Secures Over $60 Million in Funding from Dragonfly, Sequoia, and Others. An In-Depth Look at the On-Chain Derivatives Protocol Variational | CryptoSeed

链捕手Pubblicato 2026-05-22Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-22

Introduzione

Variational, a decentralized derivatives trading platform, has raised over $61.8 million in total funding, including a recent $50 million Series A led by Dragonfly Capital. Investors include Sequoia Capital, Coinbase Ventures, Bain Capital Crypto, and Hack VC. The platform, with over $810 million in Open Interest (ranking 4th among on-chain derivatives protocols), is founded by Lucas Schuermann and Edward Yu. Both are Columbia University graduates and former partners at quant fund Qu Capital. They later held senior roles at Genesis Trading, handling billions in trading volume. The broader team includes talent from Google, Meta, and top trading firms like Jane Street. Operating on Arbitrum, Variational distinguishes itself by aggregating external liquidity from CEXs, DEXs, and traditional market makers using an RFQ (Request-for-Quote) model, positioning itself more as a broker than an exchange like Hyperliquid. Its dual product line features Omni for retail users (offering up to 50x leverage on ~450+ crypto and TradFi pairs) and Pro for institutional OTC trading. Currently in a pre-TGE phase, Variational has launched an "Omni Points" system, with 50% of its upcoming $VAR token supply allocated for community incentives through trading-based rewards and referrals until Q3 2026.

Author: momo, ChainCatcher

Recently, the decentralized derivatives trading platform Variational announced the completion of a $50 million Series A financing round led by Dragonfly. Combined with three previous funding rounds, Variational has raised a cumulative total of $61.8 million. Its investor lineup is quite impressive, including not only Dragonfly but also renowned institutions such as Sequoia Capital, Coinbase Ventures, Bain Capital Crypto, Hack VC, and others.

According to DeFiLlama data, the open interest (OI) on Variational has exceeded $810 million. While there remains a significant gap compared to Hyperliquid's $9.4 billion, its OI currently ranks fourth among on-chain derivatives protocols.

In the fiercely competitive decentralized derivatives sector, why has Variational continued to secure backing from top-tier institutions? What is the team's background? What are its differentiated approaches? This article provides a brief overview.

What is the team's background?

In terms of team background and entrepreneurial experience, Variational and Hyperliquid share several similarities: both teams graduated from prestigious universities, come from quantitative trading backgrounds, founded quantitative funds, and subsequently transitioned to building on-chain derivatives platforms.

However, unlike Hyperliquid's early mystique and anonymous team approach, Variational discloses its founding team's background and entrepreneurial journey in its whitepaper.

Variational was co-founded by Lucas Schuermann and Edward Yu. CEO Lucas graduated from Columbia University and was previously responsible for trading systems engineering architecture; Edward Yu has a Chinese background and was originally a quantitative analyst. The two met while studying and conducting research in the engineering department at Columbia University and co-founded the quantitative hedge fund Qu Capital in 2017.

In 2019, Qu Capital was acquired by Digital Currency Group. Subsequently, both joined Genesis Trading: Lucas served as Vice President of Engineering, and Edward Yu served as Vice President of Quantitative Trading.

According to the whitepaper, before leaving Genesis in 2021, their team had processed trading volumes in the hundreds of billions of dollars. After leaving, they founded their proprietary trading firm, Variational, and secured $10 million in funding.

In the following years, the team operated proprietary trading strategies while integrating with mainstream CEX and DEX trading interfaces. Later, based on their own trading business and system experience, they began developing and operating the Variational Protocol.

Additionally, Variational's development and quantitative team members also hail from technology and quantitative institutions such as Google, Meta, Virtu Financial, IMC Trading, and Jane Street. The whitepaper states that core technical team members generally possess over a decade of experience in software engineering or quantitative research.

What are its product features? How does it differ from Hyperliquid?

Judging from the trading interface, there isn't a significant difference between Variational and Hyperliquid. The platform currently lists approximately 450 trading pairs, mainly covering cryptocurrency and TradFi assets, offering users leverage up to 50x. The TradFi section is currently in Beta testing. According to official disclosures, the TradFi market will list over 100 trading pairs.

However, in its press release, Variational emphasizes a distinctly different positioning from Hyperliquid.

Variational describes its model as more akin to a brokerage rather than another exchange in the style of Hyperliquid. Its target users are not limited to crypto-native traders; it aims to make the on-chain derivatives trading experience closer to traditional markets through zero-fee trading and liquidity aggregation.

