Hyperliquid’s HYPE token traded near 88.45 dollars on October 1, down 2.74 percent on the day, even as the platform’s policy arm pressed European regulators to treat perpetual futures — the product at the heart of its business — as ordinary derivatives rather than a special crypto category.
By David Chen | October 1, 2026
The Hyperliquid Policy Center submitted its position during the European Commission’s review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, better known as MiCA. The argument is simple but consequential: a financial instrument should keep its existing treatment under MiFID II, Europe’s derivatives rulebook, even when it is issued or traded on a public blockchain. For users of the largest on-chain trading venue, the outcome could decide whether they keep access to global liquidity pools or face a segregated European market.
The Hook: Same Product, New Wrapper
A perpetual future is a bet on price movement that never expires — unlike a traditional futures contract, it rolls on forever, with regular funding payments between longs and shorts. Hyperliquid’s policy team wants regulators to classify products by their economic features, arguing perpetuals share the key characteristics of derivatives already covered by MiFID II despite having no fixed expiry date. The group asked for confirmation through existing European Securities and Markets Authority guidelines rather than a separate category for crypto-linked perpetual contracts.
There is a real distinction underneath the jargon. HPC’s submission distinguishes order-book perpetuals — where buyers and sellers meet on a transparent exchange — from contracts for difference, whose providers can act directly as the customer’s counterparty, meaning the house takes the other side of your trade. That matters because ESMA’s current position, stated in February, holds that derivatives marketed as perpetual futures likely fall within existing CFD intervention measures where they meet the CFD definition. Those measures include leverage limits, margin close-out requirements and negative balance protection — protections that can cap how much retail traders can lose.
On-Chain Evidence: Transparency as a Regulatory Bargaining Chip
Hyperliquid’s policy team also proposed using independently verifiable blockchain records to meet transparency obligations — a natural fit for a venue whose entire order book lives on-chain. Its recommendations cover disclosures of trades, funding payments, orders and liquidations, alongside funding rates, margin requirements, reference prices and position-closing rules. The pitch to Brussels is essentially: our paperwork is public by default, and anyone can audit it.
The platform’s growth adds weight to the argument. Hyperliquid launched manual borrowing on September 18, letting users borrow the stablecoins USDC and USDT against supported collateral, and reported 269 million dollars borrowed across the underlying infrastructure, which also powers its portfolio margin system. Permissioned HIP-3 markets add access controls through on-chain allowlists managed by deployers.
The Core Conflict: Levels to Watch While Regulators Decide
While lawyers argue in Brussels, the chart tells its own story. TradingView’s KuCoin HYPE/USDT daily chart showed a session high of 91.105 dollars and a low of 88.119 dollars, with the token sitting near the bottom of that range after retreating from its late-September peak of 97.88 dollars — roughly 9.6 percent above current levels. At 88.45 dollars, HYPE would need to gain about 10.7 percent just to revisit that peak.
- 90.95 to 91.11 dollars — first resistance zone, where the upper Bollinger Band on the 4-hour chart meets the daily high
- 87.89 dollars — the Bollinger midpoint and first support; HYPE traded only about 0.6 percent above it
- 84.84 dollars — lower Bollinger Band, the next stop if the midpoint breaks
- 81.29 dollars — the daily Fibonacci 0.786 level, roughly 8.1 percent below the current price
- 76 to 78 dollars — the September trough, the last visible shelf below that
Momentum is cooling rather than collapsing. The daily relative strength index sat at 52.58 — above the neutral 50 line but below its own moving average of 61.17. The Aroon panel showed Aroon Up at 42.86 percent and Aroon Down at zero, reflecting distance from the recent high without active downtrend pressure, while the 4-hour average directional index read 25.55 and had fallen from its late-September readings — meaning trend strength is fading in both directions.
