Grayscale, in a back-and-forth game with the SEC, has revised the S-1 document for the Hyperliquid ETF to its third version, proposing the code GHYP. The product remains at the gate of "under review"; on the same timeline, compliance channels have begun to accumulate volume: according to a single third-party statistic, on May 22, the U.S. HYPE spot ETF saw a net inflow of approximately $10.9538 million, with a historical cumulative net inflow of about $35.9567 million. Among these, Bitwise's BHYP was the only product to realize net inflow on that day, becoming the main outlet for funds expressing exposure to HYPE within the regulatory framework. Just a day after this compliance pipeline was pressurized, on May 23, a starkly different large adjustment occurred on-chain — a wallet address associated with Arthur Hayes, marked by tools like OnchainLens, deposited 115,453 HYPE and approximately 1.76 million AERO into Bybit in one go, worth around $7.115 million at the then-current price. However, the wallet retained approximately 247,334 HYPE untransacted, indicating its action was aimed at consolidating chips toward foreign exchanges while opting not to exit completely. Thus, a clear confrontation emerged: on one side are the ETF funds constrained by SEC rules and KYC/AML measures, steadily flowing in through the "legal pipeline" shaped by multiple revisions of the S-1; on the other, centralized exchanges operating under different regulatory jurisdictions are seeing large holders concentrating liquid chips that can be realized at any moment through on-chain wallets — Grayscale’s third revision of the S-1 merely raised the possibility of the gate opening, but the real determinant of the next trading boundaries for HYPE will be how these two forces redistribute and contend between regulatory red lines and liquidity demands.

Grayscale’s Third Revision: HYPE ETF Approaches Approval Window

In the U.S., the S-1 prospectus being repeatedly "returned for revision" by the SEC is itself a rhythmic process of compliance questioning. Each revision responds to information disclosure, custody structure, security, and risk warnings item by item: the regulators delineate red lines with comment letters, while the issuer gradually hones the product from a "concept plan" into a standardized tool that can be incorporated into the U.S. securities system. Grayscale's submission of the third S-1 revision for the Hyperliquid ETF signifies that the application has not been outright rejected but has entered a deeper round of technical back-and-forth — the number of revisions does not equate to a guaranteed approval, but at least indicates that the SEC believes the product is still worth further discussion. Although the current public documents have not fully disclosed the specific terms of the third revision, the market-spread details regarding custody adjustments lack verifiable text; the only thing that can be concretely confirmed is that Grayscale is still revising in accordance with the SEC’s rhythm and that the regulatory dialogue window has not been closed.

Within this tug-of-war context, who is observing the "progress bar" has become key to market sentiment. Bloomberg ETF analyst James Seyffart pointed out that Grayscale's frequent revisions of the HYPE ETF application suggest that the product is "getting closer to listing," and he predicts that the U.S. market will witness about three HYPE-related ETFs, including Grayscale's GHYP, competing on the same stage — corresponding to this are Bitwise's positioned BHYP and the reported THYP from 21Shares, although some data still await verification by regulatory documents. However, the fact that "multiple institutions are queuing to enter" is already sufficient to shape expectations: for U.S. investors, the mainstream compliant channel to access the HYPE ecosystem in the future is likely to first be these ETFs, constrained by SEC and exchange rules and executing KYC/AML measures, rather than heading directly towards regulatory-gray offshore matching platforms.

BHYP Going Against the Tide: Compliant Funds Entering the Market

The fund distribution on May 22 provided a clear first look at the contours of the "HYPE compliant channel": statistics show that on that day, the total net inflow of the U.S. HYPE spot ETF was approximately $10.9538 million, while the Bitwise Hyperliquid ETF (BHYP) was the only product to record net inflow, with other similar ETFs either having zero inflow or experiencing slight net outflows. On the same day, under the same asset exposure, only one product absorbed funds against the tide, and it can be inferred that this approximately $10.9538 million largely flowed into HYPE-related assets through BHYP. Looking at a longer time frame, as of May 22, the historical cumulative net inflow of the HYPE spot ETF was about $35.9567 million — these figures primarily come from singular third-party statistics like SoSoValue and await further verification through ETF issuer and regulatory disclosure documents, but the scale itself already indicates that compliant funds are not merely observing but are using the ETF structure to rhythmically incorporate HYPE into a manageable asset portfolio.

