Recently, the @ HyperliquidX HIP3 protocol has become popular, with stocks such as Perp, gold Perp, and even Pok é mon cards, CS jewelry skins, etc. being able to go online for trading. This has made Hyperliquid shine for a while, but many people have overlooked it. The liquidity of @ arbitrum_cn has also skyrocketed in the past. That's right, the more popular Hyperliquid is, the more Arbitrarum can quietly make a fortune? Why do you say that? 1) A basic fact is that most of the USDC held by Hyperliquid needs to be bridged from Arbitrarum. Whenever Hyperliquid launches a TSLA stock contract or a gold perk, there is a massive influx of USDC from Arbitrarum behind it. This kind of association is not a 'side effect', but a structural dependency. These bridging activities directly contributed to Arbitrarum's daily trading volume and ecological activity, driving Arbitrarum to maintain its position as the top player in Layer 2; 2) Of course, some people may say that Arbitrarum is just a springboard for Hyperliquid funds, and the funds just leave after passing through. So why doesn't Hyperliquid choose Solana or Base, but instead deeply bind to Arbitrarum? The reasons are as follows: 1. The lowest cost of technological adaptation: Hyperliquid requires an EVM compatible mobile entry point to securely receive stablecoins, while Arbitrarum's Nitro architecture can keep bridge latency within 1 minute, and the gas fee is less than 0.01 US dollars, making users almost unaware of the frictional cost; 2. The depth of liquidity is irreplaceable: Arbitrum's native USDC circulation reached $8.06 billion, the highest among all layer2. Moreover, mature protocols such as GMX and Gains have formed a complete closed loop for lending, trading, derivatives, and income aggregation on Arbitrarum. Essentially, Hyperliquid's choice of Arbitrarum is not just a bridging channel, but a mature liquidity network; 3. The ecological synergy effect can not be copied: some shares, gold, and even treasury bond tokens newly launched by HIP3 have long existed in the form of RWA assets on Arbitrum, and have realized operations such as lending and farming through Morpho, Pendle, Euler, and other DeFi protocols. In this way, users can pledge RWA assets as collateral on Arbitrum, lend USDC, and then bridge to Hyperliquid to trade stocks with 5 or even 10 times leverage. This is not just a one-time flow of funds, but a cross ecological aggregation of liquidity. 3) In my opinion, the relationship between Hyperliquid and Arbitrarum is not simply a liquidity "parasitic relationship", but rather a strategic complementarity. Hyperliquid, as the application chain of Perp Dex, continues to stimulate transaction activity, while Arbitrarum provides continuous liquidity infusion. For Arbitrarum, it also needs phenomenon level applications like Hyperliquid to break the lack of product tension in the Ethereum ecosystem. This reminds me of when Arbitrarum launched the Orbit layer3 framework, its main focus was on the "universal layer2+specialized application chain" card. Orbit allows any team to quickly deploy their own Layer3 application chain, enjoying the security and liquidity of Arbitrarum while customizing performance parameters according to business needs. Although Hyperliquid chose to build its own layer 1 and deeply bind to Arbitrarum, it seems different from directly deploying layer 3. But if you carefully analyze the relationship between the HIP-3 ecosystem and Arbitrarum, you will find an interesting conclusion: HIP3 has become to some extent the actual Layer3 application chain of Arbitrarum. After all, the core logic of Layer3 is to outsource security and liquidity to Layer2 while maintaining its own performance advantages. Obviously, Hyperliquid cannot provide the liquidity advantage of the HIP3 ecosystem at the moment, but Arbitrarum can. Isn't this a type of variant layer 3 operating mode?