting weighted by that stake is not fully independent of the foundation, so the mechanism is only as neutral as the distribution underneath it. That is an argument about concentration, which is the argument this piece keeps returning to, and not an argument about arbitrary power.

Forced upgrades. The claim that validators must adopt protocol upgrades is essentially accurate and largely unremarkable. Every chain running a single client implementation faces the same reality: nodes that decline an upgrade fall out of consensus, which is a coordination fact, not a governance power. What makes it sharper here is the single-binary architecture. Hyperliquid runs one implementation, which the foundation has defended by pointing out that Solana operated the same way for years. The defense is honest and incomplete: single-client networks concentrate the risk that a bug or a decision in one codebase becomes the whole network’s bug or decision, which is precisely why Ethereum’s client diversity is treated as a security property instead of an inefficiency.

Closed source. This one stands, and it is the most consequential of the three. The node software has remained closed, with the foundation’s position since early 2025 being that the code will open when it is stable, citing development speed and security. Eighteen months and considerable growth later, the promise is still outstanding, and it is the crux of the June criticism: a validator running a binary it cannot read is trusting the author in a way that no amount of stake distribution fixes. Users can verify state on-chain, but nobody outside the team can independently verify what the software does before it produces that state. For a venue clearing $200 billion a month, that is the single widest gap between what the network claims and what an outsider can check.

The precedent: when the powers fired Governance arguments stay abstract until an incident makes them concrete, and Hyperliquid’s arrived in March 2025 with a memecoin called JELLY.

A trader opened a large position and manipulated the thin spot market underneath it, engineering losses that landed on the protocol’s liquidity vault, the pool that absorbs liquidated positions on behalf of depositors. With the vault facing an eight-figure hit, validators voted to delist the market and settle it at a price favorable to the protocol, and the loss was contained. The intervention worked, users were protected, and the affair was over within hours.

JUST IN: CZ calls Hyperliquid’s invention awesome for filling a Binance gap. He highlights their no-KYC model while questioning decentralization claims pic.twitter.com/WYQdYOM2H7

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) June 18, 2026 It also answered the governance question empirically. A market that traded on a network can be closed by a stake-weighted vote when the network’s own capital is at risk, and the vote at that time ran through a validator set in which the foundation held a decisive share, which is why the episode was described in the trade press as a validator put: an implicit guarantee that the house will intervene when the house is losing. Two readings follow, and both are defensible. The generous one is that any exchange, decentralized or otherwise, must be able to halt manipulation, and a venue that let a vault be drained by an obvious attack would deserve the criticism it received instead. The unforgiving one is that decentralization is only tested at the moment intervention becomes attractive, and Hyperliquid intervened. What the incident settles is not whether the network is good or bad but what it is: a venue with a functioning emergency brake and a small number of hands on it. Traders should price that accordingly, in both directions, since the same brake that protected vault depositors in March 2025 is the brake that could close a market a trader is winning in.

The comparison that survives every correction Strip out the stale numbers and the overstated claims, and one gap remains that no redelegation fixes: the set is very small relative to what it secures.

Twenty-seven validators sits against roughly 1,800 on Solana, several hundred on Cosmos Hub, and hundreds of thousands on Ethereum. The technical counterargument is legitimate and worth stating properly: Byzantine fault tolerant consensus does not require thousands of participants for safety, it requires an honest supermajority within whatever set exists, and a small high-performance set is exactly how the network achieves the sub-second finality that makes an on-chain order book viable at all. Hyperliquid’s entire product advantage, matching and finality fast enough to compete with centralized venues, is purchased with validator-set size. That is a deliberate trade, not an oversight.

The question is whether the price is right at this scale, and the arithmetic is uncomfortable. A set of 27 secures a venue processing over $200 billion monthly, with open interest, vault deposits, and now equity-linked and other builder-deployed markets on top. The attack surface that matters is not cryptographic but social and regulatory: 27 operators are 27 phone calls, 27 jurisdictions to subpoena, 27 relationships to pressure, and the foundation’s near-half stake means a much smaller number of conversations would decide most outcomes. The delegation program that expands the set applies identity checks to participants, which improves accountability and simultaneously means the expansion is curated, not open, in practice. Each of those facts is defensible on its own terms. Together they describe a network whose decentralization is best characterized as a managed trajectory: real, measurable, improving, and still a long way from the property its marketing language implies.

