Skip to main content

55 posts tagged with "blockchain"

View All Tags

BASS 2025: Charting the Future of Blockchain Applications, from Space to Wall Street

· 8 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

The Blockchain Application Stanford Summit (BASS) kicked off the week of the Science of Blockchain Conference (SBC), bringing together innovators, researchers, and builders to explore the cutting edge of the ecosystem. Organizers Gil, Kung, and Stephen welcomed attendees, highlighting the event's focus on entrepreneurship and real-world applications, a spirit born from its close collaboration with SBC. With support from organizations like Blockchain Builders and the Cryptography and Blockchain Alumni of Stanford, the day was packed with deep dives into celestial blockchains, the future of Ethereum, institutional DeFi, and the burgeoning intersection of AI and crypto.

Dalia Maliki: Building an Orbital Root of Trust with Space Computer

Dalia Maliki, a professor at UC Santa Barbara and an advisor to Space Computer, opened with a look at a truly out-of-this-world application: building a secure computing platform in orbit.

What is Space Computer? In a nutshell, Space Computer is an "orbital root of trust," providing a platform for running secure and confidential computations on satellites. The core value proposition lies in the unique security guarantees of space. "Once a box is launched securely and deployed into space, nobody can come later and hack into it," Maliki explained. "It's purely, perfectly tamper-proof at this point." This environment makes it leak-proof, ensures communications cannot be easily jammed, and provides verifiable geolocation, offering powerful decentralization properties.

Architecture and Use Cases The system is designed with a two-tier architecture:

  • Layer 1 (Celestial): The authoritative root of trust runs on a network of satellites in orbit, optimized for limited and intermittent communication.
  • Layer 2 (Terrestrial): Standard scaling solutions like rollups and state channels run on Earth, anchoring to the celestial Layer 1 for finality and security.

Early use cases include running highly secure blockchain validators and a true random number generator that captures cosmic radiation. However, Maliki emphasized the platform's potential for unforeseen innovation. "The coolest thing about building a platform is always that you build a platform and other people will come and build use cases that you never even dreamed of."

Drawing a parallel to the ambitious Project Corona of the 1950s, which physically dropped film buckets from spy satellites to be caught mid-air by aircraft, Maliki urged the audience to think big. "By comparison, what we work with today in space computer is a luxury, and we're very excited about the future."

Tomasz Stanczak: The Ethereum Roadmap - Scaling, Privacy, and AI

Tomasz Stanczak, Executive Director of the Ethereum Foundation, provided a comprehensive overview of Ethereum's evolving roadmap, which is heavily focused on scaling, enhancing privacy, and integrating with the world of AI.

Short-Term Focus: Supporting L2s The immediate priority for Ethereum is to solidify its role as the best platform for Layer 2s to build upon. Upcoming forks, Fusaka and Glumpsterdom, are centered on this goal. "We want to make much stronger statements that yes, [L2s] innovate, they extend Ethereum, and they will have a commitment from protocol builders that Layer 1 will support L2s in the best way possible," Stanczak stated.

Long-Term Vision: Lean Ethereum and Real-Time Proving Looking further ahead, the "Lean Ethereum" vision aims for massive scalability and security hardening. A key component is the ZK-EVM roadmap, which targets real-time proving with latencies under 10 seconds for 99% of blocks, achievable by solo stakers. This, combined with data availability improvements, could push L2s to a theoretical "10 million TPS." The long-term plan also includes a focus on post-quantum cryptography through hash-based signatures and ZK-EVMs.

Privacy and the AI Intersection Privacy is another critical pillar. The Ethereum Foundation has established the Privacy and Scaling Explorations (PSC) team to coordinate efforts, support tooling, and explore protocol-level privacy integrations. Stanczak sees this as crucial for Ethereum's interaction with AI, enabling use cases like censorship-resistant financial markets, privacy-preserving AI, and open-source agentic systems. He emphasized that Ethereum's culture of connecting multiple disciplines—from finance and art to robotics and AI—is essential for navigating the challenges and opportunities of the next decade.

Sreeram Kannan: The Trust Framework for Ambitious Crypto Apps with EigenCloud

Sreeram Kannan, founder of Eigen Labs, challenged the audience to think beyond the current scope of crypto applications, presenting a framework for understanding crypto's core value and introducing EigenCloud as a platform to realize this vision.

Crypto's Core Thesis: A Verifiability Layer "Underpinning all of this is a core thesis that crypto is the trust or verifiability layer on top of which you can build very powerful applications," Kannan explained. He introduced a "TAM vs. Trust" framework, illustrating that the total addressable market (TAM) for a crypto application grows exponentially as the trust it underwrites increases. Bitcoin's market grows as it becomes more trusted than fiat currencies; a lending platform's market grows as its guarantee of borrower solvency becomes more credible.

EigenCloud: Unleashing Programmability Kannan argued that the primary bottleneck for building more ambitious apps—like a decentralized Uber or trustworthy AI platforms—is not performance but programmability. To solve this, EigenCloud introduces a new architecture that separates application logic from token logic.

"Let's keep the token logic on-chain on Ethereum," he proposed, "but the application logic is moved outside. You can actually now write your core logic in arbitrary containers... execute them on any device of your choice, whether it's a CPU or a GPU... and then bring these results verifiably back on-chain."

This approach, he argued, extends crypto from a "laptop or server scale to cloud scale," allowing developers to build the truly disruptive applications that were envisioned in crypto's early days.

Panel: A Deep Dive into Blockchain Architecture

A panel featuring Leiyang from MegaETH, Adi from Realo, and Solomon from the Solana Foundation explored the trade-offs between monolithic, modular, and "super modular" architectures.

  • MegaETH (Modular L2): Leiyang described MegaETH's approach of using a centralized sequencer for extreme speed while delegating security to Ethereum. This design aims to deliver a Web2-level real-time experience for applications, reviving the ambitious "ICO-era" ideas that were previously limited by performance.
  • Solana (Monolithic L1): Solomon explained that Solana's architecture, with its high node requirements, is deliberately designed for maximum throughput to support its vision of putting all global financial activity on-chain. The current focus is on asset issuance and payments. On interoperability, Solomon was candid: "Generally speaking, we don't really care about interoperability... It's about getting as much asset liquidity and usage on-chain as possible."
  • Realo ("Super Modular" L1): Adi introduced Realo's "super modular" concept, which consolidates essential services like oracles directly into the base layer to reduce developer friction. This design aims to natively connect the blockchain to the real world, with a go-to-market focus on RWAs and making the blockchain invisible to end-users.

Panel: The Real Intersection of AI and Blockchain

Moderated by Ed Roman of HackVC, this panel showcased three distinct approaches to merging AI and crypto.

  • Ping AI (Bill): Ping AI is building a "personal AI" where users maintain self-custody of their data. The vision is to replace the traditional ad-exchange model. Instead of companies monetizing user data, Ping AI's system will reward users directly when their data leads to a conversion, allowing them to capture the economic value of their digital footprint.
  • Public AI (Jordan): Described as the "human layer of AI," Public AI is a marketplace for sourcing high-quality, on-demand data that can't be scraped or synthetically generated. It uses an on-chain reputation system and staking mechanisms to ensure contributors provide signal, not noise, rewarding them for their work in building better AI models.
  • Gradient (Eric): Gradient is creating a decentralized runtime for AI, enabling distributed inference and training on a network of underutilized consumer hardware. The goal is to provide a check on the centralizing power of large AI companies by allowing a global community to collaboratively train and serve models, retaining "intelligent sovereignty."

More Highlights from the Summit

  • Orin Katz (Starkware) presented building blocks for "compliant on-chain privacy," detailing how ZK-proofs can be used to create privacy pools and private tokens (ZRC20s) that include mechanisms like "viewing keys" for regulatory oversight.
  • Sam Green (Cambrian) gave an overview of the "Agentic Finance" landscape, categorizing crypto agents into trading, liquidity provisioning, lending, prediction, and information, and highlighted the need for fast, comprehensive, and verifiable data to power them.
  • Max Siegel (Privy) shared lessons from onboarding over 75 million users, emphasizing the need to meet users where they are, simplify product experiences, and let product needs inform infrastructure choices, not the other way around.
  • Nil Dalal (Coinbase) introduced the "Onchain Agentic Commerce Stack" and the open standard X42, a crypto-native protocol designed to create a "machine-payable web" where AI agents can seamlessly transact using stablecoins for data, APIs, and services.
  • Gordon Liao & Austin Adams (Circle) unveiled Circle Gateway, a new primitive for creating a unified USDC balance that is chain-abstracted. This allows for near-instant (<500ms) deployment of liquidity across multiple chains, dramatically improving capital efficiency for businesses and solvers.

The day concluded with a clear message: the foundational layers of crypto are maturing, and the focus is shifting decisively towards building robust, user-friendly, and economically sustainable applications that can bridge the gap between the on-chain world and the global economy.

Tickets, But Programmable: How NFT Ticketing Is Quietly Rewriting Live Events

· 11 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

The concert ticket in your digital wallet is on the verge of a massive upgrade. For decades, a ticket has been a static, disposable proof of purchase—a barcode to get you in the door, and nothing more. That model is evolving. The ticket is becoming a programmable, portable membership object, capable of unlocking experiences long after the show ends.

Done right, NFT tickets can drastically reduce fraud and scalping, create fairer access for superfans, and give organizers powerful new ways to reward loyalty—all without forcing fans to understand cryptocurrency. This isn't a theoretical future; real deployments are already live across major concerts, professional sports, aviation, and even Formula 1. The next wave of adoption hinges on seamless user experience, thoughtful policy design, and pragmatic technology choices.

The Old Ticket Stack Is Fraying

The traditional digital ticketing system is brittle and showing its age. Fans and organizers alike feel the pain points:

  • Fraud & Bots: Predatory bots snatch up inventory the moment it goes on sale, only to list it on secondary markets at hugely inflated prices, shutting out real fans. Fake or duplicate tickets plague these markets, leaving buyers with empty hands and lighter wallets.
  • Fragmented Systems: A fan’s history is scattered across dozens of vendor accounts. This makes simple actions like transferring a ticket to a friend a painful process and leaves organizers with no unified view of their most loyal attendees.
  • Disposable Artifacts: Once scanned, a QR code or PDF ticket becomes useless digital trash. It holds no ongoing value, tells no story, and offers no future utility.

Meanwhile, the market remains dominated by a primary seller facing ongoing antitrust scrutiny. State-by-state reform efforts are gaining steam, signaling that the status quo is neither beloved nor stable. The system is ripe for a change.

Tickets, But Programmable

NFT tickets aren’t about speculative digital art; they're about programmable access and ownership. By representing a ticket as a unique token on a blockchain, we fundamentally change what it can do:

  • Provable Ownership: Tickets live in a user's digital wallet, not just in a vendor's siloed database. This cryptographic proof of ownership dramatically reduces the risk of counterfeit tickets and enables secure, verifiable transfers between fans.
  • On-Chain Transfer Rules: Organizers can embed rules directly into the ticket’s smart contract. This could mean setting fair-transfer windows, capping resale prices at face value, or building in other logic that curbs predatory scalping and aligns incentives for everyone.
  • Loyalty That Compounds: A wallet containing tickets from past events becomes a portable and verifiable “fan graph.” Organizers can use this history to offer token-gated presales, seat upgrades, and exclusive perks that reward actual attendance, not just names on an email list.
  • Interoperability: “Sign in with wallet” can become a universal identity layer across different venues, artists, and partners. Fans get a unified experience without spreading their personal information across countless platforms.

This technology is already leaving the lab and proving its value in the wild.

Proof It Works: Live Deployments to Study

These are not “maybe someday” pilots; they are live systems processing real fan traffic and solving real problems today.

  • Token-Gated Presales at Scale: Ticketmaster has already launched NFT-gated ticket sales. In a pilot with the band Avenged Sevenfold, members of the "Deathbats Club" NFT community received exclusive early and discounted access to tickets, rewarding dedicated fans and filtering out bots.
  • Souvenir NFTs with Mainstream Brands: Live Nation and Ticketmaster have issued millions of virtual commemorative ticket NFTs, called “Live Stubs,” for major concerts and NFL games. This introduces fans to digital collectibles with virtually zero friction, turning a simple ticket into a lasting keepsake.
  • Aviation Goes On-Chain: Argentinian airline Flybondi began issuing its tickets as NFTs via the TravelX platform on the Algorand blockchain. This model enables flexible name changes and new commerce opportunities, proving the technology can work in an industry with strict operational, security, and identity requirements.
  • Global Sports & Premium Hospitality: Formula 1’s ticketing provider, Platinium Group, rolled out Polygon-based NFT tickets that come with perks persisting long after race day, such as hospitality access and future discounts. This transforms a one-time seat into an enduring membership touchpoint.

What NFT Tickets Unlock for Fans & Organizers

This shift creates a win-win scenario, offering tangible benefits to everyone in the ecosystem.

  • Fairer Access, Less Chaos: Token-gated presales can effectively reward verified attendees or fan club members, bypassing the captcha wars and bot-driven chaos of a general sale. The fact that the largest U.S. primary ticket seller now natively supports this proves its viability.
  • Transfers with Guardrails: Smart contracts allow organizers to define how and when tickets can be transferred, aligning with local laws and artist preferences. Secondary royalties are also possible through standards like EIP-2981, though enforcement depends on marketplace adoption. This gives organizers more control over the secondary market.
  • Portable Loyalty: Commemorative drops, like digital stubs or POAPs (Proof of Attendance Protocols), build a verifiable fan history that can actually be used across different venues, brands, and seasons. Your attendance record becomes a key to unlocking future rewards.
  • Interoperable User Experience: With custodial wallets and simple email or SMS logins, fans don’t need to manage complex seed phrases. Mass-market rollouts like Reddit’s millions of on-chain avatars—purchased with standard currency—prove this user-friendly pattern can scale.

Patterns We Recommend Shipping (In Order)

  1. Start with “Souvenir Mode.” The lowest-risk, highest-reward entry point is to issue free or bundled commemorative NFTs delivered after a ticket is scanned. This builds your on-chain fan graph and educates users without adding friction to the core job of getting them in the door. Live Nation’s “Live Stubs” is the perfect precedent.
  2. Layer in Token-Gated Presales for Superfans. Use the fan graph you’ve built. Let proven attendees or fan club members unlock prime seats or early access windows. This creates a clear reward for loyalty, reduces bot competition, and provides much cleaner economic data. The Avenged Sevenfold presale is the canonical case study here.
  3. Make the Ticket a Wallet. Treat each ticket as the root credential for delivering ongoing perks. This could be exclusive merchandise access, instant seat upgrades, food and beverage credits, or even artist AMAs—delivered before, during, and after the show. Formula 1’s membership-style approach points the way forward.
  4. Design the Secondary Market Thoughtfully. If you allow resale, establish clear rules that fit your policies and fan expectations. This could mean time-boxed transfer windows, fee caps, or face-value requirements. While standards like EIP-2981 signal royalty preferences, some marketplaces have made them optional. A direct, branded resale channel can be a wise move to ensure your rules are respected.

What Can Go Wrong (and How to Avoid It)

  • Custody & Platform Risk: Don’t strand your customers on a centralized island. When the crypto exchange FTX collapsed, some Coachella NFTs tied to the platform were stuck. If a technology partner disappears, fans shouldn’t lose their assets or benefits. Use portable wallets and ensure perks can be reissued or recognized elsewhere.
  • UX Over Crypto Jargon: The average fan should never have to see terms like “seed phrase,” “gas fees,” or “blockchain.” As Reddit demonstrated, gentle, custodial onboarding with familiar fiat checkouts is the key to scaling to millions of users. The complexity should remain under the hood.
  • Unrealistic Royalty Expectations: “Automatic royalties forever” is not guaranteed across all secondary markets. If resale economics are a key part of your strategy, consider launching your own resale venue or enforcing your rules through allowlists and clear branding terms with partners.
  • The Policy Patchwork: Ticketing laws are actively being revised across the U.S., with a focus on refunds, price transparency, anti-bot measures, and transfer rights. Your system must be architected to allow for configuration by region, and your policies must be communicated explicitly to fans.

