kinetiq

L’industrie de la blockchain a passé des années à poursuivre un objectif ambitieux : accroître l’échelle sans compromis.
Chaque grand écosystème atteint un jour un point où l’augmentation de l’adoption engendre une toute nouvelle catégorie de défis. Plus d’utilisateurs génèrent plus de transactions. Plus de développeurs lancent des applications décentralisées toujours plus sophistiquées. Plus de liquidités entrent dans le réseau. S’il s’agit là de signes de réussite, ils révèlent aussi les limites de l’infrastructure sous-jacente.
L’histoire l’a maintes fois démontré.

Le Nigeria est devenu l’un des exemples les plus clairs d’une demande réelle en cryptomonnaies en pleine croissance. L’Indice mondial d’adoption des cryptomonnaies 2025 de Chainalysis a classé le Nigeria 6e au niveau mondial dans l’ensemble et 3e pour la valeur DeFi reçue.
Pour les utilisateurs dans des marchés comme celui-ci, l’infrastructure blockchain n’est pas seulement une discussion technique. La vitesse, les coûts de transaction, la liquidité et la composabilité influencent directement l’expérience.
C’est dans ce contexte que l’on a retenu mon attention avec Elysium.
#Kinetiq propose une couche 2 conçue sur mesure et pensée autour de Hyperliquid, en s’attaquant à ce qu’elle décrit comme des goulots d’étranglement de type HyperEVM tout en conservant une connectivité étroite avec HyperCore. Plutôt que de construire une autre chaîne isolée en compétition pour la liquidité, la thèse consiste à étendre ce qui peut se produire au sein de l’écosystème Hyperliquid.