The regulator arrives Which is where the argument stopped being philosophical. On June 26, Singapore’s Monetary Authority added Hyperliquid to its Investor Alert List, the register of entities that consumers might wrongly believe are licensed. The listing is not a ban, not an enforcement action, and not a finding of wrongdoing, and Hyperliquid’s response was accurate on every point: it has never claimed authorization from the regulator, nothing about the network changed, users retain self-custody, and settlement remains on-chain. Bybit had joined the same list nine days earlier, KuCoin in February, Binance since 2021, which places Hyperliquid in familiar company and suggests a regulator working through a list instead of singling out a protocol.

The significance is what the listing does to the vocabulary. Permissionless has been a technical description inside crypto and is becoming a legal position outside it, because a protocol claiming to be infrastructure rather than an operator is making an argument about who, if anyone, is responsible for the venue. The critique that landed the same day, that a network with closed-source software, a curated validator set, and foundation-weighted governance does not meet the description, is therefore not merely a purity argument. It is a claim that the legal position rests on facts the network has not fully proven, and regulators reading the same debate will reach their own conclusions about which entity, if any, is running the exchange. That is the real stake of the governance question in 2026, and it is why the numbers in this piece matter beyond ideology: the distance between 49.3% and something much smaller, and between closed source and open, is also the distance between a plausible infrastructure claim and a contestable one.

The listing power, and the money behind it One dimension of the governance question sits outside the validator debate entirely, and for traders it may be the more consequential one: who decides what trades here.

The network’s newer listing machinery, the builder-deployed markets that opened perpetuals creation beyond the core team and produced the equity-linked contracts this publication audited separately, is gated by stake rather than by approval. Deploying a perpetual market requires staking a large HYPE position for a minimum period, and builder deployments on the EVM side run through a periodic auction for slots. Read one way, that is the most genuinely permissionless part of the system: no committee decides which markets exist, only capital does, which is why the venue could list synthetic equity exposure faster than any regulated exchange could convene a meeting about it. Read another way, it replaces gatekeeping with a wealth qualification, and it means the venue’s expanding product surface, including markets that touch regulated asset classes, is determined by whoever can post the stake.

The economics tie the two halves of the governance question together. Trading fees flow into the token’s buyback machinery, which this publication has covered as crypto’s clearest example of a network routing real revenue to its asset, and staked HYPE is simultaneously the security bond, the governance weight, and the listing key. That triple duty is elegant design and a concentration mechanism at once: the same token that secures the chain decides its rules and controls what it lists, so any accumulation of HYPE is an accumulation of all three powers together. On a chain where roughly half the stake already sits with one affiliated group, and where an entry ticket to the validator set runs above a million tokens, the practical question is not whether the system is permissionless in principle but how much capital it takes to matter, and the answer has been rising with the token.

That is the frame worth carrying out of this audit. Hyperliquid’s governance is not a story about a foundation refusing to let go; the trajectory shows the opposite, steadily and measurably. It is a story about a design in which influence tracks capital with unusual directness, on a venue whose scale now exceeds most regulated exchanges, with the software still unreadable from outside. Whether that is acceptable is a judgment each user makes. What it is, precisely, is now on the record.

What to watch The stake distribution, not the validator count. Headcount is the easy number to grow and the least informative. Whether foundation-run stake continues falling below 49.3%, and whether any single independent operator accumulates a blocking position, is the measure that determines who actually decides outcomes.

The open-source commitment. The promise to publish node software has been outstanding since early 2025 and is the single change that would most alter the audit. Its continued absence is itself information, and the longer it runs, the weaker the stability rationale becomes.

The next intervention. JELLY showed that the network will act to protect its vault. The next comparable event, and whether the decision runs through a stake distribution that no longer has a foundation majority behind it, is the test of whether governance changed or only its arithmetic did.

Regulatory follow-through. The Singapore listing has no operational effect today. Whether other jurisdictions follow, and whether any of them treats the foundation as the operator of an unlicensed exchange, is the scenario in which every fact in this audit stops being a debating point and becomes evidence.

Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Validator counts, stake distributions, and protocol parameters change continuously, and figures reflect data reported at the time of writing. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, hold, or trade any asset or on any venue. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 26, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions How many validators does Hyperliquid have? Twenty-seven as of June 2026, up from four or five at launch, then 16 at the start of 2025, 21 in April 2025, and 24 later that year. Registration is open to anyone, with the largest stakes forming the active set, and entry has required a stake above roughly one million HYPE. Validators must self-delegate a minimum of 10,000 HYPE locked for one year.

