il.hl @hyperliquidmax

$1.14 billion worth of $HYPE moved on-chain yesterday. It wasn't sold. Every single dollar was restaked — spread across 11 validators instead. 👀 When a team redistributes $1.14B of its own stake instead of selling, that's the most credible on-chain signal of conviction — and it doubles as a direct decentralization action. June 6 is Hyperliquid's monthly unlock date — running since January 2026. Although $675M worth of HYPE was scheduled for the June 6 cliff, the team committed to claiming only $38M. The rest stays locked. The 18.88M HYPE (~$1.14B) that moved on-chain wasn't distributed to the market. On-chain data shows it was redelegated FROM the team's self-custody TO 11 separate validator nodes — including CMI, HypurrCorea, ASXN, Imperator.co, ValIDAO, and others. ⛓️ All transactions executed within a 3-minute window at 6:57–7:00 PM on June 6. This is visible, verifiable, and permanent on Hyperliquid's L1. The mainstream narrative on unlock days: "Team tokens unlocked = sell pressure incoming." The on-chain reality on June 6: Zero sell pressure from this move. Redelegation ≠ liquidation. The tokens never left staking. They moved from a single point of control to 11 different validators — each with different operators, geographies, and communities. Hyperliquid's consensus requires greater than two-thirds of total staked HYPE to commit rounds. Distributing team stake across more validators directly reduces single-point-of-failure risk in the consensus layer. Opinion: Most projects talk about decentralization. This team executed $1.14B worth of it in 3 minutes — transparently, on-chain, verifiable by anyone. That's a different category of action. The question worth asking: If the team wanted to sell — June 6 was the perfect day. Unlock day. Market already down. Easier to hide in the noise. They chose to restake instead. 🎯 Whether that reflects genuine long-term conviction or is simply the rational move given vesting constraints — only time and future on-chain data will tell. But the ledger doesn't lie. Check the hashes yourself. 🔍 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

Hyperliquid News @HyperliquidNews

a day ago

15 hours ago, the team unstaked 18.88M hyperliquid:native, worth approximately $1.14B, and redelegated it across 11 validators.

16 30 607 119K 41

One of these assets crashed -38% today. The rest just followed the market. Only one of them had a 4-year-old hidden bug exposed. 🤯 Can you spot which one? One screen. Nine assets. Two completely different stories. 👇 Story 1: The macro sell-off This is crypto's worst week since July 2024. The culprit: US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw net outflows of over $3 billion across 10 consecutive trading days. Combined with geopolitical tension and whale selling, BTC touched near $60,000. Everything in that screenshot bled red because of this. 📉 BTC -6.4%. ETH -12%. SOL -8.6%. HYPE -15%. Painful — but explainable. It's the market. 💸 Story 2: The specific catastrophe ZEC: -38.44%. 🔴 That's not the market. Zcash plummeted after its founder confirmed a critical 4-year-old bug in the Orchard shielded pool that could have allowed unlimited, undetectable counterfeit ZEC creation. An emergency hard fork fixed it — but the damage to trust was immediate. On-chain data showed small liquidations relative to the size of the decline — meaning this was spot selling, not a leverage wipeout. Real holders chose to exit. Meanwhile, open interest in ZEC futures climbed to a record high as traders crowded into shorts. One bad day in the market. One catastrophic disclosure in the project. The chart looks similar. The reason is completely different. 🎯 Now look at the full picture of what's on this one screen: 🟠 BTC — crypto 🔷 ETH — crypto 🟢 HYPE — crypto 📈 S&P500 — US stock index (xyz) 🛢️ BRENT OIL — commodity (xyz) 🛢️ WTI OIL — commodity (xyz) 💚 NVDA — Nvidia stock (xyz) 🔵 MU — Micron stock (xyz) 🔒 ZEC — privacy coin One trading platform. Crypto. Stocks. Oil. All in one place. 24/7. The assets marked "xyz" are community-deployed HIP-3 permissionless markets — anyone can list anything. 🏗️ This isn't a screenshot of a CEX or a stock broker. This is Hyperliquid. The exchange that didn't exist 3 years ago. 🌍 One final signal most people missed: Despite HYPE falling -15.15% today — the funding rate is still +0.0366%. Translation: traders are still net long on HYPE. People aren't running. They're buying the dip. 💎 Compare that to ZEC — where the funding is negative and OI is at record shorts. Same red candles. Completely different underlying conviction. 📊 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