Architecture Blueprint (Pragmatic, Chain-Agnostic)

  • Chain Selection: Favor low-fee, high-throughput networks already used in consumer contexts, such as Polygon, Flow, or Algorand. Mainstream deployments have gravitated toward these chains for their low cost, speed, and better environmental footprint.
  • Token Standard: Use ERC-721 for unique, assigned seats and ERC-1155 for general admission sections or tiers. Add EIP-2981 metadata if you plan to support royalties within compliant marketplaces.
  • Wallet UX: Default to custodial wallets that use email/SMS login or passkeys for authentication. Provide an easy, optional path for users to “export to self-custody.” Pre-mint tickets to wallets or use a mint-on-claim model to reduce waste.
  • Gating & Scanning: Use fast, off-chain allowlists or Merkle proofs at the gate for quick entry. Verify ownership with time-limited digital signatures to prevent simple QR code screenshotting. After a successful scan, delight the fan by airdropping perks like POAPs, collectibles, or coupons.
  • Secondary Market & Compliance: If you enable resale, route it through a branded marketplace or a partner that respects your rules. Parameterize transferability settings to comply with different state and local laws, and pair on-chain rules with clear, human-readable refund and transfer policies.

Metrics That Actually Matter

Move beyond vanity metrics and focus on what truly indicates success.

  • Access Fairness: Measure the presale conversion rate for verified fans versus the general public. Track the percentage of tickets that are resold within a face-value price band.
  • Operational Reliability: Monitor gate throughput, scan failure rates, and the load on your customer support team. A successful implementation should reduce friction, not create it.
  • Fan Compounding: Track repeat attendance among NFT holders, measure the redemption rates for digital perks, and analyze the revenue uplift from token-gated campaigns.
  • Unit Economics: Analyze your fee take-rate net of fraud-related chargebacks. Calculate the blended customer acquisition cost and lifetime value when wallet data is used to inform marketing and targeting.

Case Study Nuggets to Borrow

  • Use NFTs as a "Thank You," Not a Hurdle: Live Nation’s commemoratives cost fans nothing and teach them the flow. Start there before you touch access control.
  • Reward Real Attendance: Token-gated presales that reference past check-ins feel fair and build loyalty.
  • Design Perks with a Shelf-Life: Formula 1’s persistent benefits, like hospitality access and future discounts, extend the ticket’s utility far beyond the event itself.
  • Avoid a Single Point of Failure: The Coachella-FTX saga underscores why portability matters. Own the fan relationship; let users take their assets with them when they want.

The Policy Reality (Briefly)

The regulatory landscape is heating up. Federal and state attention on ticketing is rising, with transparency, refunds, anti-bot rules, and transferability becoming hot-button issues. Your smart contracts and user experience must be flexible enough to adapt on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis. The entire market structure is in flux, and building on portable, open rails is the safest long-term bet.

A Practical Rollout Plan (90 Days)

Phase 1: Collectibles (Weeks 1-4)

  • Implement free commemorative NFTs for all attendees, claimed via email after the event. Measure your claim rate and wallet creation stats.

Phase 2: Fan-First Presales (Weeks 5-8)

  • Pilot a small, token-gated presale for verified past attendees. Communicate the process clearly and keep a traditional queue open as a backup.

Phase 3: Perks & Partnerships (Weeks 9-10)

  • Turn the ticket into a perks wallet. Link it to merchandise unlocks, partner discounts, or exclusive content drops for specific seat sections or cities.

Phase 4: Controlled Resale (Weeks 11-12)

  • Launch a branded resale page with rules aligned to local law. Test face-value caps and transfer windows on a small scale before rolling out nationally.

Closing Thought

The paper stub was once a cherished souvenir of a great night out. NFT tickets can be that—and so much more. When access is programmable, loyalty becomes a composable asset that travels with a fan across venues, artists, and seasons. Fans get fairer access and better perks; organizers get durable relationships and cleaner economics. And when the crypto complexity stays under the hood where it belongs, everybody wins.

A Developer's Guide to Stripe's L1 Tempo

· 11 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

Introduction

Stripe's Tempo is a newly launched Layer-1 (L1) blockchain network with a core focus on processing high-speed, low-cost stablecoin payments. The project was co-incubated by payments giant Stripe and prominent crypto venture capital firm Paradigm. From its inception, it has been positioned as a "payments-first" blockchain, designed to meet the demanding scale and performance requirements of real-world financial scenarios. In 2025, Tempo entered a private testnet phase, co-designing and validating its features with several heavyweight partners, including Visa, Deutsche Bank, Shopify, and OpenAI. For the developer community, the emergence of Tempo presents a new opportunity—to build the next generation of payment applications on an underlying infrastructure optimized for stablecoins and commerce use cases. This guide will detail how developers can technically integrate with Tempo, what resources and communities are available, and how to participate in this growing ecosystem.

1. Technical Integration: Building on L1 Tempo

A core design philosophy of Tempo is to lower the barrier to entry for developers by choosing a path of full Ethereum compatibility. This means developers can build on it using existing mature tools and knowledge bases. Tempo's architecture is based on Reth (a Rust implementation of an Ethereum client led by Paradigm), making it naturally compatible with Ethereum smart contracts and its developer toolchain.

Here are its key technical features and integration points:

  • EVM and Smart Contracts: Tempo fully supports Solidity smart contracts and the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). Developers can use standard frameworks like Hardhat, Truffle, and Foundry, as well as libraries like ethers.js and web3.js, to write, test, and deploy smart contracts. For Web3 developers, this seamless compatibility means there is almost no learning curve. Existing dApps, wallets (like MetaMask), and development tools work "out-of-the-box" on Tempo, paving the way for the easy migration of mature applications from Ethereum.

  • High Throughput & Finality: Tempo has been deeply optimized for the speed requirements of payment scenarios. Its design target is to achieve a processing capacity of over 100,000 transactions per second (TPS) and to reach sub-second deterministic finality. This means that once a transaction is confirmed, it is irreversible, eliminating the risk of transaction reordering (reorgs) that can occur with traditional probabilistic confirmations (like Proof-of-Work). This high performance and certainty are crucial for applications with stringent instant settlement requirements, such as point-of-sale (POS) systems, exchanges, and micropayments.

  • Stablecoin-Native Design: Unlike most general-purpose public chains, the Tempo network does not rely on a volatile native token to pay for transaction fees (Gas). Transaction fees on its network can be paid directly using major stablecoins (like USDC, USDT, etc.). To achieve this, the protocol integrates an automated market maker (AMM) that can automatically handle swaps between different stablecoins in the background, ensuring "issuer neutrality" for fee payments. For developers and users, this greatly improves the experience, as transaction costs can be stably pegged to fiat value (e.g., always around $0.001), avoiding the uncertainty caused by native token price volatility.

  • Payment-Oriented Features: Tempo adds several features at the protocol level tailored for financial and payment applications. These include:

    • "Payment Lanes": By isolating payment-type transactions from other types of on-chain activity (like complex DeFi operations), these lanes ensure low latency and high priority for payments.
    • Native Batch Transfers: Leveraging technologies like Account Abstraction, it supports efficiently sending payments to multiple addresses in a single transaction, which is highly practical for scenarios like payroll and supplier payments.
    • Transaction Memo Fields: This field is compatible with the ISO 20022 financial messaging standard, allowing metadata such as invoice reference numbers or compliance data to be attached to on-chain transactions, greatly simplifying corporate financial reconciliation processes.
    • Optional Privacy: The protocol supports optional transaction privacy features to meet enterprise compliance needs for protecting commercially sensitive information.
  • Integration via Stripe API: Stripe plans to deeply integrate Tempo into its existing product suite, offering developers two integration paths. The first is direct on-chain development, where Web3 developers use familiar toolchains to deploy smart contracts directly on Tempo. The second is integration via Stripe's high-level APIs, which completely abstracts away the complexity of the blockchain. For example, Stripe's Bridge platform (a tool for cross-chain stablecoin flows) will use Tempo as one of its core settlement rails in the future. Developers will only need to call Stripe's familiar REST API to initiate a payment or transfer, and the Stripe system will automatically execute it on the Tempo network in the background. This allows them to enjoy the speed and cost advantages of the blockchain without needing to worry about underlying details like node management or private key signing.

2. Developer Documentation, Tutorials, and Onboarding Resources

As of late 2025, Tempo is still in a private testnet phase, and its official developer documentation is actively being written. However, Tempo's official website has confirmed that "comprehensive technical documentation for developers is coming soon."

In the meantime, interested developers can obtain preliminary information through the following channels:

  • Official Website & FAQ: Visiting Tempo's official website and its Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page provides a high-level overview of its design philosophy, core features, and how it differs from general-purpose blockchains.
  • Apply for Testnet Access: Interested developers or companies can submit an application through the channel provided on the Tempo website (partners@tempo.xyz) to gain access to its private testnet for early exploration and prototyping.

Based on Stripe's consistent focus on developer experience, we can expect the official documentation, once released, to include the following resources:

  • Getting Started Guides: Detailed tutorials guiding developers on how to set up their development environment, connect to the Tempo testnet, and deploy their first smart contract.
  • API References and SDK Documentation: Complete technical references for the Stripe API integration path, as well as documentation for the JSON-RPC endpoints for interacting with the Tempo protocol.
  • Tutorials & Sample Applications: Open-source sample code and projects demonstrating how to build common payment applications on Tempo.
  • Best Practices: Professional advice on security, compliance, performance optimization, and other areas.

Stripe is renowned for its clear, high-quality API documentation, and there is good reason to believe that Tempo's documentation will maintain the same standard.

3. Stripe’s Developer Engagement Channels and Community

Stripe has a mature and active developer community ecosystem. For developers who want to stay updated on Tempo and receive technical support, the following official channels are available:

  • Stripe Developer Discord: This is a large community with over 120,000 members, where Stripe engineers directly participate in answering questions. The latest announcements, technical discussions, and community support for Tempo can all be found here.
  • Online Forums and Q&A Platforms: Stripe's team actively monitors and responds to questions posted on Stack Overflow (using the stripe tag) and Twitter/X (@StripeDev).
  • Stripe Blog and Newsletters: This is the primary channel for official information, in-depth technical articles, and product updates. Major milestones and case studies for Tempo will be published here.
  • Developer Events & Webinars: Stripe regularly hosts online and offline events. In particular, its annual developer conference, Stripe Sessions, is often the platform for major product announcements and will likely feature dedicated technical sessions and workshops for Tempo in the future.

By tapping into these established channels, developers can easily obtain information, solve problems, and connect with other developers interested in Tempo.

4. Opportunities to Contribute to the Tempo Ecosystem

As Tempo transitions from an internal incubation project to an open public network, developers have various ways to participate and contribute to its ecosystem beyond just building applications:

  • Open Source Contributions: Tempo is based on the open-source Reth client, and its own core components are expected to be gradually open-sourced. Developers will be able to review the code, submit issues, propose improvements, and even contribute code directly to jointly enhance the protocol's performance and security.
  • Validator Participation and Network Governance: Tempo's validator nodes are currently operated by founding partners in a permissioned model, but the long-term plan is to transition to a permissionless model. At that point, any technically capable developer or organization can run a validator node, participate in network consensus, and earn transaction fees in the form of stablecoins while securing the network. As the network decentralizes, a community governance mechanism may also be established, allowing developers to participate in protocol upgrade decisions.
  • Protocol Improvement Proposals (TIPs): Developers can draw inspiration from the Ethereum EIPs model by writing and discussing Tempo Improvement Proposals (TIPs) to suggest new features or optimizations to existing mechanisms, thereby directly influencing the protocol's evolution.
  • Participating in Hackathons and Developer Challenges: Stripe and Paradigm both have a tradition of supporting developer events. It is foreseeable that once Tempo's developer toolchain matures, there will be dedicated hackathon tracks or prize challenges to encourage developers to innovate on it.
  • Community Education & Knowledge Sharing: As early participants, developers can share their experiences and insights by writing technical blogs, creating video tutorials, answering questions in the community, or speaking at technical conferences, helping to grow the entire developer community.

The Tempo ecosystem is in its early stages of construction, providing a valuable opportunity for developers to get deeply involved in various ways and shape its future.

5. Incentives and Grant Programs for Developers

Currently, Stripe has not formally announced any grant programs or incentives for Tempo developers. At the same time, Tempo's design explicitly rules out issuing a new, speculative native token. However, this does not mean the ecosystem lacks support for developers. It is foreseeable that future incentives will focus more on utility and ecosystem building, and may include:

  • Ecosystem Fund: Established by Stripe, Paradigm, or an independent foundation to provide direct grants to teams building critical infrastructure (such as wallets, explorers, analytics tools) or promising applications for the Tempo ecosystem.
  • Hackathon Prizes & Bounties: Incentivizing developers through competitions and by posting bounties for specific development tasks, such as developing an open-source library for a particular feature.
  • Partner Incentives: For enterprise partners who choose to integrate Tempo into their business, Stripe may offer commercial incentives such as fee reductions, priority technical support, or joint marketing promotions.
  • Validator Rewards: Once the network transitions to a permissionless model, running a validator node and processing transactions will provide a continuous stream of income from transaction fees denominated in stablecoins.
  • Strategic Investment: For startups that build outstanding products or services on Tempo, strategic investment or potential acquisition from Stripe or Paradigm is also an important incentive.

In summary, Tempo's incentive model will revolve around building real-world value rather than token speculation.

6. Events, Workshops, and Meetups Around Tempo

Developers who want to learn more about Tempo and connect with the community can pay attention to the following types of events:

  • Stripe Sessions: Stripe's annual developer conference is the most important venue for getting the official roadmap and major updates for Tempo.
  • Paradigm Frontiers: Hosted by Paradigm for developers of cutting-edge crypto technology, future events will likely include in-depth technical sessions and hackathon challenges for Tempo.
  • Fintech & Crypto Industry Conferences: At major conferences like Money20/20 and Consensus, discussions on payment innovation will inevitably involve Tempo, making them good opportunities to understand its market positioning and commercial application prospects.
  • Local Meetups & Online Webinars: Smaller events organized by Stripe or local developer communities often provide more direct interaction and hands-on learning experiences.
  • Global Hackathons: Large hackathon events like ETHGlobal may feature Tempo as a sponsoring platform in the future, providing an opportunity for developers to innovate on an international stage.

Conclusion

Stripe's Tempo blockchain offers developers a unique intersection, blending the rigor of traditional fintech with the openness of the crypto world. Developers can leverage its Ethereum compatibility to get started quickly with familiar tools, or seamlessly integrate Tempo's powerful features into existing businesses through Stripe's APIs. Although the project is still in its early stages with much of the documentation and support programs still in development, the strong backing of Stripe and Paradigm signals a high commitment to developer experience and technological advancement. By actively using existing resources, joining the community, and participating in relevant events, developers can seize a valuable early-stage opportunity in a blockchain network focused on solving real-world payment problems.

How EigenLayer + Liquid Restaking Are Re‑pricing DeFi Yields in 2025

· 9 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

For months, "restaking" was the hottest narrative in crypto, a story fueled by points, airdrops, and the promise of compounded yield. But narratives don't pay the bills. In 2025, the story has been replaced by something far more tangible: a functioning economic system with real cash flows, real risks, and a completely new way to price yield on-chain.

With key infrastructure like slashing now live and fee-generating services hitting their stride, the restaking ecosystem has finally matured. The hype cycle of 2024 has given way to the underwriting cycle of 2025. This is the moment where we move from chasing points to pricing risk.

