Hyperliquid β Statistical Analysis
β
β
β
β
β
3.5
With $119.8M 24h volume on $175.1M TVL (β0.68x daily turnover) and a fee take-rate of ~4.9 bps, traction is strong, but 0 audits and a TVL definition gap (CoinGecko $5.37B vs $175.1M) add governance/measurement risk.
Updated: Β· Data Window: 24h / 7d / 30d (varies by metric availability)
1. Market Overview
- TVL: $175.1M, down -0.87% in 24h (capital base stable-to-slightly risk-off).
- Activity: $119.8M volume (24h), $724.5M (7d), $3.94B (30d); 1d volume change +23.83%.
- Market breadth: 51 listed coins and 58 pairs; reported 24h βTrading Volumeβ also shows $216.0M, implying a ~1.8x measurement spread vs the $119.8M volume figure.
2. Capital Efficiency
- 24h capital turnover (Volume/TVL): $119.8M / $175.1M β 0.68x (β68% of TVL traded per day).
- 7d turnover: $724.5M / $175.1M β 4.14x; 30d turnover: $3.94B / $175.1M β 22.5x (high utilization for a DEX-sized TVL).
- Fees/Volume (24h): $58.8K / $119.8M β 0.049% (~4.9 bps), consistent with tight-fee venue positioning.
- Fee yield on TVL (annualized from 30d): $1.9M Γ 12 / $175.1M β 13.0% gross fee run-rate; revenue run-rate: $1.5M Γ 12 / $175.1M β 10.3%.
3. Liquidity & Pair Spread
- Pair density: 58 pairs / 51 coins β 1.14 pairs per coin, suggesting limited quote-asset coverage and likely liquidity concentration in a small set of majors.
- High turnover with low pair density often implies deeper books on fewer pairs rather than uniform liquidity; this supports execution quality on core markets but raises slippage risk on long-tail listings.
- Volume momentum (+23.83% 1d) without an accompanying TVL increase (-0.87%) indicates demand is rising faster than liquidity growthβtypically a spread-tightening environment for majors and spread-widening for tails.
4. Chain Dominance
- TVL deployment is 100% on Hyperliquid L1: $175.1M, i.e., no multi-chain TVL diversification.
- Valuation vs TVL depends heavily on which TVL definition is used: MCap/TVL = 1.63 and FDV/TVL = 6.58 align with CoinGecko TVL $5.37B (implying TVL includes broader collateral), while the chain-deployed TVL is $175.1M.
- Operational implication: chain concentration simplifies liquidity fragmentation, but creates single-chain dependency for uptime, risk controls, and capital mobility.
5. Analyst Verdict
- Monetization quality: 30d fees $1.9M and revenue $1.5M imply a ~79% revenue/fees conversion (30d), and ~83.5% on 24h ($49.1K/$58.8K), indicating strong capture after rebates/ops.
- Market traction: 30d volume $3.94B on TVL $175.1M (β22.5x monthly turnover) is strong for capital efficiency.
- Risk flags: Trust Score N/A and 0 audits are material for institutional sizing; additionally, the $175.1M vs $5.37B TVL gap needs reconciliation before using MCap/TVL and FDV/TVL as comparables.
- Token backdrop: price $36.73, -8.93% (7d) but +15.99% (30d); market cap $8.76B vs FDV $35.35B indicates substantial unlock/float sensitivity alongside protocol growth.