Welcome to the GLC Research Newsletter.

We’re a buyside crypto research firm focused on delivering clear, independent insights. We also collaborate with a few select projects to help improve transparency and reporting for stakeholders.

In this edition, we’re covering the valuation gap between $HYPE and equities, a comprehensive breakdown of one of the most compelling growth stories.

Thanks again for subscribing. We’re glad to have you with us.

Let’s get into it.

Hyperliquid has established itself as one of the fastest-growing and most profitable companies in the space, with ~$1.3B in annualized revenue and 97% of that distributed directly back to investors. Yet $HYPE continues to trade at steeply discounted multiples compared to Robinhood, Coinbase, and Nasdaq.

Disclaimer: Views expressed are the author’s personal views and should not be relied upon as investment advice.

Discloser: Analyst (Yarl) behind this research owns $HYPE. Full disclaimer and disclosure here.

Key Takeaways

• $HYPE already rivals major public peers in scale and profitability.

• Trades at ~9x FCF vs. 20–40x EV/EBITDA for peers.

• FDV and dilution fears are overstated; market cap feels like the proper metric.

• Growth catalysts (HIP-3, Unit, Builder Codes) strengthen HL’s moat.

• At current multiples, $HYPE offers a compelling R/R setups in the market.

$HYPE vs. COIN, HOOD & NDAQ: Benchmarking Cash Generation

In this analysis, we benchmark $HYPE against $COIN, $HOOD, and $NASDAQ.

For comparability, we use revenue (which in $HYPE’s case is effectively equivalent to Free Cash Flow or dividends, given that 97% of revenue is allocated to buybacks) and compare it with peers’ adjusted EBITDA, the most widely accepted proxy for operating cash generation.

While this framing is actually conservative for $HYPE, since peers’ adjusted EBITDA often overstates true cash generation, it provides the most standardized valuation basis.

On an annualized basis:

• Nasdaq: ~$3.0B adj. EBITDA (Q2 annualized)
  

• Robinhood & Coinbase: ~$2.0B adj. EBITDA (Q2 annualized)
  

• Hyperliquid: ~$1.3B revenue / FCF / dividends (August annualized)

What this shows is clear:

• $HYPE is already operating at scale comparable to major industry players despite its relative youth.
  

• Its business model appears structurally more profitable, with 97% of revenue directly distributed to investors.
  

• In terms of cash generation, $HYPE functions as a cash machine.

Yet, despite this, $HYPE currently trades at valuation multiples far below $HOOD, $COIN, and $NASDAQ.

$HYPE’s Multiple vs. Peers: Why It Trades at a Discount

Looking at the chart below, one thing is clear: $HYPE trades at significantly lower valuation multiples than peers. And importantly, $HYPE’s multiples are calculated on a conservative basis, using Free Cash Flow (FCF), earnings, or even dividends, rather than adjusted EBITDA.

If we were to compare apples-to-apples on an EV/FCF basis, the undervaluation would be even more pronounced. Still, we prefer to remain conservative here:

• $HOOD & $COIN: ~40x EV/EBITDA (based on market cap and Q2 annualized EBITDA)
  

• $NASDAQ: <20x EV/EBITDA (based on market cap and Q2 annualized EBITDA)
  

• $HYPE: ~9x EV/FCF or earnings (based on $12B market cap and August annualized earnings)

All this while Hyperliquid is growing faster than any of these peers.

Why FDV Is the Wrong Metric to Value $HYPE

One recurring concern is: “BUT THE FDV…”

1. Team Allocation

We believe the FDV narrative is one of the key reasons $HYPE trades at such depressed multiples. In our view, market cap is the most appropriate metric for valuation, not FDV. Here’s why.

Unlike much of web3, Hyperliquid’s team has consistently acted in the interest of the community and tokenholders. They bootstrapped the company with their own resources, rejected VC funding, and have shown no indication of opportunistic dumping.

The team is just 11 people. They don’t need hundreds of millions to operate. Their clear ambition is to reinvest into growth and build one of the most significant success stories in the space. If the team were to sell $HYPE, it is far more likely these proceeds would be reinvested into scaling the business, further fueling buybacks. That’s a fundamentally accretive dynamic.

Last but not least, treasury shares (i.e., shares held by the company itself) are never included when valuing equities. So why should Hyperliquid Foundation tokens be counted as part of the supply when valuing $HYPE? It simply doesn’t make sense.

$HYPE is the closest thing to equity we’ve seen in web3—backed by one of the most ethical and capable teams in the space. That’s exactly why we should stick to using market cap as the proper valuation metric.

2. Future emissions and community rewards

Why would Hyperliquid choose to dilute existing investors with Airdrop 2.0 ? 

Traders aren’t on HL because of incentives, and even the mere anticipation of another airdrop is enough to drive activity. If this supply were ever released, it would most likely follow an annual inflation model, distributed gradually over 5–10 years, with yearly inflation capped at, for example, 3–7%.

That said, this potential supply should be treated the same way as new share issuance in traditional equities. In equity markets, we don’t discount valuations for hypothetical future share offerings unless management has explicitly announced them. The same logic should apply here.

