Hyperliquid vs Jupiter Comparison
| 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker | Fees | 4-7 bps position open/close |
Cost comparison
The basis is a Bitcoin purchase worth €1,000, including all fees and spreads.
| 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker | Fees | 4-7 bps position open/close |
Pros & Cons
- 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
- Near-zero network fees on Solana
- Very fast execution
- Embedded in Solana's largest trading ecosystem
- Pool model without order-book slippage
- Liquidity provision through JLP with a share of fees
- Narrow market list — essentially the major pairs
- Funding costs on open positions
- Very high leverage tiers on individual pairs raise liquidation risk
- No EU authorisation
Score Comparison
Features
- 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
- Network fees at a fraction of a cent
- JLP pool at billion-dollar scale
- Part of the Solana trading ecosystem
- Fee share for liquidity providers
The five areas head to head
AI AnalysisFees & Costs
The entry tier is 0.015% maker and 0.045% taker. Taker fees step down across 14-day volume tiers, with maker rebates at the highest tiers. Further discounts come from HYPE staking and referral links. No network fees apply on the native layer 1, so the trading fee reflects the actual cost. As of August 2026.
Opening and closing a position each cost around 0.06%, with ongoing funding costs on top. Network fees on Solana sit well below a cent per transaction and are effectively negligible. A large share of fees flows to providers of pool liquidity. As of August 2026.
Usability & User Experience
The interface follows classic futures terminals and assumes working knowledge of margin, funding and liquidation prices. Access is by wallet connection with no registration step. As of August 2026.
The interface is among the most approachable in this comparison and navigable for newcomers. A Solana wallet is required; there is no registration step. As of August 2026.
Features & Offering
More than 170 perpetual markets trade against USDC collateral. Alongside market, limit, stop-loss and take-profit orders, TWAP execution spreads larger positions over time — a feature usually reserved for institutional interfaces. Margin can be run isolated or cross. As of August 2026.
Perpetual trading runs against the JLP pool, which bundles several underlying assets and stablecoins. The offering concentrates on the major pairs; very high leverage tiers arrived on selected pairs in 2026. The aggregator additionally opens up spot trading across Solana. As of August 2026.
Details
| Hyperliquid Labs | Company | Jupiter Exchange |
| United States | Headquarters | Singapore |
Verdict
In our overall rating Hyperliquid leads with 4.8 against 4.0 for Jupiter.
For most investors Hyperliquid is therefore the better choice.
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.
Jupiter is the central trading venue on Solana and built its perpetuals as part of a wider ecosystem. As with GMX, trades run against a liquidity pool — here the JLP pool, which bundles Solana, Ethereum, Bitcoin and stablecoins and recently stood at around 1.4 billion US dollars.
In practice Solana plays to its strengths: network fees sit at a fraction of a cent and execution is fast. Trading fees run around 0.06% on open and close, plus funding costs on open positions. Very high leverage tiers arrived on selected pairs in 2026.
The constraint is breadth: perpetual trading concentrates on the major pairs around SOL, ETH and BTC, so anyone looking for a wide altcoin perpetual list is in the wrong place. For users already active on Solana, Jupiter is the obvious route. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user.