Why Kinetiq’s New Layer 2 Could Change the Economics of Hyperliquid DeFi
Layer 2s were supposed to solve a simple problem: make blockchain applications faster and cheaper.
But another question has become increasingly important:
Where does the value created by an L2 actually go?
Kinetiq’s Elysium approaches that question differently.
Rather than positioning another execution layer as a destination competing with its underlying network, Elysium is being designed specifically around Hyperliquid, with HyperCore connectivity at its foundation.
Kinetiq describes it as “the first, and only value accretive L2 in history.”
That is an ambitious claim.
But the interesting part is not the slogan.
It is the architecture and economic model behind it.
Why Hyperliquid Needs Elysium
Hyperliquid has already established a powerful onchain trading environment through HyperCore.
According to Kinetiq, however, the growth of Hyperliquid DeFi has exposed significant limitations in HyperEVM.
The manifesto points specifically to its dual block architecture, limited performance and throughput, and the resulting difficulty for both traders and builders.
The problem becomes particularly obvious when transaction demand increases.
Kinetiq states that simple swaps on HyperEVM have reached costs of as much as $20, describing this as unsustainable for new users.
That creates a difficult situation.
Hyperliquid has sophisticated traders and substantial economic activity, but the general purpose environment surrounding HyperCore has struggled to provide the execution experience required to support the next wave of applications.
Kinetiq’s answer is not to abandon Hyperliquid.
It is to build a specialized environment around it.
That environment is Elysium.
$HYPE Becomes the Gas
One of Elysium’s simplest decisions could also be one of its most important.
$HYPE will be the gas token.
Kinetiq describes this as providing “zero net-new asset friction.”
Instead of introducing another gas asset and creating another isolated economic system, Elysium remains connected to Hyperliquid’s native asset.
The architecture therefore aims to make Elysium feel less like a separate blockchain and more like an additional execution environment within the Hyperliquid ecosystem.
🔹For builders, that means fewer unnecessary asset boundaries.
🔹For users, it means one less token economy to navigate.
🔹And for Hyperliquid, it creates another environment where $HYPE has utility.
Of course, greater utility should not automatically be interpreted as guaranteed price appreciation.
The actual economic effect depends on how much activity Elysium attracts and how much $HYPE is ultimately consumed as gas.
That distinction matters.
Supercharging Hyperliquid Spot Trading
This may be one of Elysium’s most consequential objectives.
Hyperliquid is widely recognized for perpetual futures, but Kinetiq argues that its spot markets remain underutilized.
The manifesto points to several indicators.
Hyperliquid’s weekly spot volume share against Binance has fallen to a 15 month low.
Monthly spot volume is described as being at its second lowest level since launch.
And HIP 2, Hyperliquid’s native orderbook bootstrapping mechanism, is also described as being at its lowest point since Q4 2024.
The conclusion from Kinetiq is straightforward:
Hyperliquid needs a more competitive spot environment.
Elysium is designed to address that through substantially higher performance and throughput, with eventual block time parity with HyperCore.
Kinetiq describes the Day 1 production environment as “orders of magnitude more performant than HyperEVM.”
If that performance materializes, it could enable trading applications that are difficult or impractical to operate on the existing HyperEVM environment.
🔹And that matters because liquidity attracts liquidity.
🔹Better execution can encourage more applications.
🔹More applications can create more markets.
🔹More markets can attract more traders.
🔹And more traders can deepen the overall ecosystem.
Why PropAMMs Matter
The PropAMM opportunity is particularly interesting.
Kinetiq points to Solana’s spot market activity, arguing that PropAMMs there consistently generate volumes many times larger than HyperCore’s spot markets.
Elysium is designed to make PropAMMs more attractive by combining high performance execution with proximity to HyperCore.
But the more interesting component may be the oracle infrastructure.
Kinetiq says its customization of the L1Read precompile can provide PropAMMs with “a free oracle” featuring top of block freshness.
That could create a distinctive environment for market makers.
A PropAMM operating close to HyperCore can potentially hedge against Hyperliquid liquidity and pricing while accessing highly current market information.
This is more than simply adding another AMM.
It is an attempt to connect automated market making directly to Hyperliquid’s existing trading infrastructure.
Hyperliquid Becomes the Native Oracle
Another important Elysium innovation is its treatment of the L1Read precompile.
Kinetiq says Elysium will leverage and adapt L1Read so that Hyperliquid pricing and liquidity can become the native oracle infrastructure for the ecosystem.
The current HyperEVM implementation exposes BBO information.
Elysium intends to customize L1Read to expose additional information that traders and builders can use.
This could have significant implications.
An oracle is not merely a data feed.
It is infrastructure that determines what applications can safely and efficiently build around market information.
If Hyperliquid’s own market data becomes deeply integrated into Elysium’s execution environment, developers could construct applications around the same liquidity and pricing infrastructure that already powers Hyperliquid’s trading ecosystem.
That creates a much tighter relationship between the L2 and the underlying L1.
A Native Token Lifecycle
Perhaps the most compelling builder proposition is Elysium’s approach to token generation.
Kinetiq argues that launching tokens within the Hyperliquid ecosystem has historically been difficult, whether on HyperCore or HyperEVM.
Elysium is designed to change that.
A token could potentially move through an entire lifecycle:
Long tail AMM
↓
Elysium PropAMM
↓
HyperCore Spot
↓
HIP 3 Perpetuals
This is enabled by four characteristics Kinetiq highlights:
🔹Co location with HyperCore.
🔹A high performance EVM environment.
🔹Access to HIP 3 permissionless perpetual deployments.
🔹And deep connectivity between these components.
This creates something more significant than a token launchpad.
It creates a potential market lifecycle.
A new token can begin with liquidity discovery, progress into deeper market making, potentially reach a HyperCore spot orderbook and eventually access perpetual markets.
Kinetiq describes this composability as an “Elysium specific offering.”
If executed as designed, this could give builders a clearer path from token creation to mature financial markets without forcing them to stitch together completely separate ecosystems.
The Most Important Part: Sequencer Fees
This is where Elysium’s economic design becomes particularly interesting.
Kinetiq proposes the following distribution of sequencer fees:
25% → Builders
25% → Treasury
50% → KNTQ
The builder allocation is directed toward applications consuming Elysium blockspace and can be used for incentives, rebates and other growth mechanisms.
The treasury allocation goes toward Kinetiq’s operations.
The remaining 50% is used for programmatic purchases of KNTQ on the open market.
And Kinetiq makes the mechanism explicit:
“100% of the purchased KNTQ will be burned.”
The tokens are sent to the Hyperliquid Assistance Fund.
This creates a potential economic loop:
Elysium activity
↓
Sequencer fees
↓
25% Builders + 25% Treasury + 50% KNTQ
↓
KNTQ market purchases
↓
KNTQ permanently removed through the burn mechanism
This is the central reason the value accretive thesis is interesting.
Aligning Builders, Users and KNTQ
Traditional L2 economics can create a separation between the execution layer and the underlying network.
An L2 can attract users, capture fees and build its own economic moat.
Elysium is attempting to reverse that relationship.
The proposed model directs economic activity toward three destinations.
Builders receive incentives to create applications.
The treasury receives resources to maintain and grow the ecosystem.
And KNTQ holders receive the largest allocation through buybacks and burns.
Kinetiq summarizes the intended alignment clearly:
“Elysium’s success is Hyperliquid’s success.”
That is the core thesis.
The more valuable Elysium becomes as an execution environment, the more blockspace it should theoretically consume.
More blockspace generates more sequencer fees.
And 50% of those fees are designed to flow into KNTQ purchases and burns.
But there is an important analytical caveat.
The mechanism itself does not guarantee value creation.
The 50% allocation becomes economically meaningful only when Elysium generates meaningful sequencer revenue.
That means the real test begins after launch.
🔹Transaction volume.
🔹Active users.
🔹Spot trading volume.
🔹PropAMM activity.
🔹$HYPE gas consumption.
🔹Sequencer revenue.
🔹And actual KNTQ purchased and burned.
These will matter more than the headline percentages.
Why Elysium Is Different
The most interesting distinction is therefore not simply that Elysium is an L2.
🔹It is the relationship it is designed to have with Hyperliquid.
🔹Elysium uses $HYPE as gas.
🔹It is designed to be co located with HyperCore.
🔹It brings Hyperliquid market data directly into the execution environment.
🔹It targets the spot trading problem.
🔹It supports PropAMMs.
🔹It creates a potential lifecycle for new tokens.
And its sequencer economics are designed to return half of the generated fees toward KNTQ buybacks and burns.
This is why the phrase “value accretive L2” deserves attention.
The proposition is not that Elysium will automatically create value simply because it exists.
The proposition is that economic activity on Elysium is designed to reinforce the ecosystem around it rather than extract value away from it.
That is a much more interesting experiment.
The Real Question Is Adoption
Elysium’s manifesto presents a compelling technical and economic thesis.
But the thesis still has to survive contact with the market.
Can developers build on it?
Can traders find better execution and deeper liquidity?
Can #Elysium make Hyperliquid spot markets substantially more competitive?
Will PropAMMs generate meaningful volume?
Will the token lifecycle actually encourage more projects to launch and mature within Hyperliquid?
And ultimately, will the resulting sequencer revenue be large enough for KNTQ buybacks and burns to become a meaningful source of value capture?
Those are the questions I will be watching.
The most important thing about Elysium may therefore not be that it promises to make Hyperliquid faster.
It is that Kinetiq is attempting to design an execution layer where growth, infrastructure and token economics point in the same direction.
If the architecture delivers and the market adopts it, Elysium could become more than an L2.
It could become an additional economic engine for the Hyperliquid ecosystem.
And that is the experiment worth watching.
#Web3 #Hyperliquid #Kinetiq