Who controls the stake? Foundation-run validators hold approximately 49.3% of staked HYPE following redelegations in June, with about 50.7% spread across 22 independent operators. The foundation operates five of the 27 validators. This is a substantial change from early 2025, when a widely cited analysis put foundation-controlled stake above 81% across a set of 16.

Can the foundation remove validators at will? Not according to the documentation. Jailing is described as peer-triggered for latency and reliability failures, with a jailed validator ceasing to earn rewards until unjailed, and there is no automatic slashing in the system. The legitimate concern is indirect: because peer voting is weighted by stake and foundation-affiliated nodes hold close to half of it, the mechanism’s independence is limited by the same concentration issue that affects governance generally.

Is Hyperliquid’s code open source? The node software has remained closed, with the foundation stating since early 2025 that it will open the code once development is stable, citing security and shipping speed. That commitment is still outstanding, and it is the most substantive of the standing criticisms: validators run a binary they cannot audit, and no distribution of stake compensates for that.

What was the JELLY incident? In March 2025 a trader manipulated a thinly traded memecoin market to push losses onto the protocol’s liquidity vault. Validators voted to delist the market and settle it at a price that protected the vault, containing an eight-figure loss. The intervention worked and was also read as evidence of a validator put, meaning the network will act when its own capital is at risk, through a stake distribution the foundation then dominated.

How does the validator count compare to other chains? It is far smaller: roughly 1,800 validators on Solana, several hundred on Cosmos Hub, and hundreds of thousands on Ethereum, against 27 on Hyperliquid. Byzantine fault tolerant consensus does not require large sets for safety, and the small set is what delivers the sub-second finality an on-chain order book needs, but it concentrates social, regulatory, and coordination risk for a venue processing over $200 billion a month.

What did the Singapore listing mean? The Monetary Authority of Singapore added Hyperliquid to its Investor Alert List on June 26, a register of entities consumers may wrongly believe are licensed. It is not a ban or an enforcement action, and Bybit, KuCoin, and Binance appear on the same list. Its importance is that it moves the permissionless question from a technical debate into a legal one, since the claim to be infrastructure rather than an operator depends on the governance facts being what the protocol says they are.

What should traders take from this? That the network has a functioning emergency brake with a small number of hands on it, and that this is a property to price, not a scandal to condemn. Decentralization here is a managed trajectory: measurably improving on stake distribution, unresolved on source code, and small relative to the value at risk. Position sizing on any venue should reflect the governance reality, not the marketing vocabulary. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Perpetual decentralized exchange (DEX) Hyperliquid’s weekly trading volume in tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) exceeded that of all other asset categories combined for the first time.

RWAs generated $25.1 billion in trading volume from July 13 to July 19, accounting for 52% of Hyperliquid’s total weekly volume of $48.2 billion, according to Blockworks data.

“Hyperliquid’s RWA market alone was larger than the combined crypto perpetual volume of every other DEX,” wrote ARK Invest’s research director for digital assets, Lorenzo Valente, in a Thursday X post.

The milestone reflects growing demand for tokenized assets on Hyperliquid. Over the past month, RWA holders grew by 32% to 1.25 million users, while the total value of tokenized RWAs rose by 3.5% to $36.7 billion, according to data aggregator RWA.xyz.

Hyperliquid generated $7.6 million in revenue over the past week, according to DefiLlama. The perp DEX ranked third among crypto applications by weekly revenue, behind stablecoin issuers Tether and Circle, which generated $112 million and $45 million, respectively.

Hyperliquid: Perpetual Futures Volume, 2-year chart. Source: Blockworks

Major “structural shift” for crypto markets: Circle co-founderCrypto-native firms and traditional financial institutions have expanded tokenized asset offerings as they bring more financial assets onto blockchain networks. In March, the NYSE partnered with tokenization platform Securitize to develop blockchain-based stock trading infrastructure with 24/7 trading and settlement.

Circle co-founder and CEO Jeremy Allaire said growing RWA trading on Hyperliquid marks a “major structural shift” in crypto markets, moving “away from speculating on endogenous digital commodities,” in a Friday X post.

Earlier in July, Pantera Capital said perpetual futures could become a dominant trading instrument beyond crypto, as perps offer structural advantages over traditional derivatives, including 24/7 trading, no contract expiries, simpler position management and continuous price discovery.