Here’s the TL;DR on the state of play:

  • Restaking moved from narrative to cash flow. With slashing live on mainnet as of April 17, 2025, and the Rewards v2 governance framework in place, EigenLayer’s yield mechanics now include enforceable downside, clearer operator incentives, and increasingly fee-driven rewards.
  • Data availability got cheaper and faster. EigenDA, a major Actively Validated Service (AVS), slashed its prices by approximately 10x in 2024 and is on a path toward massive throughput. This is a big deal for the rollups that will actually pay AVSs and the operators securing them.
  • Liquid Restaking Tokens (LRTs) make the stack accessible, but add new risks. Protocols like Ether.fi (weETH), Renzo (ezETH), and Kelp DAO (rsETH) offer liquidity and convenience, but they also introduce new vectors for smart contract failures, operator selection risk, and market peg instability. We’ve already seen real depeg events, a stark reminder of these layered risks.

1) The 2025 Yield Stack: From Base Staking to AVS Fees

At its core, the concept is simple. Ethereum staking gives you a base yield for securing the network. Restaking, pioneered by EigenLayer, allows you to take that same staked capital (ETH or Liquid Staking Tokens) and extend its security to other third-party services, known as Actively Validated Services (AVSs). These can be anything from data availability layers and oracles to cross-chain bridges and specialized coprocessors. In return for this "borrowed" security, AVSs pay fees to the node operators and, ultimately, to the restakers who underwrite their operations. EigenLayer calls this a “marketplace for trust.”

In 2025, this marketplace matured significantly:

  • Slashing is in production. AVSs can now define and enforce conditions to penalize misbehaving node operators. This turns the abstract promise of security into a concrete economic guarantee. With slashing, "points" are replaced by enforceable risk/reward calculations.
  • Rewards v2 formalizes how rewards and fee distributions flow through the system. This governance-approved change brings much-needed clarity, aligning incentives between AVSs that need security, operators that provide it, and restakers who fund it.
  • Redistribution has started rolling out. This mechanism determines how slashed funds are handled, clarifying how losses and clawbacks are socialized across the system.

Why it matters: Once AVSs begin to generate real revenue and the penalties for misbehavior are credible, restaked yield becomes a legitimate economic product, not just a marketing story. The activation of slashing in April was the inflection point, completing the original vision for a system already securing billions in assets across dozens of live AVSs.


2) DA as a Revenue Engine: EigenDA’s Price/Performance Curve

If rollups are the primary customers for cryptoeconomic security, then data availability (DA) is where the near-term revenue lives. EigenDA, EigenLayer's flagship AVS, is the perfect case study.

  • Pricing: In August 2024, EigenDA announced a dramatic price cut of roughly 10x and introduced a free tier. This move makes it economically viable for more applications and rollups to post their data, directly increasing the potential fee flow to the operators and restakers securing the service.
  • Throughput: The project is on a clear trajectory for massive scale. While its mainnet currently supports around 10 MB/s, the public roadmap targets over 100 MB/s as the operator set expands. This signals that both capacity and economics are trending in the right direction for sustainable fee generation.

Takeaway: The combination of cheaper DA services and credible slashing creates a clear runway for AVSs to generate sustainable revenue from fees rather than relying on inflationary token emissions.


3) AVS, Evolving: From “Actively Validated” to “Autonomous Verifiable”

You may notice a subtle but important shift in terminology. AVSs are increasingly described not just as “Actively Validated Services” but as “Autonomous Verifiable Services.” This change in language emphasizes systems that can prove their correct behavior cryptographically and enforce consequences automatically, rather than simply being monitored. This framing pairs perfectly with the new reality of live slashing and programmatic operator selection, pointing to a future of more robust and trust-minimized infrastructure.


4) How You Participate

For the average DeFi user or institution, there are three common ways to engage with the restaking ecosystem, each with distinct trade-offs.

  • Native restaking

    • How it works: You restake your native ETH (or other approved assets) directly on EigenLayer and delegate to an operator of your choice.
    • Pros: You have maximum control over your operator selection and which AVSs you are securing.
    • Cons: This approach comes with operational overhead and requires you to do your own due diligence on operators. You shoulder all the selection risk yourself.
  • LST → EigenLayer (Liquid restaking without a new token)

    • How it works: You take your existing Liquid Staking Tokens (LSTs) like stETH, rETH, or cbETH and deposit them into EigenLayer strategies.
    • Pros: You can reuse your existing LSTs, keeping your exposure relatively simple and building on a familiar asset.
    • Cons: You are stacking protocol risks. A failure in the underlying LST, EigenLayer, or the AVSs you secure could result in losses.
  • LRTs (Liquid Restaking Tokens)

    • How it works: Protocols issue tokens like weETH (wrapping eETH), ezETH, and rsETH that bundle the entire restaking process—delegation, operator management, and AVS selection—into a single, liquid token you can use across DeFi.
    • Pros: The primary benefits are convenience and liquidity.
    • Cons: This convenience comes with added layers of risk, including the LRT's own smart contracts and the peg risk of the token on secondary markets. The depeg of ezETH in April 2024, which triggered a cascade of liquidations, serves as a real-world reminder that LRTs are leveraged exposures to multiple interconnected systems.

5) Risk, Repriced

Restaking’s promise is higher yield for performing real work. Its risks are now equally real.

  • Slashing & policy risk: Slashing is live, and AVSs can define custom, and sometimes complex, conditions for penalties. It is critical to understand the quality of the operator set you are exposed to and how disputes or appeals are handled.
  • Peg & liquidity risk in LRTs: Secondary markets can be volatile. As we've already seen, sharp dislocations between an LRT and its underlying assets can and do happen. You must build in buffers for liquidity crunches and conservative collateral factors when using LRTs in other DeFi protocols.
  • Smart-contract & strategy risk: You are stacking multiple smart contracts on top of each other (LST/LRT + EigenLayer + AVSs). The quality of audits and the power of governance over protocol upgrades are paramount.
  • Throughput/economics risk: AVS fees are not guaranteed; they depend entirely on usage. While DA price cuts are a positive catalyst, sustained demand from rollups and other applications is the ultimate engine of restaking yield.

6) A Simple Framework to Value Restaked Yield

With these dynamics in play, you can now think about the expected return on restaking as a simple stack:

Expected Return=(Base Staking Yield)+(AVS Fees)(Expected Slashing Loss)(Frictions)\text{Expected Return} = (\text{Base Staking Yield}) + (\text{AVS Fees}) - (\text{Expected Slashing Loss}) - (\text{Frictions})

Let's break that down:

  • Base staking yield: The standard return from securing Ethereum.
  • AVS fees: The additional yield paid by AVSs, weighted by your specific operator and AVS allocation.
  • Expected slashing loss: This is the crucial new variable. You can estimate it as: probability of a slashable event × penalty size × your exposure.
  • Frictions: These include protocol fees, operator fees, and any liquidity haircuts or peg discounts if you are using an LRT.

You will never have perfect inputs for this formula, but forcing yourself to estimate the slashing term, even conservatively, will keep your portfolio honest. The introduction of Rewards v2 and Redistribution makes this calculation far less abstract than it was a year ago.


7) Playbooks for 2025 Allocators

  • Conservative

    • Prefer native restaking or direct LST restaking strategies.
    • Delegate only to diversified, high-uptime operators with transparent, well-documented AVS security policies.
    • Focus on AVSs with clear, understandable fee models, such as those providing data availability or core infrastructure services.
  • Balanced

    • Use a mix of direct LST restaking and select LRTs that have deep liquidity and transparent disclosures about their operator sets.
    • Cap your exposure to any single LRT protocol and actively monitor peg spreads and on-chain liquidity conditions.
  • Aggressive

    • Utilize LRT-heavy baskets to maximize liquidity and target smaller, potentially higher-growth AVSs or newer operator sets for higher upside.
    • Explicitly budget for potential slashing or depeg events. Avoid using leverage on top of LRTs unless you have thoroughly modeled the impact of a significant depeg.

8) What to Watch Next

  • AVS revenue turn-on: Which services are actually generating meaningful fee revenue? Keep an eye on DA-adjacent and core infrastructure AVSs, as they are likely to lead the pack.
  • Operator stratification: Over the next two to three quarters, slashing and the Rewards v2 framework should begin to separate best-in-class operators from the rest. Performance and reliability will become key differentiators.
  • The "Autonomous Verifiable" trend: Watch for AVS designs that lean more heavily on cryptographic proofs and automated enforcement. These are likely to be the most robust and fee-worthy services in the long run.

9) A Note on Numbers (and Why They’ll Change)

You will encounter different throughput and TVL figures across various sources and dates. For instance, EigenDA's own site may reference both its current mainnet support of around 10 MB/s and its future roadmap targeting 100+ MB/s. This reflects the dynamic nature of a system that is constantly evolving as operator sets grow and software improves. Always check the dates and context of any data before anchoring your financial models to it.


Bottom Line

2024 was the hype cycle. 2025 is the underwriting cycle. With slashing live and AVS fee models becoming more compelling, restaking yields are finally becoming priceable—and therefore, truly investable. For sophisticated DeFi users and institutional treasuries willing to do the homework on operators, AVSs, and LRT liquidity, restaking has evolved from a promising narrative into a core component of the on-chain economy.


This article is for informational purposes only and is not financial advice.

Chain Abstraction Is How Enterprises Will Finally Use Web3 (Without Thinking About Chains)

· 8 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

TL;DR

Cross-chain abstraction turns a maze of chains, bridges, and wallets into a single, coherent platform experience for both developers and end users. The ecosystem has quietly matured: intent standards, account abstraction, native stablecoin mobility, and network-level initiatives like the OP Superchain and Polygon's AggLayer make a "many chains, one experience" future realistic in 2025. For enterprises, the win is pragmatic: simpler integrations, enforceable risk controls, deterministic operations, and compliance-ready auditability—without betting the farm on any single chain.


The Problem Enterprises Actually Have (and Why Bridges Alone Didn’t Fix It)

Most enterprise teams don’t want to “pick a chain.” They want outcomes: settle a payment, issue an asset, clear a trade, or update a record—reliably, auditably, and at a predictable cost. The trouble is that production Web3 today is irredeemably multichain. Hundreds of rollups, appchains, and L2s have launched over the past 18 months alone, each with its own fees, finality times, tooling, and trust assumptions.

Traditional cross-chain approaches solved transport—moving tokens or messages from A to B—but not the experience. Teams are still forced to manage wallets per network, provision gas per chain, pick a bridge per route, and shoulder security differences they can’t easily quantify. That friction is the real adoption tax.

Cross-chain abstraction removes that tax by hiding chain selection and transport behind declarative APIs, intent-driven user experiences, and unified identity and gas. In other words, users and applications express what they want; the platform determines how and where it happens, safely. Chain abstraction makes blockchain technology invisible to end users while preserving its core benefits.

Why 2025 is Different: The Building Blocks Finally Clicked

The vision of a seamless multi-chain world isn't new, but the foundational technology is finally ready for production. Several key components have matured and converged, making robust chain abstraction possible.

  • Network-Level Unification: Projects are now building frameworks to make separate chains feel like a single, unified network. The OP Superchain aims to standardize OP-Stack L2s with shared tooling and communication layers. Polygon's AggLayer aggregates many ZK-secured chains with "pessimistic proofs" for chain-level accounting, preventing one chain’s issues from contaminating others. Meanwhile, IBC v2 is expanding standardized interoperability beyond the Cosmos ecosystem, pushing toward "IBC everywhere."

  • Mature Interop Rails: The middleware for cross-chain communication is now battle-tested and widely available. Chainlink CCIP offers enterprise-grade token and data transfer across a growing number of chains. LayerZero v2 provides omnichain messaging and standardized OFT tokens with a unified supply. Axelar delivers General Message Passing (GMP) for complex contract calls across ecosystems, connecting EVM and Cosmos chains. Platforms like Hyperlane enable permissionless deployments, allowing new chains to join the network without gatekeepers, while Wormhole offers a generalized messaging layer used across more than 40 chains.

  • Intent & Account Abstraction: The user experience has been transformed by two critical standards. ERC-7683 standardizes cross-chain intents, allowing apps to declare goals and let a shared solver network execute them efficiently across chains. Concurrently, EIP-4337 smart accounts, combined with Paymasters, enable gas abstraction. This allows an application to sponsor transaction fees or let users pay in stablecoins, which is essential for any flow that might touch multiple networks.

  • Native Stablecoin Mobility: Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP) moves native USDC across chains via a secure burn-and-mint process, reducing wrapped-asset risk and unifying liquidity. The latest version, CCTP v2, further cuts latency and simplifies developer workflows, making stablecoin settlement a seamless part of the abstracted experience.

What “Cross-Chain Abstraction” Looks Like in an Enterprise Stack

Think of it as a layered capability you can add to existing systems. The goal is to have a single endpoint to express an intent and a single policy plane to govern how it executes across any number of chains.

  1. Unified Identity & Policy: At the top layer are smart accounts (EIP-4337) with role-based access controls, social recovery, and modern custody options like passkeys or MPC. This is governed by a central policy engine that defines who can do what, where, using allow- and deny-lists for specific chains, assets, and bridges.

  2. Gas & Fee Abstraction: Paymasters remove the "I need native gas on chain X" headache. Users or services can pay fees in stablecoins, or the application can sponsor them entirely, subject to predefined policies and budgets.

  3. Intent-Driven Execution: Users express outcomes, not transactions. For example, "swap USDC for wETH and deliver it to our supplier's wallet on chain Y before 5 p.m." The ERC-7683 standard defines the format for these orders, allowing shared solver networks to compete to execute them safely and cheaply.

  4. Programmable Settlement & Messaging: Under the hood, the system uses a consistent API to select the right rail for each route. It might use CCIP for a token transfer where enterprise support is key, Axelar GMP for a cross-ecosystem contract call, or IBC where native light-client security fits the risk model.

  5. Observability & Compliance by Default: The entire workflow is traceable, from the initial intent to the final settlement. This produces clear audit trails and allows data to be exported to existing SIEMs. Risk frameworks can be programmed to enforce allowlists or trigger emergency brakes, for instance, by pausing routes if a bridge’s security posture degrades.

A Reference Architecture

From the top down, a chain-abstracted system is composed of clear layers:

  • Experience Layer: Application surfaces that collect user intents and completely hide chain details, paired with SSO-style smart account wallet flows.
  • Control Plane: A policy engine for managing permissions, quotas, and budgets. This plane integrates with KMS/HSM systems and maintains allowlists for chains, assets, and bridges. It also ingests risk feeds to circuit-break vulnerable routes automatically.
  • Execution Layer: An intent router that selects the best interop rail (CCIP, LayerZero, Axelar, etc.) based on policy, price, and latency requirements. A Paymaster handles fees, drawing from a treasury of pooled gas and stablecoin budgets.
  • Settlement & State: Canonical on-chain contracts for core functions like custody and issuance. A unified indexer tracks cross-chain events and proofs, exporting data to a warehouse or SIEM for analysis and compliance.

Build vs. Buy: How to Evaluate Providers of Chain Abstraction

When selecting a partner to provide chain abstraction capabilities, enterprises should ask several key questions:

  • Security & Trust Model: What are the underlying verification assumptions? Does the system rely on oracles, guardian sets, light clients, or validator networks? What can be slashed or vetoed?
  • Coverage & Neutrality: Which chains and assets are supported today? How quickly can new ones be added? Is the process permissionless or gated by the provider?
  • Standards Alignment: Does the platform support key standards like ERC-7683, EIP-4337, OFT, IBC, and CCIP?
  • Operations: What are the provider’s SLAs? How transparent are they about incidents? Do they offer replayable proofs, deterministic retries, and structured audit logs?
  • Governance & Portability: Can you switch interop rails per route without rewriting your application? Vendor-neutral abstractions are critical for long-term flexibility.
  • Compliance: What controls are available for data retention and residency? What is their SOC2/ISO posture? Can you bring your own KMS/HSM?

A Pragmatic 90-Day Enterprise Rollout

  • Days 0–15: Baseline & Policy: Inventory all chains, assets, bridges, and wallets currently in use. Define an initial allowlist and establish circuit-break rules based on a clear risk framework.
  • Days 16–45: Prototype: Convert a single user journey, such as a cross-chain payout, to use an intent-based flow with account abstraction and a paymaster. Measure the impact on user drop-off, latency, and support load.
  • Days 46–75: Expand Rails: Add a second interoperability rail to the system and route transactions dynamically based on policy. Integrate CCTP for native USDC mobility if stablecoins are part of the workflow.
  • Days 76–90: Harden: Wire the platform’s observability data to your SIEM, run chaos tests on route failures, and document all operating procedures, including emergency pause protocols.

