Don't Just Focus on Trading Volume, Learn to Understand the 'True and False Prosperity' of Perpetual Contracts

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-02-23Востаннє оновлено о 2026-02-23

Анотація

Title: Look Beyond Trading Volume: Understanding the Real Growth of Perpetual Contracts Perpetual contracts (perps) have become a dominant force in crypto trading, with their volume now accounting for about 75% of decentralized exchange activity, up from 44% in February 2025. This surge occurred even as the total crypto market cap fell nearly 40% between August 2025 and February 2026, indicating a shift towards derivatives for speculation and hedging during volatility. However, volume alone can be misleading. It may reflect high-frequency, incentive-driven activity rather than meaningful capital deployment. A more nuanced view comes from combining volume with Open Interest (OI)—the total value of outstanding contracts. While cumulative perps volume doubled in the past six months to $14 trillion (exceeding the previous four years' total), OI grew by about 50%, from $13B to ~$18B before settling at $13B. The OI/Volume ratio, a measure of capital efficiency, rose from 0.33x to 0.49x over the past year. This growth wasn’t linear: it peaked at ~0.72x from June to mid-October 2025, then dropped to ~0.38x after a major liquidation event in October wiped out $19B in leveraged positions. At the platform level, Hyperliquid leads in capital efficiency with an OI/7-day volume ratio over 45% and a take rate of 3.2 bps, effectively converting trading activity into sustained positions and fee revenue. Aster follows with a 34% ratio but a lower take rate of 1.6 bps, prioritizing capital ...

Original Title: Reading Perps Beyond Volume

Original Author: Prathik Desai, Token Dispatch

Original Compilation: Bitpush News

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

Take Jimmy Donaldson (aka "MrBeast" on YouTube) as an example. Not only does he have a snack empire, but he recently also acquired a banking app aimed at promoting financial literacy and money management among teenagers and young adults. Why? Perhaps nothing is more straightforward than monetizing a subscriber base of 466 million users with financial products.

This summer, the world's largest derivatives exchange, the CME Group, 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 the ways people engage with finance are changing. And nothing illustrates this better than the explosion of the Perpetual Markets 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 adherence to "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 gambling on the trajectory of volatile assets outside of 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 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. Trading volume is an absolute value. It looks large, refreshes every few minutes, and is perfect for leaderboards. But it misses a key nuance: volume can reflect movement that lacks meaning. A market's high volume might be due to depth, but it could also be because rewards and incentives encourage higher-frequency activity. This activity is often recursive and largely meaningless.

This week, I delved into other metrics of the perpetual trading markets. When used in conjunction with trading 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 volume surpassing spot trading volume on decentralized exchanges. From 44% in February 2025, the share of perpetual contract volume has skyrocketed to around 75% today (relative to spot volume).

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

· In the four years ending July 31, 2025, the cumulative total 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 crypto 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 the volume metric. Especially because perpetual trading isn't just about buying an asset and holding it long-term; it also involves repeatedly adjusting bet sizes using leverage over shorter time frames.

So, when market turnover speeds up, a question inevitably comes to mind: does record-breaking volume 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 expect to see not only larger capital flows but also proportionally growing open interest exposure.

· Last February, OI averaged around $4 billion;

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

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

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

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

· Phase 2 (June - Mid-Oct): The Jump. 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-high volumes but also increased risk exposure and greater capital commitment to these derivatives.

· Phase 3: The Reversal. The start of this phase coincided with 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 dropped to ~0.38x, driven primarily by volume growth while open interest largely stagnated. October, November, and December saw the three highest monthly volumes of 2025, averaging over $1.2 trillion per month. During the same period, OI averaged around $15B, slightly below the average of the previous three months.

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 is how the top 5 perpetual exchanges by 24-hour volume performed:

· Hyperliquid: Its ratio of OI to 7-day average daily volume is over 45%, able to convert a large share of its volume into lasting positions. This suggests that for every $10 traded on the platform, $4.5 is投入 (invested) into active positions. This is important because high OI rates lead to tighter 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, converting the largest share of its 24-hour volume into fee income.

· Aster: Currently ranked second, it maintains a decent capital efficiency (OI/Vol) of 34%, even though its volume is almost half of Hyperliquid's. However, its monetization capability is notable—with a lower take rate (~1.6 bps), Aster clearly prioritizes capital retention on its platform over fee maximization.

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

Summary

It's remarkable that today's perpetual contract market is no longer a simple growth story; it requires a nuanced reading of multiple metrics. At the macro level, volume is exploding: 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 there is "patient capital" willing to trust and bet on the various products and markets emerging in perpetual trading exchanges.

What is 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, platforms that can optimize "trading conviction" and achieve sustainable monetization will be far more important than those that merely rely on rewards and incentives to dominate volume leaderboards.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the main limitation of using trading volume as the sole metric to evaluate the health of perpetual markets?

ATrading volume alone can be misleading because it may reflect high-frequency, recursive activity driven by incentives rather than meaningful capital inflow or deep market conviction. It doesn't distinguish between 'real' growth and activity that lacks significant economic substance.