Hyperliquid’s growth has drawn attention from Wall Street institutions, including NYSE parent Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), whose CEO, Jeffrey Sprecher, urged regulators to create a “level playing field” for launching 24/7 onchain perpetual futures contracts.

Magazine: How Hong Kong is turning tokenized bonds into real market infrastructure

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

A crypto whale has staked 2.93 million $HYPE tokens worth approximately $172 million in a single 24-hour window, according to on-chain analytics firm Lookonchain. The deposits were spread across 19 separate wallets, which analysts believe are controlled by the same holder.

The position was originally accumulated around nine months ago, leaving the whale sitting on an unrealized profit of roughly $44.5 million at current prices.

Why Staking $HYPE Matters The move is notable not just for its size but for what staking actually entails. Hyperliquid uses a delegated proof-of-stake consensus mechanism called HyperBFT, where validators must stake HYPE to participate in consensus and users can delegate their tokens to validators to earn staking rewards while helping secure the network. Stakers earn rewards following a dynamic formula inversely proportional to the square root of total HYPE staked, with rewards accruing every minute and distributed daily with automatic recompounding.

From a supply perspective, the decision to stake rather than sell carries a clear market signal. Staking removes tokens from liquid supply, tightening float, and ties validator economics to the token's price rather than fee revenue alone.

A Pattern of Large-Scale Accumulation This is not an isolated event. On-chain data has shown a consistent pattern of large holders locking up significant positions in recent months. Lookonchain data from June showed that three newly created wallets withdrew a combined 557,406 HYPE from Kraken and staked the tokens, a holding worth about $40.2 million at the time. Separately, Bitwise staked 1.775 million HYPE worth roughly $114 million on Hyperliquid, as reported by Lookonchain, through its Bitwise Hyperliquid ETF, which launched on NYSE Arca in May 2026.

The tokenomics reinforcing these decisions are also notable. Up to 97% of all trading fees generated on the platform are used to buy HYPE from the open market, creating persistent demand pressure that scales with trading volume. HYPE has a fixed maximum supply of 1 billion tokens, and the supply can only decrease over time through burns.

The whale's decision to stake rather than liquidate a position carrying tens of millions in unrealized gains suggests a longer-term conviction on the protocol's trajectory, even as other large holders, including Multicoin Capital, have recently moved to reduce their exposure.

Sources:
Bloomingbit: Hyperliquid Whale Buying Continues as $60 Million in Exchange Withdrawals Emerges
Hyperdash: HYPE Token Tokenomics, Staking and Buybacks
Bitcoin.com: Bitwise Stakes $114 Million in HYPE on Hyperliquid

Fasanara Capital, an institutional asset manager overseeing roughly $5.7 billion in assets, is sitting on a sizable short position against Ethereum through the decentralized perpetuals platform Hyperliquid. The firm’s trading account, identified on-chain as BobbyBigSize, is part of a combined $108 million ETH short between Fasanara and fellow institutional player Abraxas Capital.

Both positions are currently underwater, with ETH trading around $1,920.

What the on-chain data shows Nansen’s on-chain tracking has linked BobbyBigSize’s activity directly to Fasanara Capital’s trading operations. The account has been consistently building high-leverage short positions across various crypto assets, with ETH being the primary target.

Advertisement

Fasanara’s share of the combined short sits at approximately $67 million, while Abraxas Capital accounts for the remainder. Abraxas recently deposited $3 million USDC into Hyperliquid to expand its shorting exposure across both ETH and Bitcoin.

Fasanara Digital, the firm’s crypto-focused arm, launched in 2018 and has built a digital asset platform managing around $500 million. The firm is known for quantitative trading approaches, which suggests these shorts may be part of a broader, hedged strategy rather than a pure directional bet.

Abraxas Capital is known for delta-neutral and arbitrage strategies, meaning they typically try to profit from price discrepancies between venues rather than simply betting on direction. Their short position could be offset by long exposure elsewhere.

Why Hyperliquid matters here Hyperliquid is a decentralized perpetuals exchange with on-chain settlement, meaning every trade is visible and verifiable. That’s how analysts were able to track BobbyBigSize’s positions in the first place.

Previous notable ETH shorts on the platform have exceeded $100 million at leverage ratios as high as 23x.

