#hyperliquid
hyperliquid
5.9M views
13,196 Discussing
Hot
Latest
Verified
Today, 9.92 million tokens were unlocked from $HYPE (almost 1% of the total supply), worth about $820 million, sent directly to the original contributors.
This is a real liquidity stress test: if the market absorbs this supply without the price collapsing, it confirms real institutional demand; if it doesn't, it's the clearest sign that much of the recent rally was hot air.
In the next 48-72 hours, we'll see whether buying volume supports the price or whether the sell-off cascade begins from those who received free tokens today.
#hype #Hyperliquid #Token
This is a real liquidity stress test: if the market absorbs this supply without the price collapsing, it confirms real institutional demand; if it doesn't, it's the clearest sign that much of the recent rally was hot air.
In the next 48-72 hours, we'll see whether buying volume supports the price or whether the sell-off cascade begins from those who received free tokens today.
#hype #Hyperliquid #Token
Partly True
Around HYPE setting a new all-time high, the explanations on the market have been highly consistent. Since it kept climbing right around the monthly vesting date, it must have been protocol buybacks absorbing the sell pressure. That sounds plausible, but there is one link in the middle that nobody checked: whether the coins written into the vesting schedule ever actually left the custody address.
Hyperliquid’s own supply interface is public, and the answer is there. The address that holds the core contributors’ vested share received 238 million tokens at genesis, and today it reads 241.16 million, a bit more than at launch. The extra amount is staking yield, because the entire balance at that address is delegated, and the available balance is zero. The 9.92 million tokens that vest each month have never become part of the circulating supply on the protocol’s own ledger. That number appears on the calendar every month, but not in the market. Vesting expiration only removes one restriction; for the coins to actually reach the market, someone still has to actively un-delegate, withdraw, and place sell orders. On-chain, those are three separate actions, and each one has to be deliberately executed.
The price picture also should not be overread. The all-time high was touched on the evening of September 6 at 89.66, but the close that day did not hold above it, and spot today is quoted at 86.39 on OKX. Touching an intraday high and holding above it are two different things; treating a wick as trend confirmation turns a single candle shadow into a conclusion.
Let’s do one more layer of arithmetic. Suppose those tokens were actually claimed in a given month and dumped all at once the same day. At current prices, the notional amount would be around $860 million. Over the same time frame, Hyperliquid’s protocol revenue over the past 30 days was $55.35 million, and that is the full ammunition of the assistance fund for buying back HYPE. Using one month’s revenue to absorb one month’s nominal unlock amount would only cover a small fraction. So attributing this new high to buybacks is looking in the wrong direction. Right now, HYPE is being priced off the 299 million tokens that are actually circulating; the vesting schedule numbers never entered that pool.
The real point worth scrutinizing is the revenue line. OAK Research’s Lilian Aliaga compiled a set of figures in late August. Quarterly protocol revenue fell from $357 million in Q3 2025 to $202 million in Q2 this year, and the assistance fund’s buyback amount was cut roughly in half as well. She sees this as an active choice: Hyperliquid is giving more and more fees to developers building products on top of it, trading revenue for activity and market share.
I agree with her on the direction, but I would not stop the risk analysis at revenue. Declining revenue is a slow variable; there are signs before the quarterly report comes out, and readers have time to react. The fast variable is the custody address balance. The 241 million tokens there are equal to 80% of the circulating supply. Although unstaking takes time, the queue is only a few days. If nobody is claiming today, that is a holder’s deliberate choice after doing the math; the contract has not welded these tokens shut. The calculation is actually straightforward. Tokens left staked keep earning yield; withdrawing them means giving up that yield in exchange for an uncertain sale price. As long as HYPE keeps trending upward, staying put is the most profitable move. But that logic depends on the price trend, and trends change; once they do, the answer the same group of people calculates will change too.
The assistance fund is also a two-sided story. Its 47.04 million HYPE were accumulated at an average cost of $27.22, a position close to one-sixth of circulating supply, and the protocol itself is the largest single holder in that pool. When the market rises, this acts as a thick buffer; when revenue falls, it becomes a buyer that is forced to slow down more and more, and everyone knows it cannot keep buying as aggressively.
The vesting story around #Hyperliquid is a false issue right now, but it can turn into a real one at any moment, and the trigger condition is clearly identifiable. If the delegated balance at the custody address starts to decline month by month, that means contributors have begun cashing out, and my interpretation above would fail immediately. If protocol revenue continues to fall along the slope seen in Q2, then buyback support will be reduced to little more than a narrative. Checking these two numbers every month is more useful than staring at the vesting calendar.