India has 119 million crypto users. The world's #1 derivatives market. And until now — zero access to the world's best on-chain exchange. 🤯 That gap just found its answer. Let's talk about the biggest untapped market in global crypto 👇 India is one of the world's largest crypto markets with approximately 119 million active users — more than any country on Earth. It's also the largest equity-derivatives market in the world by volume. A nation of 1.4 billion people — who love to trade, understand risk, and want global access. 📊 So why can't they access Hyperliquid properly? Three words: tax, friction, timezone. India imposes a 30% flat tax on all crypto gains, a 1% tax deducted at source on every single trade regardless of whether it's profitable, and losses cannot be offset against gains. The result? Capital leaves. India's crypto market keeps growing despite high taxes and regulatory hurdles — proof that demand moves faster than policy. Most of that demand is now being served offshore — by platforms with zero Indian registration, zero local recourse, and a long history of freezing withdrawals when things go wrong. 🔴 The timezone problem nobody talks about: The US market opens at 7 PM Indian time. Runs past midnight. On a calendar designed for New York. An Indian investor wanting to trade Apple, gold, or the S&P 500 has had to stay up late, fight currency friction, navigate FEMA + RBI + SEBI simultaneously, and hope their foreign brokerage doesn't freeze the account. 🌙 What BharatLiquid claims to solve: BL Labs, an India-based team, has announced BharatLiquid — a platform that routes directly to Hyperliquid's order book, with: 📌 Rupee (INR) deposits and withdrawals 📌 FIU registration in progress 📌 Keys split between user and system — not a shared hot wallet 📌 Every fill verifiable on-chain Their stated model: not competing with Hyperliquid — routing to it. Every Indian order adds volume to the same global order book used by institutions worldwide. 🌍 ⚠️ BharatLiquid is their own announcement — no independent third-party verification found yet. Verify before using. Why this structural thesis matters regardless of BharatLiquid specifically: The gap they're describing is real and validated: Approximately 119 million Indians actively use crypto, with 72% of investors under 35, and 75% of activity coming from non-metro cities — showing deep grassroots demand far beyond major urban centres. This population wants to trade the same global markets as everyone else — not a watered-down version of them. 📱 Hyperliquid's architecture — always on, fully on-chain, no closing bell — is structurally better suited for India than traditional finance has ever been. A market that's open Sunday at 11 PM Bangalore time matters more to an Indian trader than it does to a New York hedge fund. 🕐 The macro signal: Every time Hyperliquid adds a compliant on-ramp — ETFs in the US, wrappers in Europe, INR routing in India — the same thing happens: More capital enters the same order book. More fees generated. More HYPE bought back from the market. Automatically. Every day. ♾️ The platform doesn't need to expand. The world is building the bridges to it. 🎯 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