The reality is, we don’t yet know how the Hyperliquid Foundation will deploy this supply.

What we do know is that the team has consistently acted to support the community, the token, and the ecosystem. It’s highly unlikely they would choose to dilute traders, community members, protocols building on HL (who hold significant $HYPE), or even themselves.

Hyperliquid’s Growth Trajectory

Another reason we believe it makes little sense for $HYPE to trade at such low multiples is its current growth trajectory.

Just a couple of weeks ago, we released our semiannual report on Hyperliquid, produced in collaboration with OAK Research and sponsored by HypurrFi.

Trading volume on Hyperliquid went from about $13B per week in Q4 2024 to an average of $47B during the first half of 2025, with an all-time high above $78B during the week of May 12.

By the end of 2024, Hyperliquid accounted for around 56% of trading volumes on decentralized perpetual trading platforms. Dominance continued to increase, reaching more than 73% market share at the end of H1 2025.

We have long been accustomed to seeing Hyperliquid dominate the perp DEX market, but what stood out most in the first half of 2025 was its growth relative to centralized exchanges, which are currently losing ground.

Hyperliquid holds a set of competitive advantages that make it the most compelling venue to trade. First, it is one of the cheapest places to trade both spot and perpetual futures. It also offers the deepest on-chain liquidity, with order book depth on certain assets now rivaling that of leading CEXs.

For example, during the launch of $PUMP, Hyperliquid had the deepest market depth, the highest trading volume, and the tightest spreads on the asset, a milestone never before seen in the history of a DEX.

Another major strength is that, for several months now, and particularly since the launch of the Trump memecoin, Hyperliquid has consistently been the first venue to list new assets in perps and, since the launch of UNIT, in spot markets as well.

This has become a powerful acquisition engine, reinforcing the perception among traders that Hyperliquid is the place to be for trading highly anticipated new coins.

HyperEVM TVL Growth:

$HYPE Buybacks on the rise:

Assets onboarded through Unit have generated more than $20B in trading volume. Despite these achievements, Hyperliquid’s spot-to-perps volume ratio is still only 2%, compared to 15–30% on most centralized exchanges.

Launched on February 14, 2025, Unit is more than just another Hyperliquid project. It is a backbone component that will shape the protocol’s future. Only a few months after launch, its strategic importance is already undeniable.

Unit is Hyperliquid’s asset tokenization layer, enabling native deposits and withdrawals for a wide range of assets.

Hyperliquid’s Growth Catalysts: HIP-3, Unit, Builder Codes & More

Looking forward, Hyperliquid is positioned with multiple, scalable growth catalysts:

• HIP-3: enabling any holder of 1M $HYPE to launch perpetual pairs and capture up to 50% of fees, without infrastructure overhead.

• Growth of Unit: lowers the barriers for adoption and expands user-driven activity.

• Builder Codes: strategic integrations, such as Phantom, which alone could add 2%–4% annualized cash flow growth, with far greater upside if other wallets and front-ends follow. Rabby Wallet has already announced it and MetaMask should follow.

• Organic growth: fueled by an expanding perps market and likely market share gains versus competitors.

• Wider range of assets: expanding trading opportunities on-chain.

Taken together, these catalysts reinforce Hyperliquid’s moat around liquidity and infrastructure while unlocking entirely new avenues for scaling.

Why $HYPE Still Looks Mispriced

Despite impressive H1 growth and generating ~$1.3B in annualized revenue/FCF, distributing 97% of that directly to investors, and growing at a far faster pace than peers like $COIN, $HOOD, or $NASDAQ, $HYPE still trades at only ~9x earnings/FCF multiples.

That is dramatically below Robinhood and Coinbase at ~40x EV/EBITDA and Nasdaq at ~20x, despite the fact that $HYPE’s multiples are calculated on a far more conservative basis (FCF vs. EBITDA). On an apples-to-apples EV/FCF comparison, the undervaluation would be even more pronounced.

Concerns about FDV and token supply are overstated. Treasury shares are excluded from equity valuations, and the same principle should apply to Hyperliquid Foundation tokens. The team has consistently acted in the best interest of the community and tokenholders. There is no reason to assume reckless dilution.

If anything, any future supply release would likely follow a gradual, inflation-based model. In practice, $HYPE is the closest thing to equity web3 has ever seen.

When you combine this growth trajectory with its current deeply discounted valuation multiples, the disconnect is clear: $HYPE remains heavily mispriced.

In addition, $HYPE distribution may also be a reason for $HYPE undervaluation but it is sets to change very soon with Hyperliquid Strategies Inc, check out Bob Diamond and David Schamis interview hosted by Monk & Keisan. Interview here.

You'll understand how $HYPE could soon become a Wall Street Asset.

Obviously, there are risks: market downturns, loss of market share, execution challenges, or even potential exploits. From our perspective, however, these risks are acceptable as long as Hyperliquid continues to grow and execute at its current pace.

Hyperliquid.

Hope you enjoyed reading this Hyperliquid analysis.

If you found it valuable, feel free to share it with others and follow us on X. You can also join our free Telegram group, we’re always up for thoughtful discussions and idea-sharing with the community.

Stay tuned, more in-depth insights are coming your way soon.