What this means for ETH investors The fact that both positions are underwater adds a consequential dynamic. If ETH continues to hold above $1,920 or moves higher, the pressure to unwind these shorts could create a short squeeze dynamic, where forced buying to close losing short positions would push prices up further. Conversely, if ETH breaks below current support levels, the $108 million combined short becomes a meaningful overhang that could accelerate any downward move.

Traders should watch whether BobbyBigSize reduces or increases its position in the coming days. On-chain transparency means positions are visible in real time. If Fasanara starts closing its short, that signals the thesis may be shifting. If it adds more, the firm clearly sees further downside ahead despite the current losses.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan said Hyperliquid and Robinhood could emerge as leading beneficiaries of the next crypto bull market as traditional financial markets increasingly adopt blockchain infrastructure.

In a Tuesday market memo, Hougan argued that the next crypto cycle will be driven by the convergence of traditional and onchain finance, including stablecoins, tokenized assets, round the clock trading, instant settlement, and institutional decentralized finance.

Hougan said the shift could produce a larger cycle than previous crypto rallies because it would be supported by financial activity and revenue rather than primarily speculative demand.

He identified two categories that could benefit from the transition. The first includes crypto native financial applications that generate substantial revenue and connect token value to platform usage. The second consists of established financial companies deploying products directly on blockchain networks.

Hougan placed Hyperliquid in the first category. The Layer 1 network initially gained traction through its decentralized perpetual futures exchange but has expanded into markets linked to traditional assets such as commodities and equity indexes.

Advertisement

According to Hougan, Hyperliquid surpassed $1 billion in cumulative revenue in June and is on track to generate about $800 million this year. He said the protocol directs 99% of its revenue toward purchasing HYPE tokens on the open market.

Hougan argued that the model addresses a recurring issue across crypto markets, where applications generate trading volume and fees without creating corresponding demand for their native tokens. He also pointed to Uniswap, Aave, and Morpho as protocols moving toward stronger connections between platform activity and token value.

Robinhood represents the second category by approaching the transition from the traditional finance side.

The brokerage launched the public mainnet of Robinhood Chain on July 1. The Layer 2 network was built using Arbitrum technology and is designed to support financial services and tokenized real world assets.

Robinhood also introduced stock tokens through its self custody wallet in more than 120 countries, subject to local restrictions. Eligible users can trade the products around the clock and interact with decentralized applications including Uniswap and Lighter.

The products are tokenized debt securities that provide economic exposure to underlying stocks but do not give holders legal or beneficial ownership rights in the shares. They are not available to users in the United States.

Hougan said Robinhood Chain attracted more than $300 million in deposits and processed 3.6 million daily transactions within two weeks of its launch. He argued that its early activity could pressure competing financial institutions to move beyond limited blockchain pilots and launch products at a similar scale.

Beyond Hyperliquid and Robinhood, Hougan identified Coinbase, Figure, BlackRock, Visa, Stripe, and JPMorgan as companies with meaningful exposure to the transition toward blockchain based financial infrastructure.

Bitcoin has risen 9% since July 1 while the Nasdaq 100 has fallen 6%, according to Hougan. He said improving exchange traded fund flows and market sentiment may indicate that crypto is forming a bottom, though he cautioned that it remains too early to confirm a broader recovery.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

TLDR: RWA perpetuals now represent nearly 35% of on-chain perpetual trading, with June volume reaching about $118 billion across 652 markets. Public equities control 46% of RWA open interest, supported by roughly $2 billion in positions, $2.2 billion in daily volume and 411 markets. Hyperliquid HIP-3, Solana and exchange-based tokenized stock products are widening round-the-clock access to equities, indices and commodities. Oracle failures, weekend pricing gaps, concentrated liquidity and uneven investor rights create new risks as leveraged RWA markets expand. RWA perpetuals now account for nearly 35% of total on-chain perpetual trading volume in early Q3 2026. Their share stood at only 0.16% in Q4 2025, showing how quickly traditional-market exposure has moved onto crypto rails.

June volume reached about $118 billion, while the number of available markets expanded to 652. Other market trackers also recorded more than $100 billion in June volume and over 600 listed contracts.

Public equities lead the expansion as traders seek leveraged, round-the-clock access to familiar companies without using traditional brokerage hours.

RWA Perpetuals Shift Demand Toward Public Equities Public equities now represent 46% of RWA perpetuals open interest. The segment holds roughly $2 billion in outstanding positions and generated about $2.2 billion in 24-hour volume.

