Data: 75% of Traders on Hyperliquid Are Losing Money. What Are the Profitable Ones Using?

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-05-20Востаннє оновлено о 2026-05-20

Анотація

On Hyperliquid, approximately 75% of addresses are losing money, indicating that manual traders are increasingly competing against automated systems. Profitable traders primarily employ one of three approaches: 1) Running systematic, high-frequency strategies (e.g., one address executed 261k trades with a 64.75% win rate), 2) Placing high-conviction, asymmetric bets with large positions (e.g., 50 trades yielding $4.48M at a 28% win rate), or 3) Using algorithms for execution while making manual macro judgments. The article argues that traditional methods like chart patterns or reacting to social media news are often already priced in by bots, making such traders the "exit liquidity" for systematic players. Success now depends on unique narrative timing, structural insights, or conviction during market capitulation.

Author: Stacy Muur

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Guide: Three-quarters of addresses on Hyperliquid are losing money. It's not bad luck; the rules of the game have changed. While you're still looking at candlestick patterns for formations, arbitrage bots have already made their profit. Data shows that truly profitable traders either use algorithmic systematic execution or place large bets on asymmetric opportunities with high conviction. Manual retail traders watching screens are becoming the exit liquidity for others.

About 75% of addresses on Hyperliquid are in a loss-making position.

The reality is that people trading manually on Hyperliquid are competing against systems that never rest. The trading opportunity you just discovered has likely already been priced in by the system.

When you see a certain pattern, chances are it has already been arbitraged.

Extreme funding rates are balanced in an instant.

Technical patterns have already appeared across more than 50 order books.

News headlines are priced in as soon as they appear.

What the most profitable traders are doing:

→1. Running systematic strategies (the second most profitable address executed 261,000 trades this month with a 64.75% win rate)

→ 2. Holding high-conviction positions, betting on asymmetric returns (a wallet made $4.48 million with just 50 trades and a 28% win rate)

→ 3. Using algorithms as execution tools while making macro judgments manually

If you have timing in narratives, structural insight, or conviction when everyone else capitulates, you can still make profitable trades.

But if your trades are based on chart patterns or news you saw on X, you are likely just exit liquidity.

Пов'язані питання

QAccording to the article, what percentage of addresses on Hyperliquid are losing money, and what is presented as the primary reason?

AApproximately 75% of addresses on Hyperliquid are losing money. The primary reason is that manual traders are competing against automated, systemized strategies that execute trades faster and more efficiently, often pricing in opportunities before a human trader can act.

QWhat are the two main strategies used by the most profitable traders on Hyperliquid, as described in the article?

AThe two main strategies are: 1. Running systematic, automated strategies (one example executed 261,000 trades with a 64.75% win rate). 2. Holding high-conviction positions to bet on asymmetric opportunities (one wallet made $4.48M with only 50 trades, despite a 28% win rate).

QThe article suggests that several common trading signals are often ineffective. Name at least three of these signals.

AThree common but often ineffective signals mentioned are: 1. Technical chart patterns (which appear across many order books). 2. Extreme funding rates (which get arbitraged instantly). 3. News headlines (which are priced in immediately upon release).

QWhat role does the article suggest algorithms can play for a trader who still wants to make manual, high-level decisions?

AThe article suggests using algorithms as an execution tool. A trader can make macro or high-level directional judgments manually, and then use an algorithm to handle the rapid, systematic execution of trades based on that judgment.

QAccording to the article's conclusion, what kind of manual trader is most likely to succeed, and what kind is most likely to fail?

AA manual trader who succeeds is likely one acting on deep narrative timing, unique structural insights, or having strong conviction when others are capitulating. A manual trader who fails is likely one whose decisions are based on commonly seen chart patterns or news headlines found on social media (like X), as they become 'exit liquidity' for others.