Common Pitfalls (and How to Avoid Them)

  • Routing by "Gas Price Only": Latency, finality, and security assumptions matter as much as fees. Price alone is not a complete risk model.
  • Ignoring Gas: If your experience touches multiple chains, gas abstraction isn't optional—it's table stakes for a usable product.
  • Treating Bridges as Interchangeable: They aren’t. Their security assumptions differ significantly. Codify allowlists and implement circuit breakers to manage this risk.
  • Wrapped-Asset Sprawl: Whenever possible, prefer native asset mobility (like USDC via CCTP) to minimize liquidity fragmentation and reduce counterparty risk.

The Enterprise Upside

When chain abstraction is done well, blockchain stops being a collection of idiosyncratic networks and becomes an execution fabric your teams can program against. It offers policies, SLAs, and audit trails that match the standards you already operate under. Thanks to mature intent standards, account abstraction, robust interop rails, and native stablecoin transport, you can finally deliver Web3 outcomes without forcing users—or your own developers—to care about which chain did the work.

Hyperliquid in 2025: A High-Performance DEX Building the Future of Onchain Finance

· 43 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) have matured into core pillars of crypto trading, now capturing roughly 20% of total market volumes. Within this space, Hyperliquid has emerged as the undisputed leader in on-chain derivatives. Launched in 2022 with the ambitious goal of matching centralized exchange (CEX) performance on-chain, Hyperliquid today processes billions in daily trading and controls about 70–75% of the DEX perpetual futures market. It achieves this by combining CEX-grade speed and deep liquidity with DeFi’s transparency and self-custody. The result is a vertically integrated Layer-1 blockchain and exchange that many now call “the blockchain to house all finance.” This report delves into Hyperliquid’s technical architecture, tokenomics, 2025 growth metrics, comparisons with other DEX leaders, ecosystem developments, and its vision for the future of on-chain finance.

Technical Architecture: A Vertically Integrated, High-Performance Chain

Hyperliquid is not just a DEX application – it is an entire Layer-1 blockchain built for trading performance. Its architecture consists of three tightly coupled components operating in a unified state:

  • HyperBFT (Consensus): A custom Byzantine Fault Tolerant consensus mechanism optimized for speed and throughput. Inspired by modern protocols like HotStuff, HyperBFT provides sub-second finality and high consistency to ensure all nodes agree on the order of transactions. This Proof-of-Stake consensus is designed to handle the intense load of a trading platform, supporting on the order of 100,000–200,000 operations per second in practice. By early 2025, Hyperliquid had around 27 independent validators securing the network, a number that is steadily growing to decentralize consensus.
  • HyperCore (Execution Engine): A specialized on-chain engine for financial applications. Rather than using generic smart contracts for critical exchange logic, HyperCore implements built-in central limit order books (CLOBs) for perpetual futures and spot markets, as well as other modules for lending, auctions, oracles, and more. Every order placement, cancellation, trade match, and liquidation is processed on-chain with one-block finality, yielding execution speeds comparable to traditional exchanges. By eschewing AMMs and handling order matching within the protocol, Hyperliquid achieves deep liquidity and low latency – it has demonstrated <1s trade finality and throughput that rivals centralized venues. This custom execution layer (written in Rust) can reportedly handle up to 200k orders per second after recent optimizations, eliminating the bottlenecks that previously made on-chain order books infeasible.
  • HyperEVM (Smart Contracts): A general-purpose Ethereum-compatible execution layer introduced in Feb 2025. HyperEVM allows developers to deploy Solidity smart contracts and dApps on Hyperliquid with full EVM compatibility, similar to building on Ethereum. Crucially, HyperEVM is not a separate shard or rollup – it shares the same unified state with HyperCore. This means that dApps on HyperEVM can natively interoperate with the exchange’s order books and liquidity. For example, a lending protocol on HyperEVM can read live prices from HyperCore’s order book or even post liquidation orders directly into the order book via system calls. This composability between smart contracts and the high-speed exchange layer is a unique design: no bridges or off-chain oracles are needed for dApps to leverage Hyperliquid’s trading infrastructure.

Figure: Hyperliquid's vertically integrated architecture showing the unified state between consensus (HyperBFT), exchange engine (HyperCore), smart contracts (HyperEVM), and asset bridging (HyperUnit).

Integration with On-Chain Infrastructure: By building its own chain, Hyperliquid tightly integrates normally siloed functions into one platform. HyperUnit, for instance, is Hyperliquid’s decentralized bridging and asset tokenization module enabling direct deposits of external assets like BTC, ETH, and SOL without custodial wrappers. Users can lock native BTC or ETH and receive equivalent tokens (e.g. uBTC, uETH) on Hyperliquid for use as trading collateral, without relying on centralized custodians. This design provides “true collateral mobility” and a more regulatory-aware framework for bringing real-world assets on-chain. Thanks to HyperUnit (and Circle’s USDC integration discussed later), traders on Hyperliquid can seamlessly move liquidity from other networks into Hyperliquid’s fast exchange environment.

Performance and Latency: All parts of the stack are optimized for minimal latency and maximal throughput. HyperBFT finalizes blocks within a second, and HyperCore processes trades in real time, so users experience near-instant order execution. There are effectively no gas fees for trading actions – HyperCore transactions are feeless, enabling high-frequency order placement and cancellation without cost to users. (Normal EVM contract calls on HyperEVM do incur a low gas fee, but the exchange’s operations run gas-free on the native engine.) This zero-gas, low-latency design makes advanced trading features viable on-chain. Indeed, Hyperliquid supports the same advanced order types and risk controls as top CEXs, such as limit and stop orders, cross-margining, and up to 50× leverage on major markets. In sum, Hyperliquid’s custom L1 chain eliminates the traditional trade-off between speed and decentralization. Every operation is on-chain and transparent, yet the user experience – in terms of execution speed and interface – parallels that of a professional centralized exchange.

Evolution and Scalability: Hyperliquid’s architecture was born from first principles engineering. The project launched quietly in 2022 as a closed-alpha perpetuals DEX on a custom Tendermint-based chain, proving the CLOB concept with ~20 assets and 50× leverage. By 2023 it transitioned into a fully sovereign L1 with the new HyperBFT consensus, achieving 100K+ orders per second and introducing zero-gas trading and community liquidity pools. The addition of HyperEVM in early 2025 opened the floodgates for developers, marking Hyperliquid’s evolution from a single-purpose exchange into a full DeFi platform**. Notably, all these enhancements have kept the system stable – Hyperliquid reports** 99.99% uptime historically[25]_. This track record and vertical integration_ give Hyperliquid a significant technical moat: it controls the entire stack (consensus, execution, application), allowing continuous optimization. As demand grows, the team continues to refine the node software for even higher throughput, ensuring scalability for the next wave of users and more complex on-chain markets.

Tokenomics of $HYPE: Governance, Staking, and Value Accrual

Hyperliquid’s economic design centers on its native token $HYPE, introduced in late 2024 to decentralize ownership and governance of the platform. The token’s launch and distribution were notably community-centric: in November 2024, Hyperliquid conducted an airdrop Token Generation Event (TGE), allocating 31% of the 1 billion fixed supply to early users as a reward for their participation. An even larger portion (≈38.8%) was set aside for future community incentives like liquidity mining or ecosystem development. Importantly, $HYPE had zero allocations to VCs or private investors, reflecting a philosophy of prioritizing community ownership. This transparent distribution aimed to avoid the heavy insider ownership seen in many projects and instead empower the actual traders and builders on Hyperliquid.

The $HYPE token serves multiple roles in the Hyperliquid ecosystem:

  • Governance: $HYPE is a governance token enabling holders to vote on Hyperliquid Improvement Proposals (HIPs) and shape the protocol’s evolution. Already, critical upgrades like HIP-1, HIP-2, and HIP-3 have been passed, which established permissionless listing standards for spot tokens and perpetual markets. For example, HIP-3 opened up the ability for community members to permissionlessly deploy new perp markets, much like Uniswap did for spot trading, unlocking long-tail assets (including traditional market perps) on Hyperliquid. Governance will increasingly decide listings, parameter tweaks, and the use of community incentive funds.
  • Staking & Network Security: Hyperliquid is a Proof-of-Stake chain, so staking $HYPE to validators secures the HyperBFT network. Stakers delegate to validators and earn a portion of block rewards and fees. Shortly after launch, Hyperliquid enabled staking with an annual yield ~2–2.5% to incentivize participation in consensus. As more users stake, the chain’s security and decentralization improve. Staked $HYPE (or derivative forms like upcoming beHYPE liquid staking) may also be used in governance voting, aligning security participants with decision-making.
  • Exchange Utility (Fee Discounts): Holding or staking $HYPE confers trading fee discounts on Hyperliquid’s exchange. Similar to how Binance’s BNB or dYdX’s DYDX token offer reduced fees, active traders are incentivized to hold $HYPE to minimize their costs. This creates a natural demand for the token among the exchange’s user base, especially high-volume traders.
  • Value Accrual via Buybacks: The most striking aspect of Hyperliquid's tokenomics is its aggressive fee-to-value mechanism. Hyperliquid uses the vast majority of its trading fee revenue to buy back and burn $HYPE on the open market, directly returning value to token holders. In fact, 97% of all protocol trading fees are allocated to buying back $HYPE (and the remainder to an insurance fund and liquidity providers). This is one of the highest fee return rates in the industry. By mid-2025, Hyperliquid was generating over $65 million in protocol revenue per month from trading fees – and virtually all of that went toward $HYPE repurchases, creating constant buy pressure. This deflationary token model, combined with a fixed 1B supply, means $HYPE's tokenomics are geared for long-term value accrual for loyal stakeholders. It also signals that Hyperliquid's team forgoes short-term profit (no fee revenue is taken as profit or distributed to insiders; even the core team presumably only benefits as token holders), instead funneling revenue to the community treasury and token value.
  • Liquidity Provider Rewards: A small portion of fees (≈3–8%) is used to reward liquidity providers in Hyperliquid’s unique HyperLiquidity Pool (HLP). HLP is an on-chain USDC liquidity pool that facilitates market-making and auto-settlement for the order books, analogous to an “LP vault.” Users who provide USDC to HLP earn a share of trading fees in return. By early 2025, HLP was offering depositors an ~11% annualized yield from accrued trading fees. This mechanism lets community members share in the exchange’s success by contributing capital to backstop liquidity (similar in spirit to GMX’s GLP pool, but for an orderbook system). Notably, Hyperliquid’s insurance Assistance Fund (denominated in $HYPE) also uses a portion of revenue to cover any HLP losses or unusual events – for instance, a “Jelly” exploit in Q1 2025 incurred a $12M shortfall in HLP, which was fully reimbursed to pool users. The fee buyback model was so robust that despite that hit, $HYPE buybacks continued unabated and HLP remained profitable, demonstrating strong alignment between the protocol and its community liquidity providers.

In summary, Hyperliquid’s tokenomics emphasize community ownership, security, and long-term sustainability. The absence of VC allocations and the high buyback rate were decisions that signaled confidence in organic growth. The early results have been positive – since its TGE, $HYPE’s price climbed 4× (as of mid-2025) on the back of real adoption and revenue. More importantly, users remained engaged after the airdrop; trading activity actually accelerated post-token launch, rather than suffering the typical post-incentive drop-off. This suggests the token model is successfully aligning user incentives with the platform’s growth, creating a virtuous cycle for Hyperliquid’s ecosystem.

Trading Volume, Adoption, and Liquidity in 2025

Hyperliquid by the Numbers: In 2025, Hyperliquid stands out not just for its technology but for the sheer scale of its on-chain activity. It has rapidly become the largest decentralized derivatives exchange by a wide margin, setting new benchmarks for DeFi. Key metrics illustrating Hyperliquid’s traction include:

  • Market Dominance: Hyperliquid handles roughly 70–77% of all DEX perpetual futures volume in 2025 – an 8× larger share than the next competitor. In other words, Hyperliquid by itself accounts for well over three-quarters of decentralized perp trading worldwide, making it the clear leader in its category. (For context, as of Q1 2025 this equated to about 56–73% of decentralized perp volume, up from ~4.5% at the start of 2024 – a stunning rise in one year.)
  • Trading Volumes: Cumulative trading volume on Hyperliquid blew past $1.5 trillion in mid-2025, highlighting how much liquidity has flowed through its markets. By late 2024 the exchange was already seeing daily volumes around $10–14 billion, and volume continued to climb with new user influxes in 2025. In fact, during peak market activity (e.g. a memecoin frenzy in May 2025), Hyperliquid’s weekly trading volume reached as high as $780 billion in one week – averaging well over $100B per day – rivaling or exceeding many mid-sized centralized exchanges. Even in steady conditions, Hyperliquid was averaging roughly $470B in weekly volume in the first half of 2025. This scale is unprecedented for a DeFi platform; by mid-2025 Hyperliquid was executing about 6% of *all* crypto trading volume globally (including CEXs), narrowing the gap between DeFi and CeFi.
  • Open Interest and Liquidity: The depth of Hyperliquid’s markets is also evident in its open interest (OI) – the total value of active positions. OI grew from ~3.3B at 2024’s end to around **\15** billion by mid-2025. For perspective, this OI is about 60–120% of the levels on major CEXs like Bybit, OKX, or Bitget, indicating that professional traders are as comfortable deploying large positions on Hyperliquid as on established centralized venues. Order book depth on Hyperliquid for major pairs like BTC or ETH is reported to be comparable to top CEXs, with tight bid-ask spreads. During certain token launches (e.g. the popular PUMP meme coin), Hyperliquid even achieved the deepest liquidity and highest volume of any venue, beating out CEXs for that asset. This showcases how an on-chain order book, when well-designed, can match CEX liquidity – a milestone in DEX evolution.
  • Users and Adoption: The platform’s user base has expanded dramatically through 2024–2025. Hyperliquid surpassed 500,000 unique user addresses in mid-2025. In the first half of 2025 alone, the count of active addresses nearly doubled (from ~291k to 518k). This 78% growth in six months was fueled by word-of-mouth, a successful referral & points program, and the buzz around the $HYPE airdrop (which interestingly retained users rather than just attracting mercenaries – there was no drop-off in usage after the airdrop, and activity kept climbing). Such growth indicates not just one-time curiosity but genuine adoption by traders. A significant portion of these users are believed to be “whales” and professional traders who migrated from CEXs, drawn by Hyperliquid’s liquidity and lower fees. Indeed, institutions and high-volume trading firms have begun treating Hyperliquid as a primary venue for perpetuals trading, validating DeFi’s appeal when performance issues are solved.
  • Revenue and Fees: Hyperliquid’s robust volumes translate into substantial protocol revenue (which, as noted, largely accrues to $HYPE buybacks). In the last 30 days (as of mid-2025), Hyperliquid generated about $65.45 million in protocol fees. On a daily basis that’s roughly $2.0–2.5 million in fees earned from trading activity. Annualized, the platform is on track for $800M+ in revenue – an astonishing figure that approaches revenues of some major centralized exchanges, and far above typical DeFi protocols. It underscores how Hyperliquid’s high volume and fee structure (small per-trade fees that add up at scale) produce a thriving revenue model to support its token economy.
  • Total Value Locked (TVL) and Assets: Hyperliquid’s ecosystem TVL – representing assets bridged into its chain and liquidity in its DeFi protocols – has climbed rapidly alongside trading activity. At the start of Q4 2024 (pre-token) Hyperliquid’s chain TVL was around $0.5B, but after the token launch and HyperEVM expansion, TVL soared to $2+ billion by early 2025. By mid-2025, it reached approximately $3.5 billion (June 30, 2025) and continued upward. The introduction of native USDC (via Circle) and other assets boosted on-chain capital to an estimated $5.5 billion AUM by July 2025. This includes assets in the HLP pool, DeFi lending pools, AMMs, and users’ collateral balances. Hyperliquid’s HyperLiquidity Pool (HLP) itself held a TVL around $370–500 million** in H1 2025, providing a deep USDC liquidity reserve for the exchange. Additionally, the **HyperEVM DeFi TVL** (excluding the core exchange) surpassed **\1 billion within a few months of launch, reflecting rapid growth of new dApps on the chain. These figures firmly place Hyperliquid among the largest blockchain ecosystems by TVL, despite being a specialized chain.