BL Labs @BL_labs_xyz

3 days ago

x.com/i/article/2062…

88 48 348 76K 148

@BL_labs_xyz Hyperliquid

@HunterBiden @gmoneyNFT Hyperliquid

@LowBeta @chameleon_jeff @cryptoeconprof @NYUStern Hyperliquid

The US government just officially legalized the product Hyperliquid built. And now Hyperliquid might not be allowed to sell it in the US. 🤯 Here's the regulatory paradox nobody is explaining clearly 👇 On May 29, 2026, the CFTC approved Kalshi's BTCPERP — the first bitcoin perpetual futures contract ever listed on a US-regulated exchange. The same day, they cleared Coinbase to route customers to its offshore Deribit affiliate. Translation: perps are now officially legitimate in America. ✅ The problem? Legitimacy came with a rulebook. And Hyperliquid wasn't written into it. 📋 What "regulated perps" actually requires: Kalshi's approval came with strict conditions — leverage limits, volatility controls, and full KYC requirements. Hyperliquid's entire value proposition — self-custody, no identity checks, high leverage, permissionless long-tail markets — is largely what a CFTC-regulated venue cannot match. The regulator built a cage. Hyperliquid was built to live outside it. 🔓 The 5 paths forward — explained simply: A legal analyst at @collab_currency (disclosed: HYPE holder) mapped out every option. Here's the summary: Path 1 — Go full offshore:Stay global, block US users aggressively. Lose US institutions. Keep everything else. (Binance main exchange model) 🌍 Path 2 — Build "Hyperliquid US":Create a separate regulated wrapper for US users. Ring-fence funds, products, and HYPE value capture. Most ideal — but requires massive structural rewrite. (Binance US model) 🏛️ Path 3 — Decentralize under Clarity Act:Progressively reduce team control until HYPE qualifies as a commodity, not a security. Big upside — but would slow down the fast product decisions that MADE Hyperliquid great. ⚖️ Path 4 — Go corporate, make HYPE a security:Cleanest compliance path. Most damaging to everything HYPE stands for. Considered the weakest option strategically. 🏢 Path 5 — Lobby for a new framework:Work with regulators to create bespoke rules for crypto-native perp venues. Long-term play. Already in motion via @HyperliquidPC. 🗳️ The wrinkle that changes everything: Hyperliquid's self-custody model, permissionless markets, and offshore structure cannot be replicated under CFTC-regulated infrastructure without fundamentally changing the product. But here's the flip side most people miss: USDC — Hyperliquid's primary settlement asset — is managed by Circle and Coinbase, two US-regulated entities. That means whether Hyperliquid wants it or not: US regulatory reach already exists at the asset layer. 🔗 This could be a constraint. Or it could be the exact leverage needed to negotiate a bespoke framework. The outcome depends entirely on how this dynamic is used. The honest institutional read: Whether you're bullish or bearish on Hyperliquid's US future comes down to two questions: 1️⃣ Which of the 5 paths do you think they'll actually take? 2️⃣ Can Hyperliquid remain dominant after adapting to whichever path they choose? The product is world-class. The regulatory challenge is real. Both things are true at the same time. 📊 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

Derek Edws @derekedws

4 days ago

hyperliquid is a killer product meanwhile, there are pressures that may constrain the project’s viability within US borders including: - hyperliquid’s product layer (via CFTC’s kalshi approval, coinbase/deribit no action, and policy statement) - hyperliquid’s network and token

35 46 361 138K 393

@SolanaCasinos The bug survived 4 years of human audits. An AI cracked it. So who's actually doing the "staying sharp" now? 👀

