Recently, several seemingly fragmented indicators are jointly redefining the map of crypto funding: Hyperliquid collected about $1.4 million in fees and destroyed about $1.2 million worth of HYPE on a certain day, along with recording approximately $25.1 billion in weekly trading volume from July 13 to 19, and for the first time, RWA-related categories accounted for more than half, indicating that leverage and speculative demand are beginning to concentrate on "realizable assets"; the circulating scale of USDT on the TRON network is expected to surpass $90 billion in 2024, with on-chain USDT crypto payment card transaction volumes in the second quarter reaching about $887 million, further locking in the USD-pegged token as a main channel for high-frequency settlements; at the same time, Hasu, strategic director of Flashbots, publicly pointed out on X that the BitMEX insurance fund mechanism might become a crucial reason for its ultimate closure, marking a re-pricing of the safety margin of the market's high beta leverage structure; on the distant front, Citrini analyst jukan cited predictions from Goldman Sachs and other institutions that Chinese DRAM manufacturers might advance 3D DRAM development around 2027, coupled with the geographical tail risks raised by Iranian statements under Trump's "consider restoring full-scale war if not getting 100% what is wanted," together changing the expectations of computing cost and energy risk premium, ultimately converting into a reconfiguration of liquidity distribution and leverage tolerance on-chain—capital is systematically migrating from traditional high-volatility leveraged positions to asset and trading structures centered around settlement efficiency and yield acquisition.
RWA Accounts for Over Half of Hyperliquid: Migration of Leverage
In the week from July 13 to 19, 2024, Hyperliquid's total trading volume was approximately $25.1 billion, with the trading volume of contracts and products related to RWA for the first time exceeding half of the platform's total volume. This watershed indicates a structural migration in leverage and speculative preferences: margin and high-frequency strategies that were previously concentrated on pure crypto contracts like BTC and ETH are being reallocated to RWA categories based on interest rates, credit, and real asset prices. For traders, RWA contracts provide another set of macro factor exposures (interest rate curves, credit spreads, commodity prices) and new arbitrage opportunities. Under limited risk budgets, increasing allocation to RWA implies a relative weight adjustment downwards for high beta assets like BTC and ETH, which in turn results in an outflow effect on the contract depth, funding rates, and price volatility of mainstream assets: with the same unit of margin, if a more stable annualized return or clearer macro-driven movements can be obtained from RWA products, the proportion remaining on traditional perpetual contracts will decrease.
This kind of migration has been quantified in platform revenue and token mechanisms: recently, on a certain day, Hyperliquid collected approximately $1.4 million in fees and destroyed about $1.2 million worth of HYPE. The scale of fees and destruction is highly likely synchronized with the transaction volume surge of RWA, making the platform token a core value center for capturing the growth of RWA transactions. Funds can not only participate through leverage in the price fluctuations of RWA itself, but can also indirectly share the cash flows from the platform (especially RWA) through holding HYPE and experiencing the deflationary effect, thereby forming a closed loop of “RWA transaction growth – platform revenue increase – accelerated HYPE destruction – token valuation reassessment.” In this structure, BTC and ETH are used more as margin and hedging tools, and their price performance will partly depend on the cycles and liquidation rhythms of RWA leverage, while the platform token will move up a tier in the risk asset spectrum, becoming a concentrated vehicle for expressing expectations of “RWA theme + trading structure expansion.” This will determine whether the RWA leverage expansion is a passive crowding out of crypto major assets or a new risk premium reflux channel formed through platform tokens and hedging demand.
Questioning BitMEX Insurance Pool: Exit Price for Old-fashioned Leverage Model
Hasu on X singled out BitMEX's insurance fund design, arguing that this mechanism could become a significant reason for the platform's ultimate shutdown. The core of the criticism is that the insurance fund concentrates liquidation losses in a black box pool, with the platform autonomously deciding the pace and coverage of activation. Early bitcoin perpetual contracts and high-leverage trading relied on these kinds of funds to "provide a safety net," superficially reducing liquidation frequency and maintaining smooth matching, but in essence pulling tail risks out of the trading rules and transferring them to a balance account that users find difficult to penetrate, magnifying the platform's discretion in leverage and liquidations.
As the market shifts towards more transparent on-chain clearing and automated risk management, this insurance fund model is starting to be seen as a liability of outdated leverage structures rather than a moat. On-chain contracts reveal margins, liquidation prices, and clearing paths, while platforms like Hyperliquid link fee income and HYPE destruction directly, allowing risk bearing and token value changes to be verifiable on-chain. Hasu's questioning reflects a longer-term structural migration: once old centralized high-leverage platforms are marginalized due to lack of transparency in insurance pools, the demand for BTC and ETH as margin and hedging tools will be partially shifted towards on-chain contracts and RWA trading. The focus of derivatives transactions may shift from traditional perpetual contracts to structured products underpinned by on-chain clearing and real asset collateral, and this evolutionary path will directly reshape the pricing benchmarks and risk premium distributions of BTC and ETH within the entire leveraged system.
