Aster vs Hyperliquid: Which Decentralized Exchange Is Winning the 2025 Liquidity War

Introduction

The decentralized perpetual exchange (perp DEX) market is undergoing a dramatic realignment in 2025, with Aster and Hyperliquid competing for market dominance. But which protocol is winning the liquidity war?

This article compares Aster vs Hyperliquid on liquidity, technology, tokenomics, trading volume, market share, risks, and prospects. We also examine how to purchase (ASTER/HYPE), price predictions, and timing strategies.

This will clarify which platform is best positioned for long-term dominance in perpetual DEXs.

Background: What Are Aster and Hyperliquid?

1.1 Hyperliquid Fundamentals

• Hyperliquid is a decentralized exchange specifically designed for perpetual futures trading. It uses a fully on-chain order book model on its L1 (or highly optimized environment) to deliver near-centralized exchange performance.
• Hyperliquid supports high throughput and fast finality with order book matching at sub-second block times.
• HYPE is Hyperliquid’s token. Hyperliquid’s deflationary token model features significant fee buybacks (e.g., a 97% fee allocation to buybacks), providing an incentive to holders.
• Hyperliquid is on track to command ~73% share of the decentralized perpetual trading market by mid-2025.

1.2 Aster (ASTER) Overview

• Aster is a newer perp DEX launched in 2025, often positioned as a challenger to Hyperliquid. Its architecture includes multi-chain support, privacy or hidden orders, and aggressive incentive programs.
• The project is backed by Binance-linked venture arms (e.g., YZi Labs), with strong public support from Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao (CZ).
• Aster has rolled out features such as hidden orders (to help avoid front-running or MEV), stock perps, multi-chain routing, high leverage (1001x), and plans for layer-1 integration or redesign.
• Recent performance includes surges in trading volume and open interest, with ASTER token price rallying substantially.

Thus, Aster and Hyperliquid represent two different but overlapping approaches to building the next-gen decentralized perp infrastructure.

/ You can claim a welcome reward of up to 10,055 USDT\

2. Liquidity Metrics and Market Share – Who Leads Today?

A key battleground is liquidity: daily trading volume, open interest, TVL, fee generation, and market share shifts.

2.1 Trading Volume and Market Share Shifts

• Hyperliquid once dominated ~73% of the perp DEX market by volume.
• However, recent reports show Aster surpassing Hyperliquid in daily volume. For example:
  • Aster posted 24h DEX perpetual volume > $700M on Hyperliquid’s platform.
  • Aster overtook Hyperliquid in daily trading volume, handling $793 million in 24h vs Hyperliquid’s $462 million in one report.
  • In another article, Aster surged past Hyperliquid by 8× in the relative daily volume metric.
  • Aster reportedly generated more daily fees than Hyperliquid, e.g. $25M+ vs. $3.17M in the same period.

These shifts suggest liquidity is already tilting toward Aster in certain metrics.

2.2 Open Interest and Depth

• Aster’s open interest spiked — CoinGlass data indicates an open interest jump to $1.25B.
• Meanwhile, Hyperliquid has deep liquidity given its legacy position and advanced order book.

Open interest and depth matter because liquidity without depth may be fragile; Aster is showing strength on both fronts.

2.3 TVL and Protocol Capital

• Aster’s TVL has also expanded steeply: one report claims $1.78B locked after token launch.
• Earlier in its lifecycle, Aster’s TVL rose to ~$390M in some metrics.
• Hyperliquid has historically relied more on order book and exchange throughput than typical TVL metrics.

While TVL matters less for perp DEXs than spot or lending protocols, it still reflects capital commitment to infrastructure.

2.4 Fee Generation and Revenue Share

• Aster has reportedly topped $25M in daily fees, beating Hyperliquid in the same timeframe.
• Hyperliquid’s tokenomics allocate 97% of fees to buybacks of HYPE token, which boosts scarcity and token holder alignment.
• Aster’s fee model is newer and more volatile; sustained fee generation is still being validated.

Revenue capture is a crucial signal — liquidity that doesn’t generate sustainable revenue tends to falter.

3. Architectural Differences and Feature Edge

To understand longevity, architecture, performance, and features matter in the Aster vs Hyperliquid debate.

3.1 Order Execution, Speed, and MEV Resistance

• Hyperliquid’s on-chain order book in its native environment is designed for high-frequency performance, low latency, and minimal slippage.
• Aster counters with hidden orders/privacy features to reduce front-running and MEV risk, a differentiator in perp trading.
• Aster supports dual-margin systems, flexible margin models, and stock perpetuals, while Hyperliquid focuses more on crypto-native derivatives.

3.2 Multi-Chain and Cross-Chain Liquidity

• Aster’s architecture emphasizes multi-chain routing and integrating liquidity across different chains to reduce fragmentation and maximize reach.
• Hyperliquid, being built as a full-stack solution, may have limitations in cross-chain extension or liquidity bridging complexity.

3.3 Tokenomics, Governance, and Incentives

• Hyperliquid’s fee buyback model (97% of fees) is deflationary and rewards token holders, giving HYPE a strong alignment with revenue flow.
• Aster’s token distribution involves heavy airdrops and incentivization to onboard users quickly. However, an airdrop unlock introduces potential short-term volatility
• Aster also plans roadmap features—privacy, hidden orders, Layer-1 design—that further differentiate its future value capture.

3.4 Risk Models and Capital Efficiency

• Hyperliquid’s design tends to favor high-performance capital allocation, high frequency, and liquidity-driven flows.
• Aster may draw on Binance’s ecosystem, bridging user acquisition with incentives to offer capital-efficient features and attract volume.

