Recently, the Hyperliquid HIP3 protocol has become extremely popular, allowing trading of stocks like TSLA, gold Perps, and even Pokémon cards and CS skin items. This has made Hyperliquid shine brightly for a moment, but many people have overlooked that Arbitrum's liquidity has also experienced a significant surge in the past.
That's right, the hotter Hyperliquid gets, the more Arbitrum can "quietly make a fortune"? Why do I say this?
1) A basic fact is that most of the USDC held by Hyperliquid has to be bridged over from Arbitrum. Every time Hyperliquid launches a TSLA stock contract or a gold perp, a massive amount of USDC flows in from Arbitrum. This connection is not "incidental," but rather a structural dependency.
These bridging activities directly contribute to Arbitrum's daily trading volume and ecological activity, helping Arbitrum maintain its position as the top layer 2.
2) Of course, some may argue that Arbitrum is merely a stepping stone for Hyperliquid's funds, just a passage for funds to move through. So why did Hyperliquid choose Arbitrum instead of Solana or Base? The reasons are as follows:
The lowest technical adaptation cost: Hyperliquid needs a liquidity entry point with good EVM compatibility to safely handle stablecoins, and Arbitrum's Nitro architecture allows bridging delays to be controlled within one minute, with gas fees under $0.01, making friction costs almost imperceptible to users.
Unmatched liquidity depth: The circulating supply of native USDC on Arbitrum has reached $8.06 billion, the highest among all layer 2s. Moreover, mature protocols like GMX and Gains on Arbitrum have already formed a complete closed loop of lending, trading, derivatives, and yield aggregation. Essentially, Hyperliquid's choice of Arbitrum is not just a bridging channel, but a mature liquidity network.
Unreplicable ecological synergy: Some newly launched stock Perps, gold perps, and even treasury token assets on HIP3 have long existed on Arbitrum in the form of RWA assets, and have enabled operations like lending and farming through DeFi protocols such as Morpho, Pendle, and Euler. This allows users to stake RWA assets as collateral on Arbitrum, borrow USDC, and then bridge it to Hyperliquid to trade stock perps with 5x or even 10x leverage. This is not just a passage for funds, but a cross-ecosystem liquidity aggregation.
3) In my view, the relationship between Hyperliquid and Arbitrum is by no means a simple "parasitic relationship" of liquidity, but rather a strategic complementarity.
Hyperliquid, as a Perp Dex application chain, continuously stimulates trading activity, while Arbitrum provides ongoing liquidity support. For Arbitrum, it also needs phenomenon-level applications like Hyperliquid to break the limitations of product tension in the Ethereum ecosystem.
This reminds me of when Arbitrum was promoting the Orbit layer 3 framework, which emphasized the "general layer 2 + specialized application chain" approach. Orbit allows any team to quickly deploy their own Layer 3 application chain, enjoying Arbitrum's security and liquidity while customizing performance parameters according to business needs.
Although Hyperliquid has chosen the path of building its own layer 1 and deeply binding with Arbitrum, it may seem different from directly deploying layer 3. However, if you carefully analyze the relationship between the HIP-3 ecosystem and Arbitrum, you will find an interesting conclusion: HIP3 has, to some extent, already become the de facto Layer 3 application chain of Arbitrum.
After all, the core logic of so-called layer 3 is to outsource security and liquidity to Layer 2 while maintaining its own performance advantages. Clearly, Hyperliquid cannot currently provide the liquidity advantage for the HIP3 ecosystem, but Arbitrum can.
Isn't this a variant of the layer 3 operational model?
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。
