Why Ethereum perpetual futures are losing traders to Hyperliquid

Perpetual futures have become one of crypto’s most traded products — and yet, when you ask traders where the real action happens onchain, Ethereum perpetual futures barely enter the conversation. Hyperliquid. Solana. Those are the names that come up first. That’s a striking reality for a network that essentially built decentralized finance from the ground up.

Key takeaways

• Ethereum’s base layer was never optimized for the fast, low-cost, high-frequency execution that perpetual futures demand.
• Layer-2 networks like Arbitrum and Base now host the majority of Ethereum-based perps activity, with GMX on Arbitrum serving as the early template after its 2021 launch.
• Solana and Hyperliquid have emerged as serious competitors, drawing traders with lower fees and strong retail user bases.
• Liquidity fragmentation across Ethereum’s layer-2 ecosystem remains a significant structural challenge, acknowledged even by co-founder Vitalik Buterin.
• Ethereum is increasingly positioning itself as the settlement and collateral layer underpinning perps markets, rather than their primary execution venue.

Ethereum’s Pioneering Role — and Its Built-In Limits

Ethereum changed finance. Lending protocols, tokenized assets, decentralized exchanges — all of it was built on Ethereum’s foundation. But perpetual futures, one of crypto’s highest-volume and fastest-growing product categories, were never what the network was designed to handle at its base layer.

… Continue reading the full article at the original source below.