Thus, in architectural matchups, Aster brings fresh design tactics (privacy, cross-chain, incentives) while Hyperliquid offers tested performance and infrastructure maturity.

4. Token Price Forecasts, Where to Buy, and Investment Strategy

If you consider participating in Aster vs Hyperliquid as token plays (ASTER / HYPE), here’s a guide.

4.1 Where to Buy ASTER or HYPE

• ASTER is listed on various centralized exchanges shortly after launch; cross-check listings via CEX platforms.
• You may also swap on DEXes connecting through their own chains or bridges.
• Always use reputable platforms with sufficient liquidity to avoid slippage.
• For trading perpetuals, you may leverage ASTER’s DEX interface, or in some cases via Hyperliquid’s infrastructure if ASTER pairs are supported.

4.2 Price Forecasts and Scenario Modeling

We review public forecasts and then propose scenario ranges.

• CoinMarketCap’s AI forecast warns of airdrop risks (320M unlocks) against fee-model competition.
• Price prediction platforms such as StealTheX suggest ASTER may have room to appreciate if momentum sustains.
• Observers contrast ASTER’s meteoric rally (2,800% in the first week) with concerns over concentrated holdings.

Scenario Ranges (2025–2028):

These are illustrative. Key inputs: sustained volume growth, token distribution management, architectural delivery, and competition.

4.3 Timing and Entry Strategy

• Breakout approach: Buy when ASTER breaks above key resistance zones or volume threshold.
• Pullback entry: If ASTER retraces after a breakout, enter near support.
• Staggered DCA: Given volatility, layering entry reduces timing risk.
• Take partial profits at yield or volume milestones.

4.4 Risk Management and Exit Signals

• Use stop-losses under structural support levels.
• If ASTER’s volume collapses, or Hyperliquid regains dominance, reassess.
• Watch token unlock events and centralized wallet sell-offs.
• For the HYPE side, holders must monitor whether Hyperliquid’s protocol fundamentals remain resilient.

5. Strengths and Weaknesses: Aster vs Hyperliquid Side-by-Side

Here’s a comparative breakdown:

In many respects, Aster is attacking Hyperliquid’s strengths directly — but is doing so from an early-stage position that carries both upside and risk.

/ You can claim a welcome reward of up to 10,055 USDT\

6. Which One Is “Winning” – Current Verdict and Future Outlook

As of late 2025, evidence shows Aster gaining ground fast:

• Aster has surpassed Hyperliquid in daily trading volume in multiple reports.
• It has produced larger daily fees and gained attention in liquidity metrics.
• Hyperliquid’s market share in perp DEX is reportedly declining — its share fell to ~38% in one report as competitors gain. 

But Hyperliquid still retains advantages: institutional depth, architectural maturity, and token holder alignment. The real test will be whether Aster can sustain performance and not collapse post-hype.

In the Aster vs Hyperliquid battle, Aster currently leads in narrative, volume, and momentum — but Hyperliquid may still win if it can defend its moat and innovate further.

7. FAQs on Aster Vs Hyperliquid 

Q1: What is the difference between Aster vs Hyperliquid in terms of architecture?
Aster emphasizes hidden orders, privacy, multi-chain, and incentive growth; Hyperliquid is built for high-performance on-chain order books with optimized execution.

Q2: Has Aster overtaken Hyperliquid in volume already?
Yes — as for the time of writing this piece, Aster is outpacing Hyperliquid in daily trading volume, e.g. $793M vs $462M in one 24h period.

Q3: Is ASTER a better token investment than HYPE?
ASTER has more upside potential but a higher risk. HYPE has more stability and proven operations. Use risk-adjusted allocation if betting either.

Q4: Where can I buy ASTER or HYPE?
You can buy ASTER or HYPE on major centralized exchanges such as BTCC for an optimal experience. Use DEXes or swap protocols as supported.

Q5: How sustainable is Aster’s growth after the airdrop and hype?
That is the key question: sustaining liquidity, fees, governance, and architecture progress will test Aster beyond its launch excitement.

Q6: What are the red flags for Hyperliquid or Aster failing?
For Aster: volume collapse, token unlock waves, execution lag, central dependency. For Hyperliquid: losing volume share, inability to match feature sets, stagnation.

8. Strategic Playbook and How to Position

If you want to use the Aster vs Hyperliquid insight as part of your portfolio, here’s a tactical playbook:

1. Seed small exposure to ASTER early, given upside potential and momentum.
2. Monitor liquidity metrics (volume, open interest, fees) day by day.
3. If ASTER continues to lead in volume and fee generation, scale in.
4. Use stop losses on ASTER downward breaches of support zones.
5. Maintain a core hold in HYPE as a hedge.
6. Rebalance based on performance or fundamental shifts.
7. Study announcements, roadmap milestones, and token unlock schedules — these often move markets.

For deeper strategy frameworks, risk filtering, or trade strategy, BTCC Academy is your best bet.

9. Limitations, Risks, and Final Thoughts

• The airdrop/token unlock risk for ASTER is real; massive unlocks can lead to sell pressure.
• Much of ASTER’s volume may be speculative or momentum-driven; retention is uncertain.
• Hyperliquid has structural advantages of maturity, liquidity, and proven market belt strength.
• Tactical bets must be trimmed or reversed quickly if signals falter.
• Always combine sentiment, on-chain data, tokenomics, and architectural validation in your decisions.

In the liquidity war of 2025, Aster is making an early, aggressive push and currently leads in many metrics. But the long-term winner will be the protocol that sustains value, innovation, and trust. As you follow this battle – Aster vs Hyperliquid – stay nimble, data-driven, and risk-conscious.