# Wealth Effect Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Wealth Effect", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

"We Are Heartbroken by CEX": 4 Users Reveal Why They 'Defected' to Hyperliquid

"We Are Heartbroken by CEXs": Four Users Explain Why They Switched to Hyperliquid In 2025, Hyperliquid emerged as a major player in the perpetual futures DEX space. Founded and self-funded by Jeff, it achieved significant traction, at one point handling over 10% of Binance’s daily contract volume and dominating more than 70% of the perp DEX market. Four users shared their perspectives on why they moved from CEXs to Hyperliquid: - **User A (Web3 Researcher)**: Hyperliquid prioritizes transparency and user experience over decentralization. It functions like a CEX but with on-chain settlement, offering control and verifiable transactions. - **User B (Hyperliquid Enthusiast)**: Driven by profit, he found CEXs increasingly exploitative in 2024. Hyperliquid’s wealth effect, community culture, and successful token auctions attracted users and generated significant returns. - **User C (Airdrop Farmer)**: Hyperliquid’s substantial airdrop and sustainable revenue model stood out. Its appeal to international users (especially those restricted from regulated CEXs) and high referral rewards also contributed to growth. - **User D (Project Executive)**: The meme coin boom and low liquidity in traditional tokens forced him into leveraged trading. Hyperliquid’s unique community behavior (e.g., opposing CEX-listed tokens) created arbitrage opportunities. Hyperliquid’s success stems from its user-centric design, transparency, and strategic community building. External factors, including CEXs’ failures in fostering wealth creation and trust, further drove users toward decentralized alternatives. The platform’s rise highlights a shift in user preference toward链上 products when CEXs underdeliver.

marsbit01/30 10:08

"We Are Heartbroken by CEX": 4 Users Reveal Why They 'Defected' to Hyperliquid

marsbit01/30 10:08

Wintermute: The Four-Year Cycle is Dead, How Will Crypto Break Through in 2026?

The traditional four-year crypto cycle, once considered a market "iron law," is now obsolete, according to a 2025 annual report from market maker Wintermute. The market logic has shifted from "seasonal rotation" to "liquidity lock-up." 2025 did not bring the anticipated broad rally but instead showed extreme polarization: BTC and ETH gained institutional legitimacy through ETFs, while altcoins saw significantly reduced momentum and shorter lifespans. OTC data indicates that the historical wealth flow—from Bitcoin to Ethereum, then to blue chips, and finally to altcoins—has weakened substantially. ETFs and Digital Asset Trusts (DATs) act as "walled gardens," providing sustained demand for large-cap assets but failing to naturally circulate liquidity to the broader market. Altcoin rallies in 2025 lasted an average of just 20 days, down from 60 days in 2024, reflecting a highly concentrated market. Wintermute outlines three potential catalysts to break this stagnation in 2026: 1. **Expanding Institutional Mandates**: Broader institutional adoption beyond current large-cap assets, as seen with early ETF filings for Solana (SOL) and XRP. 2. **The Wealth Effect**: A strong rally in BTC or ETH could generate spillover demand for altcoins, similar to 2024. 3. **Rotation from Equities**: Retail attention shifting back from equity markets (e.g., AI, rare earths, quantum computing) to crypto, though this is the least likely scenario. The future of the market depends on whether these catalysts can diffuse liquidity beyond a few major assets or if concentration persists. Understanding these dynamics will be key to successful strategies in 2026.

marsbit01/20 09:12

Wintermute: The Four-Year Cycle is Dead, How Will Crypto Break Through in 2026?

marsbit01/20 09:12

After the Wealth Effect Disappears, The Myth or Elegy of Decentralization

The article "After the Wealth Effect Disappears: The Myth or Elegy of Decentralization" examines the evolution of Ethereum and Bitcoin, arguing that both have strayed from their original decentralized ideals. While Ethereum shifted from PoW to PoS to enhance scalability and value capture (ETH), it sacrificed node decentralization and embraced centralized governance, despite retaining smart contracts. Bitcoin maintained minimal governance but failed to support smart contracts, limiting its utility beyond being "digital gold." The author highlights how institutional adoption (e.g., BTC ETFs, DTCC’s blockchain migration) prioritizes long-term, low-risk gains, contrasting with retail’s speculative expectations. As centralized exchanges (CEXs) become less influential, activity migrates on-chain, but this shift may not yield the envisioned decentralized utopia. Stablecoins like USDT/USDC are increasingly replacing ETH as primary assets, further centralizing the ecosystem. Ultimately, the piece critiques the compromise between decentralization and wealth generation, noting that Ethereum’s "middleman" role—embodied by Vitalik Buterin and ETH’s capital-driven model—has eroded its foundational principles. The conclusion suggests that both decentralization and wealth effect narratives are being overshadowed by pragmatic, institution-friendly financial computing.

marsbit12/13 05:45

After the Wealth Effect Disappears, The Myth or Elegy of Decentralization

marsbit12/13 05:45

After the Wealth Effect Disappears, The Myth or Elegy of Decentralization

The article "After the Wealth Effect Disappears: The Myth or Elegy of Decentralization" critically examines the evolution and challenges of decentralization, focusing on Ethereum and Bitcoin. It argues that while institutions benefit from long-term, low-risk strategies, retail investors face increasing pressure as wealth concentration grows. The piece highlights how Ethereum’s shift from PoW to PoS and its embrace of L2 scaling solutions have compromised its decentralized ideals, leading to greater centralization in governance and node operation. Similarly, Bitcoin’s limitations in smart contract functionality and its reliance on a small group of developers underscore the tension between ideological purity and practical demands. The author notes that stablecoins like USDT and USDC are increasingly dominating Ethereum’s ecosystem, further centralizing influence. Despite these shifts, Ethereum remains the most balanced platform between decentralization and capital efficiency, though its original vision of a "world computer" has given way to a more intermediary-driven, financialized model. The conclusion reflects on the inevitable trade-offs between decentralization, trust minimization, and the realities of market dynamics, suggesting that the ideals of crypto-punk movements are being overshadowed by institutional adoption and economic pragmatism.

深潮12/13 05:27

After the Wealth Effect Disappears, The Myth or Elegy of Decentralization

深潮12/13 05:27

活动图片

Bitcoin

Technology Trends