Despite the aggressive moves and massive investments from Perps like Aster and Lightner, and even endorsements from CZ, Hyperliquid is truly difficult to replace. Hyperliquid is a customized L1, and it is currently the most market maker-friendly Perp and L1 in the crypto world, bar none. Hyperliquid's real innovation lies in its redesign of the order book's microstructure, directly incorporating transaction identification into the consensus mechanism. This seemingly simple yet revolutionary design forces Hyperliquid to mandate that nodes must process Cancel and post-only orders before processing GTC and IOC orders at the consensus layer. Cancel: Cancels the pending order; Post-only orders - Only Maker orders are processed; GTC (Good-Til-Canceled) - Valid until cancelled; IOC (Immediate-Or-Cancel) - Complete the transaction immediately or cancel it. For market makers, being able to exit the market is paramount. During periods of sharp price fluctuations, order cancellation requests are always executed before other people's buy/sell requests. Market makers fear being targeted by attackers. Hyperliquid ensures that order cancellations always take priority. When prices fall, market makers cancel their orders, and the system forces these cancellations to be processed first, allowing market makers to successfully hedge their risks. On October 11, the day of the crash, Hyperliquid market makers remained online, with price spreads of 0.01-0.05%, because the market makers knew they could exit the market. For other on-chain order books or AMMs, there is usually a fatal problem. Market makers post quotes, market prices fluctuate, and they immediately issue order cancellation requests. However, in the milliseconds before the cancellation takes effect, high-frequency order takers (HFT) have already placed their orders, precisely targeting these "outdated quotes". The result is that market makers are forced to offer wider spreads to protect themselves, meaning you can't get much of a bargain from them. But with wider spreads, retail investors have to pay an extra 0.1% for each transaction. This is the "toxic order flow." While the trading volume appears large, it is actually a game between HFTs that harms the overall liquidity quality of the market. This is the problem that Solana is currently trying to solve by building ACE application control execution. It's also a problem that other blockchains struggle to solve, let alone MEV attacks. In other words, Hyperliquid defines "what constitutes a good trade" at the consensus level. Market makers can confidently quote tighter spreads because they know that order cancellation requests will be prioritized. Order takers can no longer rely on a few milliseconds of speed advantage to get ahead. This is why Hyperliquid actually has better liquidity during periods of volatility, and retail investors experience lower slippage. Hyperliquid protects those willing to provide liquidity, ensures retail investors who want to trade get the best prices, and makes it unprofitable for bots that only want to profit from arbitrage. Hyperliquid has already defined what kind of transactions are worth having their consensus confirmed, directly raising the level of competition to a whole new level.Despite the aggressive moves and massive investments from Perps like Aster and Lightner, and even endorsements from CZ, Hyperliquid is truly difficult to replace. Hyperliquid is a customized L1, and it is currently the most market maker-friendly Perp and L1 in the crypto world, bar none. Hyperliquid's real innovation lies in its redesign of the order book's microstructure, directly incorporating transaction identification into the consensus mechanism. This seemingly simple yet revolutionary design forces Hyperliquid to mandate that nodes must process Cancel and post-only orders before processing GTC and IOC orders at the consensus layer. Cancel: Cancels the pending order; Post-only orders - Only Maker orders are processed; GTC (Good-Til-Canceled) - Valid until cancelled; IOC (Immediate-Or-Cancel) - Complete the transaction immediately or cancel it. For market makers, being able to exit the market is paramount. During periods of sharp price fluctuations, order cancellation requests are always executed before other people's buy/sell requests. Market makers fear being targeted by attackers. Hyperliquid ensures that order cancellations always take priority. When prices fall, market makers cancel their orders, and the system forces these cancellations to be processed first, allowing market makers to successfully hedge their risks. On October 11, the day of the crash, Hyperliquid market makers remained online, with price spreads of 0.01-0.05%, because the market makers knew they could exit the market. For other on-chain order books or AMMs, there is usually a fatal problem. Market makers post quotes, market prices fluctuate, and they immediately issue order cancellation requests. However, in the milliseconds before the cancellation takes effect, high-frequency order takers (HFT) have already placed their orders, precisely targeting these "outdated quotes". The result is that market makers are forced to offer wider spreads to protect themselves, meaning you can't get much of a bargain from them. But with wider spreads, retail investors have to pay an extra 0.1% for each transaction. This is the "toxic order flow." While the trading volume appears large, it is actually a game between HFTs that harms the overall liquidity quality of the market. This is the problem that Solana is currently trying to solve by building ACE application control execution. It's also a problem that other blockchains struggle to solve, let alone MEV attacks. In other words, Hyperliquid defines "what constitutes a good trade" at the consensus level. Market makers can confidently quote tighter spreads because they know that order cancellation requests will be prioritized. Order takers can no longer rely on a few milliseconds of speed advantage to get ahead. This is why Hyperliquid actually has better liquidity during periods of volatility, and retail investors experience lower slippage. Hyperliquid protects those willing to provide liquidity, ensures retail investors who want to trade get the best prices, and makes it unprofitable for bots that only want to profit from arbitrage. Hyperliquid has already defined what kind of transactions are worth having their consensus confirmed, directly raising the level of competition to a whole new level.

