Catenaa, Monday, August 24, 2026- The Hyperliquid Policy Center has urged US regulators to create a unified framework for perpetual contracts, arguing that products should be classified by their economic structure rather than whether they track bitcoin, stocks, commodities or other assets.
The group submitted its proposal Monday in a comment letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The recommendation comes as perpetual futures move closer to the US regulated market and competition grows between traditional derivatives exchanges and crypto-native platforms.
Hyperliquid has emerged as one of the largest venues for perpetual contracts.
Its markets now include products linked to bitcoin, ether, oil, gold, currencies, stock indexes, individual equities and exchange-traded funds.
The policy center argues that applying different regulatory treatment primarily because of the referenced asset could create uncertainty over which agency supervises a product.
Perpetual contracts resemble futures but generally have no expiration date.
Traders can maintain positions as long as margin requirements are met, while periodic funding payments help keep contract prices aligned with underlying markets.
That structure has become one of the most popular forms of derivatives trading in crypto.
US financial regulation becomes more complicated when the underlying reference changes.
A bitcoin-linked contract may fall primarily within commodity regulation, while a contract tied to an individual security can raise securities-law questions.
The Hyperliquid Policy Center wants regulators to focus first on how the contract operates economically.
It argues that similar products should receive similar treatment even when they reference different asset classes.
The issue brings the SEC and CFTC into overlapping territory.
The CFTC oversees US futures and commodities derivatives markets.
The SEC supervises securities markets.
Security futures occupy an area where both agencies have authority.
The Hyperliquid Policy Center pointed to that existing framework as evidence that joint regulation is possible.
Security futures can be offered by exchanges registered primarily with either agency if they meet additional registration requirements.
The group argues that a modernized version of this structure could accommodate perpetual products.
Current security-futures rules were developed long before decentralized trading platforms and continuously operating perpetual markets became common.
The policy center said that framework needs updating for newer product designs.
Without clearer classifications, disputes over which exchanges can list individual products could move into litigation.
That is already happening.
CME sued the CFTC in June after the regulator allowed perpetual futures products to enter the US market through Coinbase and Kalshi.
Traditional exchanges have questioned whether crypto-oriented platforms should be allowed to offer products that resemble regulated futures without facing equivalent obligations.
CME and Intercontinental Exchange have also raised concerns over the potential effect of offshore or decentralized perpetual markets on underlying prices.
The debate increasingly centers on competitive equality.
Traditional exchanges operate under extensive capital, surveillance, clearing and market-integrity requirements.
Crypto platforms argue that newer market structures should not automatically be forced into regulatory categories designed around older products.
The regulatory debate is becoming harder to ignore because perpetual markets have grown rapidly.
According to the Hyperliquid Policy Center, markets created through Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 framework have generated more than $480 billion in volume since launching about 10 months ago.
Open interest stands near $4 billion.
HIP-3 allows developers to create permissionless perpetual markets using Hyperliquid infrastructure.
That has expanded the platform beyond crypto assets.
Markets can reference commodities, equities, indexes and other financial products.
Hyperliquid itself processed nearly $3 trillion in notional trading volume during 2025 and more than $1.5 trillion so far this year.
Volumes of that size increasingly place decentralized derivatives infrastructure in competition with established exchanges.
The policy center argues that clearer rules could help move more perpetual trading into regulated US markets.
Much of the global perpetual futures business developed offshore because US regulations historically limited access to such products.
American traders seeking similar exposure often used overseas cryptocurrency exchanges or decentralized protocols.
A defined regulatory route could allow US-registered venues to compete more directly.
That could also give regulators greater visibility into markets currently operating outside conventional exchange structures.
The policy center said exchanges should compete primarily on execution quality and liquidity instead of regulatory classification disputes.
Achieving that would require the SEC and CFTC to agree on where individual products fit.
Hyperliquid has also moved closer to the center of Washington’s crypto policy debate.
Trump mentioned the platform during a White House crypto event last week.
He said CFTC Chairman Mike Selig was working toward bringing Hyperliquid into the United States in a fully compliant and legal manner.
The statement did not amount to regulatory approval.
It did, however, signal administration interest in finding a route for decentralized perpetual markets to operate within US rules.
Hyperliquid’s HYPE token rose sharply following Trump’s remarks and was about 40% higher several days later, according to market data cited by The Block.
The policy center’s submission now places a more detailed regulatory proposal behind that political momentum.
Perpetual contracts also expose a broader problem facing US digital asset regulation.
Blockchain platforms increasingly offer financial products that do not fit neatly into traditional categories.
A decentralized market can list a contract tied to bitcoin one day and an equity, commodity or index the next.
The software architecture may remain nearly identical even though the legal classification changes.
That creates potential inconsistencies when regulators focus principally on what an instrument references.
The Hyperliquid Policy Center wants the SEC and CFTC to establish rules that account for both economic design and underlying assets.
Such an approach could reduce jurisdictional disputes while maintaining separate investor protections where securities are involved.
Established exchanges are unlikely to accept a new framework without safeguards.
Their concerns include market surveillance, manipulation, collateral standards and whether decentralized platforms face regulatory obligations comparable to traditional venues.
Perpetual markets can also operate continuously, unlike many conventional derivatives products.
That introduces questions about supervision, liquidation systems and price discovery outside normal market hours.
Those concerns will become more pressing if perpetual contracts tied to stocks and exchange-traded funds expand.
Crypto-native platforms see continuous trading as an advantage.
Traditional financial institutions may see it as requiring stronger oversight.
The SEC and CFTC have increasingly emphasized cooperation as they develop digital asset rules.
Perpetual contracts could become one of the clearest tests of that approach.
A joint framework could reduce uncertainty and create a route for products that cross traditional agency boundaries.
Failure to coordinate could leave exchanges fighting over jurisdiction while large volumes continue trading outside the regulated US system.
Hyperliquid’s growth gives the issue commercial urgency.
What began largely as a crypto derivatives model is moving toward commodities, equities and other traditional markets.
The regulatory question is therefore no longer only whether the United States will permit crypto perpetual futures.
It is increasingly about how regulators classify a financial product capable of tracking almost anything.
