The 'True and False Prosperity' of Perpetual Contracts: Have You Seen Through It?

比推Publicado a 2026-02-11Actualizado a 2026-02-11

Resumen

The article "Perpetual Contracts: Real or Illusory Boom?" examines the explosive growth of perpetual futures (perps) markets, arguing that trading volume alone is a misleading metric. While perps have become dominant—growing from 44% to 75% of DEX spot volume since February 2025—this surge doesn't necessarily reflect meaningful capital deployment. Key insights include: - Total perp volume doubled to $14 trillion in just six months, even as crypto market cap fell 40%. - Open Interest (OI), which measures unrealized risk exposure, only grew ~50% in that period, indicating much of the volume is from rapid capital recycling rather than new committed capital. - The OI/Volume ratio (a measure of capital efficiency) rose from 0.33x to 0.49x over the past year, but with significant volatility, including a sharp drop after a major liquidation event in October. - Protocol-level analysis shows Hyperliquid leads in capital efficiency (OI/Vol >45%) and fee generation (~3.2 bps take rate), while others like Aster prioritize capital retention over fees. The conclusion: True market health is best read by combining volume with OI and fee data. Sustainable platforms will be those that optimize for "conviction" (long-term capital) rather than just incentivized volume.

Author: Prathik Desai

Original Title: Reading Perps Beyond Volume

Compiled and Edited by: BitpushNews


Just when you think finance is getting boring, it always has a way of surprising you. Lately, it seems like everyone is restructuring the financial system in ways few foresaw, even those from the entertainment and media industries.

Take Jimmy Donaldson (aka "MrBeast" on YouTube) for example. He not only has a snack empire but also acquired a banking app recently, aiming to promote financial literacy and money management among teenagers and young adults. Why? Perhaps nothing is more direct than monetizing his 466 million subscriber base with financial products.

This summer, the CME Group, the world's largest derivatives exchange, will launch single-stock futures, allowing users to trade futures on over 50 top U.S. stocks including Alphabet, NVIDIA, Tesla, and Meta.

These restructurings show us how people's ways of engaging with finance are changing. And nothing illustrates this better than the explosion of the Perpetual Markets (Perps) market over the past few years.

Perpetual Futures (or Perps) are a type of financial derivative contract that allows market participants to speculate on the price of an asset without an expiration date. Perps also allow people to express views on assets quickly and cheaply. They are more captivating than traditional markets because they offer instant access and leverage. Unlike traditional markets, they don't require broker onboarding processes, jurisdictional paperwork, or follow "traditional" market hours.

Furthermore, on-chain perpetual markets allow any asset (whether traditional or crypto) to be traded in a permissionless, highly leveraged manner. This makes speculation fun, especially when humans can't resist博弈 the trajectory of volatile assets outside traditional trading hours. This allows risk to be priced in real-time.

Think about what happened two weeks ago. When traditional and crypto markets crashed simultaneously, traders flocked to Hyperliquid, driving perpetual gold and silver trading into a frenzy. On January 31st, Hyperliquid alone accounted for 2% of the global daily trading volume in its Silver perpetual contract market, which had been live for less than a month.

This explains why dashboards of perpetual contract trading volume are increasingly dominating crypto communities and forums. Volume is an absolute value. It looks large, refreshes every few minutes, and is perfect for leaderboards. But it misses a key nuance: volume might reflect movement that lacks meaning. A market's high volume could be due to depth, but it could also be due to rewards and incentives encouraging higher frequency activity. This activity is often recursive and not very meaningful.

This week, I delved into other metrics of the perpetual trading market. When used in conjunction with volume, these metrics add more dimensions and tell a completely different story than volume alone.

Let's begin.

A Few Data Points

The user-friendly interface of perpetual markets makes them a low-barrier, default interface for expressing views across various markets and global assets. The wide selection of highly leveraged derivative trading on both traditional and crypto assets on a single platform has led to perpetual contract volumes surpassing spot trading volumes on decentralized exchanges. From 44% in February 2025, the share of perpetual contract volume has soared to around 75% today (relative to spot volume).

This growth has been particularly pronounced in the past few months:

  • As of July 31, 2025, the four-year cumulative perpetual trading volume across all platforms was $6.91 trillion.

  • In just the past six months, this volume has doubled, reaching $14 trillion.

All this growth occurred against the backdrop of the total cryptocurrency market capitalization shrinking by nearly 40% between August 1, 2025, and February 9, 2026. This activity suggests traders are increasingly leaning towards derivative trading, hedging, and short-term positioning, especially when spot markets become highly volatile and bearish.

But there's a catch. With such massive activity, it's easy to misread volume metrics. Especially because perpetual trading isn't just about buying and holding assets long-term; it involves repeatedly adjusting bet sizes using leverage over shorter time frames.

