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

比推Опубликовано 2026-02-11Обновлено 2026-02-11

Введение

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

Связанные с этим вопросы

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.

Похожее

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

In recent months, the rapid growth of the AI industry has attracted significant talent from the crypto sector. A persistent question among researchers intersecting both fields is whether blockchain can become a foundational part of AI infrastructure. While many previous AI and Crypto projects focused on application layers (like AI Agents, on-chain reasoning, data markets, and compute rentals), few achieved viable commercial models. Gensyn differentiates itself by targeting the most critical and expensive layer of AI: model training. Gensyn aims to organize globally distributed GPU resources into an open AI training network. Developers can submit training tasks, nodes provide computational power, and the network verifies results while distributing incentives. The core issue addressed is not decentralization for its own sake, but the increasing centralization of compute power among tech giants. In the era of large models, access to GPUs (like the H100) has become a decisive bottleneck, dictating the pace of AI development. Major AI companies are heavily dependent on large cloud providers for compute resources. Gensyn's approach is significant for several reasons: 1) It operates at the core infrastructure layer (model training), the most resource-intensive and technically demanding part of the AI value chain. 2) It proposes a more open, collaborative model for compute, potentially increasing resource utilization by dynamically pooling idle GPUs, similar to early cloud computing logic. 3) Its technical moat lies in solving complex challenges like verifying training results, ensuring node honesty, and maintaining reliability in a distributed environment—making it more of a deep-tech infrastructure company. 4) It targets a validated, high-growth market with genuine demand, rather than pursuing blockchain integration without purpose. Ultimately, the boundaries between Crypto and AI are blurring. AI requires global resource coordination, incentive mechanisms, and collaborative systems—areas where crypto-native solutions excel. Gensyn represents a step toward making advanced training capabilities more accessible and collaborative, moving beyond a niche controlled by a few giants. If successful, it could evolve into a fundamental piece of AI infrastructure, where the most enduring value in the AI era is often created.

marsbit5 ч. назад

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

marsbit5 ч. назад

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

A US researcher's visit to China's top AI labs reveals distinct cultural and organizational factors driving China's rapid AI development. While talent, data, and compute are similar to the West, Chinese labs excel through a pragmatic, execution-focused culture: less emphasis on individual stardom and conceptual debate, and more on teamwork, engineering optimization, and mastering the full tech stack. A key advantage is the integration of young students and researchers who approach model-building with fresh perspectives and low ego, prioritizing collective progress over personal credit. This contrasts with the US culture of self-promotion and "star scientist" narratives. Chinese labs also exhibit a strong "build, don't buy" mentality, preferring to develop core capabilities—like data pipelines and environments—in-house rather than relying on external services. The ecosystem feels more collaborative than tribal, with mutual respect among labs. While government support exists, its scale is unclear, and technical decisions appear driven by labs, not state mandates. Chinese companies across sectors, from platforms to consumer tech, are building their own foundational models to control their tech destiny, reflecting a broader cultural drive for technological sovereignty. Demand for AI is emerging, with spending patterns potentially mirroring cloud infrastructure more than traditional SaaS. Despite challenges like a less mature data industry and GPU shortages, Chinese labs are propelled by vast talent, rapid iteration, and deep integration with the open-source community. The competition is evolving beyond a pure model race into a contest of organizational execution, developer ecosystems, and industrial pragmatism.

marsbit6 ч. назад

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

marsbit6 ч. назад

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

Corning, a 175-year-old glass company, is experiencing a dramatic revival as a key player in AI infrastructure, driven by surging demand for high-performance optical fiber in data centers. AI data centers require vastly more fiber than traditional ones—5 to 10 times as much per rack—to handle high-speed data transmission between GPUs. This structural demand shift, coupled with supply constraints from the lengthy expansion cycle for fiber preforms, has created a significant supply-demand gap. Nvidia has invested in Corning, along with Lumentum and Coherent, in a $4.5 billion total commitment to secure the optical supply chain for AI. Corning's competitive edge lies in its expertise in producing ultra-low-loss, high-density, and bend-resistant specialty fiber, which is critical for 800G+ and future 1.6T data rates. Its deep involvement in co-packaged optics (CPO) with partners like Nvidia further solidifies its position. While not the largest fiber manufacturer globally, Corning's revenue from enterprise/data center clients now exceeds 40% of its optical communications sales, and it has secured multi-year supply agreements with major hyperscalers including Meta and Nvidia. Financially, Corning's optical communications revenue has surged, doubling from $1.3 billion in 2023 to over $3 billion in 2025. Its stock price has risen nearly 6-fold since late 2023. Key future catalysts include the rollout of Nvidia's CPO products and the scale of undisclosed customer agreements. However, risks include high current valuations and potential disruption from next-generation technologies like hollow-core fiber. The company's long-term bet on light over electricity, maintained even through the telecom bubble crash, is now being validated by the AI boom.

marsbit7 ч. назад

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

marsbit7 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片