In the past two months, glassnode pointed out that large perpetual contract accounts on Hyperliquid have been continuously increasing their long positions. These large whales are clearly betting that the current price range will eventually be broken upward, and the long leverage exposure is showing a stable accumulation over time, reflecting a strong bullish expectation from a portion of the available funds on the platform.

In stark contrast, the whale address @0x58bro tracked by Onchainlens is on the short side: According to Jinse Finance and PANews, this address has cumulatively deposited 3,811 ETH (approximately $9.03 million) into Binance over the past month, with 2,791 ETH (approximately $6.64 million) transferred in just the past 24 hours, leaving only 0.5 ETH on-chain, while still holding short positions on Hyperliquid with 25x leverage in ETH and 40x leverage in BTC, totaling profits of approximately $33 million. One direction is large long whales patiently increasing their positions, while the other direction involves large short whales heavily profiting and migrating thousands of ETH to centralized exchanges, pulling the long-short structure within Hyperliquid to become exceptionally extreme.

From a broader trading perspective, Odaily cited Artemis data showing that the Ethereum network contributed approximately $2.7 million in fee revenue in the past 24 hours, while Hyperliquid accounted for $1.7 million. The former still holds an advantage in absolute fee volume, but the latter has accumulated comparable activity in the derivatives space. Meanwhile, TechFlow reported that PrimePiper launched an enterprise-grade prime broker aimed at AI agents on April 23, integrating with platforms such as Hyperliquid, OKX, Tiger Brokers, and IBKR, providing API key management, limit and circuit breaker mechanisms while incorporating Hyperliquid into the infrastructure network of multi-location collaborative trading and risk control. The differences in fee revenue, expansion of access paths, and the differentiation of whale longs and shorts jointly outline the current stage of trading flow being reallocated and reorganized across different venues.

The Breakthrough Dream of Long Whales Pursued for Two Consecutive Months

On April 24, 2026, glassnode spoke on the X platform, with multiple media outlets such as Odaily, TechFlow, and Foresight simultaneously citing its statement: Over the past two months, the long positions of whales on Hyperliquid have been continuously increasing. These large perpetual contract traders are clearly betting on a "range breakout." The report did not provide specific position sizes or precise price ranges, but it offered a background of accumulation over approximately two months, interpreting this holding behavior directly as "strong bullish sentiment."

From the perspective of position accumulation, glassnode's description emphasizes "continuous accumulation" rather than a short-term spike, implying that these accounts are not going all-in at once but rather incrementally increasing their longs within the current price range. Coupled with the media generally linking this to a "bullish" expectation of BTC's subsequent trend, it can be judged that, for at least two months, large perpetual traders have regarded Hyperliquid as one of the core venues to execute bullish strategies, continuously stacking long exposure on the contract side while waiting for the price to break out of the consolidation range.

It is important to emphasize that the existing public information only provides a direction and sentiment—long positions are increasing, and confidence is rising—without disclosing on-chain actual holding addresses, specific contract leverage multipliers, or precise entry prices. In other words, the outside world does not know the weight of these longs within the overall position structure, nor can it accurately estimate their dominance over the entire market; any judgment about "longs reaching a certain threshold" is still subject to confirmation.

Under these information constraints, we can only deduce the possible consequences that such concentrated longs may bring from the perspective of transaction structure and volatility logic:
● If the price is long-term compressed within a narrow range while the large long whales continue to accumulate positions in that range, based on experience, once a directional breakout occurs, actions such as adding positions in the upward direction and counterparties passively liquidating may amplify the upward momentum of price fluctuations;
● Conversely, if the price deviates downward from these longs' cost concentration areas, a large number of high-leverage longs triggering forced liquidations in a short time may magnify an originally mild correction into more extreme volatility.

However, at present, neither glassnode nor various media outlets have provided specific transaction distribution, funding rates, or liquidation data for Hyperliquid; these deductions are more based on general market structure experience rather than direct quantitative conclusions from Hyperliquid's current conditions. The continuous pursuit of the "breakthrough dream" by long whales indeed injects bullish expectations into the market on an emotional level, but whether this positional concentration will translate into greater volatility in the upcoming market still requires observation of the evolution of actual transaction and liquidation data.