Source: Cryptorank It also supports 411 active markets, compared with 54 precious-metals markets and 41 equity-index markets.

That concentration shows traders prefer listed companies over less liquid real-world assets. Equity contracts offer clear price references, frequent news events, and deep underlying markets.

Earnings, guidance, and macro data can quickly create trading opportunities. Stock perps also remain active when traditional exchanges close.

These contracts provide synthetic price exposure rather than direct share ownership. Traders can open long or short positions, often using USDC collateral, but receive no voting rights or dividends.

Funding rates and oracle prices keep each contract linked to its underlying stock. A Micron contract on TradeXYZ, for example, trades continuously through Hyperliquid infrastructure.

Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 framework has accelerated this shift by allowing qualified builders to deploy custom perpetual markets. The protocol requires deployers to stake 500,000 HYPE, creating an economic backstop for market operators.

HIP-3 markets cover equities, indices, commodities, and pre-IPO references.

The broader tokenized-equities market is also expanding across Solana, Kraken, Bybit and Robinhood-linked infrastructure. Solana accounted for 97% of cumulative tokenized-equity spot volume in May.

Kraken separately expanded xStocks to 100 backed US stocks and ETFs, widening access outside standard market hours.

RWA Perpetuals Growth Exposes New Risks Across Platforms The rapid rise of RWA perpetuals introduces risks that differ from crypto-native contracts. Equity markets close overnight and on weekends, while on-chain perps continue trading.

Platforms must manage price gaps, funding changes and thin liquidity when primary exchanges are inactive.

Oracle dependence creates another weak point. RWA contracts rely on external feeds for stock, index and commodity prices.

Ostium halted trading after an attacker manipulated its price-reporting infrastructure and drained about $18 million in USDC during July. The incident showed how a compromised oracle component can turn false prices into profitable trades.

Liquidity is also concentrated among a small group of venues and builders. TradeXYZ has controlled most HIP-3 open interest during several growth phases.

Such dominance can improve execution, but it increases exposure to one platform’s technology, market design, and risk controls.
Regulatory treatment remains uneven. Some tokenized shares represent backed instruments, while equity perps provide only cash-settled exposure.
Jurisdiction, investor rights, custody, and disclosure rules vary across platforms. Traders must therefore examine contract terms, oracle design, liquidation rules, and weekend pricing before taking leveraged positions.

A previously dormant whale on the Hyperliquid network has crossed a significant threshold, pushing its total staked holdings above one million $HYPE tokens after depositing an additional 387,800 tokens, according to on-chain data tracked by Onchain Lens.

A Stake Worth Tens of Millions The latest deposit is valued at roughly $23.4 million and follows an earlier stake of 619,120 HYPE made in November 2025. Combined, the whale's lifetime staked position is now worth approximately $61.2 million.

The move comes as $HYPE trades in a range that reflects broader strength in the Hyperliquid ecosystem. The platform crossed $1 billion in cumulative protocol revenue on June 30, according to DeFiLlama. The platform routes about 99% of trading fees into open-market HYPE purchases through its Assistance Fund.

Why Staking HYPE Matters Hyperliquid runs on delegated proof-of-stake (dPoS), where holders delegate their tokens to a validator, and an active set of validators uses that stake to produce and confirm blocks via HyperBFT consensus. In exchange for helping secure the chain, stakers earn rewards. The current staking yield is around 2.2 to 2.4% APY, paid in HYPE and auto-compounding.

Beyond yield, locking tokens into staking removes supply from active circulation. Ongoing buyback programs and staking mechanisms that remove tokens from active circulation create favorable supply-demand dynamics. This is part of what has attracted sustained whale interest in the token.

The platform now commands roughly 70% of all on-chain perpetual futures volume across every blockchain, processing over $10.5 billion in daily trading activity at throughput levels that rival traditional centralized exchanges.

The whale's decision to lock up over one million tokens at current prices signals a long-term conviction bet on the protocol, at a time when on-chain activity and institutional attention around $HYPE continue to build.

Sources:
BeInCrypto: Hyperliquid Whales Show Conflicting Moves as HYPE Hits Fresh Peak
CryptoRank: Hyperliquid Price Outlook for July 2026
Coinbase: Hyperliquid (HYPE) Price and Market Data

Bitcoin Provides Defensive ExposureBlue Macellari, T. Rowe Price’s head of digital assets and the ETF’s lead portfolio manager, said the fund reflects the company’s longstanding emphasis on active management and fundamental research.