Hyperliquid a construit un sérieux écosystème de trading autour de $HYPE , HyperCore et de sa pile DeFi en pleine croissance.
Mais faire évoluer le côté EVM pour des activités à haute fréquence crée un problème différent.
HyperEVM est volontairement limité afin de pouvoir s’assembler avec HyperCore. Elysium est conçu par #Kinetiq pour offrir un environnement EVM distinct et hautes performances tout en restant étroitement connecté à l’écosystème Hyperliquid.
Elysium est actuellement en pré-lancement, mais son architecture proposée vaut la peine d’être étudiée.
La chaîne utilise $HYPE comme gaz natif, ce qui signifie que les utilisateurs n’ont pas besoin d’obtenir un autre jeton juste pour effectuer une transaction.

Les couches 2 sont généralement présentées comme des solutions d’augmentation de capacité. Mais l’augmentation de capacité, à elle seule, ne répond pas à la question la plus importante : où va, au final, la valeur économique créée par cette activité supplémentaire ?
C’est ce qui rend l’étude de l’Elysium de Kinetiq intéressante au-delà du récit habituel des L2.
#Kinetiq décrit Elysium comme une couche 2 alignée sur Hyperliquid conçue pour résoudre un problème spécifique : HyperEVM est utile pour la composabilité avec HyperCore, mais son environnement d’exécution délibérément contraint n’est pas conçu pour des charges de travail soutenues et à haute fréquence. La documentation de Kinetiq situe l’objectif actuel à 300 Mgas/s et des blocs de 100 à 200 ms pour Elysium, contre des blocs d’exécution plus petits pour HyperEVM.