Пов'язані матеріали

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

**Title:** The AI PC Battle: Don't Bet on Sides, Bet on the Tollbooth **Summary:** The AI PC competition is moving beyond simple "x86 vs. Arm" narratives. The core investment thesis should focus on identifying which players can sustain margins, cash flow, and pricing power throughout the upgrade cycle, rather than backing a particular architecture. The opportunity is analyzed in three layers: 1. **The Advanced Foundry Tollbooth:** TSMC is positioned to collect "tolls" regardless of which chip designer wins, due to its dominant ~70% share in advanced semiconductor manufacturing, which is essential for high-end AI PC chips. 2. **Compute & Platform Spillover:** AMD represents an offensive in the x86 CPU+GPU space, while NVIDIA leverages its GPU and CUDA software stack dominance. Both benefit from the demand for increased local AI compute. 3. **Architecture Diffusion & Turnaround Plays:** ARM and Intel offer potential for significant upside (elasticity), but investments here require stricter discipline due to higher execution risks and competitive challenges. The industry is transitioning from concept to shipment validation. While short-term forecasts for AI PC adoption have been revised down slightly due to tariffs and procurement delays, the long-term trend towards AI becoming a standard PC feature remains intact. The key driver for upgrade cycles will be whether compelling enterprise applications (e.g., privacy-sensitive computing, low-latency inference) emerge beyond consumer-focused features like meeting summarization. Investment strategy should prioritize companies with platform-level advantages and recurring revenue streams. TSMC offers high certainty as the foundational tollbooth. AMD presents a strong offensive play within the established ecosystem. ARM and Intel are higher-risk, higher-potential-reward turnaround bets. The report cautions against chasing short-term hype and emphasizes a disciplined, long-term approach focused on buying ecosystem strength and cash-flow certainty after market enthusiasm subsides. **Key Risks:** Underwhelming AI PC applications slowing upgrade cycles; slow improvement in Windows on Arm compatibility; macro/tariff impacts on PC demand; potential advanced node supply-demand mismatches affecting TSMC; high overall AI sector valuations making stocks vulnerable to a risk-off shift in markets.

marsbit9 хв тому

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

marsbit9 хв тому

Which Companies Has NVIDIA's "Three-Track Investment Architecture" Invested In?

NVIDIA's investment strategy operates through a "three-track architecture," not just its NVentures venture arm. Corporate Development handles massive strategic bets (e.g., $30B in OpenAI, $10B in Anthropic, $20B in Synopsys). NVentures, a small team, focuses on early-stage, financial investments across sectors like quantum computing (Alice & Bob, PsiQuantum), AI infrastructure (OpenRouter, Tensormesh), and biotech. The NVIDIA Inception accelerator provides non-monetary support. This system allows NVIDIA to nurture startups and lock in strategic partners, creating a vast AI ecosystem. This aggressive capital deployment has drawn scrutiny. Critics like Michael Burry and EU regulators question potential "circular financing," where NVIDIA's equity investments in companies (e.g., CoreWeave, OpenAI) facilitate those companies' purchases of NVIDIA hardware, potentially inflating revenue. Supporters view it as a necessary "virtuous cycle" to secure supply and demand in a compute-scarce market. While NVentures' smaller deals appear like traditional VC, its role within the larger, controversial investment framework remains a point of debate.

marsbit37 хв тому

Which Companies Has NVIDIA's "Three-Track Investment Architecture" Invested In?

marsbit37 хв тому

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

Marvell Technology's stock price surged from under $10 in 2016 to a record $290 in June 2026, fueled not by making GPUs, but by dominating AI infrastructure connectivity. This analysis argues the market misvalues MRVL as merely a smaller Broadcom in custom AI chips, overlooking its true, unique position. Marvell's core strength lies in enabling high-speed data flow for AI clusters through three interconnected businesses. First, it holds a commanding ~70% market share in high-speed optical DSPs (essential for data center light modules), a deep-moat business with accelerating growth. Second, its custom AI chip design business serves hyperscalers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google, with a significant revenue pipeline despite lower margins. Third, stable cash flows come from Ethernet switch chips and enterprise storage controllers. Together, they form a full-stack "AI data movement" platform. CEO Matt Murphy's transformative leadership since 2016, involving strategic divestments, key acquisitions (like Inphi for optical DSPs), and securing long-term agreements with major cloud providers, repositioned the company. A pivotal $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA in 2026 underscored Marvell's critical role in the AI ecosystem, particularly through collaborations like NVLink Fusion. While Marvell faces risks—including client concentration (losing the Amazon Trainium3 design), lower-margin business mix, competitive threats, insider selling, and complex supply chains—its fundamentals remain strong. The optical interconnect moat is widening with the acquisition of Celestial AI (photonics fabric), and financial metrics show accelerating revenue growth and operating leverage. With a PEG ratio suggesting undervaluation relative to its growth, the thesis is that the market undervalues Marvell's monopolistic position in AI "plumbing" while overemphasizing its competitive custom chip segment. The story transcends investing, symbolizing how in any complex system—from the internet to AI—the value of "connection" ultimately surpasses that of individual "nodes."