A bug existed inside Zcash for 4 years. Nobody knew. And because of how privacy technology works — nobody can ever fully prove what happened during those 4 years. 🤯 This is a pure security analysis of what just happened to $ZEC. No hype. Just facts. 👇 What is Zcash, and why does security matter so much? Zcash is a cryptocurrency built on one core promise: mathematical privacy. Unlike Bitcoin — where every transaction is visible to anyone — Zcash uses something called zero-knowledge proofs (ZK proofs) to shield transactions completely. You can prove you have money without revealing how much, to whom, or from where. 🔐 This makes ZK proof integrity the entire foundation of ZEC's security model. If the math breaks — everything breaks. What happened on May 29, 2026: Security researcher Taylor Hornby discovered a critical soundness bug in the Orchard shielded pool's zero-knowledge proof circuit during an independent protocol audit for Shielded Labs. He responsibly disclosed it to the Zcash Open Development Lab within hours. In zero-knowledge proof systems, "soundness" is the property that ensures only valid transactions and state transitions are accepted by the network. A soundness vulnerability means the system could be tricked into accepting something it should have rejected. In plain English: the mathematical referee that validates every Orchard transaction could be fooled. 📋 The AI angle nobody expected: Hornby used Anthropic's Claude Opus 4.8 model to write a working exploit — and successfully generated counterfeit ZEC in a local test environment. The implication: AI-assisted security research can now discover vulnerabilities that human cryptographers missed for years. This is both good news (found before attackers) and a warning — the attack surface for cryptographic protocols just expanded. 🤖 How bad was it technically? A successful exploit could have allowed an attacker to forge transactions and double-spend funds within the Orchard pool. It could NOT, however, inflate the total ZEC supply. This distinction matters: ❌ What it COULD do: Double-spend ZEC within the Orchard shielded pool ✅ What it COULDN'T do: Create brand-new ZEC out of thin air from nothing Still serious — but not a supply hyperinflation event. 📊 The emergency response — how the team handled it: Phase 1: Emergency soft fork activated June 2 at block 3,363,426 (~02:00 UTC) — completely freezing Orchard transactions to prevent any exploitation window. P hase 2: Hard fork NU6.2 activated June 3 at block 3,364,600 with corrected circuit code. Total response time: roughly 5 days from discovery to patched network. A hard fork was necessary because a zero-knowledge proof circuit fix requires a completely new pinned verifying key — you cannot simply patch it like regular software. Five days. Emergency coordination. New cryptographic key. All while the vulnerability remained undisclosed to the public. That is genuinely fast execution for a cryptographic emergency. ✅ The core unsolvable problem: Due to Orchard's privacy-oriented nature, it is cryptographically impossible to prove whether the vulnerability had already been exploited before it was patched. This is the fundamental paradox of privacy technology. The same feature that makes Orchard transactions invisible to surveillance — makes them invisible to auditors too. You cannot prove it was exploited. You cannot prove it wasn't. The privacy is absolute — including the privacy of any potential attacker. ⚖️ How long was the risk window open? This vulnerability existed since the Orchard pool launched in May 2022 — meaning it sat undetected for 4 years across every version of zcashd from v5.0.0 through v6.12.3, and all versions of halo2_gadgets prior to v0.5.0. Four years. Every cryptographer who reviewed the codebase missed it. It took an independent security researcher using an AI model to finally find it. 🔍 Is this a new pattern or a one-off? In 2019, the team disclosed a similar counterfeiting vulnerability in the older Sprout shielded pool that had also gone undetected for years. That bug was also never known to have been exploited. The market responded with confidence rather than panic — ZEC climbed above $600 during the upgrade window. Bitcoin developer Peter Todd also cited this incident as a warning against integrating Zcash-style privacy into Bitcoin, highlighting the high cryptographic risk inherent in ZK-proof systems. Two critical bugs in two separate privacy pools. Both found years after deployment. Both fixed via emergency hard fork. The question the industry is now asking: Is this a pattern intrinsic to ZK-proof complexity? 🧠 What happens next — the supply integrity challenge: Shielded Labs proposed a network upgrade to allow public verification that ZEC supply hasn't been secretly inflated — implementing a "turnstile accounting" mechanism for all Orchard pool tokens. Detailed plans are expected to be released imminently. This is the critical test for Zcash's credibility going forward. If the turnstile mechanism can demonstrably prove supply integrity for the 4-year window — the trust problem becomes manageable. If it cannot — the philosophical gap between "probably fine" and "mathematically provable" remains open forever. 📐 The institutional security verdict: What the evidence supports: ✅ Team responded fast and transparently — 5-day emergency response ✅ No confirmed exploitation detected on-chain ✅ Patch is live and verified ✅ Historical precedent (2019) shows recovery is possible ✅ Bug found through PROPER audit, not active attack What the evidence cannot resolve: ❌ 4-year undetected window — inherently unauditable due to privacy design ❌ ZK-proof complexity creates recurring blind spots — now twice documented ❌ Supply integrity for historical period: mathematically unprovable without new mechanism ❌ AI-assisted exploit writing lowers the barrier for future attackers discovering similar bugs first The bottom line: Zcash is not broken. It is not a scam. But this event reveals something fundamental about advanced cryptographic systems: the more powerful the privacy, the harder it is to audit — and the longer bugs can hide. The open question for Zcash is whether it can ship a supply proof convincing enough to retire the doubt that a private pool can never fully dispel. That answer will determine whether this is a speed bump — or a structural turning point. 🎯 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