From a regulatory perspective, the significance of BHYP attracting "the only net inflow in the market" is not just about the scale, but rather the change in the source of funds and investor profiles. U.S. HYPE-related ETFs must operate under the framework of the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Securities Exchange Act, and fulfill compliance obligations such as KYC/AML; those purchasing shares mainly comprise regulated brokerage channels for institutions and retail investors, not anonymous addresses bypassing offshore matching platforms. According to data from certain singular sources, in the first few trading days after its listing, BHYP exhibited clear leadership over similar products in terms of asset management scale (reported to be approximately $30.50 million AUM), cumulative inflows (about $26.90 million), and average daily trading volume (about $9.20 million); these details will also need to be verified in future official disclosure documents. If combined with information claiming it as a "built-in staking" spot ETF — a pending substantiated differentiated design — the fund-absorption effect of BHYP seems to foreshadow a trend: the associated risks of HYPE are migrating in part from on-chain native, regulatory-ambiguous accounts to SEC and exchange-rule constrained ETF shares. For the HYPE ecosystem, this visible, regulatable funding channel is beginning to create a long-term power comparison with on-chain chips.

Hayes Address On-Chain Deposit: Exchange Chip Pressure

Just the following day after compliant funds orderly entered via ETFs, a starkly different large adjustment appeared on-chain: on May 23, 2026, a wallet marked as "Arthur Hayes associated address" was monitored depositing 115,453 HYPE into Bybit, valued at approximately $6.33 million at that time, along with about 1.76 million AERO, worth about $785,000. After these two deposits, there were still approximately 247,334 HYPE left in that address, indicating it was more like a "partial chip lift" rather than a complete position exit. It is important to emphasize that this attribution comes from third-party analysis and historical interactions, not official confirmations from regulators or the parties involved, and Hayes himself has not publicly explained the matter, aiming to remain in an "unverifiable" state at both regulatory and market levels.

Behaviorally, large holders transferring HYPE and AERO from self-custody wallets to a single centralized platform results in a concentration of liquidity and chips on the exchange side: from a regulatory perspective, such a directional shift not only increases the tradable chips available, providing "ammunition" for future price discovery and market making, but also corresponds to a potential selling pressure that could be triggered at any time. However, both regulators and market participants can currently only see "chips reaching the exchange" without knowing whether the next step will be to place sell orders, market make, or further hedge. Unlike the HYPE-related ETFs constrained by SEC and exchange rules, platforms like Bybit registered and operating in offshore jurisdictions implement certain levels of KYC/AML and abnormal trading monitoring but exhibit clear differences in overall compliance architecture from the scrutiny, disclosure, and ongoing regulatory requirements faced by U.S. ETF channels. In this contrast, the same underlying asset is being packaged into compliant ETF shares, adhering to the transparency rules of the U.S. capital market; simultaneously, through large holder deposits, those assets concentrate in the internal ledgers of offshore exchanges. The only certainty is that this deposit has pushed some HYPE and AERO chips from the on-chain self-custody wallets into Bybit's risk control system and regulatory boundary.

