DoubleZero has launched a dedicated market data feed for Hyperliquid, aiming to give professional trading firms a more reliable and complete view of the decentralized exchange’s order book. The service delivers Hyperliquid’s market data over fiber, rather than relying on the exchange’s public APIs.

According to DoubleZero, the feed provides an ordered, continuous stream of order book data for market makers, quantitative traders, and proprietary trading firms that depend on consistent update frequency and depth.

Key takeaways

• DoubleZero’s Hyperliquid feed distributes full order book data via a dedicated fiber network instead of public APIs.
• The service supports Hyperliquid’s native perpetual futures and also markets run through trade[XYZ], a venue using Hyperliquid infrastructure for asset-linked perpetuals.
• DoubleZero says public API changes have reduced both the frequency and the depth of order book updates available to external consumers.
• The initiative broadens DoubleZero’s “Edge” market-data offering, which already includes Solana and the prediction market Kalshi.

A fiber-based order book for professional traders

For firms that need a full and timely order book, pulling liquidity data from a public interface can introduce inconsistency. DoubleZero’s new feed is designed to address that by providing market data as a continuous stream, with ordering guarantees intended to help automated systems interpret changes quickly and predictably.

DoubleZero positioned the launch around a practical problem: before this release, companies seeking a complete view of Hyperliquid’s order book typically had to reconstruct it themselves from public API responses or run their own Hyperliquid nodes. DoubleZero now offers a third path—an outsourced, purpose-built distribution layer.

The company also attributes the need for a dedicated feed to changes in Hyperliquid’s public APIs. DoubleZero said those updates have lowered the cadence and reduced the depth of information available through the public routes, making it harder for data consumers that require more frequent, comprehensive updates.

What’s included: native perps and Hyperliquid-powered markets

DoubleZero said the feed covers Hyperliquid’s native perpetual futures markets, alongside markets operated by trade[XYZ]. In this structure, trade[XYZ] provides perpetual contracts linked to assets including oil, gold, and silver, using Hyperliquid’s underlying infrastructure.

DoubleZero added that the feed was developed in collaboration with validator operators and ecosystem partners, including Hyperion DeFi, MAVAN, and Kinetiq. That matters because fiber-based delivery depends not just on software integration but also on reliable distribution pathways across network participants.

Why this matters: convergence with traditional exchange data workflows

The launch also highlights a broader trend in onchain market infrastructure: professional trading firms are increasingly looking for data distribution patterns similar to those used by large traditional exchanges.

Hyperion DeFi CEO Hyunsu Jung told Cointelegraph that major exchanges such as CME and Nasdaq distribute professional market data over dedicated networks. The point is to deliver a consistent stream of ordered information at high speeds to automated trading systems.

Jung argued that Hyperliquid’s market data can now be consumed through a similar model. In his words, the approach is effectively “publish once, distribute simultaneously over dedicated fiber,” echoing the logic behind how institutional infrastructure treats market data as a specialized distribution problem.

That said, Jung emphasized there are meaningful differences. Traditional exchanges allow firms to reduce latency further by placing trading infrastructure close to the venue’s execution systems. Hyperliquid, by contrast, executes trades onchain, which changes where latency is incurred and how it can be optimized.

He also noted that physical geography still matters. A firm based in Tokyo, for example, will maintain a speed advantage over one in New York regardless of how the data is delivered—an important reminder that fiber distribution can improve consistency and reduce certain bottlenecks, but it does not eliminate real-world network and distance effects.

Jung summarized the relationship as not a claim that Hyperliquid is becoming “CME,” but rather that onchain markets are borrowing the market-data infrastructure layer that professional firms already rely on in conventional finance.

Expanding “Edge” market data beyond crypto venues

DoubleZero’s Hyperliquid feed is the third venue available through its Edge market-data service. The company previously deployed similar services for Solana and for Kalshi, a prediction market. With this expansion, DoubleZero is effectively positioning Edge as a cross-venue distribution platform aimed at professional-grade data consumption.

For market makers and quantitative firms, the practical value of an Edge-style service is straightforward: fewer gaps in update streams, less reliance on reconstructing order books from partial public feeds, and a single distribution layer designed for automation.

For the broader Hyperliquid ecosystem, it may also signal a shift toward treating market data as critical infrastructure in its own right. Instead of forcing each data-heavy firm to build bespoke ingestion and normalization systems, venues can increasingly support dedicated distribution pipelines that align with how trading desks already operate.

