The story of Hyperliquid is an important note as decentralized finance enters a new stage.

Summary

In the past two years, the decentralized derivatives sector has experienced explosive growth. As the regulatory and trust crises of CeFi continue to emerge, the demand for "high-performance, transparent, and verifiable" on-chain derivatives platforms has rapidly increased. Hyperliquid has stood out in this context, with its self-developed high-performance chain and full on-chain order book at its core, aiming to be "as fast as centralized exchanges but without centralized trust," gradually becoming the absolute leader in the DeFi perpetual contract market.

By mid-2025, Hyperliquid had captured 70-80% of the decentralized derivatives market share, with a daily trading volume reaching hundreds of billions of dollars and a TVL exceeding $2 billion. Its token HYPE once ranked among the top ten by market capitalization. The community even referred to it as the "on-chain version of Binance." However, Hyperliquid is not merely pursuing trading scale; its true ambition is to build a cross-chain liquidity infrastructure that allows users to complete cross-chain deposits, leveraged trading, and withdrawals with a single click from their wallets. This research report will comprehensively analyze Hyperliquid from several dimensions: team background and organizational structure, product features and trading forms, governance and institutional design, the cornerstone of user trust, market performance and competitive landscape, insights into DEX marketing, as well as risks and challenges.

1. Team Background and Organizational Structure

The rise of Hyperliquid largely stems from its unique team composition and organizational culture. Unlike many crypto projects that rely on large teams and massive funding, Hyperliquid has taken a "lean, efficient, and technology-driven" path since its inception. Its core competitiveness lies in the high execution power of a small team, engineering genes, and a commitment to community ownership.

Hyperliquid's founder, Jeff Yan, has a distinct background in quantitative analysis and systems engineering. He graduated from Harvard University with a degree in mathematics and computer science and previously worked as a quantitative trader at Hudson River Trading (HRT), a leading high-frequency trading firm on Wall Street. HRT is known for its extreme requirements for technical latency and system performance. In this environment, Jeff gained a profound understanding of ultra-low latency matching systems, quantitative model building, and market microstructure. In 2018, he entered the crypto industry, initially exploring how to transfer traditional high-frequency trading experience to a decentralized environment. By 2022, he officially established Hyperliquid with a clear mission: to create a high-performance trading platform that combines high-frequency trading with on-chain mechanisms. Unlike many crypto entrepreneurs, Jeff is not keen on business development or capital operations; he firmly believes that only by concentrating resources on product development and system iteration can one truly stand out in a competitive market. This technology-centric entrepreneurial approach has set the developmental tone for Hyperliquid and determined the overall gene of the team—quantitative thinking, systems engineering orientation, and a relentless pursuit of extreme performance.

Hyperliquid's team size is extremely streamlined. According to public reports and community estimates, the core team consists of only about 11 people, yet it supports a platform with a daily trading volume often reaching billions of dollars. Compared to traditional fintech companies with research and operational teams often numbering in the hundreds, this scale is almost unbelievable. This "small team, high output" model is also reflected in financial metrics. According to community statistics and third-party research from August 2025, Hyperliquid's annual revenue per capita exceeds $100 million, with total revenue reaching the billion-dollar level, earning it the title of "one of the highest human efficiency companies in the world." This astonishing human efficiency not only showcases the team's execution power but also reflects the high level of automation and stability of its underlying systems. Order matching, risk management, and clearing mechanisms rely almost entirely on automated system operations, allowing team members to focus primarily on protocol iteration and feature expansion rather than daily maintenance and manual intervention. This model reduces marginal labor costs, enabling the team to achieve maximum market coverage with minimal scale. More importantly, this high human efficiency does not come at the expense of security. Hyperliquid's matching engine and on-chain mechanisms have withstood tests in multiple extreme market conditions, with stable system operations and user assets remaining secure without major incidents. This has further convinced the market that even a small team can achieve trading infrastructure comparable to traditional giants through exceptional engineering capabilities and mechanism design.

In addition to the founder's background and team size, Hyperliquid's organizational culture is also one of its unique advantages. First, the team adheres to the principle of "better to have none than to have too many" in recruitment. Members mostly come from top academic and financial institutions such as MIT, Caltech, and Citadel, possessing extremely high professional backgrounds. Rather than rapidly expanding through a large workforce, Hyperliquid prefers to maintain efficient execution through the deep involvement of core members. Secondly, the team demonstrates a strong value system in capital selection. They explicitly reject external VC investments, insisting on "not taking VC." In the crypto industry, this choice is highly symbolic. Many projects obtain resources through large-scale financing in their early stages, often leading to governance and value capture rights skewed towards capital parties. Hyperliquid, on the other hand, promotes development through self-funding and protocol-driven growth, ensuring that value capture belongs to the community rather than capital. This not only enhances users' sense of belonging to the platform but also establishes a differentiated positioning on a narrative level.

