# Hyperliquid Near-Market Depth Fell 84.6% in Year Through Nov. 1

By Enna Lee

Canonical URL: https://www.tokenpost.com/news/investing/55050
Published: 2026-11-12T06:55:23.000Z
Updated: 2026-11-12T06:55:23.000Z
Section: Investing

> Across 38 comparable markets, median dollar depth within 10 basis points fell 82% on Hyperliquid, compared with 61% on Binance and 78% on OKX.

Hyperliquid’s near-market liquidity contracted sharply in the year through Nov. 1, 2026, with median dollar depth falling 84.6% as the number of active quoting account families also declined.

The comparison covered 86 long-tail assets listed on Hyperliquid, Binance and OKX with leverage below 10x. From Nov. 1, 2025, to Nov. 1, 2026, median dollar depth within five basis points of market prices fell across the sample. In 38 markets comparable at 10 basis points, median depth declined 82% on Hyperliquid, 61% on Binance and 78% on OKX.

The comparison also measured Hyperliquid’s depth against Binance for the same tokens. The median ratio of Hyperliquid’s depth to Binance’s depth within five basis points fell 57.5% over the year. That ratio compares the venues for matching assets; it is distinct from the overall depth declines across the 38 comparable markets.

Token quantities provide another view of the change because they are less affected by token price movements. With November 2025 set to an index of 100 for both measures, token quantity within five basis points fell to 28 a year later. Across the first 20 order-book levels, token quantity rose to 127 while the dollar-depth index stood at 61. The figures indicate that liquidity shifted away from the prices closest to market, even as token quantities across a wider section of the book increased.

The number of account families quoting on both sides also fell. Across 72 markets, the median count of families with at least $1,000 posted on each side within 25 basis points declined from 7.64 to 6.39. After adjusting for token prices, active maker accounts declined in 58 markets.

A separate sample of 80 markets compared one full week a year earlier with a recent full week. In that comparison, the largest account family’s median share of executed volume from resting orders fell from 25.2% to 14.6%. This measures the share of trades executed from posted orders, rather than the number of active quoting families or the amount of depth near market prices.

Fee figures covered 54 account families divided by trading volume. The lowest-volume quartile paid 0.961 basis points in historical maker fees, while the highest-volume quartile received a 0.236-basis-point rebate. The gap was about 1.20 basis points before hedging and adverse-selection costs. These figures compare volume-based account-family groups.

Hyperliquid’s congestion rules allocate block space using each address’s weighted share of resting orders from the previous UTC day. During heavy congestion, an address can use block space equal to twice that share. Since an address’s allowance depends on its prior-day order share, a smaller share can mean less capacity for placing orders and potentially building share.

A Nov. 10 snapshot of 256 HIP-4 contracts found that four professional market-making wallets supplied 47% of depth within 25 basis points of the midpoint. Taken together, the figures document lower near-market depth and fewer account families meeting the quoting threshold, while describing fee differences and congestion quotas as possible pressures. They do not quantify how much either factor contributed to the full-year depth decline.