Evan

71% of your hyperliquid trading fees might not even be going to hyperliquid we just published an analysis at onekey — one trader paid $183k in fees on $142m volume, only $52k actually went to hl. the rest was silently taken by his wallet as "builder fees" thats part of why i joined onekey to do perps growth. we charge 0% builder fee, and we built hypefees.com to let anyone see what their wallet is really costing them. coinbase ventures and binance backed, but the culture here is about building useful stuff not extracting value my job now: kol partnerships, community, content, getting traders onboard. gonna document the whole journey here day one

hl OI rankings today: $btc 2.4B, $eth 1.2B, $hype 874M, $sol 407M, $zec 293M. $zec sits at #5 with 3x the perp OI of $xrp. zcash quietly became degens' second life and nobody mentioned it

$HYPE funding flipped negative on hyperliquid itself. $874m OI and price down 2 percent, shorts collecting interest. shorting the house on the house's own table

spot and perps in one view. small step but the wallet-to-trading-hub evolution continues

0.14% vs blackrock’s 0.25%. the race to zero hasnt even started yet

something most people missed today — zec pumped 16% but the interesting part is funding rate sitting at -0.0044%. that's shorts getting destroyed while still adding positions. 113m in open interest on hyperliquid alone. ceasefire narrative doing real damage to bears rn

Something most hl traders miss — third-party wallet frontends can add fees on top of hyperliquid's native commissions. sometimes even more than the trade fee itself @OneKeyHQ keeps it clean — no extra markup, just the standard hl rate. more frontends should do this honestly

Cepiiiiiiii