In terms of governance, Hyperliquid continues this logic. The platform's fees and revenues are returned to the HLP protocol treasury and ecological fund, with no profit extraction by the team. This arrangement allows users to feel the transparency and fairness of the platform's operations, reducing concerns about "centralized arbitrage." As the community's voice in governance and ecological construction strengthens, Hyperliquid gradually forms a cultural atmosphere of "users as owners." This culture has become a significant reason for quickly gaining user trust and has built a community moat for the platform's long-term development.

In summary, Hyperliquid's team and organizational structure exhibit three distinct characteristics: the founder's background determines the gene: the accumulation of quantitative and high-frequency trading provides the platform with inherent engineering and performance advantages; a small team achieves high human efficiency: a team of just over ten supports a trading volume of billions of dollars, resulting in extremely high capital and labor efficiency; an organizational culture emphasizing community ownership: rejecting VC and emphasizing transparent distribution enhances user trust and participation. This organizational model breaks the traditional notion that "scale is necessary for success," proving that in the DeFi sector, a small, refined, user-centric team can also grow into an industry leader. The story of Hyperliquid's team is not only an important note of its success but also provides a thought-provoking paradigm for future entrants: in the world of open finance, the most scarce resources are not capital and labor, but rather exceptional engineering capabilities, clear values, and long-term consistent institutional design.

2. Product Features and Trading Forms

Hyperliquid's rapid rise in a short time is attributed not only to the team's engineering capabilities and organizational culture but also to its product architecture and trading forms, which are key to building market barriers. In the DeFi derivatives sector, the vast majority of protocols face the dilemma of "insufficient performance and security trust," while Hyperliquid successfully strikes a balance between performance and decentralization through its self-developed dual-engine architecture, full on-chain order book, innovative HLP protocol treasury, and strict leverage risk control system. This allows the platform to provide a trading experience close to centralized exchanges (CEX) while maintaining the transparency and openness of DeFi in its institutional design, making it one of the only platforms that truly combines CEX speed with DeFi security.

Hyperliquid's underlying technology architecture consists of the HyperCore and HyperEVM dual engines, corresponding to performance and openness, respectively. HyperCore is the platform's core matching and trading system, responsible for the execution of spot and perpetual contracts. Its performance metrics are close to those of traditional centralized exchanges, with a median matching latency of about 200 milliseconds and a throughput of hundreds of thousands of TPS. This means that high-frequency traders and institutional investors can execute complex strategies on-chain without losing their competitive edge due to latency and slippage. HyperEVM, on the other hand, is an Ethereum Virtual Machine-compatible environment that supports on-chain contracts and ecological expansion functions. It ensures that Hyperliquid can maintain high performance while still achieving composability with the Ethereum ecosystem and broader DeFi protocols. Through HyperEVM, Hyperliquid can quickly expand into more financial applications such as lending, liquidity staking, and asset issuance, forming a complete on-chain financial closed loop. This "dual-engine" model is designed to balance performance and verifiability: HyperCore focuses on extreme speed and stability, while HyperEVM ensures the system's openness and ecological diversity. It is this architectural innovation that enables Hyperliquid to be the first to achieve the goal of "CEX experience + DeFi security."

In terms of trading models, Hyperliquid has chosen a path that is completely different from the mainstream AMM model—full on-chain order book (CLOB). Traditional decentralized exchanges mostly rely on AMMs (automated market makers), which, while achieving permissionless liquidity, have inherent limitations in depth, slippage, and high-frequency strategies. Hyperliquid, however, has completely moved the order book and matching logic on-chain, allowing users to place orders, cancel orders, match, and clear in a fully verifiable manner. This design brings two advantages: on one hand, it significantly enhances fairness and transparency. All orders and matching results are recorded on-chain, avoiding dark box operations or market maker manipulation. On the other hand, it opens the door for institutional users and high-frequency traders. These users are familiar with order book-based trading models and rely on complex order and cancellation strategies to manage risks and arbitrage. The on-chain order book environment provided by Hyperliquid meets their dual demands for depth, speed, and programmability, allowing them to execute complex strategies as if they were on a CEX without bearing custody risks.

