Recently I kept checking the group chat for updates every night, waiting for news about the typhoon. I didn’t end up hearing anything about the typhoon—but I did hear someone in the group throw me a line: whether I’ve been blowing GRVT nonstop these days and whether I’ve taken advertising money. They said Hyperliquid is doing perpetual futures just fine, so what exactly is GRVT? I didn’t rush to refute it. Instead, I took the question seriously and thought about it—if you’re talking purely about perpetual contracts, then yes, GRVT really can’t beat Hyperliquid. Hyperliquid has the head start and the trading volume to back it up; that part can’t be “washed.”
But when I followed that criticism further, I realized the two products are on entirely different tracks. Hyperliquid from start to finish is about perfecting perpetual futures. On the GRVT side, now over 40% of its effort has been shifted to US stock perpetuals and RWA yield management—non-pure crypto assets. In plain terms, what GRVT wants isn’t “a better perpetual DEX,” but “a place on-chain that can hold traditional financial assets.” Whether this path can actually work is still something I’m unsure about. After all, packaging BlackRock’s CLOs and J.P. Morgan Henderson’s US Treasuries into wealth-management products sounds pretty great, but as for the regulatory side, their team hasn’t provided many details even up to now—I’ve kept a question mark of my own.
That guy in the group also wasn’t completely off base. If you only look at trading volume and depth in the perpetuals corner—GRVT does, in fact, fall short of the top players right now. I admit that. What I’m betting on isn’t whether it can outperform someone with just one feature. I’m looking at whether it can truly pull off the idea of simultaneously accommodating trading, wealth management, and stock exposure. If it succeeds, that’s differentiation. If it fails, then it’s just doing everything but mastering nothing.
I haven’t taken any advertising money. I’m just an ordinary player with relatively small positions. I’m optimistic about GRVT—but risks still need to be talked about.
#grvt @grvt_io
But when I followed that criticism further, I realized the two products are on entirely different tracks. Hyperliquid from start to finish is about perfecting perpetual futures. On the GRVT side, now over 40% of its effort has been shifted to US stock perpetuals and RWA yield management—non-pure crypto assets. In plain terms, what GRVT wants isn’t “a better perpetual DEX,” but “a place on-chain that can hold traditional financial assets.” Whether this path can actually work is still something I’m unsure about. After all, packaging BlackRock’s CLOs and J.P. Morgan Henderson’s US Treasuries into wealth-management products sounds pretty great, but as for the regulatory side, their team hasn’t provided many details even up to now—I’ve kept a question mark of my own.
That guy in the group also wasn’t completely off base. If you only look at trading volume and depth in the perpetuals corner—GRVT does, in fact, fall short of the top players right now. I admit that. What I’m betting on isn’t whether it can outperform someone with just one feature. I’m looking at whether it can truly pull off the idea of simultaneously accommodating trading, wealth management, and stock exposure. If it succeeds, that’s differentiation. If it fails, then it’s just doing everything but mastering nothing.
I haven’t taken any advertising money. I’m just an ordinary player with relatively small positions. I’m optimistic about GRVT—but risks still need to be talked about.
#grvt @grvt_io