Currently operating on Arbitrum, Variational employs a dual-product-line model. The Omni version primarily targets retail users, positioned as a perpetual contracts trading product aggregating liquidity from multiple sources, while the Pro version caters to institutional over-the-counter derivatives trading.

The most significant difference from Hyperliquid lies in order matching and liquidity mechanisms. Hyperliquid relies on its self-built L1 chain and a public central limit order book (CLOB), with market makers or the HLP treasury within the protocol competing to provide quotes, and traders paying maker/taker fees. In contrast, Variational uses an RFQ (Request for Quote) model, with a single liquidity provider as the counterparty. It does not rely on on-chain internal market making but instead aggregates external liquidity in real-time from sources like CEXs, DEXs, OTC channels, and traditional financial market makers, managing risk through hedging.

The rationale for choosing this differentiated path, according to Variational CEO Lucas, is that on-chain liquidity still lags far behind traditional trading venues like the CME, and order book models face a "cold start" problem. Aggregating liquidity from external sources avoids the need to rebuild liquidity from scratch on-chain.

What is the current stage? What participation opportunities are available?

Variational is currently still in the Pre-TGE stage; the $VAR token has not been issued. The project initially planned a TGE in Q1 2025, which has since been postponed. No new definitive TGE date has been officially announced.

In December 2025, Variational launched the Omni Points points system. The official statement indicates that 50% of the $VAR supply will be allocated for community incentives, distributed gradually through mechanisms like Points rather than a one-time airdrop.

Regarding points, 3 million points have been retroactively distributed to early users. Subsequently, points are distributed every Friday based on the previous week's trading snapshot. The points program is scheduled to conclude by Q3 2026 at the latest.

The main current participation opportunity is to engage in perpetual contracts trading on the Omni platform. Trading volume is the core factor for earning points, with additional point bonuses available for holding positions over time and referring others.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the total funding amount raised by the decentralized derivatives platform Variational, and who led its Series A round?

AVariational has raised a total of $61.8 million. Its Series A round of $50 million was led by Dragonfly.

QWhat are the key differences between Variational and its competitor Hyperliquid in terms of their operational models?

AThe key difference lies in their order matching and liquidity mechanisms. Hyperliquid relies on its own L1 blockchain with a public Central Limit Order Book (CLOB). Variational uses an RFQ (Request for Quote) model, acting as a single liquidity provider counterparty that aggregates external liquidity from CEXs, DEXs, OTC channels, and TradFi market makers, then manages risk through hedging.

QWhat is the professional background of Variational's founding team prior to starting the protocol?

ACo-founders Lucas Schuermann and Edward Yu met at Columbia University. They co-founded the quantitative hedge fund Qu Capital in 2017, which was later acquired by Digital Currency Group. They then joined Genesis Trading, where Lucas served as VP of Engineering and Edward Yu as VP of Quantitative Trading, before leaving in 2021 to found Variational.

QWhat is the current stage of Variational's token ($VAR) launch, and how is the project engaging its community?

AVariational is currently in the Pre-TGE stage, and the $VAR token has not been launched yet. The previously planned TGE for Q1 2025 has been postponed with no new official date announced. The project is engaging its community through an 'Omni Points' loyalty program launched in December 2025, with 50% of the $VAR supply designated for community incentives distributed via points and other mechanisms over time.

QOn which blockchain does Variational primarily operate, and what are its two main product lines?

AVariational primarily operates on the Arbitrum blockchain. It follows a dual-product line model: the 'Omni' version targets retail users as a perpetual contracts trading product aggregating liquidity from multiple sources, while the 'Pro' version is designed for institutional over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives trading.

Letture associate

IOSG Founder: Web3 Is 'Losing Blood,' How Can Practitioners Survive Better?

