Yang argues Hyperliquid's priority fees update will substantially reshape market structure by disadvantaging latency-focused market makers like Alber Blanc and Pinely who currently dominate the exchange.
Takes
12 takes
29% of directional Hyperliquid native frontend traders are profitable. Builder app users do worse.
Hydromancer pulled all HL perp trades Aug 2025–Apr 2026 and filtered out market makers + delta-neutral farmers. 29% of native-frontend users are profitable over the period; builder-app users materially worse. Useful baseline for anyone allocating through a vault or copy-trading — most users lose money, and the venue/frontend materially affects the outcome.
Are TradeXYZ users real or airdrop farmers?
Donovan analyzes 224K wallets that traded TradeXYZ markets between Oct 2025 and Apr 2026. 47% had zero prior Hyperliquid activity — a sybil signal. But trade-size distribution is mixed, and the largest user spikes map onto the Strait of Hormuz crisis (93% of the March surge traded $CL crude oil) — organic geopolitical trading, not coordinated farming. The decisive signal is frequency: median xyz-only wallet made 2 trades on 1 day then went dormant; 78% inactive within a week vs. multi-market wallets' median 144 trades over 69 days. Read: meaningful sybil activity in the user count, but a real organic long tail underneath.
第三条路: Hyperliquid <Priority Fee>
Robin analyzes HL's Priority Fee as 'the third path' vs TradFi's approaches to HFT: IEX added a 350μs speed bump (killed liquidity), NYSE/CME built bigger colocation facilities (rent extraction). Hyperliquid instead routes the HFT arms-race spend (BIS estimates $5B/yr extracted globally) back into the protocol and burns it as $HYPE. Two fee types: Gossip Priority (info edge, Dutch auction) and Order Priority (execution edge, IOC fees). Protects makers, forces takers to pay — every competitive dollar becomes HYPE burn pressure.
Hyperliquid’s Edge Expands
Update to Coinbase's earlier Hyperliquid deep-dive — HYPE +48% since. Oil perps exceeded $1B in a weekend during geopolitical tension; HIP-3 now ~30% of HL volume, with S&P 500 and oil contracts in the top-5. 500K HYPE staked per HIP-3 market tightens float. The feared April unlock of 9.9M HYPE came in at only 330K (3% of expected) — the dilution event was mostly phantom overhang. Bitwise Europe launched a HYPE staking ETP; US BHYP filing passes 85% of staking rewards to shareholders. Grayscale and 21Shares also filing.
Hyperliquid Strategies ($PURR)
ZJ argues PURR is structurally different from other digital asset treasuries because Hyperliquid generated $857M in 2025 fees with $837M flowing to buyback-and-burn, creating a deflationary token dynamic (~19M bought back annually versus ~7M emitted), while carrying zero debt and zero preferreds unlike Strategy. Base case values PURR at $10.59 by 2030 (+63% over 5 years) on $76 HYPE at 20x P/E and 1.1x NAV; bull case reaches $20.84 (+220%) at $127 HYPE and 1.3x NAV.
Hyperliquid.
Aletheia's Bitcoin Suisse client report: $820M 2025 revenue (beats Solana $176M, near Ethereum $1.1B); 41% decentralized-perp OI share, 4th-largest perp venue globally. 97% of fees burned via the Assistance Fund — $1.5B / 42M HYPE permanently removed (4.2% of supply). HIP-3 opened 120 markets, 80% RWAs, $120B cumulative volume. HL trades at 12x P/E vs peers at 27–44x. Scenarios imply 2028 price of $63–$190 vs current ~$39. Main risks: regulatory (SEC/CFTC/ESMA), governance concentration (team holds 23.8%), and the aggressive buyback model untested across a cycle.
Why the Market is Mispricing HIP-4
Quantitative case that the market is over-attributing value to HIP-4 as a Polymarket-killer. Even at 20% capture of prediction-market volume (~$12M annualized at 4bps) the direct contribution is only 1–2% of HL's $659M ARR. HYPE already trades at 15.3x ARR; HIP-4's real upside is composability (unified margin → delta-neutral strategies, structured products), not direct fees. Outcome.xyz projects $130–481M second-order ARR, but that's speculative. Conclusion: HIP-4 is infrastructure, not an immediate revenue catalyst.
Matteo explains why Hyperliquid's priority-fee revenue hasn't ramped: validators must explicitly enable the gossip priority config and most haven't, so winning the auction today doesn't guarantee prioritized mempool access. Pre-upgrade, API traders paid validators tens of thousands/month for sentry peering — the new mechanism internalizes that, adding ~$500K–$1M/mo HYPE buying pressure immediately. BIS estimates $5B/yr global HFT extraction; HL growth-mode markets charge 0.45–0.9bps — capturing priority could roughly double protocol revenue on those. Bold take: priority fees become >50% of HL's revenue in a few years if TradFi flow grows.
Building the Intelligence Layer for Hyperliquid
Analysis of 33K HL wallets: 24.4% of HIP-3 OI ($402M) belongs to 318 wallets that didn't exist 3 months ago. HIP-3 OI hit $2.05B (28% of total $7.12B). Argues that HL becoming a 'house of all finance' needs a TradFi-grade intelligence layer for vaults — Sharpe, Sortino, Brinson-Fachler attribution against BTC. Introducing Unlocked: 80+ metrics, decomposing vault returns into exposure / token selection / funding alpha. The rest of CT still picks vaults by Twitter and APR — this is the allocator tool that should exist.
Is HYPE still cheap?
Donovan argues HYPE at a $9 billion valuation looks expensive. A reverse DCF assuming 30% returns over four years requires $11.5 billion in revenues by 2030—implying 110% CAGR from the current $601 million annualized run-rate, growth rates with no historical precedent in exchange history. His bottom-up analysis suggests base case revenues of $4.7 billion by 2030, creating a $6.8 billion shortfall; only the bull case of $14 billion in revenues justifies today's price, but that requires DEXs capturing 60% of a vastly expanded perps market while Hyperliquid holds 45% share—assumptions pricing in most of the upside already.
How informed are Hyperliquid traders on weekends?
Matteo analyzed Hyperliquid's weekend trading across 35 HIP-3 instruments and found 100% directional accuracy predicting Monday's opening gaps, with a regression slope of 1.06 and R² of 0.973—median prediction error just 14 basis points. The cleanest signal arrives around 20:00 UTC, three hours before CME reopens, when liquidity providers still maintain 66-84% of book depth; in the final hours, metals overshoot (Gold slope jumps to 1.61) as books thin and convergence trades distort prices. Alpha exists in knowing when the signal is purest and fading opening dislocations between perp mids and oracles, which mean-revert within minutes.