The U.S. Hyperliquid spot ETF recorded its largest single-day net inflow since launch on May 20, with Farside data confirming cumulative net inflows of $54 million over seven trading days. Presto Research research director Peter Chung confirmed that, after adjusting for market cap, institutional capital has been entering the HYPE ETF faster than early inflows into the BTC ETF.
Day-by-day ETF inflow confirmation data: THYP and BHYP’s accelerating trajectory
Farside data confirmed the following day-by-day net inflow records for the HYPE spot ETF (in Dollars):
THYP (21Shares, launched May 12): Monday $4.4 million → Tuesday $5.3 million → Wednesday $16.65 million, historical total $34.89 million
BHYP (Bitwise, launched May 14): Monday $0 → Tuesday $5.7 million → Wednesday $8.81 million, historical total $16.56 million
Combined for the two ETFs: Monday $4.4 million → Tuesday $11 million → Wednesday $25.46 million, cumulative over seven trading days $54 million
The HYPE spot ETF market is currently comprised of these two products. Both THYP and BHYP are spot crypto ETFs listed in the U.S., tracking Hyperliquid’s native token HYPE.
Institutional entry logic confirmed by three analysts
Peter Chung (Presto Research research director) told The Block: “Institutional investors appear to be seizing this opportunity—early data shows that, after adjusting for market cap, they are flowing into the HYPE ETF faster than they flowed into the BTC ETF.”
Dominick John (Zeus Research analyst) noted that the inflows “suggest an easy on-ramp into the infrastructure space, and investors also recognize a transparent, usage-linked revenue model.”
Jeff Ko (CoinEx chief analyst) characterized HYPE’s investment logic as “structurally different” from Bitcoin and Ethereum: “Bitcoin is a non-productive store of value, while Ethereum builds around staking yield. HYPE is closer to an exchange equity that can generate cash flow—platforms reinvest a significant portion of trading fees back into token buybacks in the public market. This gives investors a more familiar valuation framework.”
Tim Sun, a senior researcher at HashKey Group, added that ongoing capital inflows indicate the market is forming a consensus: “Decentralized exchanges are starting to blend into broader financial infrastructure reorganization.”
Confirmed data on Hyperliquid’s share of this week’s on-chain derivatives market
According to The Block’s data dashboard, as of this week, the confirmed share of on-chain fees is as follows:
Hyperliquid: about 42% (highest across all chains)
Tron: 22.6%
Solana: 10.6%
Ethereum: 8%
The above data confirms that Hyperliquid has become the dominant force in on-chain Perpetual Contract and derivatives trading, with its share of on-chain fees this week exceeding the combined share of the other three major L1s.
Frequently asked questions
How does HYPE’s “token buyback” mechanism work, and what structural differences exist versus Ethereum’s staking yield?
On the Hyperliquid platform, part of trading fees are used to buy back HYPE tokens in the public market. Structurally, this mechanism is similar to publicly listed companies’ share buyback programs, allowing token holders to benefit from growth in platform revenue. Ethereum’s staking yield model, meanwhile, requires holders to lock ETH to validator nodes to earn rewards, relying on tokens newly issued and fees generated by the network Consensus Mechanism. Jeff Ko (CoinEx) said that HYPE’s cash-flow-based buyback mechanism provides traditional institutional investors with an analytical framework closer to stock valuation logic.
What methodology underlies comparing early institutional entry speed between the HYPE ETF and the BTC ETF?
Using Peter Chung from Presto Research, the comparison is based on an “adjusted-for-market-cap” inflow speed—dividing the ETF inflow amount by the corresponding asset’s market cap, standardizing, and then performing a cross-sectional comparison. HYPE’s market cap is about $13.4 billion (as of May 20), far lower than Bitcoin’s, so the same ETF inflow amount implies a higher relative strength after market-cap adjustment. This methodology excludes differences in asset size and more directly reflects institutions’ marginal allocation intent toward the asset.
What does HYPE FDV briefly surpassing Solana mean, and how do the differences between FDV and market cap affect valuation judgments?
FDV (fully diluted valuation) equals the token’s current price multiplied by the maximum supply, reflecting the theoretical total valuation assuming all tokens are in circulation; market cap calculates only the currently circulating amount. On May 20, HYPE FDV briefly rose to about $54.7 billion, surpassing Solana’s $54.2 billion, meaning that on a full-supply basis the market’s pricing of HYPE was temporarily higher than Solana’s. However, HYPE’s market cap is about $13.4 billion, far below Solana’s market cap, reflecting the difference in their current circulating scale. FDV surpassing is more a symbolic checkpoint driven by market sentiment rather than a direct comparison of liquidity scale.
