.jpg)
Kraken's parent company wants to put regulated Hyperliquid perps on American soil, and the structure it chose says everything about how crypto infrastructure meets US law. Payward announced on September 16 that it plans to bring on-chain perpetual futures to eligible US clients through Hyperliquid's HIP-3 builder-deployed market system, with Bitnomial, the CFTC-regulated exchange and clearinghouse Payward acquired earlier this year, deploying, administering, clearing and settling the contracts, and NinjaTrader Clearing, a registered futures commission merchant, carrying the customer accounts. The proposal is subject to regulatory approval and has no launch date, but the architecture is the first serious attempt to run a genuinely regulated US derivatives market on public blockchain infrastructure, with Hyperliquid the first blockchain protocol in the arrangement.
The timing is commercial, not ideological: Payward reported 6.6 million funded accounts at the end of June, up 42% year over year, and Hyperliquid recorded roughly $237 billion in perpetual volume over the last 30 days, per DefiLlama, the largest on-chain perps venue by a wide margin.
How the Hyperliquid Perps Structure Works
The design routes every regulated function through registered entities while using Hyperliquid's public order book for matching and recording. Bitnomial Exchange, a CFTC-designated contract market since 2020, would act as the HIP-3 deployer, creating and owning the perpetual markets and controlling contract definitions, oracle prices, leverage limits and settlement procedures, the authority HIP-3 grants to market deployers who meet the 500,000 HYPE staking requirement. Bitnomial Clearinghouse, separately registered as a derivatives clearing organization, handles clearing and settlement. NinjaTrader Clearing, an NFA member under ID 0309379, sits on the customer side, and only traders onboarded by NinjaTrader and included on the required allowlists can access the market at all, because Hyperliquid recently added optional permissioning that lets deployers restrict participation through on-chain allowlists. That permissioning feature is the load-bearing wall: HIP-3 was originally permissionless infrastructure, and the allowlist model exists precisely so markets can enforce "regulatory or institutional requirements limit who can trade" conditions. US clients would not gain access to Hyperliquid's full menu, only the specific markets Bitnomial chooses to deploy under its exchange rules, which keeps the CFTC's jurisdiction intact in practice rather than just on paper.
Why Kraken's Parent Is Betting on On-Chain Execution
The commercial logic is a custody-and-clarity arbitrage. Kraken already offers US perpetual futures through Bitnomial on Kraken Pro since June, so the customer demand exists; what changes with HIP-3 is execution location, moving matching and recording onto Hyperliquid's order book while the regulated stack, exchange, clearinghouse, FCM, stays exactly where the CFTC expects it. Jon Pham, Payward's head of US derivatives, framed the proposal as reusing the same clearinghouse that supports the existing American perpetuals business, and co-CEO Arjun Sethi said Bitnomial would hold the market keys and the regulatory obligations, connecting public blockchain trading infrastructure with registered US derivatives entities. The incentive runs both directions: Hyperliquid gets the legitimacy of a regulated US venue building on its rails, a different kind of endorsement than the speculative attention around its token unlocks, and Payward gets on-chain settlement economics with a compliance answer for its home regulator, a combination that matters as institutions weigh venues against the mainstream-capital validation Nasdaq's Kraken stake represented. Context matters too: Coinbase and Kraken both already offer AI-stock pre-IPO perps and other crossover products, as we covered in the exchange race into non-crypto derivatives, and the same 20x-leverage product line is now being rebuilt chain-first.
The Risks That Decide Whether This Ships
The honest hurdles are three. Regulatory: the announcement expressly conditions everything on approval, CFTC records confirm Bitnomial's registrations but not clearance for this specific HIP-3 arrangement, and the earlier reporting that Payward had presented the structure to the CFTC cuts both ways, it signals engagement, not agreement. Operational: one HIP-3 operator currently accounts for around 98% of builder-deployed open interest by Payward's own statement, and independent research put one venue at $202.36 billion of Q2 volume and 95.1% of HIP-3 activity, unaudited figures, meaning builder-deployed markets are concentrated, young, and stress-tested mostly by a single dominant operator. Competitive: CoinGecko's perpetuals report counts $85.3 trillion of 2025 volume on centralized venues against $6.38 trillion decentralized, so the prize is real but the DEX side remains a fraction of the market, and the entire bet assumes institutions want on-chain execution enough to pay for the permissioning overhead that makes it legal.
What to Watch
Watch the CFTC's response, since this is the test case for whether HIP-3 permissioned markets satisfy US derivatives law; watch whether the allowlist mechanics survive contact with live US customers once, and if, launched; and watch whether other exchanges copy the pattern, because if Payward clears the bar, the deployer-plus-clearinghouse template becomes the industry's default route from Web3 into the regulated American market. The regulated Hyperliquid perps proposal is not a product launch. It is a jurisdictional experiment with no launch date announced yet.