Une infrastructure ouvre une nouvelle route.
Une autre infrastructure construit un meilleur carrefour là où le trafic circule déjà.
#Kinetiq ’s new #Layer2 network, #Elysium , me fait penser au deuxième modèle.
À première vue, Elysium arrive avec des promesses familières : de meilleures performances, un débit plus élevé et des coûts de transaction plus faibles.
Tout cela n’est plus particulièrement surprenant. Dans presque chaque nouvelle brochure de chaîne, vous trouverez quelque part les mots « plus rapide » et « moins cher ». 🙂
Ce qui rend Elysium plus intéressant, ce n'est pas simplement la vitesse.

Hyperliquid has already established itself as one of the most important on-chain venues for perpetuals. HyperCore is at the center of that system, while $HYPE provides the underlying asset and economic foundation.
But as activity expands beyond perps, another question becomes harder to ignore: can the execution environment around HyperCore support the kind of high-frequency DeFi activity that builders and traders actually want?
This is the problem Kinetiq is trying to address with Elysium.
Why Hyperliquid needs another execution layer
HyperEVM was designed with an important constraint: maintaining close composability with HyperCore.
Its dual-block architecture uses frequent smaller blocks alongside larger blocks at longer intervals. That design has advantages for coordination with HyperCore, but it also creates limitations for applications that need consistently high throughput and low transaction costs.
For high-frequency DeFi, those limitations matter.
A simple swap can become expensive during periods of congestion, while applications such as professional spot markets and automated market makers need an environment where transactions can be executed quickly and repeatedly without unpredictable costs.
Elysium approaches this from a different direction.
Rather than trying to replace HyperCore, it is designed as a Layer 2 around Hyperliquid, using the Arbitrum Orbit stack and settling to HyperEVM while remaining closely connected to HyperCore.
The network is still pre-mainnet, so its published performance figures should be treated as targets rather than established production results. The stated goal, however, is significant: much faster block times and substantially greater execution capacity for the workloads HyperEVM is not optimized to handle.
One ecosystem, one gas asset. One of the simplest but most important decisions is the use of $HYPE as Elysium's native gas asset.
There is no need to introduce another gas token or create a separate economic system for users moving between Hyperliquid and Elysium.
That keeps the user experience connected to the existing Hyperliquid economy. More importantly, it gives $HYPE another practical role within the ecosystem. Instead of activity happening on a separate L2 with a completely different fee asset, Elysium is designed around the same underlying economic environment.
Built for spot markets and PropAMMs. The most interesting part of Elysium, in my view, is its focus on spot trading.
High-frequency market-making requires more than simply having an EVM environment with lower fees. Market makers need rapid quote updates, efficient execution and a straightforward way to hedge positions against deeper liquidity.
This is where PropAMMs become important. Elysium is designed to support these workloads while maintaining connectivity with HyperCore's existing liquidity infrastructure. Its L1Read precompile is also intended to make Hyperliquid data directly accessible to applications on Elysium, allowing builders to use native Hyperliquid information rather than relying entirely on external oracle infrastructure.
That could make the relationship between the L2 and HyperCore much tighter than the typical "L2 settles back to L1" model.
A clearer path from token launch to HyperCore
Elysium also introduces a more connected token lifecycle:
AMM → PropAMM → HyperCore Spot → HIP-3 Perps
The significance is less about the individual stages and more about the progression between them.
A new asset can begin with liquidity on Elysium, develop through a more sophisticated market-making environment, and potentially move toward HyperCore spot markets and eventually HIP-3 perpetual markets.
If this works as designed, token launches become less fragmented because different stages of market development can happen within the same broader ecosystem.
The part that changes the L2 economics. The biggest difference between Elysium and many traditional L2 models is what happens to sequencer revenue.
The proposed Elysium sequencer fee distribution is:
25% → Builders
25% → Kinetiq Treasury
50% → KNTQ open-market buybacks and burn
That final 50% is the mechanism behind Elysium's value-accretive thesis.
When users generate activity on Elysium, the sequencer earns fees. Half of the designated sequencer fees are used to purchase KNTQ on the open market, with the purchased tokens then sent for burning.
This creates a direct relationship between network usage and KNTQ supply reduction.
But there is an important distinction here: the mechanism itself does not guarantee value accrual. It only creates the mechanism for it.
For the model to matter at scale, Elysium needs actual transaction activity, meaningful trading volume and sustained demand from builders and users. A burn mechanism attached to low activity would have limited economic impact.
That is why I think the more interesting question is not simply how much KNTQ can be burned, but whether Elysium can generate enough real economic activity for the mechanism to become meaningful.
Why this model is different
Traditional L2s can create a situation where significant activity moves away from the underlying L1 while the L2 captures the economics of that activity through sequencing and fees.
Elysium is being designed around a different relationship.
Its stated architecture attempts to send value and activity in several directions at once:
- $HYPE remains the gas asset.
- HyperCore remains an important source of liquidity and market infrastructure.
- Builders receive 25% of sequencer fees.
- Kinetiq's treasury receives 25%.
- 50% of sequencer fees are directed toward KNTQ purchases and burns.
In other words, the thesis is not simply "move activity to an L2."
It is to create an execution environment where more activity can happen while strengthening the economic connection between Elysium, Hyperliquid and KNTQ.
That is what makes the value-accretive argument worth watching. The part that still needs to be proven
There is a lot to like about the architecture, but the distinction between an interesting design and a successful network will ultimately come down to execution.
Elysium is still pre-mainnet. Published throughput figures are targets, not long-term production results. PropAMM liquidity has to materialize. Builders have to choose the environment. Traders have to use it. And tokens need to successfully move through the proposed lifecycle into deeper HyperCore markets.
There are also broader economic assumptions around additional native USDC liquidity and its potential impact on Hyperliquid's ecosystem. Those scenarios depend on genuinely new liquidity and actual adoption rather than simply moving existing capital around.
So I would not describe Elysium as a proven success yet. I would describe it as a technically interesting attempt to solve a specific problem: how do you expand Hyperliquid's execution capacity without disconnecting that activity from the economic engine that already exists?
If Elysium delivers on that design, its significance goes beyond being another EVM-compatible L2.
It could become an execution layer that makes Hyperliquid more useful for builders and traders while giving network activity a direct economic relationship with KNTQ.
That is the part worth watching.
#Web3 #Hyperliquid #Kinetiq #Elysium #DeFi #Layer2

