HyperEVM appears to be both cursed and blessed with its relation to HyperCore currently The blessings are obvious with userbase, use cases, etc The curse however comes in the form of HYPE supply on the EVM’s constraint due to staking fee discounts exclusive to native stakers on HyperCore. Many of the largest HYPE holders and HL traders gain more from vanilla staking on HyperCore than the capital efficiency gained via an LST like kHYPE, leaving millions of HYPE that will not be used on HyperEVM Solution here seems to be to let liquid stakers also take part in fee discounts—curious to hear arguments against this however (would certainly need a community vetting process of LSTs, etc)

HYPE price vol = Felix Stability Depositors feast Over $1.17m in liquidated HYPE taken by HYPE SP Depositors in the past 5 days

For DAT companies, it seems there are two main drivers of value: >Access >Yield On the access front, this primarily comes down to the ability for regulated institutions and investors to gain access to crypto assets (BTC, HYPE, ETH, NFTs, etc) via regulated vehicles in a form factor they are comfortable with However, the access value-add will only continue to make sense if DAT companies can continue to increase NAV per share. If unable to sustain this (which many may not be able to), there is little point in paying a premium for one of these DATs compared to just purchasing an ETF, trading at NAV This then brings us to the second and arguably more compelling value-add: yield. Imo, this is ideally the real value-add we will see with treasury companies like that being done by Ethena to offer basis trade yield to equity investors Consider another DAT that uses its premium above NAV to purchase cash-flow businesses and drive real yield. Or in the form of a HYPE treasury vehicle earning yield via HIP-3 market deployment. Current access to these yields is limited to private market investors in case 1 and crypto-natives in case 2 Bring real yield back to stagnated public capital markets

Step by Step Guide to Earn 16%+ currently on @usd_hl >Step 1: Swap USDC for wM (@m0) on Eth mainnet: >Step 2: Bridge wM to HyperEVM via Hyperlane bridge and community frontend built by @Hy_Purr_liquid: >Step 3: Go to Felix Vanilla and deposit USDhl into either the Standard vault or the Frontier vault (Frontier lends to "riskier" collateral, so over time risk+yield should be higher compared to Standard): Happy farming, anon

What are the form factor upgrades we need to see for tokenized stocks to make sense? The promise of stocks on-chain has hovered above the crypto space for the past five years or so especially. But we’ve never seen this come to fruition at the retail level. Companies like @BackedFi have made a valiant push (and Backed continues to do so now with xStocks coming), but all of Backed’s issued assets have a total liquidity of just over $7.2m. So why haven’t tokenized equities made sense so far? At the macro level, it’s a question of unique offering: the largest traders of US equities already have venues to trade these assets that function well, often with no fees and low to no trade settlement times if executed during trade hours. Now this discounts the potential for market expansion, particularly around US equities, but it emphasizes the idea that trading crypto-native assets was a net new unlock; trading equities so far has not been. Then at the micro level, leaving the obvious piece of unregistered security issuance aside, I would say there are three other key issues with tokenized equities: >Liquidity: As shown by the total liquidity of Backed assets above, tokenized stocks have not been able to see any significant traction on the trading front because liquidity has been sparse at best >Real-world settlement: With these tokenized stocks, settlement has continually been a question. Who owns the underlying and how can I access this? Is KYC required to do so? (Most likely). In which case, if I know I want access to the underlying equity at some point and I have to KYC, why bother holding on-chain? What is the unique benefit? >Fragmentation: Trading venues on-chain continue to fragment liquidity, not offering a centralized hub of settlement which benefits traders at Fidelity/Vanguard size If the three aspects above can be addressed, equity trading on-chain could make sense sooner as more of the financial system moves on chain, but these transitions don’t appear to be shifting as quickly as I would originally have hoped

kHYPE is now live on @felixprotocol CDP with a 10m mint cap A trade here for Felix CDP enjoyors? 1. Deposit kHYPE collateral on Felix CDP 2. Mint feUSD at sub-market borrow rate* 3. Deposit feUSD into HYPE Stability Pool, earning 10-12% Earn spread between borrow rate and SP yield depending on interest. Gain exposure to incentives Risk Profile? >Liquidation risk (Max LTV is 74.07%, so ensure your value is always safely below) >Redemption risk (Getting redeemed isn't a cost if caught quickly enough, but to avoid redemption, ensure you have substantial feUSD in front of you in the redemption queue) >Smart contract risk (Felix CDP is built on the Liquity v2 codebase and audit reports can be found in the Smart Contract Audits section of our Docs. Do your own DD before using as always) *Reminder to actively monitor interest rate to avoid redemption unless using a rate manager km, gFelix

How much HYPE has come to/left HyperEVM over the past 8 weeks? Curious if anyone already has this data on HyperEVM HYPE flows

With Felix Vanilla's isolated market architecture, users can now borrow HYPE against stHYPE to loop for just 1.76% Over $14m in HYPE liquidity available

Incumbent defi teams still discount the value of a listing on Hyperliquid spot and are unsure how to bucket HL as either a traditional DEX listing where LPs may earn trading fees but face excess IL or a CEX listing costing a significant share of token supply (maybe 10%+) The reality is that neither is the case. Consider if more teams listed on HL directly instead of waiting to be listed—teams could earn 100% of the spot deployer trading fees and control their own listing + MM process Don’t rely on CEXes or solely set up Uni pools and consider token distribution done. Much more on Hyperliquid

HL builder code interfaces slowly coming to dominate mobile trading Will be interesting to see how userbases end up differing among HL-native builder code apps like @pvp_dot_trade, @liquidperps, @DexariDotCom, @basedappHQ, @MercuryappHL and others vs. retail incumbents like @phantom, @RobinhoodApp, etc @basedappHQ is now averaging $252 in revenue/user. For context, in Q1 2025, Robinhood averaged $145 revenue/user Do we see a skew of more HL-native, power-user flow to native apps? Or will that flow continue to avoid mobile entirely and different retail segmentation becomes the norm? We shall see