Hyperliquid's builder fee-sharing marketing model turns infrastructure into revenue

Hyperliquid has generated over $10 million for application builders through a protocol-level fee-sharing mechanism that fundamentally reimagines how cryptocurrency platforms incentivize ecosystem development. Unlike traditional Web3 models that rely on one-time grants or unsustainable token emissions, Hyperliquid distributes 100% of builder fees directly to developers who route trading activity through their applications, creating a perpetual revenue stream tied to actual value creation.

How the Hyperliquid fee-sharing mechanism works

Hyperliquid implements fee-sharing through Builder Codes, a fully on-chain system processed natively at the protocol level. Developers append custom fee parameters to trades executed through their applications, earning up to 0.1% on perpetual trades and 1% on spot trades. Users must explicitly approve these builder fees through their wallets, maintaining transparency and control. The technical architecture requires no external smart contracts, as fees are calculated and distributed automatically through Hyperliquid's HyperCore execution layer, which processes over 200,000 orders per second.

The platform expanded this model through HIP-3 (Builder-Deployed Perpetuals), allowing anyone who stakes 1 million HYPE tokens to deploy custom perpetual markets and capture up to 50% of trading fees generated. This transforms Hyperliquid from a single exchange into permissionless financial infrastructure. Additionally, spot token deployers through HIP-1 can configure their share of trading fees, with up to 100% of base token fees flowing to the deployer.

Applications benefiting from this model

The ecosystem showcases diverse monetization strategies. A Telegram-based social trading bot leads with $7.2 million in builder code revenue, accounting for roughly 72% of all builder fees generated. The application charges 0.05% on futures and 0.5% on spot trades while serving approximately 11,000 monthly active users who have generated $1.8 billion in cumulative perpetual volume.

BasedApp demonstrates the mobile-first opportunity, recently accounting for 20% of Hyperliquid's 24-hour perpetuals volume. The comprehensive mobile super-app combines spot and perpetual trading with Visa-linked wallets, using builder codes as what Privy describes as "a noncustodial and transparent path to monetization, without having to bootstrap liquidity." Dexari, backed by $2.3 million in funding from Binance.US veterans, positions itself as "the mobile gateway to Hyperliquid" with access to 300+ markets. Okto has generated $662,000 in builder fees while running Zero Fees campaigns, demonstrating how builders can absorb costs strategically. Analytics platforms like HyperDash monetize through copy trading functionality, earning builder fees when users replicate top trader positions.

Collectively, mobile applications (BasedApp, Dexari, Mass.Money, Supercexy) generate approximately $50,000 in daily revenue (~$1.5 million monthly recurring revenue), representing 3-6% of Hyperliquid's total perpetual contract volume.

Why this strategy works from a marketing perspective

The fee-sharing model solves Web3's fundamental economic problem: aligning long-term incentives while creating sustainable value. Traditional models such as grants, airdrops, and liquidity mining are extractive and finite. Grants typically range from $50,000 to $500,000 but create dependency cycles where teams optimize for funding rounds rather than product-market fit. Airdrops attract mercenary capital that exits immediately. Liquidity mining programs burn through treasuries in 1-2 years while diluting existing holders continuously.

Hyperliquid's approach is generative rather than redistributive. Every new user generates actual trading fees, creating an infinite value pool rather than redistributing finite grants. This shift from zero-sum to positive-sum economics transforms builder behavior. Developers focus on product quality and user experience instead of grant applications, because revenue scales directly with value created. The model also eliminates the need for builders to raise external capital or bootstrap liquidity, as they gain immediate access to Hyperliquid's $2+ billion unified liquidity pool from day one.

This creates powerful network effects. More builders drive more volume, which deepens liquidity, which attracts more builders. Unlike typical DeFi where new applications fragment liquidity and compete for the same users, Hyperliquid builders strengthen each other's execution quality through shared infrastructure. As one analysis noted: "It's like every factory was once a half power plant. Then came the public electric grid. Builder codes do the same by allowing developers to go beyond the basic task of sourcing liquidity and focus on UX."

The marketing advantage is self-reinforcing: builders market themselves because they earn revenue, creating organic growth without platform spending. Each successful builder becomes a case study attracting more developers. pvp.trade's $7.2 million earnings signals genuine opportunity to prospective builders, functioning as more credible proof than any platform marketing campaign could achieve.

Differences from traditional Web3 incentives

The contrast with traditional Web3 models is stark across every dimension:

Traditional grants provide fixed, one-time payments that attract grant farmers optimizing for funding applications rather than sustainable businesses. Hyperliquid's builder codes provide performance-based revenue with unlimited upside; the more value created, the more fees earned. Grants create dependency and typically fund 6-24 months of runway before teams must fundraise again. Fee-sharing creates perpetual revenue streams requiring no additional capital raises.

Token airdrops are dilutive one-time marketing events that often see 50%+ drawdowns post-distribution as recipients sell immediately. Builder fees are accretive, paid from actual trading activity without diluting existing holders. While airdrops attract mercenary capital seeking quick flips, fee-sharing attracts committed builders focused on long-term value, since only sustained usage generates meaningful revenue.

