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Опубликовано 2026-05-22Обновлено 2026-05-22

Введение

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.

Связанные с этим вопросы

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.

Похожее

Token Packages Are Here, Are Telecom Operators in a Hurry?

Major Chinese telecom operators are launching token-based AI computing packages, sparking public debate and highlighting a strategic shift amid slowing traditional revenue growth. In May, Shanghai Telecom introduced token plans (e.g., 9.9 RMB for 10 million tokens), quickly followed by nationwide offerings from China Telecom, China Mobile, and China Unicom. While priced higher than major AI firms like DeepSeek, these packages allow users to access multiple AI models via API using their phone bills, similar to purchasing universal mobile data. The move reflects operators' anxiety as traditional voice, SMS, and data services stagnate. With revenue growth hitting multi-year lows in 2025, AI and computing power represent a critical new frontier. However, current C端 offerings, such as AI photo editing or virtual pets, are seen as non-essential and highlight operators' role as "pipes" or integrators rather than creators of compelling AI products. Beyond consumer packages, operators aim to become key infrastructure players in China’s national computing power network. They position themselves as the "power grid" delivering AI算力, leveraging their vast network of base stations to ensure low-latency, reliable coverage, especially for applications like autonomous driving. This infrastructure role, coupled with unified national调度, could make算力 a ubiquitous utility, driving new consumption scenarios even if mass adoption of token packages remains uncertain.

marsbit1 мин. назад

Token Packages Are Here, Are Telecom Operators in a Hurry?

marsbit1 мин. назад

The Five Value Logics Behind Enterprises Selling Bitcoin

"Five Value Logics Behind Corporate Bitcoin Sell-offs" Recent news of Strategy company considering selling part of its bitcoin holdings to meet operational goals sparked market discussions, challenging its previous "never sell" stance. While long-term holding aligns with crypto investment philosophy, selling bitcoin can be a rational corporate decision aimed at maximizing shareholder value, unlike personal sales for life improvements. For instance, in Q1 2026, miners sold 25,376 BTC to fund a pivot into AI, deeming it a higher-return investment. For treasury-holding firms like Strategy, selling bitcoin can create value through five key logics: 1. **Increasing Bitcoin Per Share:** The core metric is bitcoin per share. If a company's stock trades below its bitcoin asset value, selling BTC to buy back shares can increase this ratio, as the reduction in shares outstanding outweighs the BTC sold. Similarly, using BTC proceeds to cover fixed costs like dividends during stock undervaluation minimizes the dilution of bitcoin per share. 2. **Optimizing Capital Structure & Lowering Financing Costs:** Credit ratings significantly influence financing costs. Rating agencies like S&P value cash reserves. By selling bitcoin to boost cash, companies can meet capital market expectations, secure better ratings, and issue debt at lower costs. Reducing debt through BTC sales also improves the appeal of preferred stock. Lower interest rates compound over time, boosting profits. 3. **Legitimate Tax Planning:** The US currently has no wash-sale rules for bitcoin. Companies can sell to realize a book loss, immediately repurchase at a lower cost basis, and use the loss to offset taxes—a strategy Strategy used in 2022's bear market. This can be combined with stock buybacks or debt repayment for multiple benefits. 4. **Dispelling Market FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt):** Negative narratives claim large corporate BTC sales could crash the market or invalidate the treasury model. A controlled sale (e.g., 50,000 BTC) without causing major market or stock price volatility could debunk such myths, helping the market accept bitcoin as a corporate asset. This reason is the most subjective of the five. 5. **Buying Back Preferred Stock at a Discount:** This lesser-known strategy involves repurchasing a company's own floating-rate preferred stock when it trades significantly below its par value. For example, if a $100-par security like STRC trades at $82, selling bitcoin to buy it back yields an $18 per-share, tax-free profit. Price drops may occur due to leveraged trading cascades, unrelated to BTC's price. Repurchasing avoids future increased dividend costs. In conclusion, corporate bitcoin sales should not be automatically viewed as bearish. In many scenarios, they protect the interests of the company and its shareholders. Bitcoin's monetary properties offer flexible capital allocation; using the asset rationally unlocks its maximum value.

marsbit1 мин. назад

The Five Value Logics Behind Enterprises Selling Bitcoin

marsbit1 мин. назад

I Tested with $10,000: Zero Wear, 8% APY, and Earn Points (Full Tutorial + Screenshots Included)

