Hyperliquid vs Lighter: The Technical Route Dispute of On-Chain Trading Infrastructure

2025-12-23 03:56:11

[Bit推] Hyperliquid recently named Lighter, a leading exchange, Aster, and other platforms as direct competitors in an official statement. Hyperliquid emphasizes its architectural features - fully on-chain deployment, operated by 24 validators, and transparent trading status with no hidden aspects, forming a clear contrast with other platforms that use centralized orderers.

On the other side, Lighter is taking a different path. Their technical features lie in verifiable execution and proof mechanisms, providing a complete audit trail for CLOB-like trading structures. Each route has its supporters, and the competition around decentralized trading infrastructure is becoming increasingly intense.

Additionally, in response to the community's concerns regarding the suspected insider shorting of the HYPE token, Hyperliquid has also provided a response. The official statement indicated that the wallet in question belongs to a former employee, who was dismissed at the beginning of 2024 and has no relation to the team’s operations. Hyperliquid also specifically mentioned that there are strict token trading and compliance control measures in place for all employees and contractors.

HYPE-0.69%

ASTER2.15%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ShortingEnthusiast

· 20h ago

It starts again with that "completely on-chain, transparent and without hidden aspects" stuff. Do they really think we haven't seen the marketing materials of centralized exchanges? The verifiable execution approach from Lighter is somewhat interesting, but to be blunt, isn't it just stacking technical concepts? Only those who can actually deliver results are the winners, right? It's too early to draw conclusions now.

View OriginalReply0

TokenomicsTrapper

· 12-23 17:42

lol the classic "it was a former employee" defense... actually if you read the wallet txs, the timing looks sus as hell. 24 validators running it fully onchain sounds great until you realize most are probably nodes they control anyway. lighter's zk approach is interesting but honestly both are just fighting over who gets to be the next centralized exchange with extra steps

Reply0

HappyToBeDumped

· 12-23 04:26

Are you shifting the blame to former employees again? I'm tired of this trap.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrier

· 12-23 04:26

Hmm, it's not that. Hyperliquid's attempt to clear its name seems a bit rushed. The storyline of a former employee shorting their own coin is indeed a bit unsettling.

View OriginalReply0

SatsStacking

· 12-23 04:22

24 validators sounds like a lot, but whether true Decentralization can be guaranteed depends on the actual operation... --- Lighter's verifiable execution sounds advanced, but what users care about the most is still the trading experience and Liquidity, right? --- Former employees shorting their own Token? This situation seems a bit awkward... --- The two routes have started a fight, and in the end, it should still be the retail investors who benefit. --- Fully on-chain deployment sounds bull, but the gas fees shouldn't be ridiculously high, right? --- An audit chain complete ≠ good trading experience; it seems many people haven't understood this principle. --- This response feels a bit rushed, it seems like they are trying to shift the blame. --- The competition for decentralized trading infrastructure has just begun, and there's more to come.

View OriginalReply0

MissingSats

· 12-23 04:16

The dispute over this architecture ultimately comes down to who can actually run it. Having 24 validators sounds good, but the degree of decentralization is still in question.

View OriginalReply0

DeFiCaffeinator

· 12-23 04:04

On-chain transparency vs verifiable execution, it's hard to say who will win between these two paths. However, Lighter's audit chain sounds more reassuring. --- Former employees shorting their own coin? Uh, this reason feels a bit off. --- Having 24 validators sounds decentralized, but is it really distributed? Or is it another form of disguised centralization? --- To put it bluntly, it still depends on whose trading experience is better; if the technology is amazing but fails to retain users, it's pointless. --- It feels like the competition is getting more intense, and everyone wants to be the gateway for on-chain transactions.

View OriginalReply0