Perp DEX: Next Generation Exchange “War”

Author:@sjbtc9

 

"Perp DEX is not the DEX small track, but the chain of war of the derivatives exchange."

“at the level of transactionsANY CEX CAN BE DESCRIBED AS A "BLACK BOX."It's not the same

"This war is just beginning."

A Perp DEX post was sent yesterday, and one thing:

Perp DEX, a lot of people still think of it as a DeFi track, but from OI's perspective, it's starting to affect the silo of some of the mainstream funds。

However, this data will not continue to be stacked today, because the data are only an entry point and one cannot be completely characterized。

The more important question is:

Why does Perp Dex's OI retention become more important? And what is happening in this market around Perp

I don't think the answer is "who it really is to replace."

One, Perp DEX is not a new track. The new is a different measure

Perp DEX, of course, is not new, or even called the "old-age track."。

dYdX, GMX projects have passed the market “education” round long before the cycle. The same can be done in the chain, with leverage or with a certain volume of transactions。

Perp DEX has passed the functional validation period and now enters the behavioural retention period。

In the first phase, the issues were:Can you make a contract on the chain? Does anyone really use it

And now the problem is:Would you like the money to stay here long

The two issues are completely different, and the chain is contractual, technical; there is a willingness to trade, product certification, a willingness to stay long and a movement of behaviour。

A lot of people talk about Perp DEX, first trade experience。

• Like whatQuickness, low slide points, low handling fees and poor interfaces。

Of course these are important. It doesn't work. Users don't come. There is no depth, there is a problem with liquidation mechanisms, and big money will not come and will not come。

But these are more like tickets, not the final moat。

In other words, you might have just had to prove that "this thing can run" "someone will go "stable running"

Now you have to prove that “funds are willing to put their risks in your hands”。

And that's where Perp DEX and a lot of DeFi products are different。

Swap is often a one-time operation, borrowing may be low-frequency fund management, but Perp is consistent and relatively high-frequency behaviour。

So Perp DEX or something like that, if it really comes out, it's not just an ordinary userIt is a group of high-frequency, high-risk preference, high-paying traders。

This may not be the largest number of users, but the highest value among market participants。

II. COMPANY, FOREIGN AND TRANSFER Down

1. Hyperliquid: The most commendable is not trade, but silod intelligence and value capture

The most typical case here is Hyperliquid, which is also worth spending the main space of this article, or, in other words, because of its OI changes, which led to this series of views。

Yesterday, as I simply mentioned, Hyperliquid had an OI/Commerce ratio of 97 per cent, and today I went to see the latest margin, which is almost 99 per cent。

Regardless of the structure of the participants, the funds are the most visible “voting” and have begun to form a more silod mind。

So Hyperliquid's strength is not just "a good chain exchange."Rather, it began to create a new default option for some of the funds, which could be called the moat。

Because once the default choice for funding is made, there will be a very large chain reaction: more silos, deeper markets, stronger incomes, more new markets, and stronger ecological adhesiveness。

More noteworthy is that it has made Perp DEX a relatively complete chain exchange system: it has its own high-performance chain, its order book, its security system, its clearing system, its market depth, and its agreed revenue andThe token is captured。

This is not the case with most of the DeFi agreements, many of which are:

• THERE IS TVL BUT NO HIGH FREQUENCY BEHAVIOUR

• There are users but income is unstable

• There are tokens, but the value is weak。

HyperliquidI think that's greatI don't even want to put one of 'em in this word of self-confidence。

In the first place, a user transaction is itself a source of income, and the income is sustainable$HYPEThe value capture is more directly related。

• So its value chain is:User transactions generate fees and fees to enter the protocol system Assistance Fund buys hype hype out of supply

Value capture has always been the ultimate proposition of the industry, and the prefix to value capture is at least to generate agreed income, either without income or income instability, which cannot be captured, or with income but not tied to tokens

Hyperliquid has put this standard on the table. Competers don't say more than that, but they can't do the same, and it's hard not to get sick in the community

2. Aster and Lighter: One for privacy, one for trust

The matter of Perp DEX will not be answered only by Hyperliquid, as the reasons for the funds remaining are not identical。

Some care about depth, others about speed, others about privacy, others about costs and others about alignment and transparency in liquidation。

That is why projects such as Aster and Lighter deserve to be included。

Using Defillama data, AsterAnd LighterThese twoPerp Dex's OI and 30-day exchange are in the same position as track 2 and 4Similar products provide different answers。

2.1 Aster focuses on silo privacy

Why do many users not want to move out of their old trading habits

Not because he doesn't know the chain can be traded, but because the chain is long-term, it's trouble:Multi-chain assets are fragmented, Gas experiences are poor, trade paths are complex, and positions are too transparent。

In particular, the transparency of warehouse space is crucial in the contractual landscape. The spot deal is seen, and the problem is not as great; but the fact that the contract position is seen may mean that your direction, cost, leverage and potential settlement areas are exposed。

This is a matter of privacy for ordinary users and a transaction risk for both buyers and sellers。

So Aster's focus is privacy. It emphasizes that orders are encrypted before they reach the chain, are declassified only when executed, and that the user's warehouse size, entry point and clearing price are not directly exposed to the order book. Lee

So Aster told another story on the PerpDex board:Chain transactions are not only transparent but also protect the strategic privacy of traders。

• It's also completely focused on the Hiperliquid, not so much on these angles as on the back of old and new platforms

2.2 Lighter is another line

It's easy to sum up in zero rates, but I think zero rates are just surface levels. It's really more importantIt points to the credibility of brokering and clearing。

THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH CEX IS NOT POOR EXPERIENCE. ON THE CONTRARY, CEX EXPERIENCE IS VERY GOODBUT ITS PROBLEM IS THE BLACK BOX, AND ANY CEX CAN BE DESCRIBED AS A “BLACK BOX”。

You don't know if it's completely fair, you don't know whether it's transparent to settle in extreme circumstances, and you don't know whether the platform will give priority to protecting itself.

