Hyperliquid leads on 5 of 7 shared benchmarks, Kalshi on 2. Hyperliquid wins on Perp DEX volume share, live 24h notional ranked ($8.15B vs $1.45B), Perp DEX funding stability, 24h stddev of ETH funding ranked (0.014% vs 0.020%), Most tradable markets on a perp DEX, live count per venue (178 vs 21), Perp DEX asset breadth (143 vs 4). Kalshi wins on Cheapest perp venue to hold a position, live funding normalized (1.97 bps vs 3.58 bps), Funding paid to hold an ETH perp long for 30 days, per venue, live (60.6 bps vs 82.7 bps). Data as of 2026-09-24 UTC.
Read methodology Last measured Window: rolling 24h7 shared benchmarks
CFTC-regulated US prediction market exchange. REST trade API (trade-api/v2) with documented per-tier rate limits; the market data WebSocket requires authentication.
Funding is signed. Positive means longs pay shorts, negative means longs get paid to hold. Venues settle on different native periods (hourly on Hyperliquid, dYdX, Lighter, Extended, Pacifica, Ondo, Vest, StandX and ApeX, every 4h on edgeX, every 8h on Kalshi, Aster and the CEX books); every figure is normalized from the venue's own quoted rate and interval before ranking. Funding is only the holding cost. Opening costs (taker fee, spread, impact) are the companion bench perp-fees.
Ranked only with 24 hours of funding history (288 samples) and a stddev above zero: a young listing, or a venue whose rate has not moved since listing (Ondo Perps at launch, Polymarket in July), reads artificially stable and shows as Provisional, never as the leader. Stability is not directionality: a persistently positive but tight band ranks above a rate that flips every settlement.
Counts reflect each venue's live market catalog at query time, mainnet
only. The asset class comes from the venue's own metadata where it
publishes one; Hyperliquid HIP-3 dexes and dYdX publish none, so their
symbols are matched against the crypto markets the other venues list
and a fixed table of forex, commodity and index names. Tokenized gold
(PAXG, XAUT) is a crypto token and is not counted. A market counts once
whether it trades 24/7 or only during exchange hours.
The ratio is a screen, not a verdict. Both terms are the venue's own
figures (24h volume and open interest as each API reports them, in USD),
so a venue that counts both legs of a fill moves its ratio without
changing anything real. A very low ratio (Ostium, 0.2x) means positions
held for days on thin daily volume; a very high one (Kalshi, above 40x)
means a day of trading dwarfs what stays open. The bands in the
methodology say what each range usually means.
Every row is a month of funding at the venue's average daily cost over
the hours measured in the trailing 30 days (average x 30). A venue
ranks only with 576 of the 720 hours (24 days) behind that average;
under the floor the row is provisional, unranked, and shows its day
count (the venues added on 2026-09-22 and 2026-09-23 start there).
Funding is signed: on a month where shorts paid longs the figure is
negative and "cheapest" means "was paid the most".
Frequently asked questions
Hyperliquid vs Kalshi: which one is better?
Hyperliquid and Kalshi are compared on 7 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Hyperliquid leads on Perp DEX volume share, live 24h notional ranked. Kalshi leads on Cheapest perp venue to hold a position, live funding normalized. See the live table on this page for every metric.
Which has the higher 24h perp volume, Hyperliquid or Kalshi?
On the Perp DEX volume share, live 24h notional ranked benchmark, Hyperliquid leads at $8.15B versus Kalshi at $1.45B. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
Which is cheaper, Hyperliquid or Kalshi?
On the Cheapest perp venue to hold a position, live funding normalized benchmark, Kalshi leads at 1.97 bps versus Hyperliquid at 3.58 bps. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
How is the Hyperliquid vs Kalshi comparison measured?
Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.
Auto-generated pairs require: both providers in the same benchmark for seven consecutive days, at least 1000 samples per provider, observable third-party search demand, and a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. Editorially curated pairs (like this one) may publish early when search demand is high and data is accruing; panels with fewer than 100 samples are shown as provisional. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo.