USDT on TRON Surpasses $90 Billion: Settlement Layer Absorbs Liquidity
In 2024, the circulating scale of USDT on the TRON network surpassed $90 billion, directly placing this chain in a prime position for "USD-pegged token" cross-platform settlement and payments. Compared with networks like Ethereum, TRON relies over the long term on low fees and high throughput to handle large transfers and high-frequency settlements. The growth rate of USDT on TRON continues to outpace other mainstream networks, resulting in an increasing number of over-the-counter funds and exchange users moving “equivalent USD” to TRON first, then completing payments, withdrawals, and cross-border transfers through different platforms. This structural preference means that new funds are more inclined to remain in the form of USDT rather than immediately converting to high-volatility assets like BTC or ETH, significantly enhancing the settlement layer's ability to attract liquidity.
This migration is already reflected in payment data. In the second quarter of 2024, the on-chain USDT crypto payment card transaction volume was about $887 million, indicating that part of the capital that might have entered spot or contract positions has been redirected to consumption and cross-border settlement scenarios: users extract USDT from exchanges or wallets, circulate it through the TRON network at low cost, and then complete offline or online spending via payment cards. For crypto asset pricing, this means a change in the “priority use” of funds—more USD tokens are seen as settlement mediums for transactions and daily life rather than speculative chips, which reduces the space for BTC and ETH to be used as daily payment tools but deepens their attribute of "being bought only when price risk needs to be assumed." While RWA and on-chain contracts absorb some leveraged funds, the settlement expansion of USDT on TRON is quietly rewriting the division of funds and pricing logic between BTC, ETH, and on-chain risk assets.
China's 3D DRAM Sprint by 2027: Computing Cost Redefined
Citrini analyst jukan recently referenced research from Goldman Sachs and another institution on social media, suggesting that Chinese DRAM manufacturers might further advance 3D DRAM development around 2027, positioning this technology as a key focus area. DRAM is one of the main storage components for servers and personal computers, directly determining the overall cost structure of computing systems; 3D DRAM is seen as a crucial path to improving storage density and performance. If Chinese manufacturers ramp up production at this juncture, it will alter the global memory supply curve and medium to long-term price expectations, effectively releasing a structural easing signal on “future computing costs.”
Computing and storage prices are often regarded as core variables supporting the economics of high-performance applications like AI and blockchain: for AI, long-term expectations of declining memory costs mean discounts on the unit costs of inference and training; for on-chain, this means alleviating marginal constraints on energy consumption and hardware input for node expansion and contract execution. The market's consensus on “future computing being cheaper” enhances the realizability of future cash flows from high-performance applications, compressing the technological uncertainty premium of these assets, indirectly affecting the discount rates of risk assets; on the other hand, this will also reshape the valuation logic of on-chain infrastructure and high-performance public chains—if the expectation of declining computing costs continues to strengthen around 2027, those platforms that can effectively convert lower hardware costs into higher throughput, more complex contract support, and lower average transaction fees will gain a higher premium in capital pricing, while the expectation of computing costs itself is gradually becoming a key variable for assessing the long-term valuation of on-chain infrastructure and the direction of fund migration.
Trump's Remarks on Full-Scale War with Iran: Rising Geopolitical Tail Risks
French LCI television news reported that Trump stated regarding Iran that if he cannot get “100% what he wants,” he would consider restoring “full-scale war.” The public statement of potential “full-scale war” by a key Middle Eastern oil-producing country like Iran essentially raises the market's pricing of tail risks concerning the situation in the Middle East: the risk premium and volatility range of crude oil futures will be actively adjusted upward by the market, increasing expectations of energy inflation and thereby raising the uncertainty of global asset discount rates. Historical experience shows that whenever similar levels of conflict expectations arise, risk assets (stock markets, high beta tech, and crypto assets) often first experience amplified volatility and position reduction, while safe-haven assets and capital outflow channels see elevated demand in the short term.
In such a geopolitical tail risk environment, BTC and ETH will be re-evaluated within a “dual role” pricing framework: on the one hand, Bitcoin has already been viewed as a substitute safe-haven or capital outflow channel during certain crisis events; when the Iranian risk premium rises, some funds might consider it as a non-sovereign asset to hedge energy and currency risks; on the other hand, they remain high-volatility, leverage-preferred trading targets, where during periods of declining risk appetite, derivative positions accelerate de-leveraging. Meanwhile, USD-pegged tokens like USDT will have their functions as settlement and safe-haven cash reserves reinforced—on low-cost, high-throughput networks like TRON, the on-chain USD assets that have surpassed $90 billion provide a tool for funds to switch between “off-market observation” and “on-market speculation” at any time, and offer deeper liquidity for high-frequency trading platforms like Hyperliquid that use on-chain USD assets and RWA as collateral. Therefore, whether the Iranian situation and Trump's remarks escalate into real policy signals will become a key variable to observe how crypto funds are redistributed between risk-averse and leveraged speculation.
Join our community, let's discuss and become stronger together!
AiCoin's exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin's exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin's on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
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。