Liquidity mining programs distribute native tokens as rewards, creating inflationary pressure and vampire attack dynamics where liquidity vanishes when incentives end. The typical pattern: launch, incentive spike, volume surge, incentives end, ghost town. Hyperliquid's model is non-inflationary, as fees come from actual economic activity. The platform has generated $679.9 million in cumulative fees with a $1.2 billion annualized run rate, yet builders tap this existing revenue stream rather than requiring new token emissions.

Accelerator programs offer mentorship and marketing support but no direct revenue mechanism. Teams still must raise separately and bootstrap liquidity independently. Hyperliquid provides infrastructure as revenue, allowing developers to access institutional-grade technology (200,000 orders/second throughput, sub-200ms latency, unified orderbook) plus immediate monetization capability, saving millions in development costs and months of build time.

The quality selection mechanism differs fundamentally. Traditional models reward whoever best pitches grant committees or attracts airdrop farmers. Hyperliquid's model rewards whoever generates actual trading volume from real users, emphasizing market validation rather than committee approval. This explains why established projects like SWELL and SOLV compete for Hyperliquid listings rather than launching on grant-funded chains.

Metrics that drive value for builders

Builder revenue scales across three primary dimensions: trading volume, user activity, and fee optimization.

Trading volume is the fundamental driver. At 0.1% maximum fee on perpetuals, every $1 million in volume generates $1,000 in potential builder revenue. pvp.trade's $1.8 billion in cumulative perpetual volume translates directly to its $7.2 million in fees. Hyperliquid's platform processed $2.952 trillion in cumulative perpetual volume with $11.5 billion in 24-hour volume recently, creating substantial revenue pools for builders to capture.

Total Value Locked (TVL) indicates ecosystem stickiness and available capital. Hyperliquid's TVL surged from $674 million in August 2024 to $9.463 billion by October 2025, representing a 1,300% increase. Higher TVL means more potential traders with capital to deploy, directly expanding the addressable market for builder applications.

User activity metrics determine reach. Hyperliquid reached 60,000+ peak daily unique traders with 300,000+ total users in 2024. For builders, the 11,000 monthly active users on pvp.trade demonstrate how capturing even a small percentage of platform users generates substantial revenue. BasedApp's ability to reach 20% of daily perpetuals volume shows the scale achievable by well-executed applications.

Fee structure optimization allows builders to balance competitiveness with revenue. Builder codes permit customizable fees per order, enabling dynamic pricing strategies. Okto uses this flexibility to run Zero Fees campaigns, absorbing costs to acquire users, and charges 0.05% on futures but 0.5% on spot, a 10x differential based on product dynamics.

Staking multipliers create additional revenue streams. Builders who stake HYPE tokens earn up to 40% of referred users' trading fees at the highest staking tier, strictly additive to builder code fees. This creates two parallel revenue streams from the same user base.

Open interest growth indicates market expansion. Hyperliquid's open interest reached $15.3 billion in July 2025, representing 369% year-to-date growth. Rising open interest means more leveraged positions, typically correlating with higher trading frequency and volume, which directly benefits builders.

The platform's fee distribution model itself drives value. Hyperliquid allocates 46% of fees to HLP liquidity providers and 54% to the Assistance Fund for HYPE buybacks, with the Assistance Fund receiving over $77 million cumulatively and conducting ~$1 million daily buybacks. This creates a virtuous cycle: platform success drives token value, which attracts more builders who stake HYPE for additional fee revenue, generating more activity that produces more fees.

Documented success and effectiveness data

The effectiveness of Hyperliquid's fee-sharing model is quantifiable across multiple timeframes and metrics, demonstrating sustained rather than temporary success.

Builder revenue data provides direct proof. The builder code ecosystem generated $9.5 million by early 2025, reaching $10+ million by October 2025. This growth occurred with just 43 tracked builders initially, meaning average revenue per builder approached $230,000. The top performer, pvp.trade, achieved $7.34 million cumulative revenue from $1.792 billion in perpetual volume, demonstrating that focused applications can generate multi-million dollar businesses on Hyperliquid's infrastructure alone.

Platform growth metrics validate the model's ecosystem effects. Hyperliquid's market share in decentralized perpetuals reached 73% by H1 2025, up from roughly 11% in December 2023. This 6x market share expansion occurred alongside fee-sharing program maturation. Trading volume grew from modest levels to $648 billion in Q2 2025 alone, with $1.57 trillion over 12 months. The platform captured 35% of all blockchain fee revenue in July 2025 ($86.6 million), surpassing Ethereum ($45M), Solana ($41.1M), and Tron ($58.8M), all networks with far larger developer bases.

Ecosystem expansion velocity indicates model attractiveness. Following HIP-3's October 2024 launch enabling builder-deployed perpetuals, 22+ new builders activated within months. The HyperEVM smart contract platform launch saw 100+ projects deployed rapidly despite Hyperliquid offering no traditional grant program. This adoption rate, without financial incentives beyond fee-sharing, demonstrates the model's pull.