In DeFi derivatives trading, providing stable liquidity and clearing capacity has always been a challenge. Hyperliquid innovatively addresses this pain point through the HLP (treasury) mechanism. HLP plays three roles: liquidity provider: HLP undertakes the platform's main market-making functions, ensuring stable depth for buyers and sellers; risk buffer: in the event of user losses or severe market fluctuations, HLP acts as a systemic risk hedging pool, absorbing clearing losses and thus avoiding the common ADL (automatic liquidation) seen in traditional exchanges. This way, profitable users are not forced to liquidate due to systemic risks; revenue-sharing mechanism: all users who deposit funds into HLP can share in the platform's fee income and funding rate profits.

The greatest significance of this design lies in democratization. In CEX, market making and clearing are typically controlled by a few privileged market makers, and ordinary users cannot participate directly. However, in Hyperliquid, every depositor can become part of the market-making process and share in the dividends of market growth. In the long run, this not only enhances user stickiness but also makes the platform's risk management more resilient.

Leverage and risk control are at the core of the derivatives market. While providing high leverage, Hyperliquid has established a dynamic risk control mechanism. The platform supports a maximum leverage of 40-50 times, catering to the needs of professional traders. However, in the case of low market cap tokens or large positions, the system actively lowers the leverage limit to avoid systemic risks caused by individual extreme positions. The calculation of funding rates also reflects the platform's robustness. Unlike some platforms that calculate based on internal prices or liquidity pool conditions, Hyperliquid's funding rates are based on external oracle prices, ensuring that prices are anchored to the real market and avoiding internal manipulation. The frequent settlement mechanism of rates (usually every 8 hours) further ensures the dynamic balance of the market. Through this series of mechanisms, Hyperliquid maintains the attractiveness of high-leverage trading while ensuring that systemic risks are controllable and user experiences are predictable. This establishes a relatively solid trust bridge between whales and retail users.

Overall, Hyperliquid's products and trading forms demonstrate a high level of systems engineering thinking: through the HyperCore + HyperEVM dual engine, it achieves a balance between performance and openness; through the full on-chain order book, it provides institutional-level fairness and depth; through the HLP protocol treasury, it democratizes market making and clearing functions; and through the leverage and risk control system, it attracts high-frequency and professional users while maintaining platform safety and stability. This complete product system not only addresses the long-standing pain points of decentralized derivatives but also shapes Hyperliquid's unique competitive advantage. It allows users to experience a nearly seamless transition between CEX and DeFi while establishing long-term trust and stickiness through transparent systems and revenue distribution mechanisms. For this reason, Hyperliquid has quickly stood out in a fiercely competitive field, becoming the most representative "liquidity base" today.

3. Governance and Institutional Design: The Cornerstone of User Trust

Another core competitive advantage of Hyperliquid lies in its governance and institutional innovations, which achieve openness, scalability, and rapid iteration. Since its establishment, the project has adopted a mechanism similar to Ethereum EIP, namely the Hyper Improvement Proposal (HIP), as the foundational framework for community consensus and product iteration. Through HIP, Hyperliquid not only addresses liquidity cold start and asset listing issues but also provides an institutionalized path for the expansion of the derivatives market, greatly enhancing the platform's ecological diversity.

The launch of HIP-1 marked an important first step for Hyperliquid in governance and institutional design. Through this mechanism, any project party can create its own token on the platform and quickly launch a spot market by paying a certain amount of HYPE token fees. This mechanism breaks the monopoly of "listing rights held by exchanges" in CEX and avoids the bottleneck of relying on external liquidity guidance in traditional DEX. In other words, HIP-1 standardizes and regulates the act of "listing," allowing project parties to enter the market in a completely permissionless environment while significantly reducing cold start costs. If HIP-1 solves the problem of "how to list," then HIP-2 further addresses the challenge of "how to maintain market depth in the early stages." In traditional markets, new assets often lack proactive liquidity from both buyers and sellers upon listing, leading to high slippage and unstable trading. Hyperliquid introduces automated market-making services (Hyperliquidity) through HIP-2, providing basic buy and sell depth for new projects. This not only enhances user experience but also helps new assets gain market recognition more quickly. It is worth noting that this automation is not merely liquidity incentives but is based on systematic algorithms and reasonable allocation of liquidity pools, ensuring the sustainability of market making.

