Overview
- The Hyperliquid Policy Center filed a formal request on August 24–25 urging the SEC and CFTC to classify perpetual contracts by how they work economically rather than by the asset they reference.
- Perpetuals are derivatives with no fixed expiry that use recurring funding payments to keep prices aligned with an underlying market, a design that blurs the line between futures and swaps under U.S. law.
- HPC argued that cash‑settled equity perpetuals that behave like futures should qualify as security futures, a category jointly overseen by the SEC and CFTC, and asked for prompt interpretive guidance or staff action instead of waiting for full rulemaking.
- The push follows earlier agency moves and industry conflict: the CFTC approved the first U.S.‑listed perpetuals in May and CME sued the CFTC in June, while Hyperliquid reports roughly $480 billion in HIP‑3 volume over ten months and about $4 billion in open interest.
- If regulators adopt HPC’s approach, exchanges could compete on execution rather than jurisdiction, more on‑chain volume could move under U.S. rules, and traders would face clearer listing and oversight standards that may reduce future litigation.