Conversely, don’t overstate the risk either. For staked coins to come out, they have to be un-delegated first, and that action is visible on-chain. They won’t suddenly dump out of nowhere at some unannounced dawn.
Next time you see a headline saying some token unlocks billions worth on a given day, first take a look at the project’s own supply interface. How much remains in the custody address? Is it fully delegated? You can check it in two minutes. The gap between nominal unlock amounts and actual circulating supply increases is often an order of magnitude or more, and $HYPE is just the clearest example of that gap right now.
Hyperliquid’s own supply interface is public, and the answer is there. The address that holds the core contributors’ vested share received 238 million tokens at genesis, and today it reads 241.16 million, a bit more than at launch. The extra amount is staking yield, because the entire balance at that address is delegated, and the available balance is zero. The 9.92 million tokens that vest each month have never become part of the circulating supply on the protocol’s own ledger. That number appears on the calendar every month, but not in the market. Vesting expiration only removes one restriction; for the coins to actually reach the market, someone still has to actively un-delegate, withdraw, and place sell orders. On-chain, those are three separate actions, and each one has to be deliberately executed.
The price picture also should not be overread. The all-time high was touched on the evening of September 6 at 89.66, but the close that day did not hold above it, and spot today is quoted at 86.39 on OKX. Touching an intraday high and holding above it are two different things; treating a wick as trend confirmation turns a single candle shadow into a conclusion.
Let’s do one more layer of arithmetic. Suppose those tokens were actually claimed in a given month and dumped all at once the same day. At current prices, the notional amount would be around $860 million. Over the same time frame, Hyperliquid’s protocol revenue over the past 30 days was $55.35 million, and that is the full ammunition of the assistance fund for buying back HYPE. Using one month’s revenue to absorb one month’s nominal unlock amount would only cover a small fraction. So attributing this new high to buybacks is looking in the wrong direction. Right now, HYPE is being priced off the 299 million tokens that are actually circulating; the vesting schedule numbers never entered that pool.
The real point worth scrutinizing is the revenue line. OAK Research’s Lilian Aliaga compiled a set of figures in late August. Quarterly protocol revenue fell from $357 million in Q3 2025 to $202 million in Q2 this year, and the assistance fund’s buyback amount was cut roughly in half as well. She sees this as an active choice: Hyperliquid is giving more and more fees to developers building products on top of it, trading revenue for activity and market share.
I agree with her on the direction, but I would not stop the risk analysis at revenue. Declining revenue is a slow variable; there are signs before the quarterly report comes out, and readers have time to react. The fast variable is the custody address balance. The 241 million tokens there are equal to 80% of the circulating supply. Although unstaking takes time, the queue is only a few days. If nobody is claiming today, that is a holder’s deliberate choice after doing the math; the contract has not welded these tokens shut. The calculation is actually straightforward. Tokens left staked keep earning yield; withdrawing them means giving up that yield in exchange for an uncertain sale price. As long as HYPE keeps trending upward, staying put is the most profitable move. But that logic depends on the price trend, and trends change; once they do, the answer the same group of people calculates will change too.
The assistance fund is also a two-sided story. Its 47.04 million HYPE were accumulated at an average cost of $27.22, a position close to one-sixth of circulating supply, and the protocol itself is the largest single holder in that pool. When the market rises, this acts as a thick buffer; when revenue falls, it becomes a buyer that is forced to slow down more and more, and everyone knows it cannot keep buying as aggressively.
The vesting story around #Hyperliquid is a false issue right now, but it can turn into a real one at any moment, and the trigger condition is clearly identifiable. If the delegated balance at the custody address starts to decline month by month, that means contributors have begun cashing out, and my interpretation above would fail immediately. If protocol revenue continues to fall along the slope seen in Q2, then buyback support will be reduced to little more than a narrative. Checking these two numbers every month is more useful than staring at the vesting calendar.
Conversely, don’t overstate the risk either. For staked coins to come out, they have to be un-delegated first, and that action is visible on-chain. They won’t suddenly dump out of nowhere at some unannounced dawn.
Next time you see a headline saying some token unlocks billions worth on a given day, first take a look at the project’s own supply interface. How much remains in the custody address? Is it fully delegated? You can check it in two minutes. The gap between nominal unlock amounts and actual circulating supply increases is often an order of magnitude or more, and $HYPE is just the clearest example of that gap right now.