HIP-3 can be seen as a landmark innovation in Hyperliquid's governance and institutional design. According to this proposal, any Builder can obtain the right to deploy a perpetual contract market by staking 1 million HYPE and participating in a Dutch auction. More importantly, Builders can enjoy up to 50% of the fee revenue share in the new market and customize trading parameters and rates. This mechanism greatly unleashes the creativity of the community, transferring the supply rights of the perpetual contract market from the official team to ecological participants. The potential impact of HIP-3 is profound: it allows Hyperliquid to quickly expand into long-tail assets such as RWA (real-world assets), indices, commodities, foreign exchange, and even Pre-IPO stocks, forming a differentiated product supply compared to CEX; it filters out builders with long-term investment and financial strength through high staking thresholds and auction mechanisms, avoiding the proliferation of low-quality markets; it binds fee sharing with governance, providing the community with clear economic incentives when expanding new markets.

Overall, the HIP series proposals demonstrate the logic of Hyperliquid's institutional design: first lowering the entry threshold through open listing and automated market making, and then achieving decentralized supply and scalable expansion through the Builder mechanism. This governance framework not only addresses the growth bottlenecks of traditional DEX but also shapes the institutional foundation for Hyperliquid's long-term evolution.

In decentralized finance, user trust is fundamental to the long-term development of the platform. Hyperliquid's core matching logic and capital flow mechanisms may appear to have a certain "centralized processing" flavor to outsiders, but it has still established a strong user trust in a short period. The formation of this trust stems from the combined effects of performance, systems, and narrative. First, performance and experience are the most direct attractions. Hyperliquid offers trading speeds and depths close to centralized exchanges, with matching delays as low as 200 milliseconds, sufficient to meet the needs of high-frequency traders and institutional users. Users experience a nearly seamless transition on-chain to CEX without bearing the risks of centralized custody. Secondly, transparency and non-custodial arrangements provide users with a greater sense of security. The platform does not have a profit extraction mechanism; all fee income is returned to the HLP protocol treasury and ecological fund. User assets are always under their control, and all transaction records are verifiable on-chain, contrasting sharply with the "black box" of traditional exchanges. Thirdly, community ownership forms the trust foundation at the value level. Hyperliquid has consistently rejected VC investments, not transferring benefits to external capital but insisting that "users are the owners." This narrative not only dispels concerns about the "capital versus user" game but also psychologically positions users as co-builders and long-term beneficiaries of the platform.

Additionally, the whale effect amplifies the transmission of trust. Notable whale James Wynn trades with hundreds of millions of dollars in positions and high leverage on the platform, generating extremely high returns. Such transparent and visible success stories greatly enhance ordinary users' trust and attract more capital inflow. Finally, the deflationary and incentive mechanisms reinforce expectations of token value. The HYPE token is not only a tool for governance and staking but also provides fee discounts, with part of the platform's income used for token buybacks and burns. This design leads users to believe that there is a direct binding relationship between platform growth and token value, making them more willing to hold and participate long-term.

In summary, Hyperliquid's trust flywheel is driven by the combined forces of technical performance, transparent systems, community ownership, demonstration effects, and deflationary mechanisms. This composite trust structure allows it to break through the controversy of "requiring trust like CEX" in a short time, forming a unique competitive advantage instead.

4. Market Performance and Competitive Landscape

By 2025, Hyperliquid has become the absolute leader in the DeFi perpetual contract market, with a stable market share of 70-80%. Its daily trading volume reaches hundreds of billions of dollars, far exceeding other decentralized derivatives platforms and matching the scale of some medium-sized centralized exchanges. According to DefiLlama data, Hyperliquid's annualized fees reach $1.345 billion, with fees of $110.26 million over the past 30 days, and cumulative fees have reached $660.98 million. Meanwhile, annualized revenue stands at $1.251 billion, with revenue of $102.55 million over the past 30 days and cumulative revenue of $636.46 million. This scale makes Hyperliquid a veritable "on-chain liquidity base." In terms of capital volume, Hyperliquid's TVL exceeds $2 billion, reflecting user asset accumulation and protocol security. Its token HYPE once reached a market capitalization of $16 billion, with a fully diluted valuation (FDV) exceeding $46 billion. Such a high valuation not only reflects the market's recognition of its business model but also indicates that investors generally have a positive outlook on its long-term development potential. Hyperliquid's speed and user experience are now close to centralized giants like Binance, while its non-custodial and community ownership designs help it avoid the trust and regulatory crises associated with CeFi models. Against the backdrop of declining global user trust in CEX, this differentiation has become Hyperliquid's strategic advantage. However, as regulations tighten in the future, how Hyperliquid balances the contradiction between "no KYC, cross-chain freedom" and "compliance requirements" will be a challenge it must face for continued expansion.

