Why do Hyper Liquidity’s critics and rivals continue to push back?
An analysis by Coinglass comparing data from Perpetual Decentralized Exchanges (Per DEX) has sparked a heated debate and in the process highlighted differences in the crypto derivatives sector.
The study revealed differences in transaction volumes, open interest and hyperliquid, ester and lighter. Users question what qualifies as genuine business activity on these platforms.
Coinglass Data Sparks Debate on real trading on fixed DEXs
Coinglass has pushed back after publishing a comparison of the Perp DEX, questioning whether the reported trades in the sector's units reflect actual market activity.
Sponsored
As a 24-hour snapshot comparing Hyperliquid, Aster and Lighter shows:
HyperLiquid recorded approximately $3.76 billion in trading volume, $4.05 billion in open interest and $122.96 million in liquidity. Aster reported $2.76 billion in volume, $927 million in open interest, and $7.2 million in liquidity, while Literary reported $1.81 billion, $731 million in open interest, and $3.34 million in liquidity.
According to Coinglass, such differences can occur. In perpetual futures markets, high trading volume driven by structured positions is often associated with demand volatility and filtering activity for price movements.
The firm suggested that a combination of high reported volume and relatively low liquidity could indicate a lack of demand for organic hedges:
Incentive driven marketing marketer looping or points farming.
Based on this, Coinglass concludes that HyperLiquid has demonstrated strong internal consistency across key parameters.
Sponsored
Meanwhile, the sound quality of some competitors warrants further verification using measures such as liquidity, payouts, order book depth and active trader counts.
“Conclusion…HyperLiquid shows stronger consistency between volume, OI and liquidity – a better sign of real activity. Meanwhile, the quality of Astor/Liter volume needs further confirmation (along with premiums, funding, order book depth and active traders),” the analytics platform noted.
Critics push back, but Coinglass defends its position
However, critics argue that conclusions drawn from a single day's snapshot can be misleading. Specifically, they suggest alternative explanations for the data, including differences in whale positioning, algorithms between platforms, and market structure that may influence liquidity patterns without exaggerating volume.
Others have questioned whether total liquidity alone is a reliable indicator of market health, suggesting that high liquidity may also reflect aggressive leverage or volatile business conditions.
Meanwhile, Coinglass rejects accusations that its analysis is based on speculation or fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD), stressing that its conclusions are based on publicly available data.
Sponsored
“Coinglass has highlighted a few discrepancies based on readily available publicly available data. We did not expect an independent, data-driven observation to elicit such a hostile response,” he wrote.
In another response, Koenlas stressed that disputes should be presented with strong evidence rather than accusations.
The firm argued that high-use ceilings on some platforms could make them structurally vulnerable to forced liquefaction. This perspective shifts the debate from raw numbers to exchange design and risk management.
An Example of Backsliding in the PerpDx Sector: What Counts as “Real” Activity?
The controversy comes amid widespread disagreements surrounding the hyperliquid and sustainable DEX market.
Previously, Multicoin Capital co-founder Kyle Samani publicly criticized HyperLiquid, raising concerns about its transparency, governance and closed-source membership.
Sponsored
His speech drew a strong response from businessmen and supporters of the platform, many of whom dismissed the criticism and questioned his intentions.
BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes escalated the feud by offering a $100,000 charity bet that Samani would try to pick any major altcoin with a market cap of more than $1 billion to compete with Hypeliquid's HYPE token for its multi-month performance.
The debate highlights a deeper issue facing crypto derivatives markets: the lack of standardized metrics to assess activity across DEXes.
Transaction volume has long been used as a headline indicator of success. However, the rise of incentive programs, airdrop campaigns and liquid-mining strategies have complicated the interpretation of those figures.
As new DX platforms launch and competition intensifies, metrics such as open demand, liquidity patterns, leverage levels and order-book depth are becoming central to assessing market integrity.
This Coinglass event reflects how data can become a battlefield in an industry driven by both numbers and narratives. So, the debate over what those numbers really mean is likely to intensify as the futures market continues to grow.