📰 A redemption of 433,000 HYPE by HyperLabs, the Hyperliquid development team, has now arrived.
This redemption was submitted 7 days ago, arrived 12 hours ago, and was then transferred to 11 addresses 9 hours ago. The amount is not small; converted to dollars, it is about $38.14 million, no wonder on-chain monitors singled it out.
🔥 But this time it doesn’t look like a sudden sell-off; it looks more like a regular transfer of staking rewards. HyperLabs now unstakes and transfers a little over 400,000 HYPE every month, basically matching that month’s interest income.
To be honest, this pace has already become fairly regular. It holds 241 million HYPE, and based on on-chain data, the daily staking interest is about 14,400 HYPE. Over a month, that adds up to exactly the amount transferred out each month.
💡 So looking at this transfer alone, the key point is not just “how much was transferred,” but whether it continues the previous pattern of monthly interest transfers. At this point, the answer is basically yes: after the redemption arrived, it was distributed to 11 addresses, which is more consistent with a fixed-income transfer.
🤔 Do you think this kind of monthly release and transfer of HYPE will put pressure on the market, or has it already been treated as a normal income distribution?
#HYPE #Hyperliquid #链上数据 #stakingrewards
This redemption was submitted 7 days ago, arrived 12 hours ago, and was then transferred to 11 addresses 9 hours ago. The amount is not small; converted to dollars, it is about $38.14 million, no wonder on-chain monitors singled it out.
🔥 But this time it doesn’t look like a sudden sell-off; it looks more like a regular transfer of staking rewards. HyperLabs now unstakes and transfers a little over 400,000 HYPE every month, basically matching that month’s interest income.
To be honest, this pace has already become fairly regular. It holds 241 million HYPE, and based on on-chain data, the daily staking interest is about 14,400 HYPE. Over a month, that adds up to exactly the amount transferred out each month.
💡 So looking at this transfer alone, the key point is not just “how much was transferred,” but whether it continues the previous pattern of monthly interest transfers. At this point, the answer is basically yes: after the redemption arrived, it was distributed to 11 addresses, which is more consistent with a fixed-income transfer.
🤔 Do you think this kind of monthly release and transfer of HYPE will put pressure on the market, or has it already been treated as a normal income distribution?
#HYPE #Hyperliquid #链上数据 #stakingrewards
#Hyperliquid (HYPE) updates the maximum
Token $HYPE reached a $89.6 mark amid regular token burns by the protocol. About 30 institutional giants, including UBS and Jane Street, disclosed investments in HYPE #ETF totaling more than $74.9M. Active buybacks are fueling the rally.
Token $HYPE reached a $89.6 mark amid regular token burns by the protocol. About 30 institutional giants, including UBS and Jane Street, disclosed investments in HYPE #ETF totaling more than $74.9M. Active buybacks are fueling the rally.
#Hyperliquid #etf
UBS and Jane Street enter Hyperliquid ETF 🚀
Wall Street is taking its first steps into the DeFi sector through regulated funds. According to the latest 13F reports, 30 institutions have declared $74.9 million in three new Hyperliquid ETFs.
The reports only show positions as of the end of June, so these numbers are just the “tip of the iceberg” and the first signal of the market.
🎯 Who are the TOP 5 holders:
➡️ Wealth High Governance: $23.9 million
➡️ OLP Capital: $10.5 million
➡️ UBS: $7.5 million
➡️ Bank of Montreal: $6.7 million
➡️ Jane Street: $4.4 million
The top 5 players hold 71% of all declared institutional funds. 📈 Why is $HYPE growing?
The total assets of the three ETFs have already reached $480.9 million, and the token itself has updated its ATH at around $89.60 (capitalization $19.7 billion).
The growth engine is buybacks: 99% of commissions from the trading platform (that's $68.6 million over the last 30 days) go to the automatic redemption of $HYPE from the market, and ETF funds additionally block tokens in staking, removing them from free circulation.
UBS and Jane Street enter Hyperliquid ETF 🚀
Wall Street is taking its first steps into the DeFi sector through regulated funds. According to the latest 13F reports, 30 institutions have declared $74.9 million in three new Hyperliquid ETFs.
The reports only show positions as of the end of June, so these numbers are just the “tip of the iceberg” and the first signal of the market.
🎯 Who are the TOP 5 holders:
➡️ Wealth High Governance: $23.9 million
➡️ OLP Capital: $10.5 million
➡️ UBS: $7.5 million
➡️ Bank of Montreal: $6.7 million
➡️ Jane Street: $4.4 million
The top 5 players hold 71% of all declared institutional funds. 📈 Why is $HYPE growing?