The Risk Hedge of Short Whales from Thirty Million Profit

Compared to the overall picture of "continuous accumulation of longs for two months" described by glassnode, the operational path of address @0x58bro is obviously more aggressive and leans more towards a combination of risk hedging and capital migration. Jinse Finance and PANews quoted Onchainlens data stating that this address deposited 2,791 ETH (approximately $6.64 million) into Binance in the past 24 hours and cumulatively deposited 3,811 ETH (approximately $9.03 million) over the past month, with only 0.5 ETH remaining on-chain, indicating that the vast majority of its ETH spot position has been transferred from the on-chain wallet to centralized exchanges.

Meanwhile, the same group of reports pointed out that @0x58bro has not simultaneously "exited" from the derivatives side but continues to maintain a high-leverage directional bet on Hyperliquid: holding short positions with 25x leverage in ETH and 40x leverage in BTC, totaling profits of approximately $33 million. The reports did not disclose the margin sources, opening times, and specific liquidation prices of these positions, only confirming that the current direction is high-leverage shorts and in a profitable state, which essentially locks it in as the current representative "winner" on the short side of Hyperliquid.

Structurally, @0x58bro's operations display a clear combination feature: on one hand, transferring a large amount of ETH spot to Binance through on-chain transfers, nearly emptying its on-chain balance; on the other hand, retaining high-leverage short positions on Hyperliquid, leaving the amplified directional exposure within the derivatives layer. This combination of "spot exit + high-leverage short" may reflect its risk management thinking across different trading venues: in the spot end, concentrating into CEX for higher liquidity or further processing, while on the derivatives end, continuing to bear the primary price directional risk on Hyperliquid.

Amid the backdrop of long whales accumulating chips for two months, this short whale, which has already made a paper profit of about $33 million, chooses to drain on-chain spots and direct funds to Binance while retaining high-leverage short positions, forming a rather representative funding migration path in the current differentiation of long and short on Hyperliquid. Whether it will adjust its overall risk exposure through reducing positions, hedging, or further increasing bets remains to be observed in further changes on-chain and at the Hyperliquid account level.

Fee Comparison: Ethereum Revenue Still Dominates

From the position and capital migration of a single whale, we can pull back to a more macro perspective and see the numerical projection of overall platform activity. On April 24, 2026, Odaily cited statistics from the third-party data service provider Artemis, showing that within the same 24-hour window, Ethereum’s fee revenue was approximately $2.7 million, while Hyperliquid reported $1.7 million.

This $1 million difference directly reflects the volume gap in user scale and trading activity between the current mainstream public chains and derivatives trading platforms: the former carries broader on-chain interactions and asset activities, while the latter focuses on derivatives trading such as perpetual contracts. Even though Hyperliquid has gathered high-leverage participants such as short and long whales, its daily fee revenue still shows a significant gap compared to Ethereum. It is important to emphasize that existing reports only provide this day's fee comparison and do not include longer-period data, making it impossible to infer long-term trends or convergence/divergence directions between Hyperliquid and Ethereum based on this.

In the current context of whale longs and shorts confronting on Hyperliquid, fee revenue itself can be viewed as a quantitative dimension: for a derivatives platform like Hyperliquid, fees mainly come from leveraged trading activities, and its $1.7 million daily revenue provides market participants with a verifiable metric to observe the heat of leverage trading and the overall activity of the platform. If we subsequently see synchronization or divergence between fee revenue and the changes in long positions mentioned by glassnode, it may provide further clues for judging the evolution of long and short forces, but the specific correlation still needs to be observed in conjunction with longer time series data.

PrimePiper Connects to A

Beyond fees and position structures, changes in the access layer infrastructure are also introducing new capital entry points for Hyperliquid. On April 23, 2026, TechFlow reported that PrimePiper launched an enterprise-grade prime broker platform aimed at AI agents, claiming it supports unified access from multiple trading platforms including Hyperliquid, OKX, Tiger Brokers, and IBKR, integrating Hyperliquid into a multi-location access network oriented towards automated strategies.