These issues are not usually important, but they are all important once they are in extreme or high-wave south-east。

The difference between Lighter at the bottom of the technology is that the first two are self-researched L1, and Lighter is a zero-knowledge-proved ZK L2, which generates a zero-knowledge certificate of all operations of order matching with liquidation and is validated at the Ether

So, Lighter, if he could make it clear that it's not cheap, it's trust。

So Lighter wasn't talking about "I have the most assets," or "I'm like Binance," and he was saying:The core operation of the exchange should also be proven。

The three agreements listed above can all be described as a model of the new cycle Perp DEX, so I'm not too happy to write the competition for Hyperliquid, Aster and Lighter: who's the next Perp DEX lead

This expression is too narrow。

More precisely, I think, they answer three different questions from Perp DEX:Retention of funds, privacy and trust。

3.dYdX/GMX: The old entrance is not worthless, but standards have changed

It's all the most colorful PerpDEX in the current cycle, but I think it's very important to move forward with "dYdX" and "GMX."。

Not to say they can't, but to point to a more important question:The entrance is not permanent and standards of user behaviour change。

dYdX represents the previous generation order book Perp DEX, and GMX represents the LP pool model Perp DEX。

They have all addressed real problems。

THE LP POOL MODEL OF GMX IS VERY EFFECTIVE BECAUSE THE EARLY CHAIN DOES NOT HAVE A SUFFICIENTLY DEEP ORDER BOOK DEPTH OR A SMOOTH CHAIN CONTRACT EXPERIENCE。Users can trade directly with pools, LPs assume counterparty risks and benefit from transaction costs, Swaps, leverage transactions and liquidation。

It was a beautiful DeFi original program at the time。

But the problem is that when the products Hyperliquid, Aster, Lighter begin to bring experience, depth, speed and professional traders' needs closer to CEX, the GMX model faces a problem:

It's better for DeFi original users, but it's not necessarily the main operator for professional traders。

the problem with dYdX is similar, not in the wrong direction, but in the original label of "Letter Books on the Chain" which is no longer sufficient in a new generation of competition, or more directly, "It's too old to be defeated by cycles."

In DeFiLlama's current data, GMX and dYdX still hold a certain amount of OI and barter, but they're clearly after Hyperliquid, Aster, Lighter.

So the judgement here is not "old project zero."。

The competition standards of Perp DEX have changed。

IT'S BETTER THAN "CAN WE CONTRACT ON THE CHAIN" AND IT'S MORE LIKELY NOW THAN "CAN WE GET CLOSER TO THE CEX EXPERIENCE AND LEAVE MONEY BEHIND"

(The next stage could be “can be the bottom infrastructure of derivatives markets” I'm not sure

This is the value of dYdX/GMX as a case,They are not negative educational materials, but a reference for the industry from one stage to the next。

Coinbase: Not just on the chain

Finally, there will be a case below the chain, because if the full text only refers to Hyperliquid, Aster, Lighter and other chain agreements, it is easy for readers to think that this is a chain of self-exercising。

But the truth is not。

At the end of last month, Coinbase and Kalshi, the predictive market platform, announced an official contract for online encryption. This was the first time that the United States Local Compliance Exchange had opened such traded products to domestic investors。

A few days ago, Coinbase further opened up other durable contract products, a signal that is very important。

It shows that the Perps cake is not just chained, but the core product shapes that the compliance exchange and the forecast market are competing for。

A further step was the beginning of widespread acceptance of the contract of perpetuity, a relatively new derivative instrument for financial markets, which was taking back to the United States compliance framework the high-frequency derivatives originally traded on offshore exchanges and grey markets。

on the whole, all the above cases have a focus thing and an attempt to answer one question:Who can take on the next generation of high-frequency risk trading

Both sides have tried to answer this question with different options, except for decentrization of infrastructure, chain bonds, transparent clearing, token incentives and market creation mechanisms; and under the chain regulatory plates, compliance frameworks, existing user bases and traditional financial market structures。

iii. Written at the end

The main section of this article has been placed in the second paragraph, and I hope to be able to use some classic examples to help you comb the competition and prospects of Perp DEX and even Perp

It's a sudden realization that Perp may have friends who don't know what it is

So the final point of the article is:Perp DEX is not a DEX small track, it's a projection of the chain of war on the derivatives exchange, and it's really about the closure and viscosity of money。

Finally, by recapitulating these cases, one can see a different debate around Perp:

Hyperliquid said that the chain could be used as an exchange system and a new entry; Aster said that to rob CEX users, problems of performance and privacy had to be addressed; Lighter said that the next phase would be from experience to trust mechanisms; dYdX / GMX said that old models were not worthless, but industry standards had changed; Coinbase said that Perps' war was already expanding externally。

I'm sorry.

And this “war” is just beginning。