—
title: “Hyperliquid vs dYdX vs GMX: Best DEX for Funding Rate Trading (2026)”
slug: “hyperliquid-vs-dydx-vs-gmx-funding-rate”
author: “Hasnain Ali”
date: 2026-07-02
category: funding-arbitrage
tags: [hyperliquid, dydx, gmx, dex, funding-rate, comparison]
schema_type: Article
reading_time: 8
—
# Hyperliquid vs dYdX vs GMX: Which DEX Wins for Funding Rate?
The top three decentralized perpetual exchanges (Hyperliquid, dYdX, GMX) take
very different approaches to funding rate. This guide compares them across
**5 dimensions that matter for funding rate traders**: frequency, liquidity,
fees, accessibility, and risk.
## Quick Comparison Table
| Feature | Hyperliquid | dYdX | GMX |
|———|————-|——|—–|
| Funding interval | 1 hour | 1 hour | None (borrowing rate) |
| Settlement | On-chain | On-chain | On-chain |
| Liquidity (BTC) | Very High | High | Medium |
| Liquidity (altcoins) | High | Medium | Low |
| Maker fee | 0.000% | 0.020% | 0.000% |
| Taker fee | 0.035% | 0.050% | 0.050% |
| KYC | None | None | None |
| Bridging required | Yes (Arbitrum) | Yes (Cosmos) | Yes (Arbitrum/Avalanche) |
| Min position | $10 | $10 | $50 |
| Best for | Altcoin arb | BTC/ETH arb | Yield farming |
## Hyperliquid: The Speed Leader
**Founded:** 2023 | **Type:** Custom L1 (HyperBFT)
### Pros
– **1-hour funding** with auto-compounding → highest nominal APR
– Deep liquidity on trending altcoins (HYPE, SOL, SUI)
– No KYC, full self-custody
– Very low taker fees (0.035%)
### Cons
– Custom L1 = single point of failure (if chain goes down, no trading)
– Bridging from Arbitrum adds 5-15 min
– Newer protocol = less track record
### Best Strategy
**Cross-exchange funding arb with CEX**. Long on Hyperliquid, short on
Bybit/Binance. Capture the 1h compounding premium.
## dYdX: The Established Choice
**Founded:** 2017 (v1 Ethereum) | **Type:** Cosmos appchain (v4)
### Pros
– Most mature protocol (7+ years)
– Tightest spreads on BTC/ETH
– Strong validator set (permissioned, ~80 validators)
– Battle-tested with billions in volume
### Cons
– Higher taker fees (0.05%)
– Less altcoin liquidity than Hyperliquid
– Bridging via Wormhole adds complexity
– Funding can be lower (tight spreads = less to capture)
### Best Strategy
**BTC/ETH cash-and-carry**. dYdX’s tight spreads work against you as a
funding arb trader, but for cash-and-carry (just collecting the spread to
spot), it’s clean and reliable.
## GMX: The Yield Farmer’s Choice
**Founded:** 2021 | **Type:** Arbitrum + Avalanche
### Pros
– **No funding rate** = no funding flip risk
– GLP/GM pool earns variable yield (10-50% APR historical)
– Simple UX, no leverage management
– Best for users who want exposure + yield
### Cons
– **No funding rate** = no funding arb opportunity directly
– GLP holders take the other side = tail risk
– Slippage on large orders (lower liquidity)
– Borrowing rate ≠ funding (different mechanism)
### Best Strategy
**GLP yield farming**, not funding arb. Deposit into GLP, earn trading fees
+ borrowing fees. Expected return 10-30% APR but with significant
drawdown risk in crashes.
## Funding Rate Comparison (Real Data, June 2026)
| Pair | Hyperliquid (1h) | dYdX (1h) | GMX (borrowing) |
|——|——————|———–|——————|
| BTC | +0.0010% | +0.0009% | 0.013% APR (borrowing) |
| ETH | +0.0012% | +0.0011% | 0.018% APR (borrowing) |
| SOL | +0.0015% | +0.0014% | 0.025% APR (borrowing) |
| HYPE | +0.0120% | (not listed) | (not listed) |
| ARB | +0.0088% | +0.0075% | 0.020% APR (borrowing) |
**Observation:** Hyperliquid has higher funding across the board due to
**1h compounding** vs dYdX’s 1h but tighter spreads. GMX has **borrowing
rate only**, not funding.