So, when market turnover speeds up, a question inevitably arises: Do record-breaking volumes reflect more capital flowing in, or the same capital cycling faster?

This is where observing Open Interest (OI) becomes meaningful. If volume reflects capital flow, then OI measures outstanding risk exposure. On perpetual exchanges, OI refers to the total dollar value of active, unsettled long and short contracts held by traders.

If perpetual trading is being adopted by the mass market, we would hope to see not only larger capital flows but also proportionally growing outstanding exposure.

  • Last February, OI averaged around $4 billion;

  • Now that number has more than tripled, to around $13 billion. In fact, the average for the entire month of January was around $18 billion before dropping about 30% in the first week of February.

While perpetual trading volume doubled in the past five months, OI grew by about 50% (from $13B to ~$18B, then back to ~$13B). To better understand this, I looked at the trend of Capital Efficiency (i.e., OI as a percentage of daily volume) over the past year.

The OI/Volume ratio jumped 50% from 0.33x last year to 0.49x today. But this progress wasn't smooth; the 50 basis point growth in this ratio went through multiple peaks and troughs:

  1. Phase 1 (Feb-May 2025): Dormancy. The OI/Volume ratio averaged ~0.46x, with average OI of ~$4.8B and average daily volume of ~$11.5B.

  2. Phase 2 (June - Mid-Oct): Leap. The ratio averaged ~0.72x. During this period, average OI rose to $14.8B, and average daily volume was $23B. This marked not only record volume but also increased risk exposure and greater capital commitment to these derivatives.

  3. Phase 3: Market Reversal. This phase began around the massive liquidation on October 10th, which wiped out over $19B in leveraged positions within 24 hours. From mid-October to late December, the OI/Volume ratio fell to ~0.38x, driven primarily by volume growth while open interest largely stagnated. October, November, and December saw the highest three-month trading volumes of 2025, averaging over $1.2 trillion per month. Over the same period, OI averaged around $15B, slightly below the previous three-month average.

Protocol Level

Here, I want to add more dimensions at the protocol level for perpetual markets. This helps us understand how efficiently perpetual exchanges convert trading activity into "sticky capital" and revenue.

As of February 10th, here's how the top 5 perpetual exchanges by 24-hour volume performed:

  • Hyperliquid: Its OI to 7-day average daily volume ratio exceeds 45%, able to convert a large share of volume into lasting positions. This indicates that for every $10 traded on the platform, $4.5 is投入 (invested) in active positions. This is important because high OI rates lead to narrower spreads, deeper liquidity, and confidence in scaling trades without slippage.

    • Hyperliquid's fee revenue reinforces this story. Its Take Rate is ~3.2 basis points (bps), converting the largest share of 24-hour volume into fee income.

  • Aster: Currently ranked second, it maintains a decent capital efficiency (OI/Vol) of 34%, despite having almost half the volume of Hyperliquid. However, its monetization capability is notable – with a lower take rate (~1.6 bps), Aster clearly prioritizes capital retention on its platform over fee revenue maximization.


  • edgeX & Lighter: Both perform similarly on the capital efficiency ladder, with OI/Vol at 21%. However, edgeX's fee monetization is comparable to Hyperliquid's at 2.8 bps.

Summary

It's remarkable that the perpetual contract market today is no longer a simple growth story; it requires a nuanced reading of multiple metrics. At the macro level, volume has exploded: the growth in cumulative perpetual trading volume in six months exceeded the total of the previous four years. But the picture only becomes clear when OI and volume are read together.

A clearer victory lies in the growth of the OI/Volume ratio. This is a direct signal that "patient capital" is willing to trust and bet on the various products and markets emerging on perpetual trading exchanges.

What's even more值得关注 (worth watching) in the future is how individual players will evolve from here and what they choose to optimize. Over time, exchanges that can optimize for "Conviction" and achieve sustainable monetization will be far more important than those that merely rely on rewards and incentives to dominate volume leaderboards.


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

Bitpush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

Bitpush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original article link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7611212

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat are perpetual futures (Perps) and how do they differ from traditional futures contracts?

APerpetual futures (Perps) are financial derivative contracts that allow market participants to speculate on the price of an asset without an expiration date. Unlike traditional futures, they do not require broker onboarding, jurisdictional paperwork, and are not bound by traditional market hours. They also provide instant access and leverage, enabling fast and cheap expression of views on assets.

QAccording to the article, what key metric should be observed alongside trading volume to better understand the health of the perpetuals market?

AThe article states that Open Interest (OI) should be observed alongside trading volume. While volume reflects capital flow, OI measures the amount of outstanding, unsettled risk exposure (the total dollar value of active long and short contracts).

QWhat significant event in October 2025 caused a major shift in the OI/Volume ratio, and what was the consequence?