zooko🛡🦓🦓🦓 ⓩ @zooko

4 days ago

x.com/i/article/2062…

37 407 2K 2.8M 910

@derekedws Hyperliquid

77,000 users. That's it. That's Hyperliquid's daily user count. Solana has 2,300,000. 🤯 Yet one metric just ranked Hyperliquid 5x above Solana in growth quality. Same data. Completely different story. Let me show you something that changes how you think about crypto metrics 👇 This is the Artemis Bridge Flows dashboard. It tracks every dollar moving between blockchains from 2018 to today. The question it answers: where is capital actually going and staying? 💰 The capital leaderboard since 2018: All-time net capital flows across 27 chains: 🥇 Arbitrum: +$16.1B 🥈 Hyperliquid: +$6.84B ← born 2024, already #2 🥉 Optimism: +$5.9B 4️⃣ Solana: +$5.4B 5️⃣ Base: +$5.2B 6️⃣ Polygon: +$4.9B Hyperliquid has existed for less than 3 years. Every other chain on this list has been around 5-9 years. $6.84 billion in permanent capital. Ranked #2. In under 3 years. 🚀 What does "net inflow" actually mean? Think of it like a city's population growth. People move in (inflow). People move out (outflow). Net = who actually STAYED. Hyperliquid: 📥 $82.9B came in 📤 $76.1B left 🏦 $6.84B stayed permanently Capital that stays = capital that trusts. 📋 Now here's the part that breaks the narrative: Hyperliquid has 77,200 daily active users. Compare that to: 👥 BNB Chain: 2,300,000 DAU 👥 Solana: 1,700,000 DAU 👥 Polygon: 865,800 DAU 👥 Avalanche: 183,200 DAU Hyperliquid is near the bottom in user count. Yet it's #2 in permanent capital. How? 👇 The answer is in the Growth Quality metric. Artemis ranks chains by annualized log-growth + R² — a formula that specifically rewards steady, consistent growth and penalizes chains whose numbers spike and crash. The ranking: 🟢 Hyperliquid: +395 🔵 Solana: +69 🟡 BNB Chain: +17 🔴 Avalanche: +13 🟣 Polygon: +11 Hyperliquid's growth quality score is 5.7x higher than Solana. 23x higher than BNB Chain. 🤯 This isn't viral growth. It isn't bot traffic. It isn't airdrop farmers. It's genuine, sustained, compounding adoption — the rarest thing in crypto. 📈 The user quality gap explained: 77,000 Hyperliquid users generate: $800M+ annual fee revenue $6.84B in permanent capital retained $250B+ monthly trading volume 1,700,000 Solana users generate less capital retention. Each Hyperliquid user brings ~$88,800 in net capital. Each Solana user brings ~$3,176 in net capital. The difference in capital per user? 27x. 💎 One important transparency note: ⚠️ The dominant Arbitrum inflow (99.9% of HL's inflows) is largely the USDC bridge route — most USDC enters Hyperliquid through the Arbitrum-bridged USDC pathway. This is a technical infrastructure fact, not "99.9% of users coming from Arbitrum." The net capital signal ($6.84B retained) remains valid regardless of which bridge route was used. The institutional read: When capital moves into a chain and stays — that's conviction. When that conviction builds steadily without spikes — that's structural demand. When 77,000 users retain more capital than chains with 30x more users? That's capital quality over capital quantity. 🏗️ This is what institutions see when they look at Hyperliquid. Not the user count. The money that never left. 🎯 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