**Title:** My $10,000 Real-World Test: Zero Wear-and-Tear, ~8% APY, Plus Earning Points (Full Guide + Screenshots Included) **Summary:** This article details a personal experiment with $10,000 on the StandX platform to verify its advertised ~8% APY for its stablecoin, DUSD, while earning trading points. The author created two accounts, each depositing $5,000 worth of DUSD, and used StandX's unique "Block Trade" feature to open perfectly offsetting long and short BTC positions (2x leverage each). This neutralized directional market risk. **Key Results (Over 8 Days):** * **Total Profit:** $16.91 (~7.8% annualized). * **Zero Net Directional P&L:** BTC price movements canceled out. * **Zero Wear-and-Tear:** No losses from fees, slippage, or gas from frequent trading. * **Points Earned:** 380+ trading points. **Source of the ~8.46% APY:** The yield is composed of three layers, all paid in DUSD (real USD value, not governance tokens): 1. **DUSD Base (~1.27%):** Derived from funding rates (similar to Ethena's USDe). 2. **SIP-2 Position Boost (~2.27%):** A protocol revenue-sharing mechanism. Users providing liquidity (via open positions) earn a share of platform trading fees. Leverage acts as a multiplier on this yield. 3. **SIP-3 Universal Fee Share (~4.92%):** A portion of all platform trading fees is distributed to *every* DUSD holder, regardless of whether they trade. **Sustainability Claim:** The author argues this yield is more sustainable than pure funding-rate models (e.g., Ethena) because over 7% of it comes from transaction fees (SIP-2 + SIP-3), which are less dependent on market cycles. **Step-by-Step Strategy:** A concise 3-step guide is provided for replicating the zero-risk strategy using two wallets and StandX's Block Trade to create matched long/short positions. **Risk Disclosures:** The article notes standard DeFi risks: smart contract vulnerability and yield fluctuation (Base yield varies with funding rates; SIP-2/3 yields depend on platform trading volume). **Author's Note:** The author discloses their role in Growth at StandX. The piece is presented as personal testing and analysis, not investment advice.

链捕手35 мин. назад

I Tested with $10,000: Zero Wear, 8% APY, and Earn Points (Full Tutorial + Screenshots Included)

链捕手35 мин. назад

Senior Analyst Dialogue: What Powell's Departure and Warsh's Appointment Mean for Crypto?

The podcast episode "Powell Is Out, Warsh Is In: What It Means for Crypto" features an analysis by Noelle Acheson on the macro-economic landscape and its implications for crypto. Key discussion points include: * **Equity-Bond Divergence:** Acheson highlights a significant and growing disconnect between stock and bond markets. While bond yields rise globally, signaling tighter financial conditions, equities are driven by AI-related hype and speculation, reminiscent of the 1999 dot-com bubble. * **'Bliss Trade' and Systemic Fragility:** The discussion explores the concept of a structural, cross-party government expectation to provide fiscal support ("Bliss Trade"), which underpins risk asset valuations and carries its own systemic vulnerabilities. * **Inflation Outlook:** Acheson argues that inflation is not meaningfully declining, citing core CPI stagnation and attributing the trend to de-globalization, tariffs, and geopolitical tensions like the Strait of Hormuz crisis. * **Powell's Legacy:** Powell's tenure receives mixed marks. While his defense of Fed independence is noted, he is also criticized for overseeing the "de-banking" of crypto firms in 2023 and initially misjudging inflation. * **Outlook for Warsh:** Expectations for the incoming Fed Chair, Kevin Warsh, are measured. While he may aim to reduce Fed balance sheet size and forward guidance, market realities and the FOMC will likely constrain his ability to enact significant policy shifts, particularly rate cuts. * **Crypto as a Macro Asset:** Bitcoin's role is framed as a hedge against currency debasement, benefiting from expectations of monetary stimulus. However, its maturation as a macro asset means it now competes with other high-volatility investments like AI stocks, potentially limiting near-term price catalysts. * **Market Structure & Tokenization:** The potential Clarity Act is seen as more beneficial for assets like Ethereum than Bitcoin, which already has relative regulatory clarity. Concerns are raised about "innovation exemptions" for tokenization if they enable third-party derivatives that encourage pure speculation over capital formation. In conclusion, the analysis suggests crypto markets lack a near-term positive catalyst and are caught between competing macro narratives, with significant underlying fragilities in traditional markets.

marsbit47 мин. назад

Senior Analyst Dialogue: What Powell's Departure and Warsh's Appointment Mean for Crypto?

marsbit47 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片