From a functional design perspective, PrimePiper provides unified access and risk control hub for multiple trading venues: on one hand, enterprise-level API key management, expenditure limits, and circuit breaker mechanisms to constrain the trading behavior of AI agents; on the other hand, it offers audit-level reporting capabilities for funds and professional traders, facilitating unified view management of cross-platform and cross-strategy risks and compliance. The current product is still in the Alpha phase, with team members from Galois Capital, Kraken, DRW, and AWS, indicating an attempt to build a mediating layer to serve AI strategies using traditional quantitative and infrastructure experience.

For Hyperliquid, being "linked" by this type of prime broker platform aimed at AI agents means that future programmatic trading and cross-location hedging funds may configure risk control through PrimePiper and then flow down to Hyperliquid without directly changing its own interfaces. As the report does not disclose the actual scale of PrimePiper's access on Hyperliquid or current trading volumes, this impact remains a potential direction that requires further observation: if we subsequently see signs of rising programmatic position proportions and increased cross-location hedging activities, it may respond to the improvement of such AI trading infrastructure.

Hyperl Pulled Under the Tug of Long and Short Forces

Looking at the time frame of April 23-24, 2026, Hyperliquid is simultaneously being pulled by two opposing forces of whales: on one side, the long whales continually increasing their positions as described by glassnode, betting on the price breaking through the current range; on the other side, the address @0x58bro tracked by Onchainlens, holding high-leverage short positions of 25x in ETH and 40x in BTC on Hyperliquid, accumulating profits of about $33 million, and cumulatively transferring 3,811 ETH to Binance over the past month, leaving only 0.5 ETH on-chain. The consistent accumulation of longs on the platform and the migration of shorts through derivatives and spot to lock in profits reflect significant divergence in the expectations of large funds on Hyperliquid about future directions, rather than a unified one-sided expectation.

If we place this confrontation of longs and shorts into a broader framework of fee income, the stage in which Hyperliquid finds itself becomes clearer. Odaily cited Artemis data showing that on April 24, 2026, the 24-hour fee revenue of the Ethereum network was $2.7 million, while Hyperliquid reported $1.7 million, indicating that Ethereum clearly surpassed Hyperliquid. In terms of magnitude, this gap suggests that Hyperliquid is still in a phase of catching up in terms of scale, where its trading activity and fee income are more easily driven by a small number of high-frequency traders, whale position adjustments, and high-leverage capital. In contrast, the daily metrics of larger networks like Ethereum have a relatively lower sensitivity to single entities.

On the funding structure level, the access of PrimePiper adds a variable to the future participants of Hyperliquid. The TechFlow report mentioned that this enterprise-grade prime broker platform aimed at AI agents has already supported unified access for multiple trading venues including Hyperliquid, OKX, Tiger Brokers, and IBKR in its Alpha phase, providing API key management, expenditure limits, circuit breaker mechanisms, and audit-level reporting capabilities. Although there is currently no public data disclosing the actual scale of its access on Hyperliquid, it can be anticipated that once AI accounts and institutional strategies flood in through such infrastructure, the proportion of automated trading and cross-location arbitrage funds on Hyperliquid may increase, and the interrelation between long and short position structures and fee income will also complicate, no longer necessarily dominated by a single direction of whale sentiment.

Considering the PrimePiper access news, the profit and capital migration actions of short whale @0x58bro, and the increasing long positions and fee comparisons between Ethereum/Hyperliquid disclosed by glassnode, all of which emerged during April 23-24, 2026, these signals actually portray different facets of Hyperliquid's market structure within the same phase. Moving forward, to understand the evolution of the on-chain derivatives space, there are at least several threads worth closely monitoring:

● Marginal changes in the positions of long and short whales: including the accumulation rhythm of longs reflected by data such as glassnode, and whether high-leverage shorts similar to @0x58bro continue to be maintained, closed, or reversed.
● Trends in Hyperliquid fee revenue and transaction volume: observing whether the income gap with larger networks like Ethereum is narrowing or widening, thereby judging changes in platform activity and the weight of structural participants (whales, leveraged funds).
● New capital flows brought by access parties such as PrimePiper: once there are signs of rising automated position ratios and increased cross-platform hedging and arbitrage activities, it is necessary to assess based on the long and short position structures and fee data whether Hyperliquid is transitioning from a "whale betting game" to a more complex market structure shaped by programmatic and multi-location capital.

Join our community, let's discuss together and become stronger!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

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。