Which Hyperliquid frontend generates the most builder revenue?

Live leaderboard, top 5

1. 

   FOMO

   #1 · Builder fees collected

   $136.0Kp99 $39.30
2. 

   MetaMask

   #2 · Builder fees collected

   $103.6Kp99 $51.82
3. 

   Phantom

   #3 · Builder fees collected

   $86.9Kp99 $13.01
4. 

   Trust Wallet

   #4 · Builder fees collected

   $72.5Kp99 $33.55
5. 

   Rabby

   #5 · Builder fees collected

   $46.8Kp99 $32.60

Full live data: /benchmarks/hyperliquid-frontends.

Methodology and data sources

Hyperliquid publishes one lz4-compressed CSV per builder address and UTC day at `stats-data.hyperliquid.xyz/Mainnet/builder_fills/<address>/<YYYYMMDD>.csv.lz4`, listing every fill that carried that builder code with its wallet, coin, price, size, taker flag, closed PnL and builder fee in USDC. The feed is public and keyless. A Go harness checks it every 30 minutes, keeps a 30 day local mirror, and switches the whole cohort to day D once the batch has landed and settled. The headline metric is `hl_frontend_fees_usd_24h_v2{builder="X"}`, the raw USD value of `builder_fee` summed across every fill in the day D file; the 7 day and 30 day figures sum the files of the 7 and 30 UTC days ending on D. Companion gauges expose volume routed (`hl_frontend_volume_usd_24h_v2`), unique wallets (`hl_frontend_users_24h_v2`, unions for the longer windows) and the trader perspective effective fee in basis points.

What this number does not tell you

• ·Ranking is by raw USD builder fee revenue, not by value for users. A bigger number means more fees collected via the on chain builder code field, not necessarily a better trader experience. The effective fee bps companion tab is the trader cost view.
• ·Native Hyperliquid UI orders carry no builder code and are excluded by construction. Roughly 95 percent of Hyperliquid fills land without a builder field; the 5 percent that do are the frontend ecosystem this bench measures.
• ·Builder addresses outside the curated registry are not fetched and stay off the leaderboard until added via public PR. A new frontend that ships a builder code today appears once it is added to `builders.json`.
• ·USD figures move with both volume and effective fee. A frontend can climb the leaderboard by routing more notional or by widening its fee; the companion volume and effective fee bps tabs separate the two drivers.
• ·The daily view is reactive to promo cycles and one off campaigns. Use the 7d and 30d ranges for ranking stability, the daily view for the latest complete day. Figures run 3 to 27 hours behind the chain because the feed publishes day D early on D+1.

Frequently asked questions

What does this benchmark measure?

The USD value of builder fees each Hyperliquid frontend collected on the last complete UTC day, and over the 7 and 30 days ending on it. A builder fee is the optional rebate the frontend writes into the builder field on every Hyperliquid order it routes. The on chain protocol caps this at 100 basis points on perps and 1000 on spot. The bench sums every fill's `builderFee` value attributed to a known frontend address and publishes the total per timeframe.

Why USD revenue instead of effective fee in basis points?

Effective fee in basis points answers the trader question of cost per dollar routed. USD revenue answers the operator question of size and revenue scale, the same way CoinMarketMan and ASXN dashboards present builder leaderboards. Both views are useful; the effective fee bps view is available as a companion tab.

Where does the data come from?

From the per-builder daily fills feed Hyperliquid publishes on its public stats CDN: one CSV per builder address and UTC day, with every fill that carried that builder code. A Go harness on OCB infrastructure downloads each file once the day is published and aggregates it locally. No node, no API key, no third party indexer, no internal Mobula service.

Which frontends are tracked?

Every Hyperliquid frontend with a known builder address, 106 today. The cohort spans consumer wallets (Phantom Perps, MetaMask, Rabby, OneKey, Trust Wallet), pro terminals (Insilico, Axiom, Pear, Lit Trade), social and PvP UIs (pvp.trade, Senpi, FOMO), bots and signal apps (FlowBot, Tread.fi, Moonbot, Hyperdash), based.app and defi.app. The registry is `harnesses/hyperliquid-frontends/builders.json` in the OpenChainBench repo; new addresses ship via public PR.

Why are some frontends at zero?

Three reasons. The frontend stopped operating or routed no attributed fills that day. The frontend never enabled the builder code attribution system. The frontend uses a builder address not yet in the registry. A frontend at zero on the daily view but not on 7 day or 30 day is in the first bucket; a consistent zero across all timeframes points to the second or third.

What kind of frontend collects the most builder fees?

Consumer wallets integrate Hyperliquid trading directly inside the wallet UI. Their effective fee is typically in the 5 to 10 basis point range and the user base is large. The combination of wide reach times a moderate fee produces the highest absolute revenue. Pro terminals sit below because they charge less per dollar routed by design, even though their notional volume can be comparable.

How often does the page refresh?

The harness checks the feed every 30 minutes and Prometheus scrapes the gauges every 30 seconds, but the numbers change once a day, when Hyperliquid publishes the previous UTC day early in the morning UTC. The timestamp on the bench page is the end of the day the numbers describe.

Related questions

• Which perpetual DEX has the lowest all in fees on ETH?
• Which prediction market API has the strictest rate limits?
• Which L1 blockchain has the fastest finality time?