QWhat key metric, when combined with trading volume, provides a more nuanced view of perpetual market activity?

AOpen Interest (OI) is the key metric. It measures the total dollar value of active, unsettled long and short contracts, representing the amount of 'patient capital' and real risk exposure in the market, not just the flow of capital.

QHow did the OI/Volume ratio for perpetual markets change from its average in early 2025 to February 2026?

AThe OI/Volume ratio increased by approximately 50%, rising from an average of around 0.33x in February 2025 to about 0.49x by February 2026, indicating an improvement in capital efficiency and the presence of more conviction-based trading.

QAccording to the article, which perpetual exchange demonstrated the highest capital efficiency (OI/Volume ratio) among the top five by volume?

AHyperliquid demonstrated the highest capital efficiency, with an OI to 7-day average daily volume ratio of over 45%, meaning that for every $10 traded, $4.50 was committed to an active position.

QWhat event in October 2025 marked a significant shift in the market, causing the OI/Volume ratio to drop to ~0.38x?

AThe shift began with a massive liquidation event on October 10th, 2025, which wiped out over $19 billion in leveraged positions within 24-hour period. This was followed by a phase where trading volume growth was driven largely by high-frequency activity while open interest stagnated.

Пов'язані матеріали

How Many Tokens Away Is Yang Zhilin from the 'Moon Chasing the Light'?

The article explores the intense competition between two leading Chinese AI companies, DeepSeek and Kimi (Moon Dark Side), and the mounting pressure on Yang Zhilin, the founder of Kimi. While DeepSeek re-emerged after 15 months of silence with its powerful V4 model—boasting 1.6 trillion parameters and low-cost, long-context capabilities—Kimi has been focusing on long-context processing and multi-agent systems with its K2.6 model. Yang faces a threefold challenge: technological rivalry, commercialization pressure, and investor expectations. Despite Kimi’s high valuation (reaching $18 billion), its revenue heavily relies on a single product with low paid conversion rates, while DeepSeek’s strategic silence and open-source influence have strengthened its market position and valuation prospects, now targeting over $20 billion. Both companies reflect broader trends in China’s AI ecosystem: Kimi aims for global influence through open-source contributions and agent-based advancements, while DeepSeek prioritizes foundational innovation and hardware independence, notably shifting to Huawei’s chips. Their competition is seen as vital for China’s AI progress, with the gap between top Chinese and U.S. models narrowing to just 2.7% on the Elo rating scale. Ultimately, the article argues that this rivalry, though anxiety-inducing for leaders like Zhilin, is essential for driving innovation and solidifying China’s role in the global AI landscape.

marsbit4 год тому

How Many Tokens Away Is Yang Zhilin from the 'Moon Chasing the Light'?

marsbit4 год тому

TechFlow Intelligence Bureau: ChatGPT Helps Amateur Mathematician Crack 60-Year-Old Problem, CFTC Sues New York Regulator Over Coinbase and Gemini

An amateur mathematician, with the assistance of ChatGPT, has solved a combinatorial mathematics puzzle originally proposed by Hungarian mathematician Paul Erdős in the 1960s. This marks another milestone in AI-aided mathematical research, demonstrating the evolving capabilities of large language models in formal reasoning. In other AI developments, OpenAI introduced a new privacy filter tool for enterprise API usage, automatically screening sensitive data. Meanwhile, the Qwen3.6-27B model achieved 100 tokens per second on a single RTX 5090 GPU using quantization, significantly lowering the cost barrier for local AI deployment. In crypto and Web3, the U.S. CFTC sued New York’s financial regulator, challenging its oversight of Coinbase and Gemini—a first-of-its-kind federal-state regulatory clash. Following a vulnerability, KelpDAO and major DeFi protocols established a recovery fund. Tether froze $344 million in assets linked to Iran’s central bank upon U.S. Treasury request, highlighting the centralized control risks in stablecoins. Separately, Litecoin underwent a 3-hour chain reorganization to undo a privacy-layer exploit. In the U.S., former President Trump invoked the Defense Production Act to address power grid bottlenecks affecting AI data centers and dismissed the entire National Science Board, raising concerns over research independence. A retail trader gained 250% on a $600k Intel options bet amid AI-related speculation. Xiaomi announced its first performance electric vehicle, targeting rivals like Tesla. Meanwhile, iPhone users reported devices automatically reinstalling a hidden app daily, suspected to be MDM-related. A Chinese securities report noted that A-share institutional crowding has reached its second-longest streak since 2007, signaling high valuations and potential style rotation. The day’s developments reflect a dual narrative: AI is enabling unprecedented individual breakthroughs, while centralized power structures—whether governmental or corporate—are becoming more assertive, underscoring that decentralization is as much a political-economic challenge as a technical one.

marsbit4 год тому

TechFlow Intelligence Bureau: ChatGPT Helps Amateur Mathematician Crack 60-Year-Old Problem, CFTC Sues New York Regulator Over Coinbase and Gemini

marsbit4 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片