In summary, 2025 has seen Hyperliquid scale to CEX-like volumes and liquidity. It consistently ranks as the top DEX by volume, and even measures as a significant fraction of overall crypto trading. The ability to sustain half a trillion dollars in weekly volume on-chain, with half a million users, illustrates that the long-held promise of high-performance DeFi is being realized. Hyperliquid’s success is expanding the boundaries of what on-chain markets can do: for instance, it became the go-to venue for fast listing of new coins (it often is first to list perps for trending assets, attracting huge activity) and has proven that on-chain order books can handle blue-chip trading at scale (its BTC and ETH markets have liquidity comparable to leading CEXs). These achievements underpin Hyperliquid’s claim as a potential foundation for all on-chain finance going forward.

Comparison with Other Leading DEXs (dYdX, GMX, UniswapX, etc.)

The rise of Hyperliquid invites comparisons to other prominent decentralized exchanges. Each of the major DEX models – from order-book-based derivatives like dYdX, to liquidity pool-based perps like GMX, to spot DEX aggregators like UniswapX – takes a different approach to balancing performance, decentralization, and user experience. Below, we analyze how Hyperliquid stacks up against these platforms:

  • Hyperliquid vs. dYdX: dYdX was the early leader in decentralized perps, but its initial design (v3) relied on a hybrid approach: an off-chain order book and matching engine, combined with an L2 settlement on StarkWare. This gave dYdX decent performance but came at the cost of decentralization and composability – the order book was run by a central server, and the system was not open to general smart contracts. In late 2023, dYdX launched v4 as a Cosmos app-chain, aiming to fully decentralize the order book within a dedicated PoS chain. This is philosophically similar to Hyperliquid’s approach (both built custom chains for on-chain order matching). Hyperliquid’s key edge has been its unified architecture and head start in performance tuning. By designing HyperCore and HyperEVM together, Hyperliquid achieved CEX-level speed entirely on-chain before dYdX’s Cosmos chain gained traction. In fact, Hyperliquid’s performance surpassed dYdX – it can handle far more throughput (hundreds of thousands of tx/sec) and offers cross-contract composability that dYdX (an app-specific chain without an EVM environment) currently lacks. Artemis Research notes: earlier protocols either compromised on performance (like GMX) or on decentralization (like dYdX), but Hyperliquid delivered both, solving the deeper challenge. This is reflected in market share: by 2025 Hyperliquid commands ~75% of the perp DEX market, whereas dYdX’s share has dwindled to single digits. In practical terms, traders find Hyperliquid’s UI and speed comparable to dYdX (both offer pro exchange interfaces, advanced orders, etc.), but Hyperliquid offers greater asset variety and on-chain integration. Another difference is fee and token models: dYdX’s token is mainly a governance token with indirect fee discounts, while Hyperliquid’s $HYPE directly accrues exchange value (via buybacks) and offers staking rights. Lastly, on decentralization, both are PoS chains – dYdX had ~20 validators at launch vs Hyperliquid’s ~27 by early 2025 – but Hyperliquid’s open builder ecosystem (HyperEVM) arguably makes it more decentralized in terms of development and usage. Overall, Hyperliquid can be seen as the spiritual successor to dYdX: it took the order book DEX concept and fully on-chain-ified it with greater performance, which is evidenced by Hyperliquid pulling significant volume even from centralized exchanges (something dYdX v3 struggled to do).
  • Hyperliquid vs. GMX: GMX represents the AMM/pool-based model for perpetuals. It became popular on Arbitrum in 2022 by allowing users to trade perps against a pooled liquidity (GLP) with oracle-based pricing. GMX’s approach prioritized simplicity and zero price impact for small trades, but it sacrifices some performance and capital efficiency. Because GMX relies on price oracles and a single liquidity pool, large or frequent trades can be challenging – the pool can incur losses if traders win (GLP holders take the opposite side of trades), and oracle price latency can be exploited. Hyperliquid’s order book model avoids these issues by matching traders peer-to-peer at market-driven prices, with professional market makers providing deep liquidity. This yields far tighter spreads and better execution for big trades compared to GMX’s model. In essence, GMX’s design compromises on high-frequency performance (trades only update when oracles push prices, and there’s no rapid order placement/cancellation) whereas Hyperliquid’s design excels at it. The numbers reflect this: GMX’s volumes and OI are an order of magnitude smaller, and its market share has been dwarfed by Hyperliquid’s rise. For example, GMX typically supported under 20 markets (mostly large caps), whereas Hyperliquid offers 100+ markets including many long-tail assets – the latter is possible because maintaining many order books is feasible on Hyperliquid’s chain, whereas in GMX adding new asset pools is slower and riskier. From a user experience standpoint, GMX offers a simple swap-style interface (good for DeFi novices), while Hyperliquid provides a full exchange dashboard with charts and order books catering to advanced traders. Fees: GMX charges a ~0.1% fee on trades (which goes to GLP and GMX stakers) and has no token buyback; Hyperliquid charges very low maker/taker fees (on the order of 0.01–0.02%) and uses fees to buy back $HYPE for holders. Decentralization: GMX runs on Ethereum L2s (Arbitrum, Avalanche), inheriting strong base security, but its dependency on a centralized price oracle (Chainlink) and single liquidity pool introduces different centralized risks. Hyperliquid runs its own chain, which is newer/less battle-tested than Ethereum, but its mechanisms (order book + many makers) avoid centralized oracle dependence. In summary, Hyperliquid offers superior performance and institutional-grade liquidity relative to GMX, at the cost of more complex infrastructure. GMX proved there is demand for on-chain perps, but Hyperliquid’s order books have proven far more scalable for high-volume trading.
  • Hyperliquid vs. UniswapX (and Spot DEXs): UniswapX is a recently introduced trade aggregator for spot swaps (built by Uniswap Labs) that finds the best price across AMMs and other liquidity sources. While not a direct competitor on perpetuals, UniswapX represents the cutting-edge of spot DEX user experience. It enables gas-free, aggregation-optimized token swaps by letting off-chain “fillers” execute trades for users. By contrast, Hyperliquid’s spot trading uses its own on-chain order books (and also has a native AMM called HyperSwap in its ecosystem). For a user looking to trade tokens spot, how do they compare? Performance: Hyperliquid’s spot order books offer immediate execution with low latency, similar to a centralized exchange, and thanks to no gas fees on HyperCore, taking an order is cheap and fast. UniswapX aims to save users gas on Ethereum by abstracting execution, but ultimately the trade settlement still happens on Ethereum (or other underlying chains) and may incur latency (waiting for fillers and block confirmations). Liquidity: UniswapX sources liquidity from many AMMs and market makers across multiple DEXs, which is great for long-tail tokens on Ethereum; however, for major pairs, Hyperliquid’s single order book often has deeper liquidity and less slippage because all traders congregate in one venue. Indeed, after launching spot markets in March 2024, Hyperliquid quickly saw spot volumes surge to record levels, with large traders bridging assets like BTC, ETH, and SOL into Hyperliquid for spot trading due to the superior execution, then bridging back out. UniswapX excels at breadth of token access, whereas Hyperliquid focuses on depth and efficiency for a more curated set of assets (those listed via its governance/auction process). Decentralization and UX: Uniswap (and X) leverage Ethereum’s very decentralized base and are non-custodial, but aggregators like UniswapX do introduce off-chain actors (fillers relaying orders) – albeit in a permissionless way. Hyperliquid’s approach keeps all trading actions on-chain with full transparency, and any asset listed on Hyperliquid gets the benefits of native order book trading plus composability with its DeFi apps. The user experience on Hyperliquid is closer to a centralized trading app (which advanced users prefer), while UniswapX is more like a “meta-DEX” for one-click swaps (convenient for casual trades). Fees: UniswapX’s fees depend on the DEX liquidity used (typically 0.05–0.3% on AMMs) plus possibly a filler incentive; Hyperliquid’s spot fees are minimal and often offset by $HYPE discounts. In short, Hyperliquid competes with Uniswap and other spot DEXs by offering a new model: an order-book-based spot exchange on a custom chain. It has carved out a niche where high-volume spot traders (especially for large-cap assets) prefer Hyperliquid for its deeper liquidity and CEX-like experience, whereas retail users swapping obscure ERC-20s may still prefer Uniswap’s ecosystem. Notably, Hyperliquid’s ecosystem even introduced Hyperswap (an AMM on HyperEVM with ~$70M TVL) to capture long-tail tokens via AMM pools – acknowledging that AMMs and order books can coexist, serving different market segments.

Summary of Key Differences: The table below outlines a high-level comparison:

DEX PlatformDesign & ChainTrading ModelPerformanceDecentralizationFee Mechanism
HyperliquidCustom L1 (HyperBFT PoS, ~27 validators)On-chain CLOB for perps/spot; also EVM apps~0.5s finality, 100k+ tx/sec, CEX-like UIPoS chain (community-run, unified state for dApps)Tiny trading fees, ~97% of fees buy back $HYPE (indirectly rewarding holders)
dYdX v4Cosmos SDK app-chain (PoS, ~20 validators)On-chain CLOB for perps only (no general smart contracts)~1-2s finality, high throughput (order matching by validators)PoS chain (decentralized matching, but not EVM-composable)Trading fees paid in USDC; DYDX token for governance & discounts (no fee buyback)
GMXArbitrum & Avalanche (Ethereum L2/L1)AMM pooled liquidity (GLP) with oracle pricing for perpsDependent on oracle update (~30s); good for casual trades, not HFTSecured by Ethereum/Avax L1; fully on-chain but relies on centralized oracles~0.1% trading fee; 70% to liquidity providers (GLP), 30% to GMX stakers (revenue sharing)
UniswapXEthereum mainnet (and cross-chain)Aggregator for spot swaps (routes across AMMs or RFQ market makers)~12s Ethereum block time (fills abstracted off-chain); gas fees abstractedRuns on Ethereum (high base security); uses off-chain filler nodes for executionUses underlying AMM fees (0.05–0.3%) + potential filler incentive; UNI token not required for use

In essence, Hyperliquid has set a new benchmark by combining the strengths of these approaches without the usual weaknesses: it offers the sophisticated order types, speed, and liquidity of a CEX (surpassing dYdX’s earlier attempt), without sacrificing the transparency and permissionless nature of DeFi (improving on GMX’s performance and Uniswap’s composability). As a result, rather than simply stealing market share from dYdX or GMX, Hyperliquid actually expanded the on-chain trading market by attracting traders who previously stayed on CEXs. Its success has spurred others to evolve – for example, even Coinbase and Robinhood have eyed entering the on-chain perps market, though with much lower leverage and liquidity so far. If this trend continues, we can expect a competitive push where both CEXs and DEXs race to combine performance with trustlessness – a race where Hyperliquid currently enjoys a strong lead.

Ecosystem Growth, Partnerships, and Community Initiatives

One of Hyperliquid’s greatest achievements in 2025 is growing from a single-product exchange into a thriving blockchain ecosystem. The launch of HyperEVM unlocked a Cambrian explosion of projects and partnerships building around Hyperliquid’s core, making it not just a trading venue but a full DeFi and Web3 environment. Here we explore the ecosystem’s expansion and key strategic alliances:

Ecosystem Projects and Developer Traction: Since early 2025, dozens of dApps have deployed on Hyperliquid, attracted by its built-in liquidity and user base. These span the gamut of DeFi primitives and even extend to NFTs and gaming:

  • Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs): Besides Hyperliquid’s native order books, community-built DEXs have appeared to serve other needs. Notably, Hyperswap launched as an AMM on HyperEVM, quickly becoming the leading liquidity hub for long-tail tokens (it amassed >70M TVL and \2B volume within 4 months). Hyperswap’s automated pools complement Hyperliquid’s CLOB by allowing permissionless listing of new tokens and providing an easy venue for projects to bootstrap liquidity. Another project, KittenSwap (a Velodrome fork with ve(3,3) tokenomics), also went live to offer incentivized AMM trading for smaller assets. These DEX additions ensure that even meme coins and experimental tokens can thrive on Hyperliquid via AMMs, while the major assets trade on order books – a synergy that drives overall volume.
  • Lending and Yield Protocols: The Hyperliquid ecosystem now features money markets and yield optimizers that interlink with the exchange. HyperBeat is a flagship lending/borrowing protocol on HyperEVM (with ~145M TVL as of mid-2025). It allows users to deposit assets like \HYPE, stablecoins, or even LP tokens to earn interest, and to borrow against collateral to trade on Hyperliquid with extra leverage. Because HyperBeat can read Hyperliquid’s order book prices directly and even trigger on-chain liquidations via HyperCore, it operates more efficiently and safely than cross-chain lending protocols. Yield aggregators are emerging too – HyperBeat’s “Hearts” rewards program and others incentivize providing liquidity or vault deposits. Another notable entrant is Kinetiq, a liquid staking project for $HYPE that drew over $400M in deposits on day one, indicating huge community appetite for earning yield on HYPE. Even external Ethereum-based protocols are integrating: EtherFi, a major liquid staking provider (with ~$9B in ETH staked) announced a collaboration to bring staked ETH and new yield strategies into Hyperliquid via HyperBeat. This partnership will introduce beHYPE, a liquid staking token for HYPE, and potentially bring EtherFi’s staked ETH as collateral to Hyperliquid’s markets. Such moves show confidence from established DeFi players in the Hyperliquid ecosystem’s potential.
  • Stablecoins and Crypto Banking: Recognizing the need for stable on-chain currency, Hyperliquid has attracted both external and native stablecoin support. Most significantly, Circle (issuer of USDC) formed a strategic partnership to launch native USDC on Hyperliquid in 2025. Using Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), users will be able to burn USDC on Ethereum and mint 1:1 USDC on Hyperliquid, eliminating wrappers and enabling direct stablecoin liquidity on the chain. This integration is expected to streamline large transfers of capital into Hyperliquid and reduce reliance on only bridged USDT/USDC. In fact, by the time of announcement, Hyperliquid’s assets under management surged to $5.5B, partly on anticipation of native USDC support. On the native side, projects like Hyperstable have launched an over-collateralized stablecoin (USH) on HyperEVM with yield-bearing governance token PEG – adding diversity to the stablecoin options available for traders and DeFi users.
  • Innovative DeFi Infrastructure: Hyperliquid’s unique capabilities have spurred innovation in DEX design and derivatives. Valantis, for example, is a modular DEX protocol on HyperEVM that lets developers create custom AMMs and “sovereign pools” with specialized logic. It supports advanced features like rebase tokens and dynamic fees, and has $44M TVL, showcasing that teams see Hyperliquid as fertile ground for pushing DeFi design forward. For perpetuals specifically, the community passed HIP-3 which opened Hyperliquid’s Core engine to anyone who wants to launch a new perpetual market. This is a game-changer: it means if a user wants a perp market for, say, a stock index or a commodity, they can deploy it (subject to governance parameters) without needing Hyperliquid’s team – a truly permissionless derivative framework much like Uniswap did for ERC20 swaps. Already, community-launched markets for novel assets are appearing, demonstrating the power of this openness.
  • Analytics, Bots, and Tooling: A vibrant array of tools has emerged to support traders on Hyperliquid. For instance, PvP.trade is a Telegram-based trading bot that integrates with Hyperliquid’s API, enabling users to execute perp trades via chat and even follow friends’ positions for a social trading experience. It ran a points program and token airdrop that proved quite popular. On the analytics side, AI-driven platforms like Insilico Terminal and Katoshi AI have added support for Hyperliquid, providing traders with advanced market signals, automated strategy bots, and predictive analytics tailored to Hyperliquid’s markets. The presence of these third-party tools indicates that developers view Hyperliquid as a significant market – worth building bots and terminals for – similar to how many tools exist for Binance or Uniswap. Additionally, infrastructure providers have embraced Hyperliquid: QuickNode and others offer RPC endpoints for the Hyperliquid chain, Nansen has integrated Hyperliquid data into its portfolio tracker, and blockchain explorers and aggregators are supporting the network. This infrastructure adoption is crucial for user experience and signifies that Hyperliquid is recognized as a major network in the multi-chain landscape.
  • NFTs and Gaming: Beyond pure finance, Hyperliquid’s ecosystem also dabbles in NFTs and crypto gaming, adding community flavor. HypurrFun is a meme coin launchpad that gained attention by using a Telegram bot auction system to list jokey tokens (like $PIP and $JEFF) on Hyperliquid’s spot market. It provided a fun, Pump.win-style experience for the community and was instrumental in testing Hyperliquid’s token auction mechanisms pre-HyperEVM. NFT projects like Hypio (an NFT collection integrating DeFi utility) have launched on Hyperliquid, and even an AI-powered game (TheFarm.fun) is leveraging the chain for minting creative NFTs and planning a token airdrop. These may be niche, but they indicate an organic community forming – traders who also engage in memes, NFTs, and social games on the same chain, increasing user stickiness.

