Wallet-app users on Hyperliquid are down $280 million
According to Hyperdash, users of six wallet apps are down $280 million on Hyperliquid perps. Fees are slightly more than half of the $126 million lost through the apps since 10 November 2025.
Six apps, $280 million down
Users of six wallet apps are down $280 million trading perps on Hyperliquid, Hyperdash writes in an analysis that Hanson Birringer posted on X on 19 October 2026. Hyperdash tracked nearly 400,000 wallets that trade through Phantom, MetaMask, Rabby, Trust Wallet, Invo, and fomo, each connected by a builder code that earns the app a fee on every trade.
The trades run on Hyperliquid, where Phantom has already crossed $50 billion in perps volume, as the 16 October report notes. At five of the six apps the typical wallet deposited between $30 and $60, while Rabby has fewer and considerably larger accounts, and its users are the most likely to be profitable, according to Hyperdash.
In an explainer dated 20 January 2026, Hyperdash places itself alongside Phantom, PVP.trade, and other apps whose trading bypasses Hyperliquid’s native interface. According to that page, a builder code was likely attached to those orders.
Fees and trading results
Of the $280 million, about $126 million was lost trading through these apps since 10 November 2025, according to Hyperdash, and the rest comes from before then or from trades on Hyperliquid outside these apps. Hyperdash splits that $126 million into trading results and fees, with fees the larger part, slightly more than half.
Each app adds its own builder fee on top of Hyperliquid’s base trading fee, so a $100 order costs between 6.5 and 14.5 cents depending on the app. Invo users deposited $12.4 million and traded $5.8 billion in volume.
The six apps
Hyperdash sets the six apps side by side. The fee per $100 is the base taker fee plus the standard builder fee, and the result is the traders’ all-time profit or loss on Hyperliquid.
| App | All-time result | Fee per $100 | Wallets profitable, all time | Volume per trader | Liquidated at least once | Liquidations per $10 traded |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phantom | −$100.3 million | 9.5 cents | 21% | $219,000 | 48% | 20.4 cents |
| MetaMask | −$74.0 million | 14.5 cents | 22% | $223,000 | 39% | 20.8 cents |
| Rabby | −$79.3 million | 6.5 cents | 28% | $532,000 | 36% | 15.8 cents |
| Trust Wallet | −$16.5 million | 14.5 cents | 27% | $259,000 | 29% | 13.4 cents |
| Invo | −$5.7 million | 8.0 cents | 14% | $65,000 | 73% | 12.0 cents |
| fomo | −$3.8 million | 9.5 cents | 27% | $124,000 | 26% | 11.7 cents |
The six results add up to −$279.6 million (rounded to $280 million in the text). A second chart shows fees paid on trades through each app, with no start date in the title.
| App | Fees |
|---|---|
| Phantom | $29.9 million |
| MetaMask | $15.3 million |
| Trust Wallet | $6.3 million |
| Rabby | $5.9 million |
| fomo | $5.0 million |
| Invo | $4.5 million |
Together, that is $66.9 million.
Markets
BTC accounts for close to half of volume through the apps, followed by HIP-3 markets such as oil, silver, and gold, which barely traded there before January and are now the second-largest category. On BTC, fees alone exceeded what users made on the trades they closed, and HIP-3 and smaller markets cost users more per dollar traded than BTC and ETH taken together.
The net-loss chart adds trading results and fees and comes to $125.6 million for the six apps combined (about $126 million in the text):
- BTC: $48.6 million
- HIP-3: $41.7 million
- SOL: $22.4 million
- other markets: $12.9 million
Who is still trading after three months
Monthly active traders more than tripled from November 2025 to September 2026, led by Invo and fomo, which each went from almost no traders to tens of thousands within a few months. About half of each month’s active traders are using the apps for the first time, and after three months only around one in seven new traders is still there (15 percent on the retention chart). According to Hyperdash, most of them stop after month three, while the growth comes from new users.
What to watch
- Whether the six apps publish the same fee per $100
- Whether Hyperdash describes how the wallets were selected in more detail than the article does
Sources
- Hanson Birringer, Hyperdash — Post, 19 October 2026, 12:47 a.m. Berlin · Article, “The $280M Cost of Onboarding Retail to Hyperliquid”
- Hyperdash — Builder-code explainer, 20 January 2026
- SOLANA·HUB — Phantom, $50 billion perps volume