Written by: Haotian

I want to ask, what does everyone think @HyperliquidX really is? If it's just a pure Perp Dex application, then a $45B FDV is already too high. If it's a new innovative species of L1, then a $15B circulating market cap might still be underestimated? What’s even more confusing is how should the followers of Hyperliquid benchmark their expectations?

1) If we view HL as a Perp Dex and compare it with the pioneers of Perp Dex like dYdX and GMX, the valuation is already quite high. However, if we see it as an on-chain Binance and compare it with other L1s like Solana and BNBChain, HL still has a lot of growth potential.

Objectively speaking, while HL's current market share in Perp Dex will certainly create a premium valuation, the overall market capacity for on-chain DEX is limited. It has already reached valuations that are close to or even exceed the peak periods of products like @GMX_IO and @dYdX, which are already very high.

However, if we expect it to be an on-chain Binance, we might only be able to give it a valuation comparable to BNBChain when we see significant siphoning of traditional CEX trading data indicators.

Clearly, the market is currently pricing it based on both perspectives, leaning more towards the latter. This could lead to a significant misalignment in value benchmarking, especially causing some followers who are purely Perp Dex to have illusions. They haven't even figured out what HL's valuation is based on, yet they start benchmarking it. Completely disregarding HL's technical architecture and rich, diverse ecological value is absurd.

2) Hyperliquid's HyperBFT consensus, HyperCore, and HyperEVM layered design, as well as the reconstructed on-chain high-frequency node matching engine, etc., to be honest, while criticized for centralization, there are indeed many innovative elements.

In contrast, some followers are still using the traditional "off-chain matching + on-chain settlement" technical service framework. Most have not moved beyond the application scope of the original L1 and L2 Perp Dex, and some are merely old wine in new bottles. Is it too hasty to compare them with the previously established dYdX and GMX?

In fact, if we take a calm look, HL's real moat is not purely the trading data itself. The high-frequency trading matching engine of HyperCore is one aspect, but the application ecosystem of HyperEVM is the biggest highlight. For example:

Felix Protocol mints stablecoins based on HYPE collateral, using $107M idle USDC interest earnings to buy back HYPE; Liminal Money offers a delta-neutral yield product with a 16% APY; other projects like Kinetiq's staking protocol and Hyperlend's lending ecosystem, etc., have already combined four to five dozen ecological projects.

This kind of atomic-level composability and ecological depth is what fundamentally supports its current valuation sprinting towards being an on-chain Binance. And these are clearly foundational conditions that the followers do not possess. Relying solely on farming-generated trading volume and a single "application," how can one support a "platform-level" valuation expectation?

Moreover, there is a very perplexing valuation logic that is hard to understand: Hyperliquid is the number one Perp DEX, aiming to eliminate CEX and become the on-chain Binance, while Aster is the number two Perp Dex, aiming to defend Binance and become the new on-chain Binance created by the Binance ecosystem. However, Binance is still there; how can an on-chain Binance just appear out of thin air?

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。