The total assets of the three ETFs have already reached $480.9 million, and the token itself has updated its ATH at around $89.60 (capitalization $19.7 billion).
The growth engine is buybacks: 99% of commissions from the trading platform (that's $68.6 million over the last 30 days) go to the automatic redemption of $HYPE from the market, and ETF funds additionally block tokens in staking, removing them from free circulation.
🚨 $HYPER IS AT A CRITICAL MOMENT 🚨
$HYPE just pushed into new all-time-high territory near $90. 🔥
Now the big question:
Is this the start of the next leg up… or are we about to see a sharp pullback? 👀
📍 Key levels I’m watching: 🟢 $84–$85 → important area to hold
🔥 $90 → breakout zone
🎯 $95 → next potential target
🚀 $100 → psychological milestone
The momentum is clearly strong, but after a move this aggressive, chasing the top can be risky. A clean breakout and successful retest could make the setup even more interesting.
Would you buy $HYPE here, or wait for a pullback? 👇
DYOR. Manage your risk. ⚠️
$HYPER #Hyperliquid #Crypto #altcoins #BinanceSquare
$HYPE just pushed into new all-time-high territory near $90. 🔥
Now the big question:
Is this the start of the next leg up… or are we about to see a sharp pullback? 👀
📍 Key levels I’m watching: 🟢 $84–$85 → important area to hold
🔥 $90 → breakout zone
🎯 $95 → next potential target
🚀 $100 → psychological milestone
The momentum is clearly strong, but after a move this aggressive, chasing the top can be risky. A clean breakout and successful retest could make the setup even more interesting.
Would you buy $HYPE here, or wait for a pullback? 👇
DYOR. Manage your risk. ⚠️
$HYPER #Hyperliquid #Crypto #altcoins #BinanceSquare
Hyperliquid has once again played out a “hunt the giant whale” spectacle.
Since September 3, Loracle has been opening 3x short positions on $PONS , and has already accumulated 25.04 million tokens (about $19.41 million). Its entry price is $0.6553, accounting for 19% of that platform’s outstanding PONS open interest. The unrealized loss is already approaching $3 million. This whale even set up a zero-fee PONS fork version to hedge and try to save itself.
But what truly escalated this battle was an on-chain analyst, MLM, publicly calling out on Twitter: “If you want to heavily bet on hunting down this short, DM us with funds of seven figures or more.” Then they added: “We already have eight-figure-level funds committing.”
Currently, Loracle’s liquidation price is $1.83. PONS needs to rise another 128% for liquidation to be triggered. Sounds remote? But in the crypto market, a 128% move is only the length of a single K-line.
When someone starts publicly raising funds to target a whale, it usually means two things: the market is extremely polarized, and money begins to pool together to bet on a directional move. For token holders, this isn’t just another long-versus-short showdown—it’s a signal. When “smart money” is willing to assemble to hunt whales, market sentiment has already reached a critical point.
Which side are you on?
#Hyperliquid #on-chain contest
Since September 3, Loracle has been opening 3x short positions on $PONS , and has already accumulated 25.04 million tokens (about $19.41 million). Its entry price is $0.6553, accounting for 19% of that platform’s outstanding PONS open interest. The unrealized loss is already approaching $3 million. This whale even set up a zero-fee PONS fork version to hedge and try to save itself.
But what truly escalated this battle was an on-chain analyst, MLM, publicly calling out on Twitter: “If you want to heavily bet on hunting down this short, DM us with funds of seven figures or more.” Then they added: “We already have eight-figure-level funds committing.”
Currently, Loracle’s liquidation price is $1.83. PONS needs to rise another 128% for liquidation to be triggered. Sounds remote? But in the crypto market, a 128% move is only the length of a single K-line.
When someone starts publicly raising funds to target a whale, it usually means two things: the market is extremely polarized, and money begins to pool together to bet on a directional move. For token holders, this isn’t just another long-versus-short showdown—it’s a signal. When “smart money” is willing to assemble to hunt whales, market sentiment has already reached a critical point.
Which side are you on?
#Hyperliquid #on-chain contest
WALL STREET IS EXPOSING $HYPE
• Jane Street reported about $4.4M across three U.S.-listed Hyperliquid ETFs, while UBS disclosed roughly $7.5M in holdings.