AA massive liquidation event on October 10, 2025, wiped out over $19 billion in leveraged positions within 24 hours. This event marked the start of a phase where the OI/Volume ratio dropped to ~0.38x, driven by growth in trading volume while open interest largely stagnated.

QWhich perpetual exchange, as of February 10th, had the highest capital efficiency (OI/Volume ratio) and what was its approximate ratio?

AAs of February 10th, Hyperliquid had the highest capital efficiency with an OI to 7-day average daily volume ratio of over 45%.

QWhat does the article suggest is a more important long-term goal for perpetual exchanges than simply topping volume leaderboards?

AThe article suggests that a more important long-term goal is for exchanges to optimize for 'trading conviction' and achieve sustainable monetization, rather than just relying on rewards and incentives to dominate volume rankings.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Low Investment Isn't Apple's Immunity Pass

While Meta and Google face investor scrutiny over ballooning AI capital expenditures, Apple's minimal AI investment has paradoxically become a strength. Its market cap recently reclaimed the global top spot, surpassing $5 trillion. The irony is deep: Apple's own AI efforts have lagged, with "Apple Intelligence" delayed and core talent lost, forcing reliance on partners like Google Gemini and Alibaba's Qianwen. Its Q3 FY2026 (Q2 CY) earnings initially seemed stellar. Revenue hit $109.4B (up 16% YoY), with iPhone and Mac sales, growing 22% and 29% respectively, driving most of the growth. However, the stock fell over 8% post-earnings. The primary concern was a weaker Q4 revenue growth forecast of 9-11%, below expectations, due to looming supply chain constraints. Apple is feeling the indirect cost of the AI boom. Soaring memory and chip prices, fueled by massive data center investments from Microsoft, Amazon, and others, are forcing Apple to raise Mac and iPad prices significantly. The upcoming iPhone launch is also expected to see substantial price hikes. Despite avoiding heavy AI infrastructure spending—its capital expenditures are actually down 28%—Apple cannot escape the industry-wide supply and cost pressures. While Apple's operating cash flow remains robust, its substantial R&D spending (up 32% YoY) has yet to yield major AI breakthroughs. As Tim Cook prepares to step down as CEO, Apple faces a challenging transition: balancing its premium hardware success against the strategic and cost pressures of the AI era it has so far cautiously navigated.

marsbitHace 16 min(s)

Low Investment Isn't Apple's Immunity Pass

marsbitHace 16 min(s)

PA Graphics Explanation | One Chart to Understand the Major Web3 Events in August 2026

**PANews Crypto Calendar: Key Web3 Events in August 2026** PANews introduces its revamped crypto calendar, featuring comprehensive coverage, flexible filtering, and easy export options. The market in August will be shaped by multiple key events across macroeconomics, regulation, tokenomics, and project developments: * **Macro & Policy:** Key US economic data releases (July Non-Farm Payrolls, CPI), the Federal Reserve meeting minutes, and the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium will be in focus. On the regulatory front, the US Senate plans to release a new draft of the *CLARITY Act*, while the EU's expanded crypto ban against Belarus comes into effect. * **Token Unlocks:** Significant token unlocks are scheduled for assets including ENA, AVAX, CONX, ZRO, and KAITO, which may influence market volatility. * **Project Updates & Shutdowns:** Several services, including Exchange Art, Ctrl Wallet, Zapper, NFTfi, and Summer.fi, are set to cease operations or undergo major adjustments. Users are advised to manage their assets accordingly. * **Corporate Activity:** Q2 earnings reports from companies like SpaceX, Circle, and Nvidia are due. Unitree Robotics will initiate its IPO subscription on the STAR Market, and Moonshot AI plans to begin a Pre-IPO financing round. * **Industry Events:** Major conferences such as Bitcoin Asia 2026 and the 2026 Digital Expo will take place. The overarching market narrative for August will revolve around macroeconomic expectations, regulatory developments, token unlock schedules, and ongoing industry consolidation.

marsbitHace 26 min(s)

PA Graphics Explanation | One Chart to Understand the Major Web3 Events in August 2026

marsbitHace 26 min(s)