Strategic Partnerships: Alongside grassroots projects, Hyperliquid’s team (via the Hyper Foundation) has actively pursued partnerships to extend its reach:

  • Phantom Wallet (Solana Ecosystem): In July 2025, Hyperliquid announced a major partnership with Phantom, the popular Solana wallet, to bring in-wallet perpetuals trading to Phantom’s users. This integration allows Phantom’s mobile app (with millions of users) to trade Hyperliquid perps natively, without leaving the wallet interface. Over 100+ markets with up to 50× leverage became available in Phantom, covering BTC, ETH, SOL and more, with built-in risk controls like stop-loss orders. The significance is twofold: it gives Solana community users easy access to Hyperliquid’s markets (bridging ecosystems), and it showcases Hyperliquid’s API and backend strength – Phantom wouldn’t integrate a DEX that couldn’t handle large user flow. Phantom’s team highlighted that Hyperliquid’s liquidity and quick settlement were key to delivering a smooth mobile trading UX. This partnership essentially embeds Hyperliquid as the “perps engine” inside a leading crypto wallet, dramatically lowering friction for new users to start trading on Hyperliquid. It’s a strategic win for user acquisition and demonstrates Hyperliquid’s intent to collaborate rather than compete with other ecosystems (Solana in this case).
  • Circle (USDC): As mentioned, Circle’s partnership to deploy native USDC via CCTP on Hyperliquid is a cornerstone integration. It not only legitimizes Hyperliquid as a first-class chain in the eyes of a major stablecoin issuer, but it also solves a critical piece of infrastructure: fiat liquidity. When Circle turns on native USDC for Hyperliquid, traders will be able to transfer dollars in/out of Hyperliquid’s network with the same ease (and trust) as moving USDC on Ethereum or Solana. This streamlines arbitrage and cross-exchange flows. Additionally, Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol v2 will allow USDC to move between Hyperliquid and other chains without intermediaries, further integrating Hyperliquid into the multi-chain liquidity network. By July 2025, anticipation of USDC and other assets coming on board had already driven Hyperliquid’s total asset pools to $5.5B. We can expect this number to grow once the Circle integration is fully live. In essence, this partnership addresses one of the last barriers for traders: easy fiat on/off ramps into Hyperliquid’s high-speed environment.
  • Market Makers and Liquidity Partners: While not always publicized, Hyperliquid has likely cultivated relationships with professional market-making firms to bootstrap its order book liquidity. The depth observed (often rivaling Binance on some pairs) suggests that major crypto liquidity providers (possibly firms like Wintermute, Jump, etc.) are actively making markets on Hyperliquid. One indirect indicator: Auros Global, a trading firm, published a “Hyperliquid listing 101” guide in early 2025 noting Hyperliquid averaged $6.1B daily perps volume in Q1 2025, which implies market makers are paying attention. Additionally, Hyperliquid’s design (with incentives like maker rebates or HLP yields) and the no-gas benefit are very attractive to HFT firms. Although specific MM partnerships aren’t named, the ecosystem clearly benefits from their participation.
  • Others: The Hyper Foundation, which stewards protocol development, has begun initiatives like a Delegation Program to incentivize reliable validators and global community programs (a Hackathon with $250k prizes was held in 2025). These help strengthen the network’s decentralization and bring in new talent. There’s also collaboration with oracle providers (Chainlink or Pyth) for external data when needed – e.g. if any synthetic real-world asset markets launch, those partnerships will be important. Given that Hyperliquid is EVM-compatible, tooling from Ethereum (like Hardhat, The Graph, etc.) can be relatively easily extended to Hyperliquid as developers demand.

Community and Governance: Community engagement in Hyperliquid has been high due to the early airdrop and ongoing governance votes. The Hyperliquid Improvement Proposal (HIP) framework has seen important proposals (HIP-1 to HIP-3) passed in its first year, signaling an active governance process. The community has played a role in token listings via Hyperliquid’s auction model – new tokens launch through an on-chain auction (often facilitated by HypurrFun or similar), and successful auctions get listed on the order book. This process, while permissioned by a fee and vetting, has allowed community-driven tokens (like meme coins) to gain traction on Hyperliquid without centralized gatekeeping. It also helped Hyperliquid avoid spam tokens since there’s a cost to list, ensuring only serious projects or enthusiastic communities pursue it. The result is an ecosystem that balances permissionless innovation with a degree of quality control – a novel approach in DeFi.

Moreover, the Hyper Foundation (a non-profit entity) was set up to support ecosystem growth. It has been responsible for initiatives like the $HYPE token launch and managing the incentive funds. The Foundation’s decision to not issue incentives recklessly (as noted in The Defiant, they provided no extra liquidity mining after the airdrop) may have initially tempered some yield-farmers, but it underscores a focus on organic usage over short-term TVL boosts. This strategy appears to have paid off with steady growth. Now, moves like EtherFi’s involvement and others show that even without massive liquidity mining, real DeFi activity is taking root on Hyperliquid due to its unique opportunities (like high yields from actual fee revenue and access to an active trading base).

To summarize, Hyperliquid in 2025 is surrounded by a flourishing ecosystem and strong alliances. Its chain is home to a comprehensive DeFi stack – from perps and spot trading, to AMMs, lending, stablecoins, liquid staking, NFTs, and beyond – much of which sprung up just in the past year. Strategic partnerships with the likes of Phantom and Circle are expanding its user reach and liquidity access across the crypto universe. The community-driven aspects (auctions, governance, hackathons) show an engaged user base that is increasingly invested in Hyperliquid's success. All these factors reinforce Hyperliquid's position as more than an exchange; it's becoming a holistic financial layer.

Future Outlook: Hyperliquid’s Vision for Onchain Finance (Derivatives, RWAs, and Beyond)

Hyperliquid’s rapid ascent begs the question: What’s next? The project’s vision has always been ambitious – to become the foundational infrastructure for all of onchain finance. Having achieved dominance in on-chain perps, Hyperliquid is poised to expand into new products and markets, potentially reshaping how traditional financial assets interact with crypto. Here are some key elements of its forward-looking vision:

  • Expanding the Derivatives Suite: Perpetual futures were the initial beachhead, but Hyperliquid can extend to other derivatives. The architecture (HyperCore + HyperEVM) could support additional instruments like options, interest rate swaps, or structured products. A logical next step might be an on-chain options exchange or an options AMM launching on HyperEVM, leveraging the chain’s liquidity and fast execution. With unified state, an options protocol on Hyperliquid could directly hedge via the perps order book, creating efficient risk management. We haven’t seen a major on-chain options platform emerge on Hyperliquid yet, but given the ecosystem’s growth, it’s plausible for 2025-26. Additionally, traditional futures and tokenized derivatives (e.g. futures on stock indices, commodities, or FX rates) could be introduced via HIP proposals – essentially bringing traditional finance markets on-chain. Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 already paved the way for listing “any asset, crypto or traditional” as a perp market so long as there’s an oracle or price feed. This opens the door for community members to launch markets on equities, gold, or other assets in a permissionless way. If liquidity and legal considerations allow, Hyperliquid could become a hub for 24/7 tokenized trading of real-world markets, something even many CEXs don’t offer at scale. Such a development would truly realize the vision of a unified global trading platform on-chain.
  • Real-World Assets (RWAs) and Regulated Markets: Bridging real-world assets into DeFi is a major trend, and Hyperliquid is well-positioned to facilitate it. Through HyperUnit and partnerships like Circle, the chain is integrating with real assets (fiat via USDC, BTC/SOL via wrapped tokens). The next step might be tokenized securities or bonds trading on Hyperliquid. For example, one could imagine a future where government bonds or stocks are tokenized (perhaps under regulatory sandbox) and traded on Hyperliquid’s order books 24/7. Already, Hyperliquid’s design is “regulatory-aware” – the use of native assets instead of synthetic IOUs can simplify compliance. The Hyper Foundation could explore working with jurisdictions to allow certain RWAs on the platform, especially as on-chain KYC/whitelisting tech improves (HyperEVM could support permissioned pools if needed for regulated assets). Even without formal RWA tokens, Hyperliquid’s permissionless perps could list derivatives that track RWAs (for instance, a perpetual swap on the S&P 500 index). That would bring RWA exposure to DeFi users in a roundabout but effective way. In summary, Hyperliquid aims to blur the line between crypto markets and traditional markets – to house all finance, you eventually need to accommodate assets and participants from the traditional side. The groundwork (in tech and liquidity) is being laid for that convergence.
  • Scaling and Interoperability: Hyperliquid will continue to scale vertically (more throughput, more validators) and likely horizontally via interoperability. With Cosmos IBC or other cross-chain protocols, Hyperliquid might connect to wider networks, allowing assets and messages to flow trustlessly. It already uses Circle’s CCTP for USDC; integration with something like Chainlink’s CCIP or Cosmos’s IBC could extend cross-chain trading possibilities. Hyperliquid could become a liquidity hub that other chains tap into (imagine dApps on Ethereum or Solana executing trades on Hyperliquid via trustless bridges – getting Hyperliquid’s liquidity without leaving their native chain). The mention of Hyperliquid as a “liquidity hub” and its growing open interest share (already ~18% of the entire crypto futures OI by mid-2025) indicates it might anchor a larger network of DeFi protocols. The Hyper Foundation’s collaborative approach (e.g. partnering with wallets, other L1s) suggests they see Hyperliquid as part of a multi-chain future rather than an isolated island.
  • Advanced DeFi Infrastructure: By combining a high-performance exchange with general programmability, Hyperliquid could enable sophisticated financial products that were not previously feasible on-chain. For example, on-chain hedge funds or vault strategies can be built on HyperEVM that execute complex strategies directly through HyperCore (arbitrage, automated market making on order books, etc.) all on one chain. This vertical integration eliminates inefficiencies like moving funds across layers or being front-run by MEV bots during cross-chain arbitrage – everything can happen under HyperBFT consensus with full atomicity. We may see growth in automated strategy vaults that use Hyperliquid’s primitives to generate yield (some early vaults likely exist already, possibly run by HyperBeat or others). Hyperliquid’s founder summarized the strategy as “polish a native application and then grow into general-purpose infrastructure”. Now that the native trading app is polished and a broad user base is present, the door is open for Hyperliquid to become a general DeFi infrastructure layer. This could put it in competition not just with DEXs but with Layer-1s like Ethereum or Solana for hosting financial dApps – albeit Hyperliquid’s specialty will remain anything requiring deep liquidity or low latency.
  • Institutional Adoption and Compliance: Hyperliquid’s future likely involves courting institutional players – hedge funds, market makers, even fintech firms – to use the platform. Already, institutional interest is rising given the volumes and the fact that firms like Coinbase, Robinhood, and others are eyeing perps. Hyperliquid might position itself as the infrastructure provider for institutions to go on-chain. It could offer features like sub-accounts, compliance reporting tools, or whitelisted pools (if needed for certain regulated users) – all while preserving the public, on-chain nature for retail. The regulatory climate will influence this: if jurisdictions clarify the status of DeFi derivatives, Hyperliquid could either become a licensed venue in some form or remain a purely decentralized network that institutions plug into indirectly. The mention of “regulatory-aware design” suggests the team is mindful of striking a balance that allows real-world integration without falling afoul of laws.
  • Continuous Community Empowerment: As the platform grows, more decision-making may shift to token holders. We can expect future HIPs to cover things like adjusting fee parameters, allocating the incentive fund (the ~39% of supply set aside), introducing new products (e.g. if an options module were proposed), and expanding validator sets. The community will play a big role in guiding Hyperliquid’s trajectory, effectively acting as the shareholders of this decentralized exchange. The community treasury (funded by any tokens not yet distributed and possibly by any revenue not used in buybacks) could be directed to fund new projects on Hyperliquid or provide grants, further bolstering ecosystem development.

Conclusion: Hyperliquid in 2025 has achieved what many thought impossible: a fully on-chain exchange that rivals centralized platforms in performance and liquidity. Its technical architecture – HyperBFT, HyperCore, HyperEVM – has proven to be a blueprint for the next generation of financial networks. The $HYPE token model aligns the community tightly with the platform’s success, creating one of the most lucrative and deflationary token economies in DeFi. With massive trading volumes, a ballooning user base, and a fast-growing DeFi ecosystem around it, Hyperliquid has positioned itself as a premier layer-1 for financial applications. Looking ahead, its vision of becoming “the blockchain to house all finance” does not seem far-fetched. By bringing more asset classes on-chain (potentially including real-world assets) and continuing to integrate with other networks and partners, Hyperliquid could serve as the backbone for a truly global, 24/7, decentralized financial system. In such a future, the lines between crypto and traditional markets blur – and Hyperliquid’s blend of high performance and trustless architecture may well be the model that bridges them, building the future of onchain finance one block at a time.

Sources:

  1. QuickNode Blog – “Hyperliquid in 2025: A High-Performance DEX...” (Architecture, metrics, tokenomics, vision)
  2. Artemis Research – “Hyperliquid: A Valuation Model and Bull Case” (Market share, token model, comparisons)
  3. The Defiant – “EtherFi Expands to HyperLiquid…HyperBeat” (Ecosystem TVL, institutional interest)
  4. BlockBeats – “Inside Hyperliquid’s Growth – Semiannual Report 2025” (On-chain metrics, volume, OI, user stats)
  5. Coingape – “Hyperliquid Expands to Solana via Phantom Partnership” (Phantom wallet integration, mobile perps)
  6. Mitrade/Cryptopolitan – “Circle integrates USDC with Hyperliquid” (Native USDC launch, $5.5B AUM)
  7. Nansen – “What is Hyperliquid? – Blockchain DEX & Trading Explained” (Technical overview, sub-second finality, token uses)
  8. DeFi Prime – “Exploring the Hyperliquid Chain Ecosystem: Deep Dive” (Ecosystem projects: DEXs, lending, NFTs, etc.)
  9. Hyperliquid Wiki/Docs – Hyperliquid GitBook & Stats (Asset listings via HIPs, stats dashboard)
  10. CoinMarketCap – Hyperliquid (HYPE) Listing (Basic info on Hyperliquid L1 and on-chain order book design)

What Are Memecoins? A Crisp, Builder-Friendly Primer (2025)

· 10 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

TL;DR

Memecoins are crypto tokens born from internet culture, jokes, and viral moments. Their value is driven by attention, community coordination, and speed, not fundamentals. The category began with Dogecoin in 2013 and has since exploded with tokens like SHIB, PEPE, and a massive wave of assets on Solana and Base. This sector now represents tens of billions in market value and can significantly impact network fees and on-chain volumes. However, most memecoins lack intrinsic utility; they are extremely volatile, high-turnover assets. The risks of "rug pulls" and flawed presales are exceptionally high. If you engage, use a strict checklist to evaluate liquidity, supply, ownership controls, distribution, and contract security.

