Perpetual Contract DEX Battle: The Ecosystem Competition Behind Kyle and Hyperliquid's Clash

Hyperliquid’s 24-hour trading volume reaches approximately $13.08 billion, far surpassing most competitors. However, in early February, its open interest declined by about 36.2% over seven days—a downward trend commonly observed across major platforms.

Kyle Samani publicly criticized Hyperliquid, accusing it of closed-source code, permissioned architecture, and lack of KYC mechanisms, viewing these as manifestations of the “worst” problems in the crypto industry.

Arthur Hayes responded with a charitable bet worth $100,000, wagering that the HYPE token’s performance over the next few months will outperform any altcoin with a market cap exceeding $1 billion.

Debate Spark: A Tweet and a $100,000 Bet

On February 8, well-known crypto investor and former Multicoin Capital co-founder Kyle Samani publicly challenged on social media. He sharply stated, “Hyperliquid exemplifies many of the worst issues in the crypto industry.”

Samani’s criticism focused on several core issues: Hyperliquid’s closed-source code, permissioned architecture, and lack of effective KYC/AML mechanisms. His comments quickly sparked intense discussion within the crypto community, with supporters and critics voicing their opinions.

This debate emerged as Samani recently announced he would gradually step back from daily operations at Multicoin Capital, allowing him more freedom to express personal views. A commenter noted, “Leaving the investment firm means Samani can be more daring in speaking his true thoughts.”

In response, a prominent crypto influencer, Arthur Hayes, dramatically challenged him on social media: “Let’s make a bet.”

Hayes proposed that from February 10, 2026, 00:00 UTC to July 31, 2026, the HYPE token’s price increase will surpass that of any altcoin with a market cap over $1 billion on CoinGecko. The loser must donate $100,000 to a charity designated by the winner.

Data Truth Battle: Industry Reflection Triggered by Coinglass

Another front in the debate centers on data analysis. The crypto data platform Coinglass released a report questioning the trading data of several major perpetual DEXs.

According to Coinglass’s comparative analysis, Hyperliquid’s 24-hour trading volume is about $3.76 billion, open interest is $4.05 billion, and liquidation volume reached $122.96 million.

In comparison, Aster’s trading volume in the same period was $2.76 billion, open interest $927 million, and liquidation volume only $7.2 million; Lighter’s trading volume was $1.81 billion, open interest $731 million, and liquidation volume $3.34 million.

Coinglass’s analysis indicates that in perpetual markets, high trading volume often correlates with open interest dynamics and liquidation activity during price volatility. The platform suggests that if reported trading volume is high but liquidation volume is relatively low, it may indicate “incentive-driven trading” or “market maker cycles.”

This analysis has sparked in-depth industry discussions on the definition of “real trading activity.” Critics argue that conclusions based solely on a single-day snapshot can be misleading. They point out that whale positions, algorithmic differences between platforms, and market structure changes can all influence liquidation patterns without necessarily implying inflated trading volume.

Reshaping the Landscape: From Dominance to Competition

As this debate unfolds, the competitive landscape of perpetual DEXs is undergoing profound change. Industry analysis shows Hyperliquid’s market share has fallen from nearly 99% at the start of the year to about 66%.

Approximately $2.5 billion of new capital has flowed into emerging platforms like Aster, Lighter, and EdgeX. On-chain data indicates only about 7% of Hyperliquid users have tried these new platforms, and over 95% of the new capital comes from addresses that have never used Hyperliquid.

This shift raises a key question: Is the growth of perpetual DEXs driven by genuine user migration and market expansion, or is it a false boom fueled by airdrop expectations?

Recent data shows that after the airdrops, Lighter’s perpetual contract trading volume sharply declined, with weekly volume nearly tripling from its peak. Hyperliquid has regained its leading position in perpetual DEX trading.

In the past 7 days, Hyperliquid’s trading volume was about $40.7 billion, higher than Aster’s $31.7 billion and Lighter’s $25.3 billion. In 24-hour open interest, Hyperliquid leads with approximately $9.57 billion.

New Battlefield: The Rise of Stock Perpetual Contracts

While competition among traditional crypto perpetual contracts intensifies, a new arena is emerging: stock perpetual contracts. These products combine the price volatility of traditional stocks (primarily US equities) with the mature mechanisms of perpetual contracts.

Stock perpetual contracts offer users a way to gain near-equity exposure without actually holding stocks or being limited by trading hours. These products have begun to scale on leading perpetual DEXs like Hyperliquid, Aster, and Lighter.

This trend reflects an accelerated integration of real-world assets with on-chain derivatives, pushing the crypto trading market from a focus solely on native crypto assets toward a “full-asset perpetualization” paradigm.

In this process, perpetual DEXs are expected to evolve into comprehensive trading portals covering a broader range of assets with stronger global attributes. Meanwhile, mainstream centralized exchanges, constrained by licensing and increasingly strict securities regulations, are unlikely to rapidly list such products in the foreseeable future.

The rise of stock perpetual contracts opens a potential growth space built on hundreds of trillions of dollars in stock assets but also introduces new regulatory challenges and risk considerations.

Tech Race and Industry Future

The competition among perpetual DEXs is not just about market share but also about technological pathways. Successful platforms need to meet four core requirements for centralized-limit order books: sub-100-millisecond end-to-end latency, co-located deployment, zero or predictable fees, and effective MEV protection.

Hyperliquid’s technological breakthroughs include 70-millisecond fixed block times, validator co-location deployment, zero fees, and order cancellation priority mechanisms. These innovations help it build a liquidity flywheel: attracting non-toxic retail flow, which in turn attracts market makers to provide deep liquidity, tighten spreads, and draw in more users.

Currently, centralized exchanges’ perpetual contracts generate daily trading volumes in the hundreds of billions of dollars, while on-chain perpetuals account for only 1-2%, leaving significant market space. As regulatory environments evolve and user demand for fund security increases, capital migration to on-chain solutions is expected to continue.

In the future, competition among perpetual DEXs will become more diversified. Technology is necessary but not sufficient; distribution capability is becoming a key factor. The example of Morpho, which rapidly surpassed Aave after integrating with Coinbase on the Base chain, demonstrates the importance of a strong distribution network.

Summary

As of February 10, the crypto world is still awaiting the outcome of the bet, but the specific data on HYPE token prices should be checked against the latest figures from major trading platforms like Gate.

The outcome of this debate remains uncertain, but the competitive landscape of perpetual DEXs has become more transparent. Whether Hyperliquid maintains its leading position or emerging platforms chip away market share, the ultimate beneficiaries are users seeking safer and more efficient trading experiences.

When technological standards conflict with decentralization ideals, the market ultimately votes not with pure ideology but with the most usable products.