Chinese Millionaire Trader Explains Why This New On-Chain Dex Would Be Bigger Than Hyperliquid

When a Singaporean trader managing over $200 million in crypto positions reveals why he’s pushing capital into an unproven protocol over the dominant market leader, the market pays attention. While the trader requested anonymity due to compliance requirements, his positions on Hyperliquid are publicly on-chain.

He cited three specific concerns that led him to his conclusion: Hyperliquid’s centralization risks despite decentralized branding, liquidation hunting by sophisticated actors, and a lack of yields beyond speculative trading. His comments came during a private roundtable in Hong Kong last month and reflect growing unease among Asian institutional capital about how Hyperliquid’s design holds serious vulnerabilities.

Hyperliquid’s dominance and structural cracks

Hyperliquid’s technical achievements are undeniable. The platform processes 200,000 orders per second with sub-second finality, controls roughly 70% of perpetual DEX market share, and generated $844 million in fees during 2025.

Yet these numbers distract from structural issues that professional traders increasingly find problematic. The protocol received a 24% DeFiSafety score due to unaudited core logic and closed-source node software. The team controls the supermajority of validator stake, meaning the supposedly decentralized exchange could theoretically access the $2.3 billion in bridged USDC through validator collusion.

The March 2025 JELLY token manipulation incident cost the protocol’s liquidity vault $12 million and required manual intervention to resolve. It’s clear proof that the decentralization claims don’t always match operational reality.

HFDX’s alternative architecture

There’s an opening for protocols that address these specific weaknesses while maintaining competitive performance. HFDX approaches the perpetual DEX architecture differently by separating trading infrastructure from capital deployment strategies.

Rather than forcing all participants into the same liquidity pool that acts as counterparty to every trade, the platform introduces Liquidity Loan Note strategies. These allow capital providers to earn pre-defined, fixed-rate returns over stated terms. The returns derive from actual protocol activity, like trading fees, borrowing costs, and liquidation premiums, rather than token emissions or unsustainable yield farming programs.

The risk management framework differs meaningfully as well. Where Hyperliquid concentrates risk in the HLP vault that has experienced significant drawdowns during market stress, HFDX’s architecture allows for tranched risk exposure.

Conservative capital can participate in senior tranches with lower but more stable returns backed by overcollateralization. Risk-seeking participants can take junior positions with higher potential yields. This capital efficiency means the protocol can support comparable trading volume with potentially less total liquidity, reducing the cold-start problem that typically plagues new DEX launches.

On fees, HFDX targets a competitive structure in the range of 0.025-0.040% for takers, comparable to Hyperliquid’s tiered system but with shorter volume calculation windows that benefit growing traders. The protocol’s non-custodial design and on-chain execution match Hyperliquid’s standards, but the fully audited codebase and transparent oracle mechanisms address security concerns that have driven institutional caution.

The early mover calculation

Acknowledging the obvious: Hyperliquid currently offers superior liquidity depth, proven infrastructure stability, and an established ecosystem that HFDX cannot match at launch. Network effects in derivatives trading are substantial, and liquidity begets liquidity. The platform’s $6 billion TVL and $15 billion daily volume create tight spreads and minimal slippage that newer protocols struggle to replicate immediately.

Yet the Asian trader’s calculus focuses on a different timeline. His view is that protocols capturing even 15-20% of Hyperliquid’s current market share within twelve months could deliver asymmetric returns to early participants. This is especially true if they solve documented pain points around centralization, structured yield access, and risk management that Hyperliquid’s architecture doesn’t address.

For traders willing to evaluate new infrastructure before it becomes consensus, HFDX presents a credible alternative worth closer inspection.

Make Your Money Work Smarter And Unlock A Wealth Of Opportunities With HFDX Today!

Website: https://hfdx.xyz/

Telegram: https://t.me/HFDXTrading

X: https://x.com/HfdxProtocol

Disclaimer: This is a paid post and should not be treated as news/advice. LiveBitcoinNews is not responsible for any loss or damage resulting from the content, products, or services referenced in this press release

The post Chinese Millionaire Trader Explains Why This New On-Chain Dex Would Be Bigger Than Hyperliquid appeared first on Live Bitcoin News.