The 10-Second Definition

A memecoin is a cryptocurrency inspired by an internet meme, a cultural inside joke, or a viral social event. Unlike traditional crypto projects, it is typically community-driven and thrives on social media momentum rather than underlying cash flows or protocol utility. The concept began with Dogecoin, which was launched in 2013 as a lighthearted parody of Bitcoin. Since then, waves of similar tokens have emerged, riding new trends and narratives across different blockchains.

How Big Is This, Really?

Don't let the humorous origins fool you—the memecoin sector is a significant force in the crypto market. On any given day, the aggregate market capitalization of memecoins can reach tens of billions of dollars. During peak bull cycles, this category has accounted for a material share of the entire non-BTC/ETH crypto economy. This scale is easily visible on data aggregators like CoinGecko and in the dedicated "meme" categories featured on major crypto exchanges.

Where Do Memecoins Live?

While memecoins can exist on any smart contract platform, a few ecosystems have become dominant hubs.

  • Ethereum: As the original smart contract chain, Ethereum hosts many iconic memecoins, from $DOGE-adjacent ERC-20s to tokens like $PEPE. During periods of intense speculative frenzy, the trading activity from these tokens has been known to cause significant spikes in network gas fees, even boosting validator revenue.
  • Solana: In 2024 and 2025, Solana became the ground zero for memecoin creation and trading. A Cambrian explosion of new tokens pushed the network to record-breaking fee generation and on-chain volume, birthing viral hits like $BONK and $WIF.
  • Base: Coinbase's Layer 2 network has cultivated its own vibrant meme sub-culture, with a growing list of tokens and dedicated community tracking on platforms like CoinGecko.

How a Memecoin Is Born (2025 Edition)

The technical barrier to launching a memecoin has dropped to near zero. Today, two paths are most common:

1. Classic DEX Launch (EVM or Solana)

In this model, a creator mints a supply of tokens, creates a liquidity pool (LP) on a decentralized exchange (like Uniswap or Raydium) by pairing the tokens with a base asset (like $ETH, $SOL, or $USDC), and then markets the token with a story or meme. The primary risks here hinge on who controls the token contract (e.g., can they mint more?) and the LP tokens (e.g., can they pull the liquidity?).

2. Bonding-Curve “Factory” (e.g., pump.fun on Solana)

This model, which surged in popularity on Solana, standardizes and automates the launch process. Anyone can instantly launch a token with a fixed supply (often one billion) onto a linear bonding curve. The price is automatically quoted based on how much has been bought. Once the token reaches a certain market cap threshold, it "graduates" to a major DEX like Raydium, where the liquidity is automatically created and locked. This innovation dramatically lowered the technical barrier, shaping the culture and accelerating the pace of launches.

Why builders care: These new launchpads compress what used to be days of work into minutes. The result is massive, unpredictable traffic spikes that hammer RPC nodes, clog mempools, and challenge indexers. At their peak, these memecoin launches on Solana generated transaction volumes that matched or exceeded all previous network records.

Where "Value" Comes From

Memecoin value is a function of social dynamics, not financial modeling. It typically derives from three sources:

  • Attention Gravity: Memes, celebrity endorsements, or viral news stories act as powerful magnets for attention and, therefore, liquidity. In 2024–2025, tokens themed around celebrities and political figures saw massive, albeit often short-lived, trading flows, particularly on Solana DEXs.
  • Coordination Games: A strong community can rally around a narrative, a piece of art, or a collective stunt. This shared belief can create powerful reflexive price movements, where buying begets more attention, which begets more buying.
  • Occasional Utility Add-Ons: Some successful memecoin projects attempt to "bolt on" utility after gaining traction, introducing swaps, Layer 2 chains, NFT collections, or games. However, the vast majority remain purely speculative, trade-only assets.

The Risks You Can’t Ignore

The memecoin space is rife with dangers. Understanding them is non-negotiable.

Contract and Control Risk

  • Mint/Freeze Authority: Can the original creator mint an infinite supply of new tokens, diluting holders to zero? Can they freeze transfers, trapping your funds?
  • Ownership/Upgrade Rights: A contract with "renounced" ownership, where the admin keys are burned, reduces this risk but doesn't eliminate it entirely. Proxies or other hidden functions can still pose a threat.

Liquidity Risk

  • Locked Liquidity: Is the initial liquidity pool locked in a smart contract for a period of time? If not, the creator can perform a "rug pull" by removing all the valuable assets from the pool, leaving the token worthless. Thin liquidity also means high slippage on trades.

Presales and Soft Rugs

  • Even without a malicious contract, many projects fail. Teams can abandon a project after raising funds in a presale, or insiders can slowly dump their large allocations on the market. The infamous $SLERF launch on Solana showed how even an accidental mistake (like burning the LP tokens) can vaporize millions while paradoxically creating a volatile trading environment.

Market and Operational Risk

  • Extreme Volatility: Prices can swing 90%+ in either direction within minutes. Furthermore, the network effects of a frenzy can be costly. During $PEPE's initial surge, Ethereum gas fees skyrocketed, making transactions prohibitively expensive for late buyers.
  • Rug pulls, pump-and-dumps, phishing links disguised as airdrops, and fake celebrity endorsements are everywhere. Study how common scams work to protect yourself. This content does not constitute legal or investment advice.

A 5-Minute Memecoin Checklist (DYOR in Practice)

Before interacting with any memecoin, run through this basic due diligence checklist:

  1. Supply Math: What is the total supply vs. the circulating supply? How much is allocated to the LP, the team, or a treasury? Are there any vesting schedules?
  2. LP Health: Is the liquidity pool locked? For how long? What percentage of the total supply is in the LP? Use a blockchain explorer to verify these details on-chain.
  3. Admin Powers: Can the contract owner mint new tokens, pause trading, blacklist wallets, or change transaction taxes? Has ownership been renounced?
  4. Distribution: Check the holder distribution. Is the supply concentrated in a few wallets? Look for signs of bot clusters or insider wallets that received large, early allocations.
  5. Contract Provenance: Is the source code verified on-chain? Does it use a standard, well-understood template, or is it full of custom, unaudited code? Beware of honeypot patterns designed to trap funds.
  6. Liquidity Venues: Where does it trade? Is it still on a bonding curve, or has it graduated to a major DEX or CEX? Check the slippage for the trade size you are considering.
  7. Narrative Durability: Does the meme have genuine cultural resonance, or is it a fleeting joke destined to be forgotten by next week?

What Memecoins Do to Blockchains (and Infra)

Memecoin frenzies are a powerful stress test for blockchain infrastructure.

  • Fee and Throughput Spikes: Sudden, intense demand for blockspace stresses RPC gateways, indexers, and validator nodes. In March 2024, Solana recorded its highest-ever daily fees and billions in on-chain volume, driven almost entirely by a memecoin surge. Infrastructure teams must plan capacity for these events.
  • Liquidity Migration: Capital rapidly concentrates around a few hot DEXs and launchpads, reshaping Miner Extractable Value (MEV) and order-flow patterns on the network.
  • User Onboarding: For better or worse, memecoin waves often serve as the first point of contact for new crypto users, who may later explore other dApps in the ecosystem.

Canonical Examples (For Context, Not Endorsement)

  • $DOGE: The original (2013). A proof-of-work currency that still trades primarily on its brand recognition and cultural significance.
  • $SHIB: An Ethereum ERC-20 token that evolved from a simple meme into a large, community-driven ecosystem with its own swap and L2.
  • $PEPE: A 2023 phenomenon on Ethereum whose explosive popularity significantly impacted on-chain economics for validators and users.
  • BONK & WIF (Solana): Emblematic of the 2024-2025 Solana wave. Their rapid rise and subsequent listings on major exchanges catalyzed massive activity on the network.

For Builders and Teams

If you must launch, default to fairness and safety:

  • Provide clear and honest disclosures. No hidden mints or team allocations.
  • Lock a meaningful portion of the liquidity pool and publish proof of the lock.
  • Avoid presales unless you have the operational security to administer them safely.
  • Plan your infrastructure. Prepare for bot activity, rate-limit abuse, and have a clear communication plan for volatile periods.

If you integrate memecoins into your dApp, sandbox flows and protect users:

  • Display prominent warnings about contract risks and thin liquidity.
  • Clearly show slippage and price impact estimates before a user confirms a trade.
  • Expose key metadata—like supply figures and admin rights—directly in your UI.

For Traders

  • Treat position sizing like leverage: use only a small amount of capital you are fully prepared to lose.
  • Plan your entry and exit points before you trade. Do not let emotion drive your decisions.
  • Automate your security hygiene. Use hardware wallets, regularly review token approvals, use allow-listed RPCs, and practice identifying phishing attempts.
  • Be extremely cautious of spikes caused by celebrity or political news. These are often highly volatile and revert quickly.

Quick Glossary

  • Bonding Curve: An automated mathematical formula that sets a token's price as a function of its purchased supply. Common in pump.fun launches.
  • LP Lock: A smart contract that time-locks liquidity pool tokens, preventing the project creator from removing liquidity and "rugging" the project.
  • Renounced Ownership: The act of surrendering the admin keys to a smart contract, which reduces (but doesn't entirely eliminate) the risk of malicious changes.
  • Graduation: The process of a token moving from an initial bonding curve launchpad to a public DEX with a permanent, locked liquidity pool.

Sources & Further Reading

  • Binance Academy: "What Are Meme Coins?" and "Rug pull" definitions.
  • Wikipedia & Binance Academy: DOGE and SHIB origins.
  • CoinGecko: Live memecoin market statistics by sector.
  • CoinDesk: Reporting on Solana fee spikes, PEPE’s impact on Ethereum, and the SLERF case study.
  • Decrypt & Wikipedia: Explanations of pump.fun mechanics and its cultural impact.
  • Investopedia: Overview of common crypto scams and defenses.

Disclosure: This post is for educational purposes and is not investment advice. Crypto assets are extremely volatile. Always verify data on-chain and from multiple sources before making any decisions.

What Are Crypto Airdrops? A Concise Guide for Builders and Users (2025 Edition)

· 12 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

TL;DR

A crypto airdrop is a distribution of tokens to specific wallet addresses—often for free—to bootstrap a network, decentralize ownership, or reward early community members. Popular methods include retroactive rewards for past actions, points-to-token conversions, drops for NFT or token holders, and interactive "quest" campaigns. The devil is in the details: snapshot rules, claim mechanics like Merkle proofs, Sybil resistance, clear communication, and legal compliance are critical for success. For users, the value is tied to tokenomics and safety. For teams, a successful airdrop must align with core product goals, not just generate temporary hype.


What is an airdrop—really?

At its core, a crypto airdrop is a marketing and distribution strategy where a project sends its native token to the wallets of a specific group of users. This isn't just a giveaway; it’s a calculated move to achieve specific goals. As defined by educational resources from Coinbase and Binance Academy, airdrops are commonly used when a new network, DeFi protocol, or dApp wants to rapidly build a user base. By giving tokens to potential users, projects can incentivize them to participate in governance, provide liquidity, test new features, or simply become active members of the community, kickstarting the network effect.

Where airdrops show up in the wild

Airdrops come in several flavors, each with a different strategic purpose. Here are the most common models seen in the wild today.

Retroactive (reward past behavior)

This is the classic model, designed to reward early adopters who used a protocol before it had a token. Uniswap’s 2020 airdrop is the definitive example, setting the modern template by distributing 400UNI400 UNI tokens to every address that had ever interacted with the protocol. It was a powerful "thank you" that turned users into owners overnight.

Points → token (incentives first, token later)

A dominant trend in 2024 and 2025, the points model gamifies participation. Projects track user actions—like bridging, swapping, or staking—and award off-chain "points." Later, these points are converted into a token allocation. This approach allows teams to measure and incentivize desired behaviors over a longer period before committing to a token launch.

Holder/NFT drops

This type of airdrop targets users who already hold a specific token or NFT. It’s a way to reward loyalty within an existing ecosystem or to bootstrap a new project with an engaged community. A famous case is ApeCoin, which granted claim rights for its $APE token to Bored Ape and Mutant Ape Yacht Club NFT holders upon its launch in 2022.

Ecosystem/governance programs

Some projects use a series of airdrops as part of a long-term strategy for decentralization and community growth. Optimism, for example, has conducted multiple airdrops for users, while also reserving a significant portion of its token supply for public goods funding through its RetroPGF program. This demonstrates a commitment to building a sustainable and value-aligned ecosystem.

How an airdrop works (mechanics that matter)

The difference between a successful airdrop and a chaotic one often comes down to technical and strategic execution. Here are the mechanics that truly matter.

Snapshot & eligibility

First, a project must decide who qualifies. This involves choosing a snapshot—a specific block height or date—after which user activity will no longer be counted. Eligibility criteria are then defined based on behaviors the project wants to reward, such as bridging funds, executing swaps, providing liquidity, participating in governance, or even contributing code. For its airdrop, Arbitrum collaborated with the analytics firm Nansen to develop a sophisticated distribution model based on a snapshot taken at a specific block on February 6, 2023.

Claim vs. direct send

While sending tokens directly to wallets seems simpler, most mature projects use a claim-based flow. This prevents tokens from being sent to lost or compromised addresses and requires users to actively engage. The most common pattern is a Merkle Distributor. A project publishes a cryptographic fingerprint (a Merkle root) of the eligible addresses on-chain. Each user can then generate a unique "proof" to verify their eligibility and claim their tokens. This method, popularized by Uniswap’s open-source implementation, is gas-efficient and secure.

Sybil resistance

Airdrops are a prime target for "farmers"—individuals who use hundreds or thousands of wallets (a "Sybil attack") to maximize their rewards. Teams employ various methods to combat this. These include using analytics to cluster wallets controlled by a single entity, applying heuristics (like wallet age or activity diversity), and, more recently, implementing self-reporting programs. LayerZero’s 2024 campaign introduced a widely discussed model where users were given a chance to self-report Sybil activity for a 15% allocation; those who didn't and were later caught faced exclusion.

Release schedule & governance

Not all tokens from an airdrop are immediately available. Many projects implement a gradual release schedule (or vesting period) for allocations given to the team, investors, and ecosystem funds. Understanding this schedule is crucial for users to gauge future supply pressure on the market. Platforms like TokenUnlocks provide public dashboards that track these release timelines across hundreds of assets.

Case studies (fast facts)

  • Uniswap (2020): Distributed 400UNI400 UNI per eligible address, with larger allocations for liquidity providers. It established the claim-based Merkle proof model as the industry standard and demonstrated the power of rewarding a community retroactively.
  • Arbitrum (2023): Launched its L2 governance token, $ARB, with an initial supply of 10 billion. The airdrop used a points system based on on-chain activity before a February 6, 2023 snapshot, incorporating advanced analytics and Sybil filters from Nansen.
  • Starknet (2024): Branded its airdrop as the "Provisions Program," with claims opening on February 20, 2024. It targeted a broad range of contributors, including early users, network developers, and even Ethereum stakers, offering a multi-month window to claim.
  • ZKsync (2024): Announced on June 11, 2024, this was one of the largest Layer 2 user distributions to date. A one-time airdrop distributed 17.5% of the total token supply to nearly 700,000 wallets, rewarding the protocol's early community.

Why teams airdrop (and when they shouldn’t)

Teams leverage airdrops for several strategic reasons:

  • Kickstart a two-sided network: Airdrops can seed a network with the necessary participants, whether they are liquidity providers, traders, creators, or restakers.
  • Decentralize governance: Distributing tokens to a wide base of active users is a foundational step toward credible decentralization and community-led governance.
  • Reward early contributors: For projects that didn't conduct an ICO or token sale, an airdrop is the primary way to reward the early believers who provided value when the outcome was uncertain.
  • Signal values: An airdrop’s design can communicate a project’s core principles. Optimism's focus on public goods funding is a prime example of this.

