Hyperliquid-pris

Med 5 milliarder dollar i USDC står Hyperliquid nå for 7,5 % av de totale USDC o/s av Circle - På tide for Jeff å bruke beholdningen sin som innflytelse for en vesentlig rev-aksje på renter - Hvis han klipper 4 %, er det 200 millioner dollar i ekstra protokollinntekter for en telefonsamtale (~20 % økning til 1 milliard dollar kjørehastighet)

Hyperliquid lanserer $USDH, sin opprinnelige stablecoin. Dette er en massiv katalysator for økosystemet, og her er grunnen til at det er utrolig bullish: Stablecoins er ryggraden i enhver L1. Med $USDH får Hyperliquid sitt eget oppgjørslag som kan koble sammen perps-, spot-, staking- og EVM-protokoller som Kinetiq, Hypurrfi og Hyperlend. Hver ny app i økosystemet vil ønske å integrere $USDH som standard. TVL-utvidelse Stablecoins driver TVL. Med $USDH som basissikkerhet kan protokoller som Kinetiqs Earn-modul og utlånsmarkeder skaleres massivt. Mer $USDH i omløp = høyere DeFi-aktivitet = sterkere nettverkseffekter. Stablecoin-svinghjulet I stedet for å stole på eksterne staller (USDC, USDT, DAI), påløper verdi internt via USDH: - Mynte-/brennegebyrer - Utlånsstrømmer med sikkerhet - Innfødte på/av-ramper Dette skaper en selvforsterkende likviditetssløyfe der mer adopsjon fører til mer protokollinntekter, noe som fører til mer økosystemvekst. $USDH er et stort skritt fremover for hele Hyperliquid-økosystemet og vil bli integrert i Mercury så snart det er live på Mainnet. Hypervæske.

Hyperliquid is missing out on $115M yearly revenue $3.4B USDC deposits, yielding ZERO revenue for HL, all of it going to circle If Hyperliquid would launch their own Stablecoin they could earn 4.25% on these deposits resulting in ~$115M revenue per year, relatively risk free Here is @chameleon_jeff answer to this question: TL:DR • there are so many things to do, its not something they are currently working on • so much low-hanging fruit, not a priority • $100M yield is low in comparison, protocol makes 5-10x of that annualized My perspective: Currently HL revenue sits at ~$900M (annualized) and is therefore almost 10x higher, but it would still represent an additional 10% in revenue, which at this scale doesn't seem insignificant, particularly as it would scale alongside their main product (perps). This appears to be a more low-hanging fruit than the HyperEVM, especially when comparing possible revenue numbers (those are usually quite low for chains, except for maybe tron) There is a reason why the highest revenue consistently goes to stablecoin issuers like Tether/Circle. But I guess this would heavily depend on the fed policy and current T-Bill rates so it isn't a constant. On the other hand HyperEVM opens the door to create a wide ecosystem and might result in L1 premium which would reflect positively on $HYPE price. There is also the issue of legal framework/regulation, creating a stablecoin of that magnitude might put an unnecessary target on their back? Ideally developing both would be the best case because it would result in L1 premium + additional revenue and a own native stable would also be a positive for the chain but the team is quite small so obviously there are limitations to whats possible. Also Im not exactly sure how this would work in regard to the bridge infrastructure, the implementation and security aspects. These are just my thoughts, please note I'm absolutely not qualified enough to make a decent evaluation on this stuff and I dont hold all the cards in that matter. Would love to hear your thoughts!