Investors and traders will likely watch next how widely institutions adopt the feed and whether other onchain venues respond with similar dedicated distribution layers, particularly as more market participants push for predictable, ordered depth updates beyond what public APIs can provide.

Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.

Bitcoin’s recent surge has some traders liquidating the coins to take profits on their holdings. But the pace of this operation is far slower than at prior market peaks, a positive sign for the market.

BTC has rallied by 44% to nearly $85,000 this quarter, its best performance since the final three months of 2024, according to CoinDesk data. The strong rise comes after three straight quarters of red ink.

Naturally, some are taking profits, as evidenced by the net realized profit/loss metric. It records the dollar gains locked in when coins actually move on-chain at a price above the last price at which they changed hands.

Analysts treat that prior transfer as a cost basis: if a coin bought or last spent at $40,000 is later sent or sold at $84,000, the $44,000 difference is booked as realized profit.

“BTC holders just realised $2.4bn in profits. At prior market tops, daily realized profits ran between $7bn and $10bn,” Bitfinex said on X.

Ethena has added tokenized U.S. equities and equity perpetual futures to the basis trading strategy used for part of USDe’s backing, taking a funding model previously centered on crypto markets into listed stocks.

According to a statement shared with crypto.media, Ethena will use Binance’s bStocks as the spot side of the trade while taking offsetting positions through equity perpetual futures on the exchange.

The structure follows a framework previously approved by the Ethena Risk Committee for adding tokenized equity basis trades to the protocol’s allocation strategy. Ethena has historically used a delta neutral approach in crypto markets, pairing asset exposure with derivatives positions intended to hedge movements in the underlying asset.

Under the new setup, bStocks will provide tokenized equity exposure while Binance’s corresponding perpetual contracts will provide the hedge. The strategy seeks to capture the difference between the spot and perpetual markets without relying primarily on the direction of the underlying stock.

“This is the most significant expansion of USDe’s funding mechanism since we started,” Ethena Labs founder Guy Young said.

“Equities trade in the hundreds of trillions of dollars globally, and as more of that market moves onchain, we see a substantial opportunity to continue diversifying our backing strategy,” Young added.

How will Ethena use tokenized stocks for USDe?

Binance’s bStocks represent interests in securities held by issuer BTech Holdings Limited. Eligible users can convert the tokens into the corresponding securities through Binance where permitted by applicable laws.

The exchange launched its first bStocks in June with tokenized versions of Nvidia, Tesla, Circle, Micron and Sandisk. The assets are backed 1:1 by corresponding securities and can be converted between stock and tokenized form without conversion fees for eligible users.

Unlike direct share ownership, bStocks provide economic exposure to the linked securities without giving token holders the voting rights associated with owning the shares themselves.

Demand for the product grew quickly after its launch. By August, the value of Binance bStocks had reached roughly $610.6 million, putting the product ahead of xStocks as the second largest tokenized stock issuer in the dataset tracked by Token Terminal. Ondo Finance remained the largest issuer at the time.

Ethena plans to pair the tokenized assets with short positions in Binance equity perpetual futures. Gains or losses in the spot position can therefore be offset by movements in the derivatives position, leaving the funding or basis between the two markets as the main source of return.

Binance had more than $2.9 billion of open interest across equity perpetual futures based on figures provided by Ethena. Open interest in the products has grown at a compound monthly rate of 105% this year, while the equity basis averaged an annualized 3.56% during the past six months.

Ethena USDe backing moves beyond crypto basis trades

USDe’s backing model has already changed considerably as Ethena has added lending, stablecoin liquidity and tokenized real world assets alongside its original crypto basis positions.

Crypto.news previously reported that crypto basis positions accounted for roughly $39 million, or 1%, of USDe’s backing portfolio in early July. DeFi lending represented around 46%, while liquid stablecoins made up 35% and tokenized real world assets accounted for another 11.2%.

Institutional lending has become another part of the allocation. Ethena and FalconX launched a $1 billion facility in August that allows assets backing USDe to finance overcollateralized loans to institutional borrowers. FalconX originates and services the loans through a special purpose vehicle, while qualified custodians hold collateral worth more than the outstanding loans.

Institutional lending represented roughly $310 million, or 6.9%, of USDe backing in early July, according to Ethena governance data cited at the time.

Adding equities gives the protocol another market in which it can run the basis strategy that formed the original foundation of USDe. Ethena expects the opportunity in equity perpetuals to eventually become significantly larger than the corresponding crypto perpetual market.

