The post Hyperliquid’s Buyback Crosses $521.85M, Founder Rebuts Claims on Protocol Priorities appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. @HyperliquidX has officially accumulated $521.85 million in value through its buyback mechanism since launch. Data shared on X reveals the protocol has repurchased 15.26 million $HYPE tokens through collected fees, offsetting 5.64% of circulating supply. The buybacks have run consistently from March through October 2025, showing sustained accumulation and strong fee performance. . @HyperliquidX ‘s buyback mechanism has accumulated $521.85M in value since launch. Key metrics: • 15.26M $HYPE repurchased via protocol fees• 5.64% of circulating supply offset• Steady accumulation from March-October 2025 The chart shows consistent buyback activity.… pic.twitter.com/UVYZAIocUB — Tokenomist (@Tokenomist_ai) October 18, 2025 Steady Buybacks Reflect Active Market Demand Hyperliquid’s buyback system works directly from protocol-generated fees, automatically purchasing $HYPE from the market and adding deflationary pressure. The accumulated $521.85M represents months of consistent performance. According to data shared by Tokenomist, the chart shows steady upward momentum, a signal of both platform usage and organic demand. Since March, buybacks have accelerated in tandem with trading volume and fee income. Analysts note this mechanism has helped stabilize $HYPE price volatility while reinforcing Hyperliquid’s long-term value framework. The 5.64% offset of circulating supply is a strong indicator that Hyperliquid’s fee model is not just revenue-driven but actively redistributive to holders. FUD Around Protocol Revenue Prioritization As buyback metrics spread, discussions emerged online suggesting Hyperliquid might prioritize protocol revenue over trader benefits. Hyperliquid founder Jeff, known as @chameleon_jeff, directly addressed these claims, calling them FUD and offering a transparent breakdown of recent events. Debunking the FUD that Hyperliquid prioritizes protocol revenue over traders On 10/10, Hyperliquid ADLs net made users hundreds of millions of dollars by closing profitable short positions at favorable prices. If more positions had been backstop liquidated, HLP could have made… — jeff.hl (@chameleon_jeff) October 18, 2025 He cited the October 10 ADL (Auto-Deleveraging) event as an… The post Hyperliquid’s Buyback Crosses $521.85M, Founder Rebuts Claims on Protocol Priorities appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. @HyperliquidX has officially accumulated $521.85 million in value through its buyback mechanism since launch. Data shared on X reveals the protocol has repurchased 15.26 million $HYPE tokens through collected fees, offsetting 5.64% of circulating supply. The buybacks have run consistently from March through October 2025, showing sustained accumulation and strong fee performance. . @HyperliquidX ‘s buyback mechanism has accumulated $521.85M in value since launch. Key metrics: • 15.26M $HYPE repurchased via protocol fees• 5.64% of circulating supply offset• Steady accumulation from March-October 2025 The chart shows consistent buyback activity.… pic.twitter.com/UVYZAIocUB — Tokenomist (@Tokenomist_ai) October 18, 2025 Steady Buybacks Reflect Active Market Demand Hyperliquid’s buyback system works directly from protocol-generated fees, automatically purchasing $HYPE from the market and adding deflationary pressure. The accumulated $521.85M represents months of consistent performance. According to data shared by Tokenomist, the chart shows steady upward momentum, a signal of both platform usage and organic demand. Since March, buybacks have accelerated in tandem with trading volume and fee income. Analysts note this mechanism has helped stabilize $HYPE price volatility while reinforcing Hyperliquid’s long-term value framework. The 5.64% offset of circulating supply is a strong indicator that Hyperliquid’s fee model is not just revenue-driven but actively redistributive to holders. FUD Around Protocol Revenue Prioritization As buyback metrics spread, discussions emerged online suggesting Hyperliquid might prioritize protocol revenue over trader benefits. Hyperliquid founder Jeff, known as @chameleon_jeff, directly addressed these claims, calling them FUD and offering a transparent breakdown of recent events. Debunking the FUD that Hyperliquid prioritizes protocol revenue over traders On 10/10, Hyperliquid ADLs net made users hundreds of millions of dollars by closing profitable short positions at favorable prices. If more positions had been backstop liquidated, HLP could have made… — jeff.hl (@chameleon_jeff) October 18, 2025 He cited the October 10 ADL (Auto-Deleveraging) event as an…

Hyperliquid’s Buyback Crosses $521.85M, Founder Rebuts Claims on Protocol Priorities

@HyperliquidX has officially accumulated $521.85 million in value through its buyback mechanism since launch.