In the DEX sector, Hyperliquid's advantages are also very clear: compared to AMM-based DEXs (like Uniswap), Hyperliquid offers more professional order book trading tools and deeper liquidity, attracting institutional and high-frequency users. Compared to order book-based DEXs like dYdX V4, Hyperliquid's self-developed high-performance L1 and HLP model demonstrate stronger performance and resilience, avoiding performance bottlenecks associated with reliance on external chains. Overall, Hyperliquid has established a de facto monopoly position in the DeFi perpetual contract market. It is both a challenger to CEX and a surpasser of other DEXs. Hyperliquid's governance and institutional design have achieved a full-process openness from listing, market making to the expansion of the derivatives market through the HIP series proposals; its user trust stems from the flywheel of performance, transparency, and values; its market performance proves the success of this model. In 2025, it is not only the leader in DeFi perpetual contracts but also the prototype of "on-chain liquidity infrastructure." However, regulation and governance remain key challenges for the future. For other DEXs, Hyperliquid's experience indicates that only by combining technical performance, institutional innovation, and value narratives can a long-term moat be established in fierce competition.

5. Risks and Challenges

Although Hyperliquid has achieved a leap from a small team to a market leader in a short period, any rapidly growing financial infrastructure inevitably faces a series of risks and challenges. For Hyperliquid, these challenges not only determine whether it can maintain its leading position but also affect the overall landscape of the DeFi derivatives sector.

The primary challenge comes from the uncertainty of the global regulatory environment. Hyperliquid's model emphasizes no KYC and the free flow of cross-chain funds, which is advantageous for user experience and market expansion, but may pose potential risks in terms of compliance. Regulatory agencies in various countries are increasingly focusing on the leverage risks of crypto derivatives, anti-money laundering requirements, and cross-border capital flows, and may introduce mandatory registration or identity verification requirements in the future. If Hyperliquid faces regional restrictions, it could impact its user growth and liquidity. Unlike CeFi platforms, DeFi protocols find it difficult to resolve compliance issues through traditional licensing paths, and how to balance regulatory compliance with the spirit of decentralization will be a long-term challenge for Hyperliquid.

While Hyperliquid advocates "users as owners" and achieves governance democratization through HIP proposals and the HLP treasury, there are still risks of governance centralization in practice. For example, during the JELLYJELLY manipulation incident, the Hyper Foundation needed to intervene in governance and market operations, indicating that the ecosystem still relies on the core team's final decisions. This phenomenon reveals a paradox: decentralized institutional design often still requires centralized power to back it up when faced with complex governance or malicious attacks. How to further optimize the governance mechanism for validators and ensure a balance of interests between Builders and users will directly affect Hyperliquid's long-term sustainability. Hyperliquid's high-performance matching engine and cross-chain bridge design are competitive advantages, but they also harbor systemic risks. In extreme market volatility or large-scale liquidation events, cross-chain deposits, liquidations, and fund settlements may come under significant pressure. Any delays or failures could impact user trust. Additionally, while the HLP treasury bears most of the risks, its capacity to withstand extreme losses still has limits. Enhancing system resilience without compromising user experience is a direction that Hyperliquid must continuously invest in.

Hyperliquid's revenue is highly dependent on market activity, especially the leverage demand for derivatives trading. During bull markets, trading volume and fee income can grow rapidly, but in bear market conditions, a decline in trading activity may lead to a significant reduction in protocol revenue. If the platform cannot maintain sufficient revenue distribution during downturns, it may weaken the enthusiasm of HLP depositors, thereby affecting market depth and overall ecosystem stability. The cyclical risk of the business model needs to be partially hedged through diversified products (such as RWA, lending, etc.). Furthermore, Hyperliquid's brand narrative is built on "rejecting VC and community ownership," which is an important asset for its differentiation. However, if the team faces scrutiny over hidden profits or if the governance structure encounters accusations of opacity, it could quickly undermine user trust in the narrative. Additionally, as the whale effect strengthens, some users worry that Hyperliquid may become overly reliant on large holders' funds, potentially causing market volatility and uneven profit distribution. If such cognitive risks are not managed properly, they could lead to community rifts.