Binance Head of Exchange and Trading Shunyet Jan said growing liquidity around bStocks and equity perpetuals was creating more use cases for both products.

“Ethena runs one of the largest systematic strategies in digital assets, and their expansion into tokenized securities and equity perps is a clear sign of how the convergence of crypto and traditional assets will surface new opportunities,” Jan said.

Binance equity markets provide the other side of the trade

Binance has spent much of 2026 building stock products alongside its crypto trading business, giving Ethena both tokenized spot instruments and derivatives within the same trading ecosystem.

The exchange opened access to more than 7,000 U.S. stocks and ETFs for eligible users outside the United States in June. Fractional purchases start at $5, while users can fund positions with USDT, USDC, BNB and selected cryptocurrencies.

bStocks followed later that month as the tokenized layer of the equity offering. Eligible holders can trade the assets around the clock and withdraw supported tokens to compatible self custody wallets.

Activity in Binance’s traditional finance derivatives business has grown alongside the spot offering. The exchange’s TradFi perpetual futures generated roughly $433.4 billion of trading volume during August, according to figures previously reported by The Block. Equity linked contracts accounted for approximately $342.9 billion of the total.

The exchange has continued building products around the same market. Binance recently said its Direct Stocks service crossed $1 billion in user held U.S. equities within 30 days of launch, while trading volume approached $3 billion over the period.

Equity perpetuals give traders leveraged exposure without requiring ownership of the underlying securities, while bStocks create tokenized representations tied to securities held by BTech Holdings. Ethena’s strategy uses the two sides together instead of treating them as separate directional trades.

Tokenized equities have grown across crypto platforms

Ethena’s allocation arrives as tokenized stocks have become one of the faster growing parts of the real world asset market.

Token Terminal data cited in August put the tokenized stock market it tracked at around $2.7 billion, compared with roughly $80 million a year earlier. Binance’s bStocks accounted for more than $600 million at the time, while Ondo Finance and xStocks represented other major issuers in the dataset.

Binance Research previously estimated that tokenized stocks had grown 422% as the wider tokenized real world asset market expanded during 2026. The firm said adoption would continue to depend on factors including regulation, custody, market depth and exchange support.

Traditional market products have meanwhile become a larger part of activity on crypto exchanges. Binance Research said TradFi linked perpetual contracts already represented roughly 10% of stablecoin trading volume earlier this year, with stablecoin settlement providing a route for users to trade traditional assets through existing crypto accounts.

Ethena’s equity allocation will operate within the risk framework approved by its Risk Committee, using tokenized spot positions and corresponding perpetual hedges as the protocol begins deploying its basis strategy outside crypto assets.

The divergence comes as government bond yields climb globally. The war in the Middle East has driven oil and diesel prices higher, complicating the inflation outlook and raising questions about how much further central banks may need to tighten policy. The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield briefly hit 5.2% on Thursday before easing to 5.163%.

When MOVE was last around this level in March, the S&P 500 stood near 6,350. It has since risen to 7,704, up roughly 21%. However, bond traders are now paying considerably more for protection against swings in interest rates.

Over a 20-day window, the correlation between VIX and MOVE has slipped to −0.06, turning negative for the first time since April 2024, though that reading is close to zero. The correlation between BVIV and MOVE is more clearly negative at −0.37, one of its lowest readings in years. As bond volatility has risen, bitcoin’s expected volatility has remained near its yearly low.

As CoinDesk reported this week, rising yields alone have shown little consistent relationship with bitcoin’s returns.

KelpDAO has escalated its legal fight over a major cross-chain bridge exploit by filing a lawsuit against LayerZero, alleging that shortcomings in LayerZero’s security infrastructure helped enable the theft of roughly $292 million worth of rsETH earlier this year.

The filing, first reported by KelpDAO and reported in related coverage of the incident, targets LayerZero as well as its co-founder and CEO, Bryan Pellegrino. KelpDAO says LayerZero did not adequately disclose risks and failed to stop attackers from compromising its infrastructure, while it also alleges LayerZero reviewed and endorsed KelpDAO’s bridge deployment and configuration in writing.

Key takeaways

• KelpDAO claims LayerZero’s technology and security infrastructure contributed to the April rsETH bridge exploit that stole 116,500 rsETH.
• The lawsuit alleges LayerZero failed to disclose relevant risks and did not prevent attackers from compromising its internal systems.
• KelpDAO also alleges LayerZero reviewed and endorsed KelpDAO’s bridge configuration and deployment in writing before the incident.
• LayerZero previously attributed the loss to attackers compromising its internal nodes and approval process, while arguing KelpDAO’s setup relied too heavily on a single verification path.
• Pellegrino rejected the allegations as “meritless” and said he plans to defend the case in Vancouver.