Data shared on X reveals the protocol has repurchased 15.26 million $HYPE tokens through collected fees, offsetting 5.64% of circulating supply.

The buybacks have run consistently from March through October 2025, showing sustained accumulation and strong fee performance.

Steady Buybacks Reflect Active Market Demand

Hyperliquid’s buyback system works directly from protocol-generated fees, automatically purchasing $HYPE from the market and adding deflationary pressure.

The accumulated $521.85M represents months of consistent performance. According to data shared by Tokenomist, the chart shows steady upward momentum, a signal of both platform usage and organic demand.

Since March, buybacks have accelerated in tandem with trading volume and fee income. Analysts note this mechanism has helped stabilize $HYPE price volatility while reinforcing Hyperliquid’s long-term value framework.

The 5.64% offset of circulating supply is a strong indicator that Hyperliquid’s fee model is not just revenue-driven but actively redistributive to holders.

FUD Around Protocol Revenue Prioritization

As buyback metrics spread, discussions emerged online suggesting Hyperliquid might prioritize protocol revenue over trader benefits.

Hyperliquid founder Jeff, known as @chameleon_jeff, directly addressed these claims, calling them FUD and offering a transparent breakdown of recent events.

He cited the October 10 ADL (Auto-Deleveraging) event as an example of how the system works in favor of traders, not against them.

According to him, had the platform used backstop liquidation instead, Hyperliquid’s liquidity providers (HLP) could have earned “hundreds of millions more” in unrealized PnL. But the team deliberately avoided that, reducing exposure risk and prioritizing user profits.

How Hyperliquid’s ADL Works

The Auto-Deleveraging mechanism is a critical risk management component used across derivatives platforms.

Hyperliquid’s ADL queue determines which positions are closed first during liquidation events, using a formula based on leverage used and unrealized profit and loss (PnL).

This design ensures traders with higher risk exposure and higher unrealized profits are first in line for position closure, mirroring how most centralized exchanges operate.

Jeff clarified that the formula’s simplicity is deliberate, it prioritizes reliability and transparency over complexity.

Balancing Profitability and Risk

Jeff’s defense of Hyperliquid’s model highlights an ongoing tension in DeFi, balancing protocol sustainability with user fairness.

While some critics argue that buyback systems and fee accruals can lean toward maximizing protocol gains, Hyperliquid’s ADL framework shows the opposite.

By limiting exposure and allowing users to retain profits during the October event, Hyperliquid effectively sacrificed internal gains to maintain system health.

That approach, Jeff argues, keeps the platform aligned with trader outcomes and mitigates liquidation cascades that could destabilize markets.

Community Feedback and Ongoing Research

Despite the defense, community discussions remain active. Some users have proposed more complex ADL logic, such as partially offsetting long and short positions across correlated assets to reduce forced closures.

Jeff acknowledged the feedback but cautioned against overengineering.

Still, he confirmed that research is ongoing to assess whether any substantial improvements would justify the added complexity.

This openness reflects a maturing phase for Hyperliquid, which continues to emphasize user-centric iteration rather than opaque back-end adjustments.

Buyback Mechanism as a Strength Signal

The success of the buyback program has become a central narrative in Hyperliquid’s growth story.

Accumulating over half a billion dollars in buyback value in less than a year places Hyperliquid among the strongest derivatives protocols by internal liquidity generation.

Repurchasing 15.26 million $HYPE since inception has provided measurable support for the token’s market structure, reducing supply while increasing perceived value among holders.

Even without direct token burns, the consistent buyback inflow acts as a soft deflationary force, incentivizing longer-term holding and reinforcing token utility within the ecosystem.

Market analysts view the buyback as a proxy for platform health, as protocol fees reflect real trading volume, the buyback ratio mirrors user activity in real time.

From Controversy to Clarity

Hyperliquid’s communication following the ADL event was key in quelling the FUD.