ETF Channel Collides with Exchanges: Who Dominates HYPE Pricing

The same HYPE exposure on ETFs and on Bybit contrasts two completely different funding and regulatory logics. The former comes from regulated brokerage accounts, institutional clients, and compliant retail investors, all needing to undergo KYC/AML and be enveloped by SEC and exchange rules: Grayscale, Bitwise, 21Shares disclose custodians, risk factors, and fee structures in their S-1s and will have to undergo continuous validation through custody and audit reports in the future, pushing funds to hold HYPE-related assets in a "regulatable manner." The latter is concentrated on centrally registered platforms with regulatory frameworks starkly different from the U.S. securities market. Although they also implement some KYC/AML measures, the overall standards are varied, with more transactions occurring in internal ledgers characterized by high leverage and turnover rates, allowing funds to flow in and out rapidly, and strategies to switch frequently, but leaving little systemic information comparable to SEC disclosure templates.

From a funding structure perspective, the HYPE spot ETF side is slowly "filling positions": as of May 22, 2026, the historical cumulative net inflow for spot ETFs was approximately $35.9567 million, with a total net inflow of around $10.9538 million on that day. Among them, the Bitwise Hyperliquid ETF (BHYP) was the only product to achieve net inflow, with these figures primarily from singular third-party statistics like SoSoValue awaiting future verification from formal disclosure documents. However, it is sufficient to demonstrate that compliant long-term exposure is forming a price bottom. Almost on the same timeline, a wallet address associated with Arthur Hayes deposited 115,453 HYPE (approximately $6.33 million) and about 1.76 million AERO (approximately $785,000) into Bybit on May 23, while still retaining around 247,334 HYPE on-chain; this chip not only increased the tradable supply on the exchange side, but also more easily fell under the platform's large transaction monitoring and compliance risk controls. The result is that the price discovery for HYPE is being torn into two layers: the net inflow to ETFs represents a long-term exposure "assetized" under the U.S. regulatory framework, while the large-holder chips on the exchange represent short-term speculation characterized by high volatility and leverage, with both sides hedging against and restraining one another. As more HYPE-related products are integrated into ETFs and other regulated structures, the regulatory boundary between on-chain native transactions and traditional capital markets is being redrawn, and the pricing power for HYPE will oscillate long-term between these two systems, rather than being permanently monopolized by either side.

The Regulatory Game is Not Over: Signals to Watch Closely Next

Currently, HYPE has formed two concurrent portrayals: on one side, Grayscale's third revision of the GHYP S-1 is still in the SEC review queue, representing a compliant assetization path, coupled with the cumulative net inflow of approximately $35.956 million for the HYPE spot ETF as of May 22, indicating that long-term funds constrained by KYC/disclosure are slowly accumulating chips through the ETF channel; on the other side, the reality presented by the Arthur Hayes-linked address transferring over 110,000 HYPE to Bybit while retaining nearly 250,000 positions post-deposit — large holders still favor participating in high-volatility speculation using highly liquid chips on offshore exchanges. Looking ahead, several signals are worth paying close attention to: Firstly, the SEC's subsequent rounds of comments on GHYP and whether it will require further revisions will determine when the S-1 transitions to a countdown to "listing"; Secondly, the formally disclosed documents regarding the Grayscale, Bitwise BHYP, and the potential third HYPE-related ETF mentioned by James Seyffart regarding fees, custody, and risk disclosures will reallocate the weight of compliant funds across different products; Thirdly, whether the currently net-inflowing HYPE spot ETF can maintain sustained buying amidst regulatory uncertainties and fluctuating sentiment or shifts to net redemptions will directly impact the compliant channel's traction on on-chain and exchange prices. The larger suspense lies in whether the high-leverage derivatives, liquidity mining, and other functions within the Hyperliquid ecosystem, as well as the regulatory pressures faced by cross-border exchanges like Bybit in various jurisdictions, will be viewed by the SEC and other regulators as risk sources requiring additional constraints, consequently tightening regulatory terms for ETFs and related exposures. For project parties, platforms, and users, what truly needs to be practiced in this long tug-of-war is not betting on one side’s "guaranteed win," but rather understanding the flow of funds between regulatory and non-regulatory channels, the changes in the term structure and risk preferences, and thus re-defining the opportunities and risk boundaries they can bear.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram group: 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。