KEYTAKEAWAYS
-
Decentralized perpetuals are reshaping crypto trading through different models like order books, liquidity pools, debt pools, and appchains.
-
Hyperliquid dominates with over 60% of market share, while dYdX, GMX, Synthetix, and Aevo take different paths with unique strengths and risks.
-
The sector’s future depends on balancing speed, decentralization, and compliance to become as essential as electricity or water.
CONTENT
AFTER THE CRISIS, A NEW STAGE
In the winter of 2022, the collapse of FTX struck the crypto derivatives market like an earthquake, shattering trust overnight. Traders realized their biggest fear was not price volatility, but the fact that funds could be frozen and never withdrawn. Out of this rubble, decentralized perpetuals stepped onto the stage. They became experimental labs trying to answer the same question: can leverage, speed and liquidity rival centralized exchanges without custody risk?
dYdX started with an order book on Ethereum Layer 2, GMX simplified market making through a shared pool, and Synthetix used a debt pool as counterparty. Later, Hyperliquid went further, building its own high-performance chain with native order books, while Aevo combined perpetuals with options to design a toolkit for professional traders. Each crisis became a turning point: GMX’s “zero slippage” design was exploited, dYdX solved bottlenecks in its Cosmos migration, and Mango’s incident on Solana revealed how a delayed oracle could cost hundreds of millions. The sector we see today is the result of these scars being turned into stronger code.
FIVE PATHS IN THE SAME RACE
If perpetual protocols were race cars, dYdX would be a hybrid tuned for balance between performance and fuel efficiency—chasing both speed and decentralization. GMX looks more like a public bus: all riders (GLP holders) fund the pool together, sharing risks and rewards. Hyperliquid is a pure speed machine, running on a self-built track with 0.2-second latency, nearly matching Binance. Synthetix is more like a city-state: the debt pool backed by SNX stakers acts as its treasury, distributing gains and losses among citizens.
Aevo is the multi-purpose modified car, able to run perpetuals, options, and structured strategies on one account. These choices define strengths and weaknesses: Hyperliquid offers unmatched speed and depth but draws criticism on decentralization; dYdX maintains balance yet pays the price of ecosystem cold start; GMX is simple and easy but heavily depends on oracles; Synthetix provides the widest range of synthetic assets but ties risk directly to its token; Aevo offers variety but still relies on a centralized sequencer. Market data is blunt: by August 2025, Hyperliquid captured over 60% of all on-chain perpetual volume, pushing GMX and dYdX into secondary roles, while Synthetix and Aevo held on to niche users.
BLACK SWANS AND THE MAGIC OF LIQUIDITY
The real test comes during black swans. Imagine Bitcoin dropping 15% in a single minute: on dYdX, liquidators must act fast or the book falls out of balance; on GMX, losses hit the GLP pool directly, shrinking its net value; on Hyperliquid, the insurance fund must absorb massive margin gaps to maintain confidence; on Synthetix, SNX price drops amplify debt pool stress, creating a double hit; on Aevo, if the sequencer fails, users could be stuck unable to close positions.
Each model has its weak points, but all try to patch them through engineering: higher-frequency oracles, thicker insurance funds, more flexible liquidation rules. At the same time, liquidity works like magic: deeper books attract professional market makers, lower slippage brings in quant funds, and momentum draws retail traders.
Hyperliquid has ridden this flywheel to become the “Binance of DeFi,” while GMX saw outflows when GLP yields fell. Synthetix leaned on synthetic forex and commodities to keep niche demand, while Aevo attracted strategy-driven players with its options + perpetual mix. Others like Drift on Solana used Vaults with double-digit yields, and Orderly Network tried to merge fragmented liquidity across chains. All are attempts to answer one question: if you can’t win on scale, can you win on product design?
THE FUTURE MOSAIC OF PUBLIC GOODS
In the end, the winner may not be “who replaces whom” but “who makes perpetuals a public good.” On the tech side, decentralized sequencers, shared ordering layers, and high-frequency oracles will narrow the gap between performance and autonomy, making order books possible without permissioned chains.
On the regulatory side, compliant stablecoins and on-chain identity will define who can trade which assets, at what leverage, and under what disclosure. Token economics will keep evolving: GMX positioned itself as DeFi’s dividend stock, Hyperliquid fueled a scarcity story through buybacks and deflation, dYdX grew steadily via governance and staking, Synthetix balanced between debt risk and buybacks, and Aevo is still searching for momentum.
Over time, decentralized perpetuals may become as invisible yet essential as electricity or running water, a background infrastructure powering markets. For traders, the bet will not only be on price curves but on the reliability of mechanisms themselves. Whoever builds that reliability most solidly will hold the valve when the next liquidity wave arrives.