Market Implications: An American Parallel Is Already Moving
Europe is not the only regulator in play. Payward, the parent company of Kraken, announced on September 16 that it intends to deploy Hyperliquid perpetual markets for U.S. clients, subject to regulatory approval. Its plan assigns market operation and clearing to Bitnomial, with NinjaTrader Clearing carrying client accounts — and trading would require inclusion on both firms’ allowlists, using the same permissioned HIP-3 structure. In plain English: a fully regulated American pipeline to Hyperliquid’s markets is being assembled, piece by piece.
That is the deeper bullish case for HYPE beyond the charts. If Hyperliquid’s technology becomes the plumbing for regulated derivatives in both the U.S. and Europe, demand for the token — which is tied to the platform’s ecosystem — could follow the volume. If instead ESMA folds perpetuals into CFD-style rules with tight leverage caps, the retail experience on Hyperliquid from Europe could look very different.
The Verdict: Watch 91 Dollars and Brussels
For a regular investor, two signposts matter. On the chart, a sustained move above the 90.95-to-91.11 dollar zone would reopen the path toward the 92-to-95 dollar trading area and eventually the 97.88 dollar peak; a loss of the 87.89 dollar midpoint shifts attention down to 84.84 and 81.29. On policy, the question is whether Europe accepts that a perpetual future is just a future — with blockchain record-keeping as a bonus — or decides it needs its own, stricter rulebook. Until then, expect the price to keep chopping between those levels.
The cryptocurrency market remains highly volatile. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.
classify by economic features not by the wrapper is the most sensible thing anyone has said to brussels in years
^ meanwhile HYPE cant even clear 91. the MiFID II lobbying is bullish, the chart is not
it tagged 91 twice last week and rejected both times. need a close above with real volume, otherwise the MiFID news is just noise
third test with the MiFID II story as fuel is different tho. news driven breakouts get more follow through than plain technical ones
hard agree on needing the volume close. third test of 91 with the MiFID story behind it is the only reason im watching at all
third test at 91 with actual regulatory fuel behind it is a different animal. plain technical rejections and news driven breakouts do not behave the same
agree the third test is different, but 91 held three times because nobody wants to be the one breaking it before the ruling
three rejections at 91 with nobody wanting to break it first is exactly how pre ruling ranges form. the fourth attempt comes the day the MiFID read drops
if MiCA carves perps into a special crypto category, EU users end up on a segregated book with worse liquidity. nobody wins that, not even the regulators
hyperliquid arguing a perp is just a derivative with a blockchain wrapper. MiFID II already handles the economics side, hard to see brussels disagreeing once the lobbying dust settles
MiFID II treatment for on-chain perps would be massive for the serious EU traders i know. cross venue funding arb actually becomes doable without the crypto carve out headache
funding arb across venues is the sleeper argument here. MiFID treatment opens that up to actual size, not just degen accounts
classify by economic features is the most sensible thing anyone has said to a european regulator all year. a perp is just a rolling future, pretending otherwise helps nobody
agreed, tho the EU will find a way to make the sensible option take 3 more years of consultations
Three years is optimistic. EMIR took closer to five from proposal to live reporting requirements.
Calling a rolling future a future should not be a controversial take, yet here we are waiting for brussels to notice perps carry expiry mechanics like every other derivative
HYPE testing 91 while the policy team lobbies Brussels. did not have that combo on my 2026 bingo card
The segregated book scenario would hurt EU liquidity but lets be real, VPNs exist. Writing borders for a permissionless venue is theater.
vpns fix account access, not liquidity routing. a segregated book means worse fills for EU users even with the workaround
vpn workarounds do nothing for the liquidity pools themselves. a segregated book hurts depth for everyone routing through it, EU traders just eat it first
segregated book point is real but EU already lives with worse venue access on stocks. ppl routing through US brokers for years, same movie
equities routing offshore costs you a few cents on fills. a segregated perp book costs you liquidation slippage when the book thins. not the same movie at all
same movie except perps have no consolidated tape. worse fills in perps feed liquidation cascades, EU traders feel that way harder than stock routing ever did
segregated book depth is the real cost. spreads will tell the story way before any official liquidity report does
hype at 91 while lobbying brussels is a decent flex. mifid treatment on perps would unlock volume that dwarfs the current book