By breaking down the internal decisions and exposing the trade-offs between profit-taking and risk reduction, Jeff reframed the debate.

What initially appeared as a protocol favoring revenue was, in fact, an example of responsible risk control that prioritized users’ realized gains.

This transparency has helped stabilize sentiment across the community and reinforced Hyperliquid’s reputation as one of the few derivatives protocols openly publishing both buyback data and internal explanations behind key decisions.

Broader Takeaways for DeFi Protocols

Hyperliquid’s handling of the October 10 ADL event, and the subsequent $521.85M buyback milestone, offers a few broader lessons for the space:

1. Transparency builds trust. Sharing details of liquidation logic and PnL distribution helps counter misinformation.

2. Simplicity scales better. Complex liquidation systems risk introducing errors and confusing users.

3. Sustainable incentives matter. A buyback tied to real protocol fees reflects genuine economic performance.

4. Trader-first risk models attract loyalty. Prioritizing user outcomes, even at protocol cost, strengthens long-term ecosystem credibility.

From March to October 2025, Hyperliquid has demonstrated measured growth, transparent operations, and strong market discipline.

The $521.85M buyback isn’t just a milestone, it’s proof of a functioning model that rewards real usage over speculative hype.

Founder Jeff’s insistence on maintaining a simple yet transparent ADL system underscores Hyperliquid’s focus on reliability and trader trust.

As DeFi derivatives continue to evolve, Hyperliquid’s balance between protocol profitability and user protection could set a new standard for how decentralized exchanges manage growth under scrutiny.

Disclosure: This is not trading or investment advice. Always do your research before buying any cryptocurrency or investing in any services.

Follow us on Twitter @nulltxnews to stay updated with the latest Crypto, NFT, AI, Cybersecurity, Distributed Computing, and Metaverse news!

Source: https://nulltx.com/hyperliquids-buyback-crosses-521-85m-founder-rebuts-claims-on-protocol-priorities/

Market Opportunity
null Logo
null Price(null)
--
----
USD
null (null) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