However, airdrops are not a silver bullet. Teams should not conduct an airdrop if the product has poor retention, the community is weak, or the token's utility is poorly defined. An airdrop amplifies existing positive feedback loops; it cannot fix a broken product.

For users: how to evaluate and participate—safely

Airdrops can be lucrative, but they also carry significant risks. Here’s how to navigate the landscape safely.

Before you chase a drop

  • Check legitimacy: Always verify airdrop announcements through the project’s official channels (website, X account, Discord). Be extremely wary of "claim" links sent via DMs, found in ads, or promoted by unverified accounts.
  • Map the economics: Understand the tokenomics. What is the total supply? What percentage is allocated to users? What is the vesting schedule for insiders? Tools like TokenUnlocks can help you track future supply releases.
  • Know the style: Is it a retroactive drop rewarding past behavior, or a points program that requires ongoing participation? The rules for each are different, and points programs can change their criteria over time.

Wallet hygiene

  • Use a fresh wallet: When possible, use a dedicated, low-value "burner" wallet for claiming airdrops. This isolates the risk from your main holdings.
  • Read what you sign: Never blindly approve transactions. Malicious sites can trick you into signing permissions that allow them to drain your assets. Use wallet simulators to understand a transaction before signing. Periodically review and revoke stale approvals using tools like Revoke.cash.
  • Be cautious with off-chain signatures: Scammers increasingly abuse Permit and Permit2 signatures, which are off-chain approvals that can be used to move your assets without an on-chain transaction. Be just as careful with these as you are with on-chain approvals.

Common risks

  • Phishing & drainers: The most common risk is interacting with a fake "claim" site designed to drain your wallet. Research from firms like Scam Sniffer shows that sophisticated drainer kits were responsible for massive losses in 2023–2025.
  • Geofencing & KYC: Some airdrops may have geographic restrictions or require Know Your Customer (KYC) verification. Always read the terms and conditions, as residents of certain countries may be excluded.
  • Taxes (quick orientation, not advice): Tax treatment varies by jurisdiction. In the US, the IRS generally treats airdropped tokens as taxable income at their fair market value on the date you gain control of them. In the UK, HMRC may view an airdrop as income if you performed an action to receive it. Disposing of the tokens later can trigger Capital Gains Tax. Consult a qualified professional.

For teams: a pragmatic airdrop design checklist

Planning an airdrop? Here’s a checklist to guide your design process.

  1. Clarify the objective: What are you trying to achieve? Reward real usage, decentralize governance, seed liquidity, or fund builders? Define your primary goal and make the target behavior explicit.
  2. Set eligibility that mirrors your product: Design criteria that reward sticky, high-quality users. Weight actions that correlate with retention (e.g., time-weighted balances, consistent trading) over simple volume, and consider capping rewards for whales. Study public post-mortems from major airdrops on platforms like Nansen.
  3. Build in Sybil resistance: Don't rely on a single method. Combine on-chain heuristics (wallet age, activity diversity) with clustering analytics. Consider novel approaches like the community-assisted reporting model pioneered by LayerZero.
  4. Ship a robust claim path: Use a battle-tested Merkle Distributor contract. Publish the full dataset and Merkle tree so that anyone can independently verify the root and their own eligibility. Keep the claim UI minimal, audited, and rate-limited to handle traffic spikes without overwhelming your RPC endpoints.
  5. Communicate the release plan: Be transparent about the total token supply, allocations for different recipient groups (community, team, investors), and future release events. Public dashboards build trust and support healthier market dynamics.
  6. Address governance, legal, and tax: Align the token’s on-chain capabilities (voting, fee sharing, staking) with your long-term roadmap. Seek legal counsel regarding jurisdictional restrictions and necessary disclosures. As the IRS and HMRC guidance shows, details matter.

Quick glossary

  • Snapshot: A specific block or time used as a cutoff to determine who is eligible for an airdrop.
  • Claim (Merkle): A gas-efficient, proof-based method that allows eligible users to pull their token allocation from a smart contract.
  • Sybil: A scenario where one actor uses many wallets to game a distribution. Teams use filtering techniques to detect and remove them.
  • Points: Off-chain or on-chain tallies that track user engagement. They often convert to tokens later, but the criteria can be subject to change.
  • Release schedule: The timeline detailing how and when non-circulating tokens (e.g., team or investor allocations) enter the market.

Builder’s corner: how BlockEden can help

Launching an airdrop is a massive undertaking. BlockEden provides the infrastructure to ensure you ship it responsibly and effectively.

  • Reliable snapshots: Use our high-throughput RPC and indexing services to compute eligibility across millions of addresses and complex criteria, on any chain.
  • Claim infra: Get expert guidance on designing and implementing Merkle claim flows and gas-efficient distribution contracts.
  • Sybil ops: Leverage our data pipelines to run heuristics, perform clustering analysis, and iterate on your exclusion list before finalizing your distribution.
  • Launch support: Our infrastructure is built for scale. With built-in rate-limits, automatic retries, and real-time monitoring, you can ensure claim day doesn’t melt your endpoints.

Frequently asked (fast answers)

Is an airdrop “free money”? No. It’s a distribution tied to specific behaviors, market risks, potential tax liabilities, and security considerations. It's an incentive, not a gift.

Why didn’t I get one? Most likely, you either missed the snapshot date, didn't meet the minimum activity thresholds, or were filtered out by the project's Sybil detection rules. Legitimate projects usually publish their criteria; read them closely.

Should teams leave claims open forever? It varies. Uniswap’s claim contract remains open years later, but many modern projects set a deadline (e.g., 3-6 months) to simplify accounting, recover unclaimed tokens for the treasury, and reduce long-term security maintenance. Choose a policy and document it clearly.

Further reading (primary sources)

Building Gas-less Experiences with Sui Paymaster: Architecture and Implementation Guide

· 10 min read
Dora Noda
Software Engineer

Imagine a world where users can interact with your dApp seamlessly, without needing to hold any native tokens (SUI). This is no longer a distant dream. With Sui's Gas Station (also known as a Paymaster), developers can cover gas fees on behalf of their users, completely removing one of the biggest barriers for new entrants to Web3 and enabling a truly frictionless on-chain experience.

This article provides a complete guide to upgrading your dApp to be gas-less. We'll dive deep into the core concepts of the Sui Paymaster, its architecture, implementation patterns, and best practices.

1. Background and Core Concepts: What is a Sponsored Transaction?

In the world of blockchain, every transaction requires a network fee, or "gas." For users accustomed to the seamless experiences of Web2, this is a significant cognitive and operational hurdle. Sui addresses this challenge at the protocol level with Sponsored Transactions.

The core idea is simple: allow one party (the Sponsor) to pay the SUI gas fees for another party's (the User) transaction. This way, even if a user has zero SUI in their wallet, they can still successfully initiate on-chain actions.

Paymaster ≈ Gas Station

In the Sui ecosystem, the logic for sponsoring transactions is typically handled by an off-chain or on-chain service called a Gas Station or Paymaster. Its primary responsibilities include:

  1. Evaluating the Transaction: It receives a user's gas-less transaction data (GasLessTransactionData).
  2. Providing Gas: It locks and allocates the necessary gas fee for the transaction. This is usually managed through a gas pool composed of many SUI Coin objects.
  3. Generating a Sponsor Signature: After approving the sponsorship, the Gas Station signs the transaction with its private key (SponsorSig), certifying its willingness to pay the fee.
  4. Returning the Signed Transaction: It sends back the TransactionData, which now includes the gas data and the sponsor's signature, to await the user's final signature.

In short, a Gas Station acts as a refueling service for your dApp's users, ensuring their "vehicles" (transactions) can travel smoothly on the Sui network.

2. High-Level Architecture and Interaction Flow

A typical gas-less transaction involves coordination between the user, the dApp frontend, the Gas Station, and a Sui Full Node. The interaction sequence is as follows:

Flow Breakdown:

  1. The User performs an action in the dApp UI, which constructs a transaction data package without any gas information.
  2. The dApp sends this data to its designated Gas Station to request sponsorship.
  3. The Gas Station verifies the request's validity (e.g., checks if the user is eligible for sponsorship), then populates the transaction with a Gas Coin and its signature, returning the semi-complete transaction to the dApp.
  4. The User sees the full transaction details in their wallet (e.g., "Purchase one NFT") and provides the final signature. This is a crucial step that ensures the user maintains consent and control over their actions.
  5. The dApp broadcasts the complete transaction, containing both the user's and the sponsor's signatures, to a Sui Full Node.
  6. After the transaction is finalized on-chain, the Gas Station can confirm this by listening for on-chain events or receipts, then notify the dApp backend via a webhook to close the loop on the business process.

3. Three Core Interaction Models

You can use the following three interaction models individually or in combination to suit your business needs.

Model 1: User-Initiated → Sponsor-Approved (Most Common)

This is the standard model, suitable for the vast majority of in-dApp interactions.

  1. User constructs GasLessTransactionData: The user performs an action within the dApp.
  2. Sponsor adds GasData and signs: The dApp backend sends the transaction to the Gas Station, which approves it, attaches a Gas Coin, and adds its signature.
  3. User reviews and gives final signature: The user confirms the final transaction details in their wallet and signs it. The dApp then submits it to the network.

This model strikes an excellent balance between security and user experience.

Model 2: Sponsor-Initiated Airdrops/Incentives

This model is perfect for airdrops, user incentives, or batch asset distributions.

  1. Sponsor pre-fills TransactionData + signs: The Sponsor (typically the project team) pre-constructs most of the transaction (e.g., airdropping an NFT to a specific address) and attaches its sponsorship signature.
  2. User's second signature makes it effective: The user only needs to sign this "pre-approved" transaction once for it to be executed.

This creates an extremely smooth user experience. With just one click to confirm, users can claim rewards or complete tasks, dramatically increasing the conversion rates of marketing campaigns.

Model 3: Wildcard GasData (Credit Line Model)

This is a more flexible and permission-based model.

  1. Sponsor transfers a GasData object: The Sponsor first creates one or more Gas Coin objects with a specific budget and transfers ownership directly to the user.
  2. User spends freely within the budget: The user can then freely use these Gas Coins to pay for any transactions they initiate within the budget's limits and validity period.
  3. Gas Coin is returned: Once depleted or expired, the Gas Coin object can be designed to be automatically destroyed or returned to the Sponsor.

This model is equivalent to giving the user a limited-time, limited-budget "gas fee credit card," suitable for scenarios requiring a high degree of user autonomy, such as offering a free-to-play experience during a game season.

4. Typical Application Scenarios

The power of the Sui Paymaster lies not just in solving the gas fee problem, but also in its ability to deeply integrate with business logic to create new possibilities.

Scenario 1: Paywalls

Many content platforms or dApp services require users to meet certain criteria (e.g., hold a VIP NFT, reach a certain membership level) to access features. The Paymaster can implement this logic perfectly.

  • Flow: A user requests an action → the dApp backend verifies the user's qualifications (e.g., NFT ownership) → if eligible, it calls the Paymaster to sponsor the gas fee; if not, it simply denies the signing request.
  • Advantage: This model is inherently resistant to bots and abuse. Since the sponsorship decision is made on the backend, malicious users cannot bypass the qualification check to drain gas funds.

Scenario 2: One-Click Checkout

In e-commerce or in-game purchase scenarios, simplifying the payment process is critical.

  • Flow: The user clicks "Buy Now" on a checkout page. The dApp constructs a transaction that includes the business logic (e.g., transfer_nft_to_user). The user only needs to sign to approve the business transaction in their wallet, without worrying about gas. The gas fee is covered by the dApp's Sponsor.
  • Advantage: You can encode business parameters like an order_id directly into the ProgrammableTransactionBlock, enabling precise on-chain attribution for backend orders.

Scenario 3: Data Attribution

Accurate data tracking is fundamental to business optimization.

  • Flow: When constructing the transaction, write a unique identifier (like an order_hash) into the transaction's parameters or into an event that will be emitted upon execution.
  • Advantage: When the Gas Station receives the on-chain receipt for a successful transaction, it can easily extract this order_hash by parsing the event or transaction data. This allows for a precise mapping between on-chain state changes and specific backend orders or user actions.

5. Code Skeleton (Based on the Rust SDK)

Here is a simplified code snippet demonstrating the core interaction steps.

// Assume tx_builder, sponsor, and wallet have been initialized

// Step 1: On the user or dApp side, construct a gas-less transaction
let gasless_transaction_data = tx_builder.build_gasless_transaction_data(false)?;

// Step 2: On the Sponsor (Gas Station) side, receive the gasless_transaction_data,
// fill it with a Gas Coin, and return the transaction data with the Sponsor's signature.
// The sponsor_transaction_block function handles gas allocation and signing internally.
let sponsored_transaction = sponsor.sponsor_transaction_block(gasless_transaction_data, user_address, gas_budget)?;

// Step 3: The dApp sends the sponsored_transaction back to the user,
// who signs and executes it with their wallet.
let response = wallet.sign_and_execute_transaction_block(&sponsored_transaction)?;

For a complete implementation, refer to the official Sui documentation's Gas Station Tutorial which offer out-of-the-box code examples.

6. Risks and Protection

While powerful, deploying a Gas Station in a production environment requires careful consideration of the following risks:

  • Equivocation (Double-Spending): A malicious user might try to use the same Gas Coin for multiple transactions in parallel, which would cause the Gas Coin to be locked by the Sui network. This can be effectively mitigated by assigning a unique Gas Coin per user or transaction, maintaining a blacklist, and rate-limiting signing requests.
  • Gas Pool Management: In high-concurrency scenarios, a single large-value Gas Coin can become a performance bottleneck. The Gas Station service must be capable of automatically splitting large SUI Coins into many smaller-value Gas Coins and efficiently reclaiming them after use. Professional Gas Station providers like Shinami offer mature, managed solutions for this.
  • Authorization and Rate Limiting: You must establish strict authorization and rate-limiting policies. For instance, manage sponsorship limits and frequencies based on user IP, wallet address, or API tokens to prevent the service from being drained by malicious actors.

7. Ecosystem Tools

The Sui ecosystem already offers a rich set of tools to simplify Paymaster development and deployment:

  • Official SDKs (Rust/TypeScript): Include high-level APIs like sponsor_transaction_block(), significantly reducing integration complexity.
  • Shinami Gas Station: Provides an all-in-one managed service, including automated Gas Coin splitting/reclaiming, detailed metrics monitoring, and webhook notifications, allowing developers to focus on business logic.
  • Enoki / Mysten Demos: The community and Mysten Labs also provide open-source Paymaster implementations that can be used as a reference for building your own service.

8. Implementation Checklist

Ready to upgrade your dApp to the gas-less era? Go through this checklist before you start:

  • Plan Your Funding Flow: Define the Sponsor's funding source, budget, and replenishment strategy. Set up monitoring and alerts for key metrics (e.g., gas pool balance, consumption rate).
  • Reserve Attribution Fields: When designing your transaction parameters, be sure to reserve fields for business identifiers like order_id or user_id.
  • Deploy Anti-Abuse Policies: You must implement strict authorization, rate-limiting, and logging mechanisms before going live.
  • Rehearse on Testnet: Whether building your own service or integrating a third-party Gas Station, always conduct thorough concurrency and stress testing on a testnet or devnet first.
  • Continuously Optimize: After launch, continuously track transaction success rates, failure reasons, and gas costs. Fine-tune your budget and strategies based on the data.

Conclusion

The Sui Paymaster (Gas Station) is more than just a tool for covering user gas fees. It's a powerful paradigm that elegantly combines a "zero SUI on-chain" user experience with the business need for "order-level on-chain attribution" within a single, atomic transaction. It paves the way for Web2 users to enter Web3 and provides developers with unprecedented flexibility for business customization.

With an increasingly mature ecosystem of tools and the current low gas costs on the Sui network, there has never been a better time to upgrade your dApp's payment and interaction flows to the gas-less era.