Aster is coming on strong, but why is Hyperliquid so hard to replace?

2025/11/04 18:00

Despite the aggressive moves and massive investments from Perps like Aster and Lightner, and even endorsements from CZ, Hyperliquid is truly difficult to replace.

Hyperliquid is a customized L1, and it is currently the most market maker-friendly Perp and L1 in the crypto world, bar none.

Hyperliquid's real innovation lies in its redesign of the order book's microstructure, directly incorporating transaction identification into the consensus mechanism.

This seemingly simple yet revolutionary design forces Hyperliquid to mandate that nodes must process Cancel and post-only orders before processing GTC and IOC orders at the consensus layer.

  • Cancel: Cancels the pending order;
  • Post-only orders - Only Maker orders are processed;
  • GTC (Good-Til-Canceled) - Valid until cancelled;
  • IOC (Immediate-Or-Cancel) - Complete the transaction immediately or cancel it.
  • For market makers, being able to exit the market is paramount. During periods of sharp price fluctuations, order cancellation requests are always executed before other people's buy/sell requests.

Market makers fear being targeted by attackers. Hyperliquid ensures that order cancellations always take priority. When prices fall, market makers cancel their orders, and the system forces these cancellations to be processed first, allowing market makers to successfully hedge their risks.

On October 11, the day of the crash, Hyperliquid market makers remained online, with price spreads of 0.01-0.05%, because the market makers knew they could exit the market.

For other on-chain order books or AMMs, there is usually a fatal problem. Market makers post quotes, market prices fluctuate, and they immediately issue order cancellation requests.

However, in the milliseconds before the cancellation takes effect, high-frequency order takers (HFT) have already placed their orders, precisely targeting these "outdated quotes".

The result is that market makers are forced to offer wider spreads to protect themselves, meaning you can't get much of a bargain from them. But with wider spreads, retail investors have to pay an extra 0.1% for each transaction. This is the "toxic order flow."

While the trading volume appears large, it is actually a game between HFTs that harms the overall liquidity quality of the market.

This is the problem that Solana is currently trying to solve by building ACE application control execution. It's also a problem that other blockchains struggle to solve, let alone MEV attacks.

In other words, Hyperliquid defines "what constitutes a good trade" at the consensus level. Market makers can confidently quote tighter spreads because they know that order cancellation requests will be prioritized.

Order takers can no longer rely on a few milliseconds of speed advantage to get ahead. This is why Hyperliquid actually has better liquidity during periods of volatility, and retail investors experience lower slippage.

Hyperliquid protects those willing to provide liquidity, ensures retail investors who want to trade get the best prices, and makes it unprofitable for bots that only want to profit from arbitrage.

Hyperliquid has already defined what kind of transactions are worth having their consensus confirmed, directly raising the level of competition to a whole new level.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

DeSci Seoul 2025: Shaping the Future of AI, Data, and Decentralized Science

DeSci Seoul 2025: Shaping the Future of AI, Data, and Decentralized Science

The post DeSci Seoul 2025: Shaping the Future of AI, Data, and Decentralized Science appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. On September 22, 2025, the AI X Data Summit by DeSci Seoul 2025 will take place in Seoul, bringing together global leaders, innovators, and researchers at the forefront of next-generation scientific innovation. The summit will explore in depth how artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain-secured data infrastructures will transform research, collaboration, and innovation. The conference will feature keynote speeches and panel discussions by world-class speakers, structured around five core sessions. The first panel, “DeSci × AI”, will examine how AI can be applied across scientific domains such as protocol design, lab automation, real-time hypothesis generation, and open lab robotics. The second panel, “Biohacking & Longevity,” will focus on breakthroughs in life extension research, new collaborative models in the longevity field, and decentralized funding mechanisms that can support them. The third panel, “Healthcare, AI, Web3,” will address the pressing challenges of secure and privacy-preserving data sharing, interoperability, and finding the balance between openness and patient rights. The fourth panel, “Funding DeSci and DeAI Projects in Web3,” will contrast traditional funding structures with Web3-based models, exploring decentralized grants, IP-NFTs, and strategies for long-term revenue sustainability. Finally, the fifth panel, “Web3 Approach for AI Development and Infrastructure,” will look ahead to how foundational Web3 principles—Layer 1 blockchains, DAO governance, on-chain data verification, and censorship resistance—will shape the development of resilient and decentralized AI infrastructures. Beyond a traditional academic conference, DeSci Seoul 2025 aims to open a new scientific paradigm built on data sovereignty, AI integration, and community governance. The event is expected to provide researchers, innovators, and investors in fields such as healthcare, longevity, AI, blockchain development, and decentralized funding with practical solutions and opportunities for collaboration. As AI, data infrastructures, and decentralized science emerge as some of the most dynamic and influential sectors in the global blockchain industry, this summit is set to…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/19 09:17