Capital efficiency metrics show infrastructure leverage. Hyperliquid's 11-person team generated $638.83 million in cumulative revenue with $1.167 billion annualized, translating to $106 million revenue per employee. Hyperliquid notes this is the highest globally, surpassing Tether ($93M) and OnlyFans ($37.6M). This efficiency extends to builders who access the same infrastructure without bearing development costs.

Token performance reflects market confidence in the model. HYPE launched at $3.90 in November 2024 and reached $49.75 all-time high by July 2025, with current prices around $41-43. The $11+ billion market cap for a platform that launched tokens just 11 months prior indicates market belief in the sustainable revenue model versus speculative narratives common in crypto.

Competitive positioning data shows market validation. On January 28, 2025, Hyperliquid's daily fees ($1.93M) surpassed Ethereum's ($1.82M) for the first time. By February 2025, weekly revenue reached $12.8M versus Ethereum's $11.5M. While Ethereum has thousands of dApps and protocols, Hyperliquid achieved comparable fee generation with a focused builder ecosystem, suggesting superior economic efficiency.

User migration patterns reveal real-world adoption. VanEck analysis noted Hyperliquid successfully attracted high-value users from Solana, demonstrated by TVL growth from $2.1 billion in December 2024 to $9.463 billion by October 2025, representing a 350% increase in 10 months. The platform's 94,000+ addresses receiving the November 2024 airdrop (31% of total supply) created a substantial user base for builders to serve.

Builder-specific success metrics document individual cases. Okto's $662,000 in builder fees from a wallet application shows non-trading-interface monetization viability. Mobile applications collectively generating $50,000 daily (~$18.25 million annualized) demonstrate the mobile-first opportunity. HyperDash's analytics-to-execution model proves diverse builder types can succeed.

Auction pricing trends signal demand. HIP-1 spot token deployment auctions, which cost deployers HYPE tokens, rose from initial 500 HYPE minimum to instances approaching $1 million for premium tickers like $PVP (secured by pvp.trade for $200,000). This willingness to pay substantial sums for ecosystem access indicates builders see clear ROI from Hyperliquid's fee-sharing model.

The effectiveness data reveals a compounding system: strong platform metrics attract builders, builder activity drives more volume and fees, increased fees validate the model and attract more builders, and the cycle accelerates. With $679.9 million in cumulative fees, 73% perpetual DEX market share, and $10+ million distributed to builders in less than two years of builder code operation, Hyperliquid has documented the transition from theoretical model to proven, scaled revenue-sharing infrastructure.

Why marketing professionals should understand this model

Hyperliquid's approach represents a strategic shift in ecosystem development relevant beyond cryptocurrency. The platform demonstrates that infrastructure providers can create competitive moats not through walled gardens or platform lock-in, but through aligned economic incentives that make the ecosystem itself the product.

Traditional platform strategies, seen in app stores, payment processors, and SaaS marketplaces, extract value through rent-seeking (30% app store fees, payment processing spreads, subscription margins). Hyperliquid inverts this: the platform distributes 100% of builder fees while earning from the underlying trading activity. This creates a positive-sum dynamic where platform success directly translates to builder success, eliminating the adversarial relationship common in traditional platforms.

For marketing professionals, the model offers lessons in organic growth mechanics. Hyperliquid spends essentially nothing on user acquisition. The 11-person team generates $106 million revenue per employee with no marketing department. Instead, builders handle user acquisition themselves because the revenue model justifies their marketing spend. pvp.trade's $7.2 million in fees funds its own user acquisition, community building, and product development, while simultaneously generating volume that benefits Hyperliquid. This creates distributed marketing where every builder becomes a growth channel.

The transparency-as-trust mechanism warrants attention. All builder fees are processed on-chain with public audit trails. Users explicitly approve builder fees per transaction. This radical transparency builds trust in an industry plagued by hidden fees and conflicts of interest, offering a lesson applicable to fintech, healthcare platforms, and any industry where opacity breeds user skepticism.

The model proves that sustainable revenue beats extraction incentives for ecosystem quality. Hyperliquid's 73% market share came from builders choosing the platform over alternatives offering larger grants or token incentives. This suggests that professionals with genuine capability prefer meritocratic, revenue-based compensation over subsidized early adoption, a principle applicable to B2B marketplace design, partner ecosystems, and developer relations programs.

Finally, the infrastructure-as-product positioning demonstrates defensibility. Hyperliquid doesn't compete with builders; it provides the rails they monetize. This is comparable to AWS not competing with companies building on its infrastructure, or Stripe enabling payment processing rather than building competing e-commerce stores. Marketing professionals building platform businesses can learn from this positioning: make ecosystem success synonymous with platform success through shared economic upside rather than zero-sum fee extraction.

Disclaimer: The content on this website is for educational and marketing innovation purposes only and should not be considered investment advice.

Follow us

Website: www.teramy.academy

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/company/teramy-academy

Twitter: https://x.com/teramyacademy

TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@teramy_academy