Hyperliquid’s lead in onchain perpetuals brought a new challenge to the Solana ecosystem after Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko, known as Toly, argued that Solana needs its own atomically composable offender DEX within the SVM. The debate comes as Hyperliquid is already trying to determine its regulatory path in Washington as the CLARITY Act progresses.
The exchange began when Jeffrey Yan, co-founder of Hyperliquid, said he had spent several days in Washington at the Hyperliquid Policy Center, meeting with policymakers as the CLARITY Act progressed. According to him, discussions focused on Hyperliquid, its potential benefits for US consumers, and the regulatory pathway to bring on-chain derivatives markets into the US framework.
That policy soon collided with a separate market structure debate over The comment sparked backlash from users, who wondered whether the industry needs another Perpetuals location instead of further innovation.
Related reading
Rune summed up the issue directly: “I admire the guys at Solana for making their apps public, sincere respect for the buzz, but maybe the energy should go towards innovation instead of replication.” He added that the central question was what a Solana-born offender DEX could do better than Hyperliquid, besides competing on fees or copying the same product category.
Hyperfluid vs. Solana
Tolys answer was composability. He argued that the comparison is not fundamentally different from why Hyperliquid was needed when Binance, Coinbase or CME already existed.
“It’s like asking: what can Hyperliquid do that Binance, Coinbase or CME can’t?” Toly wrote. “Solana’s SVM needs an atomically composable perp DEX in its runtime for innovation to flourish. Apps built in the SVM can’t use HL because you have to bridge there.”
The disagreement goes to the heart of how different ecosystems view derivatives infrastructure. Hyperliquid has built its business around a vertically integrated, onchain exchange experience that appeals to traders looking for restraint, speed, and a non-CEX interface. Rune acknowledged that Hyperliquid had answered its own “why exist” question through “self-custody, no KYC, community ownership,” but questioned whether composability alone is enough for a Solana-born rival to win.
Toly did not claim that success is guaranteed. Instead, he has deemed the market large enough to warrant aggressive experimentation by Solana teams, especially if the base layer can support products that compete with centralized locations.
Related reading
“The 10B OI is the opportunity,” he wrote, referring to open interest. “It’s a small part of what Binance, CME, Coinbase and NYSE have. Why wouldn’t I want Solana to compete for the share of the global market?”
He added that Binance and other incumbents are unlikely to leave that market unchallenged, and that Hyperliquid’s own growth has already validated the demand for a DEX-like trading interface. “HL has proven that people will trade with a DEX interface rather than a Binance/CME style interface,” Toly said, pointing to Solana ecosystem teams and hackathon winners as examples of broader experiments.
The debate also caught the attention of market participants outside the Solana-Hyperliquid rivalry. Moonrock Capital founder Simon Dedic said he was “neither a Hyperliquid nor a Solana maxi” and did not care much for trading, but argued that Toly’s interest itself was notable. “When Toly, one of the most brilliant, successful and ruthless founders in the industry, gets excited about a new product like this, you better pay attention, I guess,” he wrote.
At the time of writing, HYPE was trading at $45,968.
Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com