The Rise of Fee-Generating Blockchain Protocols: Hyperliquid vs. edgeX

The decentralized finance (DeFi) landscape in 2025 is witnessing a seismic shift in on-chain dominance, driven by two titans: Hyperliquid and edgeX. These protocols are redefining how users interact with blockchain-based trading and liquidity provision, with their fee structures, user behavior patterns, and operational resilience shaping the future of DeFi. As investors and developers scrutinize their performance, the battle for transaction volume and capital inflows has become a critical barometer of innovation and user trust.

On-Chain Fee Revenue: A New Benchmark

In October 2025, edgeX briefly outpaced Hyperliquid in 24-hour fee income, generating $2.3 million, according to Lookonchain. This surge underscores edgeX's ability to attract high-frequency trading activity and cross-chain liquidity; a Coinotag report notes it ranks second in net inflows for bridging fund flows, trailing only Ethereum. Meanwhile, Hyperliquid maintained a steady trajectory, reporting $20.19 million in weekly revenue and a 35.9% surge in perpetual trading volume to $58.08 billion, as Coinotag reported. During periods of extreme volatility, Hyperliquid's HLP vault even delivered over 10% daily returns, showcasing its operational robustness according to Coinfomania.

The divergence in their fee models is telling. edgeX's focus on cost-efficient cross-chain transactions and competitive trading fees has drawn users seeking lower friction in capital movement. Hyperliquid, on the other hand, leverages its stablecoin inflows and high-margin perpetual contracts to sustain revenue, even as market conditions fluctuate.

User Behavior Shifts: Cost Efficiency vs. Stability

DeFi users are increasingly prioritizing cost efficiency and liquidity depth, two areas where edgeX and Hyperliquid offer distinct value propositions. edgeX's 24-hour fee revenue spike correlates with a 24% increase in active transaction addresses, according to Bitget. Its ability to rank second in bridging fund inflows-behind only Ethereum-highlights its role as a liquidity hub for multi-chain ecosystems.

Conversely, Hyperliquid's user base appears more anchored to stability. Its $25 million in weekly stablecoin inflows suggests a preference for predictable, high-volume trading environments, particularly during market turbulence. This dynamic is further reinforced by Hyperliquid's HLP vault, which offers yield-generating opportunities during volatile periods, creating a flywheel effect for capital retention.

Protocol-Specific Innovations: The EdgeX Advantage

edgeX's rise is not merely a function of transaction volume but also its product innovations. By blending centralized finance (CeFi) efficiency with decentralized security, edgeX has attracted a diverse user base, including institutional players seeking hybrid solutions; Coingecko lists edgeX with 47 trading pairs and $747 million in 24-hour volume, demonstrating a focus on depth and accessibility.

Hyperliquid, meanwhile, has doubled down on perpetual contracts and stablecoin integration, positioning itself as a haven for traders who prioritize leverage and liquidity. However, edgeX's cross-chain capabilities-particularly its ability to facilitate seamless fund transfers between Ethereum, Solana, and Arbitrum-have created a unique value proposition in a fragmented DeFi landscape.

Investment Implications: A Tale of Two Strategies

For investors, the competition between Hyperliquid and edgeX highlights two contrasting strategies: edgeX's aggressive cost optimization and cross-chain scalability versus Hyperliquid's focus on stablecoin-driven liquidity and volatility resilience. While edgeX's short-term fee dominance is impressive, Hyperliquid's ability to sustain revenue during market stress-such as its $40 million single-day profit during a crisis-demonstrates a different kind of strength.

The key question is whether edgeX's user acquisition momentum can translate into long-term retention, or if Hyperliquid's operational depth will reassert dominance as market cycles evolve. Given the current data, a diversified approach that accounts for both protocols' strengths may be optimal for DeFi portfolios.