Wall Street's Most Famous 'Cassandra' Now Has His Sights Set on Nvidia

Michael Burry, the famed "Big Short" investor, has once again captured Wall Street's attention with a series of short positions against major tech and semiconductor stocks, most notably Nvidia. In late June and July, through his "Cassandra Unchained" newsletter, Burry disclosed short bets against Nvidia, Tesla, Applied Materials, Caterpillar, the SOXX semiconductor ETF, and later, Micron Technology. His core thesis revolves around potential distortions in the AI infrastructure boom, specifically questioning whether extended depreciation schedules (e.g., 6 years vs. a realistic 2-3 years for AI chips) by cloud giants like Microsoft and Google artificially inflate profits. He also raises concerns about possible "off-balance-sheet circular financing," where chip demand might be propped up by vendor-backed funding to clients. Nvidia's stock experienced volatility following these disclosures, briefly dipping but largely holding near Burry's reported entry points, leaving his positions roughly flat or slightly underwater as of late July. This move is part of a pattern for Burry, whose track record since his legendary 2008 bet is mixed. He has faced notable losses, such as on Tesla in 2021, while scoring on broader market turns like the 2020 pandemic crash. His methodology focuses intensely on free cash flow and scrutinizing original financial documents to spot overvaluation and structural risks, but it often struggles with timing the market. The article contrasts Burry's stance with other prominent investors. Steve Eisman, another "Big Short" figure, is not shorting Nvidia, citing strong fundamentals but expressing nervousness about sustainability. Jim Chanos agrees with the broad "accounting mismatch" concern—comparing it to the dot-com bubble—but targets financial leverage in private equity firms rather than the chip stocks themselves. While Nvidia's short interest remains relatively low at 1.3-1.4% of float, the massive stock size means absolute short losses have been significant, exceeding $5 billion earlier this year. The piece concludes that for ordinary investors, the key takeaway is not replicating specific short bets but learning from the critical frameworks these investors use: questioning rosy accounting, identifying structural vulnerabilities, and maintaining skepticism during market euphoria, even if pinpointing the exact catalyst for a downturn remains elusive.

marsbitHace 51 min(s)

Wall Street's Most Famous 'Cassandra' Now Has His Sights Set on Nvidia

marsbitHace 51 min(s)

Weekly Selection丨Epic Stock Market Volatility, Changxin Tech's IPO Reshapes Storage Landscape, Saylor Aims to Re-Anchor STRC Around September 8th

PANews Weekly Digest: Market Turmoil, Tech Breakthroughs, and Crypto Developments. The week saw significant volatility across global markets. South Korea's KOSPI index experienced extreme turbulence, including multiple trading halts, largely driven by sharp declines in AI hardware stocks like SK Hynix. In contrast, China's Changxin Xinqiao (CXC) achieved a landmark IPO with a market cap surpassing 4 trillion yuan, marking a major success for the domestic DRAM industry after a decade of losses. In the crypto and Web3 space, several key narratives emerged. AI is driving demand for new infrastructure, with projects like AI agent wallets and programmable payments gaining traction, attracting interest from firms like Coinbase. The Bitcoin mining sector is pivoting, with companies like MARA focusing on energy management as electricity becomes a core AI-era asset. Meanwhile, the RWA (Real World Assets) sector faces a "utilization puzzle," with hundreds of billions in on-chain assets remaining dormant. Notable market movements included a historic single-day surge of over 17% for the KOSPI index and a significant migration of $16.5 billion in staked ETH within the Lido ecosystem. Michael Saylor announced a target to re-peg the STRC stablecoin around September 8th. Other highlights include discussions on Ethereum's ambitious 2030 roadmap for scaling and privacy, analysis showing high protocol revenues not always translating to token price gains, and warnings from Citi about potential extreme commodity price shocks by late 2026.

marsbitHace 56 min(s)

Weekly Selection丨Epic Stock Market Volatility, Changxin Tech's IPO Reshapes Storage Landscape, Saylor Aims to Re-Anchor STRC Around September 8th

marsbitHace 56 min(s)

When the Market Begins to Question AI Capex: A Full Analysis of Q2 Earnings Reports from Five Tech Giants

In late July 2026, five major US tech giants—Alphabet, Intel, Microsoft, Meta, and Apple—released their Q2 earnings reports. While all companies exceeded revenue and profit expectations, driven by strong AI-related business growth, investor reactions diverged sharply due to concerns over escalating AI capital expenditures (capex) and their impact on free cash flow. Alphabet reported strong revenue growth and a surging cloud business, but its stock fell after announcing a doubled year-on-year capex and negative quarterly free cash flow for the first time. Intel posted its strongest revenue growth in over 15 years, but its stock experienced volatile trading after significantly raising its full-year capex guidance. Microsoft saw its stock surge after beating estimates and, crucially, lowering its capex forecast while projecting positive free cash flow. Meta faced the most severe sell-off as its profits declined despite revenue beats, with free cash flow plunging over 90% and its capex guidance raised. Apple reported record June-quarter results, but its stock plummeted after providing Q4 revenue guidance that fell short of expectations, citing supply chain constraints and forex headwinds. The overall takeaway is that the market's focus has shifted from validating AI demand to scrutinizing the timeline for returns on massive AI investments. Companies demonstrating a clearer path to managing capex and preserving free cash flow, like Microsoft, were rewarded, while those signaling continued aggressive spending faced investor skepticism.

Odaily星球日报Hace 1 hora(s)

When the Market Begins to Question AI Capex: A Full Analysis of Q2 Earnings Reports from Five Tech Giants

Odaily星球日报Hace 1 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片