• The five largest institutional holders account for around $53M, or 71% of the $74.9M total disclosed holdings. The three ETFs have also pulled in about $356.6M in net inflows since launch.
• The numbers add another layer to the institutional story around $HYPE , although 13F filings are only snapshots as of June 30 and don't necessarily mean these firms are outright bullish.
• With regulated demand building, traders will be watching $HYPE 's next major support and resistance zones closely to see whether price can turn the institutional narrative into another leg higher.
#hype #Hyperliquid
• Jane Street reported about $4.4M across three U.S.-listed Hyperliquid ETFs, while UBS disclosed roughly $7.5M in holdings.
• The five largest institutional holders account for around $53M, or 71% of the $74.9M total disclosed holdings. The three ETFs have also pulled in about $356.6M in net inflows since launch.
• The numbers add another layer to the institutional story around $HYPE , although 13F filings are only snapshots as of June 30 and don't necessarily mean these firms are outright bullish.
• With regulated demand building, traders will be watching $HYPE 's next major support and resistance zones closely to see whether price can turn the institutional narrative into another leg higher.
#hype #Hyperliquid
According to Ai aunt monitoring, on Hyperliquid there has once again appeared a “whale-hunting operation” targeting the giant whale shorts.
Giant Whale Loracle has been opening $PONS 3x short positions since September 3. It currently holds 25.04 million tokens, worth about $19.41 million. The entry price is $0.6553, accounting for 19% of Hyperliquid PONS’s outstanding open interest, and the position is still being increased; its unrealized loss is now approaching $3 million. Even more interestingly, this address has also previously set up its own PONS zero-fee fork version in an attempt to救 itself.
An on-chain analyst MLM publicly posted yesterday stating, “If you want to heavily position to target this short, funds exceeding seven figures can DM me,” then added, “At present, commitments have already been made by eight-figure level funds.”
According to calculations, Loracle’s current liquidation price is $1.83. That means PONS would need to rise another 128% (without adding margin) to trigger forced liquidation, corresponding to an actual market value of $1.284 billion. Whether this whale-hunting operation will ultimately succeed, we can continue to wait for the subsequent developments.
#Hyperliquid #猎鲸行动 $PONS
Giant Whale Loracle has been opening $PONS 3x short positions since September 3. It currently holds 25.04 million tokens, worth about $19.41 million. The entry price is $0.6553, accounting for 19% of Hyperliquid PONS’s outstanding open interest, and the position is still being increased; its unrealized loss is now approaching $3 million. Even more interestingly, this address has also previously set up its own PONS zero-fee fork version in an attempt to救 itself.
An on-chain analyst MLM publicly posted yesterday stating, “If you want to heavily position to target this short, funds exceeding seven figures can DM me,” then added, “At present, commitments have already been made by eight-figure level funds.”
According to calculations, Loracle’s current liquidation price is $1.83. That means PONS would need to rise another 128% (without adding margin) to trigger forced liquidation, corresponding to an actual market value of $1.284 billion. Whether this whale-hunting operation will ultimately succeed, we can continue to wait for the subsequent developments.
#Hyperliquid #猎鲸行动 $PONS
Hyperliquid returns with “Whale Hunting Operation,” and this time the target is a massive short whale for PONS—at 3x.
According to monitoring, since September 3, the whale Loracle has opened $PONS 3x short positions, currently holding 25.04 million tokens worth approximately $19.41 million. The entry price is $0.6553, accounting for 19% of Hyperliquid’s outstanding PONS, and the position is still being added. Its unrealized loss is already close to $3 million.
What’s interesting is that this address previously built its own no-fee fork version of PONS, attempting to self-rescue. Yesterday, on-chain analyst MLM publicly posted that if anyone wants to heavily position themselves to target this short seller, funds exceeding seven digits can be direct messaged for contact; it was then added that commitments for involvement at eight-figure funding levels have already been made.
Loracle’s current liquidation price is $1.83, meaning PONS needs to rise by 128% (without adding margin) to trigger a forced liquidation. This corresponds to a real market cap of $1.284 billion. What do you think of this long-vs-short showdown?
#加密货币 #Hyperliquid #区块链
According to monitoring, since September 3, the whale Loracle has opened $PONS 3x short positions, currently holding 25.04 million tokens worth approximately $19.41 million. The entry price is $0.6553, accounting for 19% of Hyperliquid’s outstanding PONS, and the position is still being added. Its unrealized loss is already close to $3 million.