"We were never going to launch just a Bitcoin ETF," Macellari said during an appearance on the Crypto Prime podcast on Monday.

Its initial portfolio was led by Bitcoin at roughly 41% and ETH at about 18%, followed by positions in BNB, SOL XRP, HYPE and smaller allocations to other assets.

Macellari described the current market as a crypto winter and noted the fund is positioned relatively defensively, explaining its substantial Bitcoin weighting.

‘Tokenization Good, Crypto Bad’ Is A False DivideMacellari argued that Wall Street often tries to separate tokenization from cryptocurrencies by claiming tokenization is valuable while native digital assets are not.

She rejected that distinction.

If stocks, funds and other financial products migrate to public blockchains, their activity could create value for the networks and native tokens underpinning those systems.

The broader portfolio reflects T. Rowe Price’s bullish outlook on what she called "on-chain finance."         

Macellari highlighted Hyperliquid’s revenue model as particularly compelling because it can be understood and valued using metrics familiar to traditional investors.

ETH and SOL may also benefit as financial institutions move tokenized assets and around-the-clock markets onto blockchain networks, she predicts.

Crypto Winter May Approach Its Final StageMacellari explained that the market has been in a persistent downturn since the October 2025 selloff, marking the first crypto winter experienced by many investors through spot exchange-traded products.

Bitcoin has suffered a drawdown of about 50%, while Ethereum, Solana and other altcoins have faced deeper declines.

However, she said the selloff has created more attractive asymmetric opportunities in projects whose underlying adoption and economics remain intact.

The key difference from previous winters is that banks, asset managers and financial platforms have continued developing digital-asset infrastructure rather than abandoning the sector.

Macellari expects choppy conditions and the possibility of further declines through the summer but believes the market could begin emerging from crypto winter heading into Q4.

Image: Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

https://gemwallet.com/learn/beginners-guide-to-hyperliquid-trading-platform/

Hyperliquid has announced that its HIP-4 outcome markets will support permissionless deployment in an upcoming upgrade, according to The Block. This development will allow market creators to launch their own markets without prior approval, contingent upon a staking requirement of 1,000,000 HYPE tokens. The move follows the launch of HIP-4 on May 2, 2026, which introduced collateralized binary contracts settling in USDH with zero fees for opening positions. Initially, deployment was limited to canonical markets curated and settled by validators, but the upcoming Phase 2 upgrade will expand this capability to a wider user base. This strategic move is seen as part of Hyperliquid’s efforts to enhance its prediction market infrastructure and compete with established platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi.

Advertisement

Key Takeaways Hyperliquid’s announcement of permissionless deployment for HIP-4 markets appears to suggest potential for increased market activity. The requirement of staking 1,000,000 HYPE tokens per market slot may indicate a barrier to entry for some creators, but ensures system integrity. Market pricing suggests participants view the development as supportive of Hyperliquid’s price potentially reaching higher targets by the end of 2026. What to Watch Observers should monitor developments around the Phase 2 upgrade’s implementation, as successful execution could further bolster Hyperliquid’s competitive positioning. The market’s reaction to this upgrade, alongside any potential strategic partnerships or increased volumes, will be key indicators of Hyperliquid’s future valuation trajectory. Additionally, watch for any regulatory responses or security concerns that may arise, as these could significantly impact market sentiment and pricing.

Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h December 31 29% — — View market → January 1 2027 6.1% — — View market → January 1 2027 3.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 51.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 9.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 4% — — View market →

https://web3.bitget.com/en/academy/what-is-hype-hyperliquid-token-crypto-price-prediction

Hyperliquid, a decentralized Layer-1 blockchain and perpetuals DEX, is planning to enhance its HIP-4 upgrade by incorporating decentralized prediction markets, according to a report by CoinDesk. The upgrade, previously activated on mainnet in May 2026, introduced native outcome contracts that function as fully collateralized binary prediction markets. These markets settle based on real-world events and initially included curated one-day binary markets on Bitcoin (BTC) and Hyperliquid’s native token, HYPE. This development marks Hyperliquid’s strategic expansion beyond perpetual futures, placing it to compete directly with platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi.

