Looking back at the fierce DEX competition during DeFi Summer — Uniswap, Balancer, Curve each showcased their strengths, along with countless Uniswap fork projects flooding in. The entire race was like an arms race.
And now? The Perps market is playing out a similar story.
What's the difference? Back then, DEXs attracted users through liquidity and trading pairs. Today, the competition in the Perps ecosystem has upgraded to the level of ecosystem integration. More and more wallet projects are choosing to connect to innovative Perps exchanges like Hyperliquid. The logic behind this is clear — wallets are no longer just asset storage tools but gateways to the trading ecosystem.
Is this a good business? Data shows that wallets connected to Perps exchanges are indeed increasing user stickiness and trading frequency. But risks also exist: liquidity fragmentation, contract risks, high user education costs.
Rather than saying the wallet track is competing to connect, it's more about vying for the discourse power in the trading ecosystem. Whoever can occupy this key node of the wallet will control the user entry point in the Perps era. From this perspective, it is indeed a track worth fighting for — as long as you have clear risk control strategies and ongoing ecosystem operation capabilities.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
9 Likes
Reward
9
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
OnchainHolmes
· 2h ago
I watched the DeFi Summer fork projects all go bad, and now Perps is making another round? Using wallets as trading gateways, to be honest, is just a gamble on whose risk control won't fail.
View OriginalReply0
MetaDreamer
· 2h ago
Perps this round of arms race doesn't feel as crazy as DeFi Summer
---
Another story of competing entry points, wallets went to adopt Hyperliquid, but in the end, it's just liquidity fragmentation
---
Basically, whoever controls the wallet wins, but how many wallets can withstand contract risks?
---
I made a killing during DeFi Summer, but I feel like I need to be more cautious this round of Perps
---
Having a clear risk control strategy sounds good in theory, but only a few actually implement it
---
But to be fair, transforming wallets from storage tools into trading gateways is indeed a brilliant idea
View OriginalReply0
DaoTherapy
· 2h ago
It's all coming to an end. Connecting Perps to wallets feels just like the DEX fork wars back in the day, and in the end, only a few players dominate.
---
Once again, it's the same old story of liquidity fragmentation. I'm tired of hearing about it. Is a wallet really suitable for this kind of thing?
---
So basically, it's about fighting for user access. Whoever controls the wallet makes the rules. The risk control part, I just can't figure out how to solve it.
---
Hyperliquid is so popular right now, but whether it can last a few years is another story. History always repeats itself.
---
Good business? It depends on how long it can sustain. Short-term good data doesn't guarantee long-term stability.
---
The combination of wallets + Perps, I think no one has truly calculated the risk of users being cut.
---
Still the same point: ecosystem operation capability is the real dividing line. How many wallets truly understand this?
View OriginalReply0
ColdWalletAnxiety
· 2h ago
Back in the DeFi Summer days, it was indeed crazy. Now Perps are back? It feels like wallets are all betting on Hyperliquid, but what about the fragmentation risk?
---
Wow, this is the new way for wallets to stay active—upgrading from a piggy bank to a trading hub, pretty impressive.
---
Is the risk control strategy clear? Easy to say, but who will take responsibility if there's a liquidation?
---
Wait, how can we just gloss over the contract risk? I feel sorry for those friends who got liquidated.
---
Controlling nodes = holding the voice, this logic sounds like a prelude to cutting the leeks...
---
I'm optimistic about wallets integrating with Perps, but with such high user education costs, can ordinary people really get the hang of it?
---
Hyperliquid is hot, but ecosystem fragmentation is really a ticking time bomb, isn't it?
View OriginalReply0
GweiTooHigh
· 2h ago
Connecting wallets to Perps is like the DEX fork wave back in the day. It seems like a hot trend, but in reality, it's a trap. Liquidity fragmentation is unavoidable for everyone.
Do you remember that DeFi feast?
Looking back at the fierce DEX competition during DeFi Summer — Uniswap, Balancer, Curve each showcased their strengths, along with countless Uniswap fork projects flooding in. The entire race was like an arms race.
And now? The Perps market is playing out a similar story.
What's the difference? Back then, DEXs attracted users through liquidity and trading pairs. Today, the competition in the Perps ecosystem has upgraded to the level of ecosystem integration. More and more wallet projects are choosing to connect to innovative Perps exchanges like Hyperliquid. The logic behind this is clear — wallets are no longer just asset storage tools but gateways to the trading ecosystem.
Is this a good business? Data shows that wallets connected to Perps exchanges are indeed increasing user stickiness and trading frequency. But risks also exist: liquidity fragmentation, contract risks, high user education costs.
Rather than saying the wallet track is competing to connect, it's more about vying for the discourse power in the trading ecosystem. Whoever can occupy this key node of the wallet will control the user entry point in the Perps era. From this perspective, it is indeed a track worth fighting for — as long as you have clear risk control strategies and ongoing ecosystem operation capabilities.