if you're trading on Hyperliquid and waiting to see what's next we have sth for you

Now imagine what happens with HIP-4. Send it

if you had bought $HYPE instead of being an LP with Multicoin with all due respect, there is only one Hyperliquid

Your HyperEVM ecosystem passport. How many of the 12 stamps did you collect? @Catbal @felixprotocol @hyperlendx @hlnames @HyperSwap @HypioHL @kinetiq_xyz @Morpho @nunchi @pendle_fi @Theo_Network @ventuals Check it out at hlwrapped2025 (dot) xyz

Are you a Hypurr NFT owner? Check out all the perks you could be eligible for and get a rewind of all your stats in 2025: hlwrapped2025 (dot) xyz

CEX dominance doesn’t mean onchain perps lose. It just means that billions of trading volume have not migrated yet. Keep the faith. Hyperliquid.

You were a part of history in 2025. Here's what Hyperliquid achieved together: + $2.95 trillion in total volume + 606,170 cumulative users + A 30-validator network securing the protocol Now, it's time to see your 2025 highlights on Hyperliquid: hlwrapped2025 (dot) xyz

.@machibigbrother's trading age is 42 years old. How about you? Find out at hlwrapped2025 (dot) xyz

Here are @JamesWynnReal's trading stats on Hyperliquid. How did you fare? Check it out: hlpwrapped2025 (dot) xyz

The Hyper Foundation proposes to burn all HYPE tokens accumulated by the AF. Over 10% of circulating supply could be removed if the proposal passes. There's only one Hyperliquid.

well if y'all wanted sneaks

unbelievable but here it is real-time, 3D interactive scene with your hands wrapping up Hyperliquid 2025 the way it deserves have to tag the gang in this @HyperliquidX @hypurr_co @Hypurr

Is Tarun's paper even talking about ADL? ADL is a mechanical liquidation design with a core purpose of: + avoiding slippage + preventing bad debt from existing Exchanges would never want to have deliberate insolvency risk. Hyperliquid.

FOGO hyperps are now live on HyperETH Long or short $FOGO with up to 3x leverage on the platform that lets you win on every trade: hypereth.io/perps/FOGO

Are we in an AI bubble? Oracle's earnings report could signal if the AI expansion is sustainable, or needs constant financing. Long or Short $ORCL with up to 3x leverage on the platform that gives you the AI edge: hypereth.io/hip3/xyz/ORCL/US…

Could the losses during the Oct 10 liquidation cascade have been reduced? @tarunchitra believes that an outdated algorithm (Queue ADL) massively over-liquidated profitable traders by ~$653M. There are 2 key points to his argument: + The system took more than it needed During repeated ADL triggers, the Queue algorithm closes the entire profitable position, instead of 'shaving off' only the required amount. Over many consecutive triggers, such as during Oct 10 where it was triggered over 40 times, the small inefficiencies compounded. This is how the ~$653M “overshoot” claim was made, where the haircut applied to profitable traders exceeded the minimum required to cover deficits. + Concentrated victimhood Queue also tends to concentrate impact on a smaller set of large winners (often whales or market makers), which raises concerns over fairness. During the cascade, ADL can fire many times in a row, and constantly looks for the top winners who lose out compared to those with smaller position sizes. Concentrated victimhood can result in whales and MMs deciding to leave the platform altogether if they're constantly being singled out and getting penalised. While Queue preserves solvency in the near-term, it can damage liquidity conditions in the future. ___ @chameleon_jeff's came up with 2 rebuttals to the article, claiming that it's criticising a version of ADL that @HyperliquidX doesn't actually use: + ADL does not 'send profits' to HLP In the article, ADL is seen as 'taking winners' profit and handing it to HLP', so HLP gets enriched. But HLP is not a 'special recipient that ADL funnels money into', it can be on the losing side too. HLP is treated just like any other participant under ADL. In simpler terms, ADL is a system-wide position reduction rule used in emergencies to force close profitable positions, only when both market liquidations and the HLP backstop cannot maintain the solvency of the platform. In fact, HLP could have made a higher PnL by backstopping more liquidations, but that takes on more risk that could affect solvency. So instead of seeing it as a 'protocol revenue' mechanism, it is ADL is a risk reallocation mechanism. + ADL 'destroying' $653m of PnL is inaccurate ADL forced traders out of positions early, so they didn't earn all the profits if they had held all their positions the entire time. 'Destroyed PnL' is more of an opportunity cost, and not necessarily money being confiscated or handed to HLP. In a previous post, @chameleon_jeff mentioned how the ADL logic is meant to be simple so they're more reliable in crises and easier for users to understand and predict. More changes add complexity which could lead to unexpected and unintended behaviors when it is expected to be stable. Nevertheless, the team would be open to adding more complexity if it adds robustness to the design: xitter.cf/chameleon_jeff/status/… ___ Our take The only reason why this debate is even possible is because of Hyperliquid being fully transparent onchain. For years, we no idea on the true ADL mechanics that CEXes used, since none of their data is publicly available. We've seen accusations of CEXes: ▶︎ Trading against their users ▶︎ Under-reporting liquidations There's no way to verify the data, while onchain transparency holds everyone accountable. ADL is not bad and shouldn't be removed entirely, as it's the last-resort measure that helps to maintain solvency for a perps platform. But with data being fully public, the debate shifts from 'ADL bad' to 'how can we add robustness and fairness to ADL without introducing fragile complexity?' To become the blockchain that houses all of finance, we need more nuanced discussions to improve the system. Hyperliquid.

Those who can, do Those who can't, fud Hyperliquid