Advertisement

The addition of decentralized prediction markets is expected to bolster Hyperliquid’s utility and attract a broader user base. This aligns with the project’s ongoing efforts to leverage its existing infrastructure, which includes an order book, cross-margin account, and USDH/USDC settlement. Market participants appear to view these developments as potentially increasing Hyperliquid’s market position, as evidenced by the current odds in relevant prediction markets.

Key Takeaways Hyperliquid’s plan to integrate decentralized prediction markets in its HIP-4 upgrade suggests a significant enhancement of the platform’s offerings. The introduction of outcome contracts and validator-governed offchain markets indicates a strategic move to compete with established prediction platforms. Current market odds and participant behavior suggest a moderate increase in Hyperliquid’s perceived value and potential future price. What to Watch Observers should monitor for further announcements regarding the implementation of decentralized prediction markets and any partnerships that may arise. The market’s response to these developments could provide insights into Hyperliquid’s ability to capture a larger share of the derivatives platform market. Additionally, any reports on Hyperliquid’s volume or user engagement could impact market perceptions and pricing, providing a clearer picture of the platform’s growth trajectory.

Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h December 31 29% — — View market → January 1 2027 6.1% — — View market → January 1 2027 3.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 51% — — View market → January 1 2027 9.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 3% — — View market →

Multicoin Capital has provided $1.75 million in seed funding as the sole institutional backer for Trasia Labs, the developer of a specialized perpetual futures trading platform built natively on Hyperliquid. This transaction represents Multicoin’s entry into the Hyperliquid ecosystem and supports a project explicitly designed to serve traders across Asian markets.

Co-founded by Mable Jiang—previously a general partner at Multicoin Capital and chief revenue officer at the team behind Stepn—and Edison Chen, a longtime web3 builder, Trasia officially launched its initial web interface on July 17, 2026.

The platform offers bilingual support in Chinese and English and has a native mobile application scheduled for release in August.

An invite-only Asia Points rewards program is now active to engage early users.

Trasia operates as a non-custodial venue that initially provides acess to Hyperliquid’s native perpetual markets.

It intends to introduce proprietary contracts later in the year, with an early emphasis on assets linked to high-interest sectors such as AI infrastructure and companies approaching public listings or generating strong regional investor attention.

The team maintains flexibility in contract selection to respond quickly to market shifts.

The founders deliberately limited external equity capital at this stage, preferring to demonstrate product-market fit and user traction before seeking additional rounds.

In parallel, more than $35 million in HYPE and USDC has been committed to support the rollout of Trasia’s HIP-3 Asian equity perpetuals markets and related growth initiatives.

The platform leverages HIP-3 mechanics, which allow developers to build decentralized perpetual exchanges on Hyperliquid by staking a bond, enabling customized offerings while benefiting from the underlying network’s performance and liquidity.

A key differentiator for Trasia is its regional focus and distribution strategy.

Rather than competing solely for existing on-chain derivatives users, the team targets participants who may be new to decentralized trading or unfamiliar with Hyperliquid entirely.

Plans center on mobile-first design, localized channels, and the founders’ established networks in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Tokyo to lower entry barriers and build a distinct user community.

The current team consists of approximately ten members based primarily in these hubs.

This investment aligns with broader interest in expanding decentralized finance tools to serve high-potential geographies.

Asia represents a significant pool of trading activity and capital, yet many participants still rely on traditional or centralized venues.

By combining Hyperliquid’s high-throughput order book infrastructure with tailored user experiences and asset selections, Trasia aims to capture incremental flows and contribute to deeper on-chain liquidity in regional equities and related instruments.

Multicoin Capital has expressed long-term optimism about both the base Hyperliquid protocol and application-layer projects like Trasia.

The firm views the ecosystem as positioned for substantial growth, with specialized platforms capable of gaining meaningful share through targeted execution and user ownership.

Trasia will focus on product refinement, liquidity provisioning, and user acquisition amid a competitive HIP-3 landscape.

Early indicators, including the points program and upcoming mobile launch, suggest an emphasis on community engagement and accessibility. Success will depend on converting regional interest into sustained trading activity while navigating market volatility and evolving regulatory considerations.

The round highlights continued selective capital deployment in crypto infrastructure, particularly where experienced teams address clear geographic and product gaps.

For participants in the Hyperliquid ecosystem, Trasia’s development offers another avenue for exposure to Asia-centric perpetuals innovation and potential liquidity expansion. As the platform matures, it could serve as a case study in how focused distribution and technical integration drive adoption in decentralized derivatives.