Backpack vs Hyperliquid Comparison
In our overall rating Hyperliquid leads with 4.8 out of 5 points, ahead of Backpack with 2.9. Our table lists the trading fee as “0.02% maker / 0.05% taker” for Backpack and “0.015% maker / 0.045% taker” for Hyperliquid. If you care most about support, Backpack has the better sub-score, while Hyperliquid leads on usability, features, fees, and stability.
| 0.02% maker / 0.05% taker | Fees | 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker |
Cost comparison
The basis is a Bitcoin purchase worth €1,000, calculated from the disclosed trading fee. A price markup in the spread is not included, because most providers do not publish it.
| 0.02% maker / 0.05% taker | Fees | 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker |
Not enough reviews available.
Hyperliquid sets the trading fee by your weighted volume over the last 14 days, with spot volume counting double. Perpetuals and spot have separate tiers, and fees are assessed daily at the end of the day (UTC).
| Transaction | Cost at Hyperliquid |
|---|---|
| Perpetuals, entry tier 0 | 0.015% maker, 0.045% taker |
| Perpetuals, tier 1 above USD 5 million | 0.012% maker, 0.040% taker |
| Perpetuals, tier 4 above USD 500 million | 0% maker, 0.028% taker |
| Perpetuals, tier 6 above USD 7 billion | 0% maker, 0.024% taker |
| Spot, entry tier 0 | 0.040% maker, 0.070% taker |
| Maker rebate above 0.5% share of maker volume | credit of 0.001% to 0.003% |
| HYPE staking | 5% discount above 10 HYPE up to 40% above 500,000 HYPE |
| Referral code | 4% discount on the first USD 25 million of volume |
| Orders and trading on the native layer 1 | no gas fee |
| USDC deposit | network fee of the source chain, e.g. Arbitrum |
| First transfer to a new Hyperliquid account | one-off activation fee of 1 USDC |
How to save: Limit orders as a maker cost a third of the taker fee in the entry tier: on a USD 10,000 position that is USD 1.50 instead of USD 4.50. Staking just over 100 HYPE cuts both rates by 10%, and a referral code takes off another 4%. We compare other decentralised derivatives exchanges and their fees in our perp DEX comparison.
As of 22 October 2026 according to the Hyperliquid documentation on fees.
Pros & Cons
- MiCA authorisation for the European entity, passported across the EU
- Perpetuals for EU clients through an entity under MiFID II supervision
- A named European supervisory counterparty
- Clean, approachable interface
- 200+ markets in the global offering
- Wallet and exchange in one ecosystem
- VARA licence in Dubai
- EU clients limited to roughly 40 pairs and 10x leverage
- Fees above the fee-free competitors
- Not a pure DEX — execution runs on operator-run order-book infrastructure
- Account with identity verification required
- Order book held fully on-chain on a purpose-built layer 1
- CEX-level fees from 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker
- No network fees on trades
- 170+ perpetual markets with order types including TWAP
- Self-custody, no mandatory KYC
- No EU authorisation and no regulated counterparty
- Support runs through community channels only
- Leverage is capped tightly on smaller markets: headline figures apply to major markets only
- Tax reporting rests entirely with the user
Score Comparison
Features
- One of the few perpetual venues with EU authorisation
- MiCA CASP since May 2026
- Perpetuals for EU clients since September 2025
- Solana-native infrastructure
- Largest perpetual DEX by trading volume
- Purpose-built layer 1 rather than a rollup dependency
- Fee discount through HYPE staking
- TWAP orders available to retail users
The five areas head to head
AI AnalysisFees & Costs
For perpetuals, standard fees are 0.02% for makers and 0.05% for takers, roughly the market average. At high volume, taker fees can be reduced further through limit orders. Against the fee-free competitors in this segment that is the more expensive route, set against a regulated framework. As of August 2026. In spot trading the entry tier charges 0.08% for makers and 0.10% for takers, and the swap function costs 0.85% (as of October 2026).
The entry tier is 0.015% maker and 0.045% taker. Across six further tiers based on 14-day volume, the taker fee falls to 0.024% and the maker fee drops to 0% above USD 500 million; market makers with more than 0.5% of maker volume also receive a rebate. Further discounts come from HYPE staking (5 to 40%) and a referral code (4%). Orders on the native layer 1 cost no gas, so the trading fee reflects the actual cost. As of 22 October 2026.
Usability & User Experience
The interface is among the most approachable in the segment and navigable even without long futures experience. Unlike the pure on-chain competitors, an account with identity verification is required. As of August 2026.
The interface follows classic futures terminals and assumes working knowledge of margin, funding and liquidation prices. Access is by wallet connection or email login, with no account opening. As of October 2026.
Features & Offering
Globally the offering spans more than 200 markets at up to 50x leverage. EU clients operate under a separate, tighter frame: roughly 40 perpetual pairs and up to 10x leverage, offered through a European entity under MiFID II supervision. Reduce-only orders are available alongside standard order types. As of August 2026.
More than 170 perpetual markets trade against USDC collateral. Besides market and limit orders there are stop, take-profit, scale and trailing-stop orders as well as TWAP execution, which splits larger positions into suborders at least 30 seconds apart. That feature is usually reserved for institutional interfaces. Margin can be run cross (the default) or isolated. As of October 2026.
Details
| Trek Labs Ltd FZE / Trek Labs Europe Ltd | Company | Hyperliquid Labs |
| United Arab Emirates (EU entity: Cyprus) | Headquarters | Singapore |
Verdict
In our overall rating Hyperliquid leads with 4.8 against 2.9 for Backpack.
For most investors Hyperliquid is therefore the better choice.
Backpack sits apart in this comparison because the question is not whether you accept a regulatory gap. Its European entity obtained a MiCA CASP licence and a payment institution licence from the Latvian central bank in May 2026, both passported across the EU and EEA. Perpetuals themselves fall outside MiCA — a separate European entity under MiFID II supervision covers them.
The price of that protection is a much tighter frame: EU clients trade roughly 40 pairs at up to 10x leverage, against up to 50x globally. Fees of 0.02% maker and 0.05% taker sit around the market average and above the fee-free competitors.
For EU-based traders this is a different proposition from the rest of the field: less leverage, fewer markets, higher fees — but a regulated framework and a named supervisory counterparty. For anyone unwilling to trade perpetuals entirely outside European supervision, it is one of the few available routes.
Hyperliquid is the reference point among perpetual DEXs. Trading runs through an order book held entirely on-chain on a purpose-built layer 1 rather than through an AMM pool, which in practice delivers execution close to a centralised exchange while custody stays with the user.
Entry-tier fees are 0.015% maker and 0.045% taker and fall further across volume tiers; staking HYPE reduces them again. No network fees apply on the native layer 1. Leverage is tiered by market: up to 40x on Bitcoin and considerably lower on smaller markets.
The regulatory picture is straightforward: Hyperliquid holds no EU authorisation, and perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case. There is no withholding at source, so tax reporting rests entirely with the user. The platform suits experienced traders who weight self-custody and execution quality above regulatory protection.