HYPE Treasury Company Wants to Bring Hyperliquid to U.S. Clients

Key Takeaways

• FCM would carry U.S. accounts on HIP-3* markets
• Q3 net income: $620.6M on $803M unrealized gains
• HYPE treasury grew from 29.3M to 38.5M
• No launch date, contracts or fees disclosed

The Nasdaq-listed company, which trades as PURR, disclosed the filing in its November 5 results release, where CEO David Schamis described the application and the quarter’s token buying as “the same bet.”

What a U.S. Account Would Mean

A futures commission merchant is the firm that takes a customer’s orders and holds the money backing them, as the National Futures Association describes the role. It stands between the trader and the market. It does not run the market.

That is the position Hyperliquid Strategies is seeking. Its subsidiary would carry U.S. client accounts for markets built under HIP-3*, a permissioned version of the HIP-3 framework that already lets outside deployers launch perpetual futures on Hyperliquid. The release does not mention access to Hyperliquid’s existing open markets, so the plan as described reaches U.S. traders through a narrower set of permissioned markets.

On the record

• FCM application filed by a subsidiary
• Scope: U.S. client accounts on permissioned HIP-3* markets
• Stated aim: perpetual futures for U.S. customers inside a regulated framework

Not yet disclosed

• The subsidiary’s name
• Which contracts would list first
• Who could open an account, and at what cost
• A start date

The Broker Is Only Half the Approval

The release ties the plan to two decisions. It gives no assurance on the timing or outcome of the FCM application, and none on regulatory approval of the permissioned HIP-3* markets themselves. The second condition carries more weight than the first.

Under U.S. rules, a market offering futures to retail traders generally has to be designated as a contract market by the CFTC, unless an exemption or exclusion applies. An FCM can carry accounts, but it cannot give a market that standing. Hyperliquid’s documentation places contract specifications, price inputs and daily operation with each market’s deployer, and the release says independent operators would run their own markets compliantly, with the blockchain underneath staying neutral infrastructure.

Neither document names the operator that would seek U.S. standing for these markets, or the clearinghouse that would stand behind the trades. Until one is identified, the application covers the account layer of a structure whose market layer has not been disclosed.

Wallet restrictions do not close that gap. As Coindoo reported in its look at Hyperliquid’s permissioned-market plans, HIP-3* limits trading to approved addresses. Deciding which U.S. customers may legally hold those addresses is a separate, legal question.

Capital Is the Smaller Hurdle

An FCM is a compliance operation before it is a trading one. The NFA’s FCM application requirements call for financial reporting, a chief compliance officer and written procedures for cybersecurity, risk management and customer complaints, all of which must stay in place after approval.

The capital floor is modest by comparison. The CFTC sets minimum adjusted net capital for an FCM at $1,000,000, or a higher amount tied to the margin on positions it carries. Hyperliquid Strategies ended September with $254.6 million in cash and cash-like instruments and no debt, so meeting the opening requirement looks manageable, provided that capital is placed in the registered subsidiary. The obligation grows with the business: the more customer margin the FCM carries, the more capital it must hold.

Where the $620.6 Million Came From

September quarter, main line items

Net unrealized gains on HYPE+$803.0M Staking revenue and validator commissions+$12.3M Interest income+$1.0M SG&A and R&D expenses−$7.6M Equity facility expense, mainly non-cash−$15.3M Provision for income taxes−$172.3M Net income$620.6M

The quarter’s profit measures HYPE’s price more than the company’s operations. The gain on tokens it still holds exceeded net income outright, and the largest deduction was a tax provision booked in the same quarter. Set both aside and the operating picture is small: staking, validator commissions and interest brought in about $13.3 million, roughly 1.7 times what the company spent on SG&A and R&D.

Most of that income comes from the validator the company runs with Unit, which the release describes as the largest on the network outside the Hyperliquid Foundation. Annualized, the quarter’s staking and commission revenue comes to about $49 million, or roughly 1.4% of the $3,505.3 million value of the company’s HYPE at September 30.

The price exposure is far larger. With about 38.5 million HYPE on the balance sheet at quarter-end, each $1 move in the token shifts the treasury’s value by roughly $38.5 million, about 6% of the entire quarter’s net income.

Newer Tokens, Thinner Cushion

The 9.1 million HYPE bought during the quarter cost $785 million, an average of about $86 per token. HYPE closed September at $90.99, around 5% above that level, so the quarter’s purchases added size to the treasury but little margin.

The margin sits in older holdings. According to the release’s cumulative figures, the company has bought about 25.9 million HYPE at an average of $61.13 since launch, and its latest count of 38.9 million tokens, including staking and validator rewards, carries a blended cost of $56.35. HYPE would have to fall about 38% from its September 30 price before the position as a whole sat below what the company paid for it.

Crypto Hack Recovery Has a Problem Bigger Than Stolen Keys

How the Buying Is Funded

All of it rests on share sales. The company raised $911 million in the quarter through its committed equity facility, under which, according to its SEC prospectus, it sells newly issued shares to Chardan. Coindoo’s earlier report on the expanded facility covered its capacity. The September quarter shows it in heavy use, and the income statement now carries a charge for it.

The same quarter included $17 million spent repurchasing 2.7 million PURR shares, about $6.30 each. Selling and retiring stock in parallel benefits remaining holders when shares are sold high and bought back low, and the cumulative figures show that pattern: about $1,578.4 million raised at an average of $10.36 per share, against $27.9 million spent on roughly 5.8 million shares at $4.81. The company has since raised its repurchase authorization to $100 million.

The release does not give a share count, so it does not show HYPE per share, the measure that tells holders whether issuance has grown or diluted their slice of the treasury. For that, the company points investors to the Adjusted Net Asset Value section of its website.

The Same Bet, in Both Directions

Schamis’s case is that the brokerage and the treasury reinforce each other. The release argues that Hyperliquid’s fees flow back to HYPE through programmatic buybacks and puts the value accruing to the ecosystem at about $834 million over the twelve months to September 30, a figure the company says it has not independently verified. On that view, U.S. accounts trading HIP-3* markets would add fees to the system that supports the token, while the FCM earns its own account revenue.

The counter-argument follows from the same words. If both businesses are one bet, the FCM offers no hedge against the treasury. A decline in HYPE would shrink the asset base and could arrive alongside weaker activity on the very markets the brokerage is meant to serve. Investors looking to PURR for exposure beyond the token would not find it in this plan.

Three disclosures would test it: an approved FCM registration, visible in the NFA’s public BASIC database; the name of the operator and clearinghouse behind U.S.-facing HIP-3* markets; and FCM costs and customer revenue reported as separate lines, starting with results for the quarter ending December 31, 2026. Until those appear, the quarter’s numbers describe a HYPE treasury, and the brokerage remains an application.