marsbit39 хв тому

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

marsbit39 хв тому

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

A discussion on Zhihu about "AI relay stations" shifted the niche developer topic of "cheap tokens" into broader user awareness. Users moved beyond simply questioning the legitimacy of these services to focus on practical concerns: Where do cheap tokens truly come from? Is the model being accessed the real one? Can relay stations see prompts, code, and API keys? For occasional users, are the risks worth it? The core debate centered less on price and more on trust. A primary worry is model authenticity—the risk of "model swapping," where users paying for a premium model might be routed to a cheaper one, creating an information asymmetry. Others argued that cost comparisons matter; while cheaper than official pay-as-you-go APIs, relay stations may not be the lowest-cost option versus subscriptions, domestic models, or free tiers, making user needs assessment crucial. Speculation about token sources ranged from legitimate bulk discounts to gray-area methods like account sharing or exploiting regional pricing. This opacity makes risk assessment difficult for users. Data security emerged as a critical concern, especially for enterprise use. When processing sensitive information like code, contracts, or client data, the inability to verify a relay station's data handling, retention, or access policies poses significant compliance and confidentiality risks. The evolving consensus suggests relay stations can be used cautiously for low-sensitivity, disposable tasks (e.g., summarizing public info, simple translation). However, they should not be the default for sensitive, professional, or production workflows involving proprietary data, Agents, or automated systems. Recommendations include avoiding large prepayments, not relying on a single service, using test prompts to monitor quality, anonymizing data where possible, and keeping official channels as backups. Ultimately, the discussion framed tokens not just as a billing unit but as a measure of real cost encompassing price, model integrity, data security, and service stability. The popularity of relay stations highlights user demand for affordable access, but the debate underscores a key trade-off: the savings from cheap tokens may come at the price of trust, transparency, and control over one's data and AI experience.

marsbit1 год тому

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

marsbit1 год тому

In-Depth Research Report on TradFi: The Convergence Wave of Crypto and Traditional Finance

In 2026, the crypto industry is undergoing a profound infrastructure-level transformation—TradFi assets are migrating on-chain at an unprecedented pace. According to CoinGecko's Q1 2026 report, the total value locked (TVL) of tokenized real-world assets (RWA) has surpassed $31 billion, a nearly 4x increase from $7.8 billion at the beginning of 2025, with the sector’s aggregate market capitalization reaching $19.3 billion. Among these, the market cap of tokenized stocks surged from $2 million to $486 million, with Q1 spot trading volume reaching $15.1 billion—a single quarter already surpassing the entire second half of 2025. RWA perpetual contract Q1 trading volume reached a staggering $524.8 billion, far exceeding the $313 billion for all of 2025. Meanwhile, BlackRock's BUIDL fund has reached $2.3 billion in scale and has filed for two new tokenized funds, signaling that the world's largest asset manager's tokenization strategy is evolving from pilot to product suite expansion. HTX, as a core participant in the crypto exchange sector, officially launched TradFi perpetual futures products including NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, META, and SPY in 2026, enabling crypto users to gain 24/7 trading access to core U.S. equities. Boston Consulting Group predicts that global tokenized asset scale could reach $16 trillion by 2030, while McKinsey offers a conservative estimate of approximately $2 trillion. The on-chain migration of TradFi assets is no longer a "future narrative" but a structural transformation unfolding in real time, as crypto exchanges evolve from single crypto asset trading platforms toward "multi-asset-class trading infrastructure."

HTX Learn1 год тому

In-Depth Research Report on TradFi: The Convergence Wave of Crypto and Traditional Finance

HTX Learn1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот

Ф'ючерси