What’s interesting is that this address previously built its own no-fee fork version of PONS, attempting to self-rescue. Yesterday, on-chain analyst MLM publicly posted that if anyone wants to heavily position themselves to target this short seller, funds exceeding seven digits can be direct messaged for contact; it was then added that commitments for involvement at eight-figure funding levels have already been made.
Loracle’s current liquidation price is $1.83, meaning PONS needs to rise by 128% (without adding margin) to trigger a forced liquidation. This corresponds to a real market cap of $1.284 billion. What do you think of this long-vs-short showdown?
#加密货币 #Hyperliquid #区块链
📈 Hyperliquid hit an ATH of USD 89.60 driven by several positive events. The asset rose 85% over the year supported by million-dollar HYPE buybacks, network revenues that outpaced Ethereum, and the launch of an ETF in the U.S. #Hyperliquid #ATH #hype #ETH #etf
$ETH
$BTC
$BNB
$ETH
$BTC
$BNB
$HYPE — one of the hottest perps.
Price ~$87. High activity and traders’ interest.
Are you following $HYPE ? Press $HYPE and watch the volumes.
#HYPE #Hyperliquid #Crypto
Price ~$87. High activity and traders’ interest.
Are you following $HYPE ? Press $HYPE and watch the volumes.
#HYPE #Hyperliquid #Crypto
📰 Hyperliquid once again staged a “whale-hunting operation.”
Trader Loracle started shorting PONS on September 3, using a 3x short position. They currently hold 25.04 million PONS. Based on the entry average price of $0.6553, the position is about $19.41 million—roughly 19% of Hyperliquid’s total PONS open positions.
🔥 The key point is that this short position is still being increased, but the unrealized loss is already approaching $3 million. Even more unexpected: Loracle even created their own forked “Pons zero-fee” version, trying to “self-rescue” this position.
💡 On September 6, overseas analyst @mlmabc directly posted to publicly solicit funds, preparing to jointly target this short seller, and stated that funding commitments in the eight-figure range are already in place. To be honest, this no longer feels like a normal long-versus-short dispute—it’s more like putting a massive position on the table and waiting for the market to watch.
⚠️ Loracle’s short liquidation price is $1.83, meaning PONS would need to rise 128% to trigger liquidation. Previously, Hyperliquid also saw a similar hunt targeting Bitcoin shorts with 50x leverage—ultimately, the outcome often turns out to be more thrilling than simply betting on bullish versus bearish moves.
🤔 This time, do you think Loracle can hold, or will the public hunt push this short position straight toward liquidation?
#PONS #Hyperliquid #链上数据 #加密市场
Trader Loracle started shorting PONS on September 3, using a 3x short position. They currently hold 25.04 million PONS. Based on the entry average price of $0.6553, the position is about $19.41 million—roughly 19% of Hyperliquid’s total PONS open positions.
🔥 The key point is that this short position is still being increased, but the unrealized loss is already approaching $3 million. Even more unexpected: Loracle even created their own forked “Pons zero-fee” version, trying to “self-rescue” this position.
💡 On September 6, overseas analyst @mlmabc directly posted to publicly solicit funds, preparing to jointly target this short seller, and stated that funding commitments in the eight-figure range are already in place. To be honest, this no longer feels like a normal long-versus-short dispute—it’s more like putting a massive position on the table and waiting for the market to watch.
⚠️ Loracle’s short liquidation price is $1.83, meaning PONS would need to rise 128% to trigger liquidation. Previously, Hyperliquid also saw a similar hunt targeting Bitcoin shorts with 50x leverage—ultimately, the outcome often turns out to be more thrilling than simply betting on bullish versus bearish moves.
🤔 This time, do you think Loracle can hold, or will the public hunt push this short position straight toward liquidation?
#PONS #Hyperliquid #链上数据 #加密市场
🔥 $HYPE hit a fresh ATH of $88.04 — beating BTC, ETH, AND SOL this week. Real fee revenue (~$2.8M/day) backing the pump.
But a ~$820M token unlock just landed. Diamond hands or dump incoming? 💎🙌
💬 Comment "HOLD" or "SELL" — let's see the split
#Hyperliquid #hype #Write2Earn!
@Abdul - Basit @CZTrades @EM Insight
But a ~$820M token unlock just landed. Diamond hands or dump incoming? 💎🙌
💬 Comment "HOLD" or "SELL" — let's see the split
#Hyperliquid #hype #Write2Earn!
@Abdul - Basit @CZTrades @EM Insight
Log in to explore more content