IOSG Founder: Web3 Is "Bleeding Out" – How Can Practitioners Survive Better? In a candid reflection, the founder of IOSG Ventures voices deep concerns about the current state of Web3, describing an ecosystem experiencing severe "blood loss." Despite the recent MuShanghai event showcasing a successful pivot towards a more diverse, global community, a somber reality persists: many crypto-native attendees were there exploring exits or new labels in biotech, AI, and robotics. The core issue is identified as a breakdown in the ecosystem's positive feedback loop. Alarmingly, underestimated "low-probability bad events" are occurring simultaneously: a significant brain drain of Chinese developers to AI, a lack of breakout applications despite massive funding, and a widening credibility gap for practitioners globally, often stigmatized as scam artists. This has created a dire接班人 (successor) problem, with the next generation seeing little professional prestige or financial upside in crypto compared to fields like AI. A significant portion of the critique focuses on Ethereum and Vitalik Buterin. While not pessimistic about Ethereum's technology, the founder worries that critical development windows were missed by focusing on niche technical narratives like ZK and L2 instead of mass-market applications. A more urgent concern is that Vitalik may be isolated in an "information bubble," shielded from the grassroots community's hardships by layers of intermediaries, preventing crucial feedback from reaching him. The call is for Vitalik to return to a founder's mindset, re-engage directly with the community, and rally efforts for the next decade. The divergence between U.S. and Chinese OG (Original Gangster) ecosystems is stark. While many U.S. builders reinvest their wealth into the ecosystem, the Chinese scene suffers from a severe lack of "造血能力" (blood-making ability), with most market-driven funds struggling and many early success stories cashing out entirely. This threatens the entire Asian Web3 ecosystem's survival. For individual practitioners, survival advice is pragmatic: find your core "why," maintain life balance beyond token prices, continuously learn new skills (like AI), form small, trusted alliances for mutual support, and practice self-compassion. The industry's greatest need is not money or tech, but lighthouses—individuals at all levels who offer mentorship, grants, referrals, and honest reflection to guide others. The piece concludes with a direct appeal: OGs must pay forward the opportunities the industry gave them; founders must not struggle alone; and builders must continue their work, ensuring it remains a viable profession. The survival of Web3's "cathedral" depends not on any single leader but on the collective responsibility of everyone who remains.

marsbit21 min fa

IOSG Founder: Web3 Is 'Losing Blood,' How Can Practitioners Survive Better?

marsbit21 min fa

Deficits, Inflation, and the New Fed: The Deep Logic Behind US Bond Yields Breaking 5% and the Market Reset

In the week of May 15-19, 2026, U.S. long-term Treasury yields surged to multi-year highs, with the 30-year yield hitting 5.2%, a level unseen since 2007, and the 10-year yield climbing to 4.687%. Equity markets declined in response. Four primary factors are driving the rise in yields. First, stubborn inflation persists, with April wholesale prices rising 6% year-over-year, fueling expectations of potential future Fed rate hikes instead of cuts. Second, newly confirmed Fed Chair Kevin Warsh inherits a complex inflation battle, with markets closely awaiting his first FOMC meeting. Third, deteriorating U.S. fiscal health, marked by large deficits and rising debt servicing costs, is eroding the traditional "safe-haven" premium for Treasuries. Fourth, the "One Big Beautiful Bill" tax cuts are projected to add trillions to the national debt, contributing to Moody's recent credit rating downgrade. Rising yields pressure stocks through several channels: a higher discount rate reduces the present value of future earnings (especially for growth stocks); rising risk-free rates compress equity risk premiums, making bonds relatively more attractive; higher borrowing costs impact consumers and corporations; and a stronger dollar affects multinational earnings. For investors, the environment favors value and financial stocks over long-duration growth stocks. Bond investors find attractive yields in short to intermediate maturities, while income investors see the best fixed-income opportunities in over a decade. Key developments to watch include Chair Warsh's first FOMC meeting, upcoming inflation data, Treasury auction demand, and whether the 30-year yield approaches 6%, a level that could trigger a more sustained equity valuation reset. The bond market's message is clear: the era of cheap government borrowing is over, posing a central challenge for markets in late 2026.

marsbit22 min fa

Deficits, Inflation, and the New Fed: The Deep Logic Behind US Bond Yields Breaking 5% and the Market Reset

marsbit22 min fa

Is MicroStrategy Selling Bitcoin Not a Bearish Signal? Deconstructing the 5 Financial Logics Behind Corporate Bitcoin Divestment

The article "Is Strategy Selling Bitcoin Not a Bearish Signal? Decoding 5 Financial Logics Behind Corporate Bitcoin Divestment" analyzes why companies might sell their bitcoin holdings, arguing it's not necessarily negative. It begins by noting the market's surprise at Strategy's potential sale, contrasting its previous "never sell" stance. The core argument is that corporate decisions prioritize shareholder value, and selling bitcoin can be a rational strategic choice. The article outlines five key financial reasons for such sales: 1. **Increase Bitcoin Holdings Per Share:** Companies can use proceeds from bitcoin sales to repurchase shares when the stock price is undervalued relative to its bitcoin assets. This reduces the outstanding share count, potentially increasing the bitcoin amount backing each remaining share. 2. **Optimize Capital Structure & Reduce Financing Costs:** Building cash reserves through bitcoin sales can improve credit ratings (as favored by agencies like S&P), leading to lower future borrowing costs. Repaying debt with sale proceeds also reduces financial leverage. 3. **Legitimate Tax Planning:** In the absence of wash-sale rules for bitcoin in the US, companies can sell to realize capital losses, then repurchase, lowering the tax basis of their holdings and creating tax offsets. 4. **Counter Negative Market Narratives:** A controlled, non-disruptive sale could demonstrate market resilience and disprove fears that corporate selling would crash the market, thereby normalizing bitcoin as a corporate treasury asset. 5. **Repurchase Preferred Stock at a Discount:** If a company's preferred stock trades significantly below its face value, using bitcoin sale proceeds to repurchase it can retire expensive liabilities at a profit, saving on future dividend payments. The conclusion emphasizes that bitcoin's monetary properties offer flexibility. Strategic sales can protect corporate and shareholder interests, making asset utilization more important than rigid "hold" mandates.