@PDmytriiev hl.eco

605 companies built a business on top of someone else's exchange. Nobody gave them permission. Nobody asked them to. They just... did. And made $81 million. 🤯 Here's something that breaks the traditional business model entirely 👇 On every normal financial platform — NYSE, Binance, Coinbase — only ONE company makes money. The platform. On Hyperliquid? 605 builders are running their OWN businesses on top of the same infrastructure. Each one keeping their own slice of the fees. 💰 Let me show you the actual numbers. Total Builder Ecosystem Revenue (all-time): $81.71M Daily builder revenue right now: $321.74K/day Unique users going through builders: 24.5K 📊 And here's the breakdown of who's winning: 🥇 Phantom — $1.40M revenue, 21,322 users 🥈 Insilico — $208.42K revenue (+44.5% growth) 🥉 Rabby — $276.57K revenue (+53.4% growth) These aren't Hyperliquid employees. They're independent teams — wallet apps, trading tools, analytics platforms — that plugged into Hyperliquid's infrastructure and started earning fees from their own users. Now here's what most people don't understand about why this matters: Think of it like an App Store. 📱 Apple built the phone and the operating system. But 99% of the apps you actually USE were built by outside developers. Those developers make money. Apple makes money. Users get better products. Everyone wins. That's exactly what's happening on Hyperliquid — but for financial markets. The fastest growing builder in the ecosystem just posted +522% growth. 🚀 One builder earns $497.46 per user — the highest revenue-per-user in the entire ecosystem. And there are 605 builders total — with 396 still anonymous, building quietly in the background. What does this signal structurally? When builders earn real money from a platform — they have financial incentive to: ✅ Keep improving their products ✅ Bring MORE users to the ecosystem ✅ Stay on Hyperliquid instead of switching to competitors Every new user a builder acquires → becomes a Hyperliquid user → generates protocol fees → funds $HYPE buybacks 🔄 The builders are doing Hyperliquid's marketing and distribution FOR FREE. Because they profit from it too. The institutional read here: Right now, builder volume = only 6.8% of total HL volume. Meaning 93.2% of Hyperliquid volume still comes through the native interface. 605 builders. 6.8% market penetration. If builder penetration grows to 20%... 30%... even 50% of volume? The builder revenue goes from $81M to $500M+. And every dollar of that activity still runs through Hyperliquid's core infrastructure — generating protocol fees, generating buybacks, generating demand for $HYPE. 🎯 The platform didn't build an exchange. They built a financial operating system. And 605 companies are already paying to run on it. 🏗️ ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

@danmatern Hyperliquid

@brian_armstrong @Bechtold77 @coinbase @HyperliquidX Hyperliquid

A DeFi protocol just force Coinbase and Circle to share their profits. And those profits now automatically buy $HYPE. 🤯 Here's something that's never happened before in financial history 👇 A decentralized exchange negotiated a deal where two of the world's biggest financial companies hand over most of their income — directly to the protocol. Not a rumor. This is live. Let me explain. 💰 First — the scale nobody is talking about: Hyperliquid now holds $6.90 BILLION in stablecoins. To put that in perspective: 🥇 Ethereum: $48.82B USDC 🥈 Solana: $7.70B USDC 🥉 HyperEVM: $6.58B USDC ← Hyperliquid 4️⃣ Base: $4.18B 5️⃣ Arbitrum: $2.27B 6️⃣ Polygon: $2.08B 7️⃣ BSC: $1.28B A DEX built 3 years ago is the #3 USDC chain on Earth. 🌍 And money is pouring in FAST: 📊 Last 24 hours: +$346 million new stablecoins minted 📊 Last 7 days: +$1.17 billion net inflow That's not a trickle. That's a flood. 🌊 Now here's the deal that changes everything: For years, this $6.9B sitting in Hyperliquid was generating massive yield. How? Simple: US Treasury interest rates. $6.9B × ~4%/year = $276 million/year in interest income The problem? That yield historically flowed to Circle and Coinbase — not to Hyperliquid or its users. The protocol supplied the users, the liquidity, and the trading activity that made the stablecoin useful — but kept none of the income. Hyperliquid decided that needed to change. 🔧 The AQAv2 deal — explained simply: Think of it like owning a shopping mall. Before: Tenants (Circle, Coinbase) kept all the rent money. After AQAv2: The mall owner (Hyperliquid) now keeps ~90% of the rent. 🏢 Under the new arrangement, Coinbase serves as USDC treasury deployer and shares the vast majority of reserve income with the Hyperliquid protocol. Compass Point analysts estimate the deal removes roughly $60-80 million in annual EBITDA from Coinbase and Circle combined. Where does that money go? ➡️~90% of all USDC reserve yield → Hyperliquid protocol➡️ Protocol uses it to buy $HYPE from the open market➡️ Automatically. Every day. On top of the $800M/year in trading fees. Implied additional yield revenue: 💵 ~$135M/year (illustrative at ~4% rate — estimate, not guaranteed)💵 ~$11.27M/month💵 ~$370K/day ⚠️ Activation still pending — yield routing begins after Coinbase + Circle complete technical setup The skin-in-the-game signal: Circle committed to stake 500,000 HYPE tokens as part of the deal. Coinbase also increased its staked HYPE position. The companies providing the stablecoin infrastructure are now forced to be aligned with $HYPE. If HYPE goes up → they profit. If HYPE goes down → they lose. 🎯 The total revenue picture for $HYPE: 💰 Trading fees (existing): ~$800M/year💰 Stablecoin yield (new, AQAv2): ~$135M/year (illustrative) Combined: ~$935M/year in protocol revenue — and this is BEFORE US market access opens. The precedent this sets: Compass Point warns that other DeFi protocols may now demand similar revenue-sharing terms from Circle and Coinbase — creating pressure across the entire stablecoin industry. Hyperliquid didn't just negotiate a deal for itself. It changed the rules for every protocol. Forever. 📜 ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