Que se passe-t-il après qu'un token est lancé ?
Lancer un actif n'est que la première étape. Un token peut trouver un premier pool de liquidité, attirer des traders précoces et établir un marché. Mais à mesure que l'activité augmente, des questions plus difficiles commencent : la liquidité peut-elle s'approfondir, l'actif peut-il atteindre l'infrastructure spot native, et peut-il, à terme, prendre en charge des produits dérivés ?
C'est la question la plus importante derrière #Elysium
Kinetiq propose une solution Layer 2 dédiée aux activités financières au sein de l'écosystème #Hyperliquid . Au lieu de considérer un L2 comme un simple autre endroit pour exécuter des transactions, Elysium est conçu autour de la connexion entre les lancements de tokens, la liquidité, les marchés spot et les perpétuels.

Dans la Web3 aujourd’hui, beaucoup d’activités ont lieu et les solutions de couche 2 (L2) sont devenues l’épine dorsale du scaling des blockchains, mais la plupart suivent un schéma familier : elles extraient de la valeur de leur couche 1 (L1) sans la réinjecter. Arbitrum, Optimism et zkSync reposent toutes sur #Ethereum pour le règlement, pourtant leurs frais de séquenceur et leurs dynamiques de gaz s’accumulent principalement aux opérateurs de la L2, plutôt qu’aux stakers d’Ethereum. L’Elysium de Hyperliquid brise ce modèle. Il est conçu non pas comme une L2 parasitaire, mais comme un moteur de création de valeur qui renforce #Hyperliquid et #Kinetiq au cœur même de leur système.

Il y a une vieille leçon issue des communautés africaines : lorsqu’une route devient prospère, de plus en plus de personnes commencent à l’utiliser. Finalement, la même route qui faisait circuler tout le monde facilement devient bondée.
C’est une façon utile de voir Hyperliquid aujourd’hui.
Hyperliquid a construit l’un des écosystèmes de trading on-chain les plus solides de la crypto, mais l’augmentation de l’activité met aussi en évidence des limites de l’infrastructure. HyperEVM a connu des périodes de congestion et des coûts de transaction élevés, ce qui constitue un défi pour les applications qui ont besoin d’une exécution rapide et peu coûteuse.