Summary: Regulation, governance, system stability, market cycles, and brand perception are the five major sources of risk for Hyperliquid in the future. These challenges do not diminish its current leading position but determine whether it can become a true "cross-chain liquidity infrastructure."

6. Insights for DEX Marketing

Hyperliquid's successful experience is not limited to the product level but also forms a highly instructive model in terms of narrative and institutional design. For newcomers hoping to rise in the decentralized trading space, Hyperliquid's approach provides clear insights, including:

1. Narrative-Driven:

User ownership and value return. Hyperliquid consistently emphasizes "rejecting VC, users as owners," and implements this through fee sharing and HLP revenue sharing. This narrative not only enhances users' sense of belonging but also builds strong community stickiness. For any DEX, narrative is not merely promotion but a unity of system and practice:

Only by allowing users to genuinely feel the benefits brought by the platform's growth can the narrative have lasting power.

2. Product-Driven:

Balancing performance and experience. Hyperliquid's core competitiveness comes from its "dual-engine architecture + full on-chain order book."

This indicates that in the DEX field, users will not lower their expectations for experience simply because of decentralization.

On the contrary, only when performance approaches that of CEX are users willing to use the platform long-term. Therefore, for newcomers, marketing cannot stop at the label of "decentralization" but must combine "high performance, low latency, and transparent verifiability" to convey the product selling point of "both fast and secure" to users.

3. Community-Driven: Whale Effect and Retail Diffusion. Hyperliquid's growth path first drives trading volume and liquidity through whale users, then achieves retail diffusion through partnerships with wallets like Phantom. This "top-down + bottom-up" dual-driven approach provides a reusable framework. For DEX, the initial phase can establish market trust by showcasing successful cases from large holders, while in the medium to long term, it needs to deeply integrate with entry-level applications (wallets, aggregators) to bring retail users into the ecosystem.

4. Mechanism-Driven: Open Growth and Revenue Sharing Logic. The success of HIP-3 indicates that creating an open builder ecosystem is an effective way to expand the market. Through high-stakes staking and fee sharing, Hyperliquid has delegated market creation rights to the community, achieving scalable expansion on the supply side. For marketing, this logic suggests that DEX should treat "institutional design" itself as part of the growth narrative, emphasizing that the platform belongs to everyone, not just a few.

5. Brand-Driven: From DEX to "Liquidity Base." Hyperliquid no longer positions itself as a single exchange but emphasizes "cross-chain liquidity infrastructure." This positioning gives it a higher strategic imaginative space. For any DEX, the key to brand marketing lies in breaking out of the limitations of "single-point applications" and building a larger narrative, such as "on-chain settlement layer" or "cross-chain asset gateway," to gain strategic premiums beyond a single product.

The insight from Hyperliquid is that the five dimensions of narrative, product, community, mechanism, and brand must work in synergy; marketing is not a single action but a unified output of systems, products, and strategy.

7. Conclusion

The story of Hyperliquid is an important footnote in the new stage of decentralized finance. Starting from a team of fewer than twenty people to now occupying 70-80% of the decentralized perpetual contract market, the driving forces behind this can be summarized in three points: engineering culture, institutional design, and narrative values.

At the engineering level, Hyperliquid has built a self-developed high-performance chain and full on-chain order book with a lean team, proving that small teams can also surpass traditional giants in systems engineering; at the institutional level, through the HIP series proposals and the HLP protocol treasury, it has achieved a unity of market expansion, risk management, and revenue sharing; at the narrative level, by rejecting VC and emphasizing community ownership, it has built a sense of belonging and value recognition among users. These three elements together form Hyperliquid's "trust flywheel," making it not only the leader in DeFi derivatives but also a prototype of the next generation of on-chain financial infrastructure. Looking ahead, the challenges Hyperliquid must face are equally clear: tightening regulatory environments, risks of centralized governance structures, system resilience under extreme market conditions, and the impact of market cycles on revenue models. However, the paradigm it has created has already provided a reference for the industry. For newcomers, Hyperliquid's experience indicates that in the fierce competition of decentralized trading, only by combining performance advantages, institutional innovation, and narrative values can a true long-term moat be built.

In a sense, Hyperliquid is not just a DEX; it has taken a crucial step toward becoming a "cross-chain liquidity base." Its emergence signifies that the future of DeFi will no longer be a collection of single applications but will gradually evolve into a global financial network that is performance-comparable to CEX, institutionally transparent, and community-governed.

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。