@PeterMintzberg @HyperliquidX Hyperliquid

@_stevenhl Hyperliquid

Today, Grayscale put $HYPE on Nasdaq. Not just to hold it. To stake it — and pay you for owning it. 🤯 Something historic happened this morning, June 3, 2026. 👇 The world's largest crypto asset manager just launched HYPG — the Grayscale Hyperliquid Staking ETF — on the Nasdaq stock exchange. For the first time ever: anyone with a regular brokerage account can now own $HYPE AND earn staking rewards from it. No crypto wallet needed. No seed phrase. No exchange account. Just a normal stock ticker. 📱 Let's break down exactly what HYPG is: Think of it like a savings account — but instead of earning 0.5% interest at a bank, you're earning staking rewards from one of the most active financial protocols on Earth. Here's how it works: 1️⃣ You buy HYPG shares on Nasdaq — same as buying Apple or Tesla 2️⃣ Grayscale takes your money and buys real $HYPE tokens 3️⃣ Those tokens get staked on the Hyperliquid network 4️⃣ Staking rewards (historically ~2.2% per year) flow back into the fund 5️⃣ Your shares reflect both the price of HYPE + the accumulated staking yield Price exposure. Plus income. Through one stock ticker. 🔑 The fee structure — why this matters: HYPG management fee: 0.29%/year Historical staking yield: ~2.2%/year Net math: ~+1.91%/year just from staking — before HYPE price moves a single cent. Grayscale describes HYPG as carrying the lowest gross fee among all U.S. Hyperliquid exchange-traded products — making it the most cost-efficient institutional wrapper for $HYPE available today. 📊 Now look at what this ETF is holding: Hyperliquid has traded over $2.99 trillion in perpetual futures volume with over $5.5 trillion in open interest. The protocol earned approximately $857 million in fees in 2025 alone — and 99% of those fees went back into the protocol through buybacks, making HYPE one of the most value-accretive tokens in decentralized finance. This is what's sitting inside HYPG. 🏦 Who is the custodian? Not some random startup. 🏛️ Anchorage Digital Bank N.A. — the first federally chartered crypto bank in the US, approved by the OCC 📋 BNY (Bank of New York Mellon) — one of the world's oldest and largest financial institutions, serving as Fund Administrator The infrastructure behind HYPG is built on century-old banking foundations. 🔐 The staking mechanic — what most people don't know: When HYPG stakes HYPE, those tokens actively participate in securing the Hyperliquid network. Validators who stake HYPE: → Help confirm transactions → Earn fees for doing so → Those fees distribute as staking rewards Grayscale notes it is the first sponsor to bring staking to U.S. spot exchange-traded products — meaning HYPG is doing something no ETF has done before with a crypto staking model built into a Nasdaq-listed product. The full picture of who is now involved with $HYPE: 📌 Bitwise (BHYP) — NYSE-listed ETF 📌 21Shares (THYP) — Nasdaq-listed ETF 📌 Grayscale (HYPG) — Nasdaq-listed, staking ETF, launched TODAY 📌 VanEck — pending SEC filing 📌 Pantera Capital — institutional investor thesis published June 2 📌 Coinbase — USDC treasury deployer on Hyperliquid 📌 Circle — technical deployer, staking 500K HYPE Six months ago, none of these names were attached to $HYPE. Today, every single one of them has financial skin in the game. 🎯 The bottom line for regular people: You no longer have to understand crypto to invest in Hyperliquid. You don't need a wallet. You don't need to understand staking. You don't need to trust a crypto exchange. You just need a Fidelity, Schwab, or Robinhood account — and a single ticker: $HYPG. 📈 The on-ramp for institutional money just got wider. Again. 🚀 ⚠️Always read the prospectus. Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

