Live Data
Perpetual Futures on Hyperliquid L1
Live volume, TVL, and protocol rankings for perpetual futures trading on Hyperliquid L1. 3 perp DEXes tracked.
Total Value Locked in DeFi
$1.26b
Key Metrics
Perpetual Futures DEXs on Hyperliquid L1
3 protocols| # | Protocol | Volume 24h |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | $2.72b | |
| 2 | $178.3k | |
| 3 | - |
Protocols on Hyperliquid L1
Perpetual futures trading on Hyperliquid L1
Hyperliquid L1 is purpose-built for perpetual futures. The chain supports roughly 200,000 orders per second with a 0.2-second median end-to-end latency, according to the Hyperliquid documentation. Traders do not pay gas, but trading fees and funding can apply.
The protocol that built its own chain
Hyperliquid runs a central limit order book directly on the L1 rather than using AMM pricing. A market order crosses visible book levels. The official base-perp API returned $2.7845 billion in 24-hour notional volume on August 11, 2026. Use the live perpetuals listing for current cross-venue data.
The chain's base perp activity is concentrated in HyperCore. A protocol or bridge outage can therefore affect a large share of the chain's trading path.
What the chain delivers technically
Sub-second finality puts Hyperliquid L1 in a different category than Ethereum rollups for latency-sensitive strategies. Arbitrage bots and market makers running on rollups like Arbitrum still face 1-2 second block confirmation windows, even at their fastest. The Hyperliquid L1 architecture page describes the consensus mechanism as HyperBFT, a custom BFT variant tuned for order book throughput.
Hyperliquid has two execution environments. HyperCore runs the native order book, while HyperEVM supports general-purpose EVM smart contracts. The environments share the same chain but have different execution and risk paths.
Risk picture
The Arbitrum bridge is a separate risk surface. Deposits and withdrawals need signatures from more than two-thirds of validator staking power. Withdrawals also have a dispute period. Users must review the bridge design separately from order execution.
The JELLY incident in March 2025 was a real test of crisis response. A coordinated low-liquidity manipulation attempt tried to trigger cascading HLP liquidations. The team froze the market and refunded affected parties. No user funds were lost, but the episode confirmed the chain's validator set retains emergency override capability.
Compare live Hyperliquid execution costs against alternatives using our cost comparison tool, or browse the full perpetuals listing to see where Hyperliquid ranks on 24h volume today.