Ehhh this is like $174M across multiple chains and cold/hot wallets sent to 0x770b10b273fC44Fe9197D6bF20F145c2e98463Ee over the past hour.

Most tech giants in the 2000s built their infrastructure and product as one entangled unit. Amazon had the foresight to separate out AWS as an API layer, of which Amazon retail was the first of many users. Today, AWS generates more profit than all of Amazon's other business lines combined. Hyperliquid is built with the same philosophy. Housing all of finance requires thoughtfully designed, open financial primitives. Each primitive should obey the Unix principle of "Do one thing and do it well." Talented builders then have the foundation to chain these together to create magical applications. HyperCore borrowing is an example to highlight this philosophy in action. Most other platforms implement portfolio margin by marking an account's collateral to market value with an LTV haircut, creating borrowed assets without an explicit lender. This system is simpler to implement, but misses a golden opportunity for composability. Hyperliquid instead begins with a borrow/lend protocol on HyperCore. Every borrowed asset is sourced from a supplier, so risk is isolated within the borrow/lend primitive instead of platform-wide. HyperCore's portfolio margin system is implemented as an orchestration layer that composes borrow/lend, with other primitives such as perps, spot, and outcome trading. This decomposition has several nice corollaries: 1. Today's announcement of manual borrowing is not a new feature, but simply an extension of the underlying primitive. Borrowers on day one have access to 400M and growing of supplied liquidity. 2. Portfolio margin users earn interest on their idle stablecoin collateral. This is not a new feature, but a natural byproduct of composing trading with lending. 3. System safety is easier to reason about when perp and borrow/lend margining are independent. In the same way that math theorems almost prove themselves when the right abstractions are defined, composable designs just feel right.

BREAKING: President Trump says he will issue a $5,000 "dividend" to every adult citizen in the US if the Republicans win the midterm elections. There are currently ~245 million US citizens age 18+, meaning this dividend would cost ~$1.2 trillion. This would mark the biggest economic stimulus payment since the pandemic.

The 2026 rini roadmap: 1) Security audit wrapping up now. 2) Beta opens September 2026: 20+ vault managers & traders already in, native HIP-3 and HIP-4 access, custom performance and management fees instead of a fixed rate. 3) Public launch by end of 2026: open to every manager, plus the communication layer between managers and depositors. Not whitelisted yet? rini.xyz/#waitlist Managers or depositors, which stage are you watching for?

A note on the SPCX pre-IPO (IPOP) contract: TradeXYZ IPOP contracts are price-based perpetual contracts that track the market-implied expected price of one share of Class A or common stock. Neither share count nor market cap are an input to the market specification, oracle methodology, or conversion treatment. Our documentation had previously featured educational examples showing how a user might derive their own fair price in a scenario where they started with a view on both market cap and share count. Although these examples were included for context, we received feedback that they caused confusion, so we have removed them from the documentation. TradeXYZ does not use, publish, or rely on a share-count or market-cap denominator for SPCX or any other XYZ market. When SpaceX completes their IPO and sufficient external market data becomes available, SPCX is expected to transition to standard external oracle pricing, and the contract is expected to converge toward the public trading price.

How Two Things Can Be True At Once - Hyperliquid I find myself in a weird place with Hyperliquid. I am incredibly bullish on the hyperliquid:native token. But I am becoming increasingly bearish on Hyperliquid as a trader-facing exchange. For many months now, I’ve talked about how much I wish Hyperliquid would spend real time improving its user interface and overall user experience. Because traders live and work inside these products. The interface matters. The flow matters. Intuitive design matters. The small things that reduce friction matter a lot when real money is on the line. And yet, for over a year, Hyperliquid has failed to ship any meaningful improvements in those areas. As one of the largest revenue-generating protocols in all of crypto, at some point you have to ask: why? The answer seems pretty clear. They chose to be an infrastructure company. They chose to build the rails. The engine. The backend. The liquidity layer. The thing other people can build on top of. And to be fair, they have done that incredibly well. For a while, I wondered if I was just a lone voice in the wilderness. Maybe the things I wanted only mattered to me. Maybe most traders were perfectly happy with the experience as-is. But $82 million generated by builder codes tells me I’m not alone. Over 20,000 unique traders connect to Hyperliquid through another interface every single day. That is not a rounding error. That is the market speaking. That is traders saying, “We like the liquidity. We like the engine. But we want a better cockpit.” Companies like Based, Insilico, and even wallet apps have listened to what active traders actually want. They have focused on smoother trading interfaces, better workflows, simpler execution, and features that make the experience feel less like you're fighting the product and more like using it. That revenue exists only because the demand exists. And that’s the part I don’t think should be ignored. It is entirely possible to focus on infrastructure while also improving the customer experience. I understand Hyperliquid runs an incredibly lean team. I understand the desire to pick a lane and stay focused. A lot of infrastructure companies don’t try to be everything to everyone. They focus on becoming the best infrastructure layer possible. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with that. But that is much closer to a B2B business model. And my personal passion is B2C. It's where I've spent much of my adult life. And I am a consumer of these products, after all. I am a trader. I care about what it actually feels like to use them every day. And from that perspective, Hyperliquid has become a strange contradiction inside my own mind. As infrastructure, I think Hyperliquid will continue to dominate. As the "AWS of perps", it may become one of the most important companies in the entire industry. And because so much revenue flows back toward HYPE, I believe the token has some of the best potential in crypto. I fully expect HYPE to be one of the darling runners of the next cycle. In fact, it already has been - in a bear market no less. But as a trader? I keep feeling disappointed. Because it could be so much better. That is the frustrating part. The trader experience still feels like an afterthought. And the data shows I'm not alone in feeling that. So yes, two things can be true at once. HYPE can be one of the best tokens in crypto. And Hyperliquid can still be leaving a massive amount of trader love, loyalty, and user experience on the table. 🫡 From the depths — The White Whale 🐋