Grayscale @Grayscale

5 days ago

Grayscale Hyperliquid Staking ETF (Ticker: $HYPG) is now trading. The $HYPE ETP with the lowest gross management fee in the U.S.¹ and staking, in your brokerage account today. Why $HYPE? → $HYPE is the crypto asset powering 24/7 markets → $HYPE captures value from

69 136 603 97K 31

The CEO of one of Wall Street's biggest exchanges just said a crypto app is "bigger than Nasdaq." He wasn't joking. 🤯 That wasn't a crypto influencer talking. That was Jeffrey Sprecher — founder and CEO of Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), the company that owns the New York Stock Exchange. He said it publicly. At Bernstein's Strategic Decisions Conference. May 27, 2026. The subject? Hyperliquid. 🎯 Let that sink in for a second: NYSE's parent company isn't dismissing $HYPE. They're studying it. Meeting its founders. Lobbying regulators against it. When incumbents start lobbying against you — you've already won the respect battle. 📋 Here's the full picture from Pantera Capital's research (June 2, 2026): This isn't crypto Twitter hype. This is one of the oldest and most respected crypto investment funds writing a formal institutional thesis. 📑 The numbers that matter: 💰 $62 trillion — total perps volume on centralized exchanges in 2025 alone 📈 14% — DEX perps share of CEX volume today (was less than 1% in early 2023)🟢 40% — Hyperliquid's share of ALL on-chain perp volume 📊 $250B+ monthly volume 💵 $800M annualized revenue But the real story is what Hyperliquid is BECOMING: It started as a crypto exchange. Now it's the exchange the world uses when every other market is closed. 🌍 Real examples — not theory: 🛢️ Iran conflict started Saturday morning.NYSE closed. CME closed. Everywhere closed. Hyperliquid was the only place to trade oil. That weekend: $3.7 billion in crude oil volume. In one weekend. On a crypto app. 🥈 China announced silver margin changes on a weekend.Silver briefly hit 2% of global derivatives volume on Hyperliquid at peak. 🚀 Cerebras IPO — one of the biggest IPOs of the year. The investment banks underwriting the deal were monitoring Hyperliquid prices on their screens before the opening trade. Traditional assets have reached up to 40% of Hyperliquid's volume. A crypto exchange. Where 40% of trades are oil, gold, silver, S&P 500, and pre-IPO stocks. That's not DeFi anymore. That's something entirely new. 🏗️ The TAM that nobody is pricing in: 📌 $200B/day — 0DTE options and leveraged ETFs 📌 $2T/day — commodities derivatives 📌 $8T/day — FX derivatives Total: ~$10 trillion per day in addressable market. Hyperliquid capturing even a low single-digit percentage sustainably = 5x current revenue potential. 🔥 The SpaceX catalyst to watch: SpaceX is reportedly targeting an IPO later this month. Right now? It's trading at ~$200/share on Hyperliquid. The banks pricing the IPO are reportedly watching this number. Elon Musk — a vocal crypto supporter — is SpaceX's CEO. If he signals that Hyperliquid's price matters to the IPO process? That's a step-function increase in global awareness for the platform. 📡 What Pantera actually concludes: "The question is no longer whether perps can matter outside crypto; the market is already answering that. The question is whether the infrastructure that the blockchain industry built first can become the place where the rest of finance increasingly prices risk, trades, and discovers." That's not a retail trader talking. That's Pantera Capital — one of the first institutional crypto funds in the world — making their case. 📜 The risks (being transparent): ⚠️Biggest risk: US regulation — perps not yet freely available to US users ⚠️If regulated perps open in the US, competition gets more serious ⚠️Hyperliquid could potentially lose share to regulated venues for US users ⚠️Mitigant: Hyperliquid may launch its own US regulated version ⚠️Not financial advice. Always DYOR.

Pantera Capital @PanteraCapital

6 days ago

Last Friday, the CFTC opened the door to perpetual futures in the U.S. After years of regulatory headwinds, perps are graduating from crypto’s edge into mainstream finance. @HyperliquidX has been building exactly what the market needs: a fast, onchain, 24/7, permissionless

18 38 183 26K 57