Hyperliquid Records $5.2B Daily Volume as Metals Trading Dominates Its Perpetual Markets

On Feb. 5 Hyperliquid’s perpetual‑derivatives layer recorded an unprecedented single‑day turnover of $5.2 billion, an episode driven largely by a dominant market deployer and explosive activity in tokenized precious‑metals contracts. One deployer captured nearly nine out of every ten dollars traded that day, while its silver perpetual made up about two‑thirds of platform volume. Open interest rose sharply ahead of the metal price reversal, peaking just over $1.06 billion before settling near $665 million after the correction — roughly an 88% month‑over‑month increase in open interest. Other market tallies published around the same window reported materially lower silver turnover (about $1.25 billion) and a smaller open‑interest figure (circa $155 million), suggesting differences in time windows, contract scope or on‑chain measurement conventions across data providers. The activity translated into upward pressure on HYPE — the protocol’s native token — because fee flows routed to an Assistance Fund are used to buy HYPE on‑market, converting elevated derivatives fees into token demand. That tokenomic loop likely magnified short‑term price moves and created an observable coupling between derivatives flows and protocol token liquidity. Market observers, including some high‑profile investors, warned that heavy leveraged positions in tokenized metals can produce rapid deleveraging and forced‑sale feedback loops; these risks were intensified by simultaneous margin increases in traditional markets (for example, CME margin hikes) and limited dollar liquidity on certain crypto rails. The episode has reframed Hyperliquid in market perceptions: from a crypto‑native perpetual venue into a multi‑asset trading layer that now routinely hosts non‑crypto underlyings. That broadened product fit offers clear commercial upside — larger fee pools, new user segments and a stronger institutional narrative — but it also concentrates operational and counterparty risk around large deployers and thin intraday liquidity. In response to these stresses, Hyperliquid governance conversations and testnets accelerated: HIP3 would extend permissionless markets to tokenized real‑world assets, while HIP4 (Outcomes) proposes bounded, fully collateralized, non‑leveraged markets designed to eliminate liquidation cascades and stabilize payoff profiles. Each path has tradeoffs for revenue, oracle design, margining and dispute resolution. The immediate outlook is therefore mixed: meaningful market validation and token demand on one hand, and clearer incentives to harden risk controls, diversify liquidity sources, and reconcile tokenomic feedback loops with robust margining and settlement mechanics on the other. Regulators, prime brokers and institutional counterparties will likely scrutinize the cross‑market linkages that surfaced during the event, especially if similar concentrated flows recur.