BitcoinWorld Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security Ever wondered why withdrawing your staked Ethereum (ETH) isn’t an instant process? It’s a question that often sparks debate within the crypto community. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin recently stepped forward to defend the network’s approximately 45-day ETH unstaking period, asserting its crucial role in safeguarding the network’s integrity. This lengthy waiting time, while sometimes seen as an inconvenience, is a deliberate design choice with profound implications for security. Why is the ETH Unstaking Period a Vital Security Measure? Vitalik Buterin’s defense comes amidst comparisons to other networks, like Solana, which boast significantly shorter unstaking times. He drew a compelling parallel to military operations, explaining that an army cannot function effectively if its soldiers can simply abandon their posts at a moment’s notice. Similarly, a blockchain network requires a stable and committed validator set to maintain its security. The current ETH unstaking period isn’t merely an arbitrary delay. It acts as a critical buffer, providing the network with sufficient time to detect and respond to potential malicious activities. If validators could instantly exit, it would open doors for sophisticated attacks, jeopardizing the entire system. Currently, Ethereum boasts over one million active validators, collectively staking approximately 35.6 million ETH, representing about 30% of the total supply. This massive commitment underpins the network’s robust security model, and the unstaking period helps preserve this stability. Network Security: Ethereum’s Paramount Concern A shorter ETH unstaking period might seem appealing for liquidity, but it introduces significant risks. Imagine a scenario where a large number of validators, potentially colluding, could quickly withdraw their stake after committing a malicious act. Without a substantial delay, the network would have limited time to penalize them or mitigate the damage. This “exit queue” mechanism is designed to prevent sudden validator exodus, which could lead to: Reduced decentralization: A rapid drop in active validators could concentrate power among fewer participants. Increased vulnerability to attacks: A smaller, less stable validator set is easier to compromise. Network instability: Frequent and unpredictable changes in validator numbers can lead to performance issues and consensus failures. Therefore, the extended period is not a bug; it’s a feature. It’s a calculated trade-off between immediate liquidity for stakers and the foundational security of the entire Ethereum ecosystem. Ethereum vs. Solana: Different Approaches to Unstaking When discussing the ETH unstaking period, many point to networks like Solana, which offers a much quicker two-day unstaking process. While this might seem like an advantage for stakers seeking rapid access to their funds, it reflects fundamental differences in network architecture and security philosophies. Solana’s design prioritizes speed and immediate liquidity, often relying on different consensus mechanisms and validator economics to manage security risks. Ethereum, on the other hand, with its proof-of-stake evolution from proof-of-work, has adopted a more cautious approach to ensure its transition and long-term stability are uncompromised. Each network makes design choices based on its unique goals and threat models. Ethereum’s substantial value and its role as a foundational layer for countless dApps necessitate an extremely robust security posture, making the current unstaking duration a deliberate and necessary component. What Does the ETH Unstaking Period Mean for Stakers? For individuals and institutions staking ETH, understanding the ETH unstaking period is crucial for managing expectations and investment strategies. It means that while staking offers attractive rewards, it also comes with a commitment to the network’s long-term health. Here are key considerations for stakers: Liquidity Planning: Stakers should view their staked ETH as a longer-term commitment, not immediately liquid capital. Risk Management: The delay inherently reduces the ability to react quickly to market volatility with staked assets. Network Contribution: By participating, stakers contribute directly to the security and decentralization of Ethereum, reinforcing its value proposition. While the current waiting period may not be “optimal” in every sense, as Buterin acknowledged, simply shortening it without addressing the underlying security implications would be a dangerous gamble for the network’s reliability. In conclusion, Vitalik Buterin’s defense of the lengthy ETH unstaking period underscores a fundamental principle: network security cannot be compromised for the sake of convenience. It is a vital mechanism that protects Ethereum’s integrity, ensuring its stability and trustworthiness as a leading blockchain platform. This deliberate design choice, while requiring patience from stakers, ultimately fortifies the entire ecosystem against potential threats, paving the way for a more secure and reliable decentralized future. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is the main reason for Ethereum’s long unstaking period? A1: The primary reason is network security. A lengthy ETH unstaking period prevents malicious actors from quickly withdrawing their stake after an attack, giving the network time to detect and penalize them, thus maintaining stability and integrity. Q2: How long is the current ETH unstaking period? A2: The current ETH unstaking period is approximately 45 days. This duration can fluctuate based on network conditions and the number of validators in the exit queue. Q3: How does Ethereum’s unstaking period compare to other blockchains? A3: Ethereum’s unstaking period is notably longer than some other networks, such as Solana, which has a two-day period. This difference reflects varying network architectures and security priorities. Q4: Does the unstaking period affect ETH stakers? A4: Yes, it means stakers need to plan their liquidity carefully, as their staked ETH is not immediately accessible. It encourages a longer-term commitment to the network, aligning staker interests with Ethereum’s stability. Q5: Could the ETH unstaking period be shortened in the future? A5: While Vitalik Buterin acknowledged the current period might not be “optimal,” any significant shortening would likely require extensive research and network upgrades to ensure security isn’t compromised. For now, the focus remains on maintaining robust network defenses. Found this article insightful? Share it with your friends and fellow crypto enthusiasts on social media to spread awareness about the critical role of the ETH unstaking period in Ethereum’s security! To learn more about the latest Ethereum trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Ethereum’s institutional adoption. This post Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 15:30
Shiba Inu Price Forecast: Why This New Trending Meme Coin Is Being Dubbed The New PEPE After Record Presale

Shiba Inu Price Forecast: Why This New Trending Meme Coin Is Being Dubbed The New PEPE After Record Presale

While Shiba Inu (SHIB) continues to build its ecosystem and PEPE holds onto its viral roots, a new contender, Layer […] The post Shiba Inu Price Forecast: Why This New Trending Meme Coin Is Being Dubbed The New PEPE After Record Presale appeared first on Coindoo.
Share
Coindoo2025/09/18 01:13
The U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board plans to study in 2026 whether crypto assets such as stablecoins can be classified as cash equivalents.

The U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board plans to study in 2026 whether crypto assets such as stablecoins can be classified as cash equivalents.

PANews reported on December 31 that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) plans to study in 2026 whether certain crypto assets can be classified as cash
Share
PANews2025/12/31 16:50