marsbit51 min fa

Is MicroStrategy Selling Bitcoin Not a Bearish Signal? Deconstructing the 5 Financial Logics Behind Corporate Bitcoin Divestment

marsbit51 min fa

Why Did Zhipu Surge Nearly 30% in a Single Day?

"Global AI Model Unicorn" Zhipu's stock surged nearly 30% in a single day, reaching a new market cap high. The catalyst was the launch of its GLM-5.1-highspeed API, boasting a generation speed of **400 tokens per second**, setting a new global benchmark. This speed, roughly 3-5 times faster than industry leaders like OpenAI's GPT-4o and Anthropic's Claude, is achieved **without compromising the full-scale model's capabilities**. In the era of AI Agents requiring dozens of self-calls, such latency reduction is critical, transforming speed from a system metric into a determinant of intelligence limits. The breakthrough stems from a three-layer technical overhaul: 1. **TileRT Inference Engine**: Compiles the entire model into a continuous, always-on computation pipeline using "Warp Specialization," minimizing GPU idle time by having different processor groups handle data loading, computation, and communication in parallel. 2. **Heterogeneous Parallelism for MLA**: To efficiently run the GLM-5.1 model using the MLA attention mechanism, TileRT employs a heterogeneous strategy. One GPU handles sparse indexing/routing, while the others perform dense computation, optimizing for MLA's unique workflow. 3. **ZCube Network Architecture**: Replaces the standard Spine-Leaf (ROFT) network topology with a flat, dual-group interconnect. This design creates a single optimal path between any two GPUs, eliminating network congestion at scale and reducing latency. The business impact is significant: a 15% increase in cluster throughput (free extra capacity), a 40.6% reduction in tail latency (improved stability), and a one-third cut in networking hardware costs. Long-term, this innovation challenges the dominance of NVIDIA's integrated hardware-software stack (GPU+NVLink+InfiniBand), potentially benefiting manufacturers of high-density Leaf switches and optical modules while lowering the software barrier for domestic AI chips like Huawei's Ascend. The innovation proves that more can be achieved with the same compute, reshaping the infrastructure beyond just GPUs.

marsbit2 h fa

Why Did Zhipu Surge Nearly 30% in a Single Day?

marsbit2 h fa

The Powell Era Concludes: Warsh Takes Over the Fed, What It Means for Global Finance and the Crypto Market?

The podcast discusses the implications of Jerome Powell's departure and Kevin Warsh's appointment as Federal Reserve Chair for global markets and crypto. It highlights a significant divergence between bond markets, which price in global tightening and persistent inflation, and equity markets, driven by AI hype—a disparity reminiscent of the dot-com bubble. The analysis introduces the "Bliss Trade" concept, a structural expectation of government stimulus during crises, which underpins risk asset valuations and currency debasement trades. Inflation is seen as sticky, driven by deglobalization and further complicated by geopolitical tensions, unlikely to fall quickly even if immediate crises subside. Powell's tenure is critiqued for misjudging inflation and overseeing the de-banking of crypto firms, despite defending Fed independence. Regarding crypto, Bitcoin is viewed as a macro asset and a hedge against currency debasement, but its current muted performance stems from competition with higher-beta assets like AI stocks. The potential Clarity Act is seen as more beneficial for Ethereum than Bitcoin, with concerns about tokenization innovation leading to pure speculation. A key warning signal is the widening gap between the market-cap-weighted and equal-weighted S&P 500 indices, suggesting underlying market fragility.

marsbit2 h fa

The Powell Era Concludes: Warsh Takes Over the Fed, What It Means for Global Finance and the Crypto Market?

marsbit2 h fa

Trading

Spot

Futures