From exploit to courtroom dispute

The legal move follows the April 18 attack, which resulted in the theft of 116,500 rsETH from Kelp’s LayerZero-powered bridge. According to earlier reporting from Cointelegraph, the haul was valued at about $292 million at the time.

In its account of the incident, LayerZero said attackers compromised its internal nodes and manipulated the verifier into approving a forged cross-chain message. LayerZero argued that the theft was possible because the bridge design relied on a single decentralized verifier network (DVN) as the only verification path.

LayerZero also said it recommended using multiple DVNs and later stopped acting as the sole required verifier for applications, an important detail because it suggests the protocol changed its posture after the incident. KelpDAO, however, disputes that narrative and argues that the core failure lies with LayerZero’s security practices.

KelpDAO’s accusations against LayerZero

KelpDAO said LayerZero failed to disclose risks in its technology and did not prevent attackers from compromising LayerZero’s infrastructure. The lawsuit further alleges that LayerZero reviewed and endorsed KelpDAO’s deployment and configuration in writing before the exploit.

KelpDAO framed the case as both a security response and an effort to correct what it sees as an inaccurate public record about responsibility for the breach. In a statement shared via KelpDAO’s account, the group emphasized that protecting users’ assets remains its top priority, while it seeks to hold LayerZero and Pellegrino accountable for the harm it says was caused to KelpDAO and the broader DeFi ecosystem.

Separately, KelpDAO also targeted the question of disclosure—essentially arguing that even if a bridge design includes certain dependencies, users and operators must be clearly informed about risks and threat models associated with those dependencies.

LayerZero’s stance: internal compromise and verifier design

LayerZero’s position, as described in prior coverage, focused on what happened inside its own system and why the message verification pathway worked the way it did. In its final incident report cited by Cointelegraph, LayerZero said internal nodes were compromised and that a forged cross-chain message was approved by its verifier.

LayerZero argued that the bridge released rsETH after receiving approval for the forged message—pointing to the fact that there was no requirement for a second independent verifier in the setup used for that deployment.

That distinction matters because it frames the dispute as more than a question of whether something went wrong; it becomes a debate over whether the dominant failure mode was inside LayerZero’s infrastructure, inside KelpDAO’s configuration choices, or a combination of both.

LayerZero also said it recommended the use of multiple DVNs and later stopped acting as the sole required verifier for applications—implying that the system design risk was mitigated after the exploit. The lawsuit, by contrast, suggests KelpDAO believes these controls and warnings should have been in place earlier.

Pellegrino rejects the claims; responsibility remains contested

LayerZero co-founder and CEO Bryan Pellegrino responded by calling KelpDAO’s claims “meritless,” according to a post shared on X. He also said he would defend the case in Vancouver.

The lawsuit therefore intensifies a dispute that had been brewing for months after the April incident. As Cointelegraph previously reported, the arguments have repeatedly returned to the same central fault line: whether the loss was caused primarily by compromise of LayerZero’s infrastructure, weaknesses or decisions in KelpDAO’s bridge configuration, or both.

In May, KelpDAO publicly disputed LayerZero’s account of responsibility. KelpDAO said that its DVN configuration had been previously discussed with LayerZero and “confirmed as secure,” while it accused LayerZero of failing to adequately warn it about the risks. In that period, KelpDAO also announced plans to migrate the rsETH bridge to Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol.

That migration plan is relevant to investors and users because it shows that KelpDAO did not wait for legal clarity to alter its operational posture. Still, legal filings aim to determine accountability—how the incident is ultimately characterized and who is held responsible for losses.

Cointelegraph attempted to obtain additional comment from LayerZero but did not receive a response before publication, according to the earlier reporting included in the source material.

For now, the key thing to watch is how the court frames the alleged “shared failure” described by each side—especially the claims around risk disclosure and whether LayerZero’s alleged written endorsement of KelpDAO’s configuration becomes central evidence. As the case develops, the most important unanswered question remains whether the evidence supports KelpDAO’s view that LayerZero’s security infrastructure and communications were the decisive factors, or whether LayerZero can persuade the court that the exploit was driven mainly by configuration choices at the application layer.