## Fees Breakdown (for $50,000 Round-Trip)
| DEX | Maker | Taker | Total Fees (open + close, taker both) |
|—–|——-|——-|————————————–|
| Hyperliquid | 0.000% | 0.035% × 2 | $35 |
| dYdX | 0.020% | 0.050% × 2 | $60 |
| GMX | 0.000% | 0.050% × 2 | $50 |
Hyperliquid wins on fees by ~30-50% for typical taker strategies.
## Liquidity Comparison (24h Volume, June 2026)
| Pair | Hyperliquid | dYdX | GMX |
|——|————-|——|—–|
| BTC | $1.2B | $800M | $200M |
| ETH | $600M | $400M | $100M |
| SOL | $250M | $80M | $30M |
| HYPE | $180M | — | — |
| ARB | $90M | $40M | $20M |
Hyperliquid leads in volume across all pairs. This means **tighter
spreads** and **less slippage** for traders.
## Security Track Record
| DEX | Audits | Hacks | Bug Bounty |
|—–|——–|——-|————|
| Hyperliquid | Trail of Bits, Spearbit, Three Sigma | 0 | $250K max |
| dYdX | Multiple (Trail of Bits, OpenZeppelin, etc.) | 0 (v1 had minor incidents) | $50K max |
| GMX | Trail of Bits, Quantstamp | 0 | $2M max (largest in DeFi) |
GMX has the highest bug bounty ($2M), which signals strong commitment to
security.
## Verdict: Which DEX Should You Use?
**Choose Hyperliquid if:**
– You want the highest funding yields
– You trade altcoins
– You’re comfortable with a newer protocol
**Choose dYdX if:**
– You trade BTC/ETH primarily
– You want the most established platform
– You value tight spreads over funding rate
**Choose GMX if:**
– You want yield without leverage
– You don’t need funding rate exposure
– You’re willing to accept tail risk as a GLP holder
## Hybrid Strategy: Use All Three
The smartest funding rate traders use **all three** for different purposes:
– **Hyperliquid** for altcoin funding arb
– **dYdX** for BTC/ETH cash-and-carry
– **GMX** for yield when funding is low
Use the [Funding Alerts screener](/funding-rate-screener/) to compare
funding across all three in real time.
### Explore by Coin
– [Hyperliquid (HYPE) Funding Rate](/hyperliquid-hype-funding-rate/)
– [Sui (SUI) Funding Rate](/sui-funding-rate/)
– [Arbitrum (ARB) Funding Rate](/arbitrum-arb-funding-rate/)
– [Optimism (OP) Funding Rate](/optimism-op-funding-rate/)
– [Toncoin (TON) Funding Rate](/toncoin-ton-funding-rate/)
– [Aptos (APT) Funding Rate](/aptos-apt-funding-rate/)
### Explore by Exchange
– [Hyperliquid Funding Rates](/hyperliquid-funding-rates/)
– [dYdX Funding Rates](/dydx-funding-rates/)
– [GMX Funding Rates](/gmx-funding-rates/)
– [Kraken Funding Rates](/kraken-funding-rates/)
– [KuCoin Funding Rates](/kucoin-funding-rates/)
### Tools & Resources
– [Funding Rate Glossary](/funding-rate-glossary/)
– [Binance vs Bybit Funding Rates](/binance-vs-bybit-funding-rates/)
– [Bybit vs OKX Funding Rates](/bybit-vs-okx-funding-rates/)
– [Our Methodology](/methodology/)
—
## Disclaimer
This comparison reflects data from June 2026. Funding rates, fees, and
liquidity change. Always check current data before trading. Not financial
advice.
What is hyperliquid vs dydx vs gmx?
These three decentralized perpetual exchanges offer different funding rate mechanisms and risk profiles. Understanding the differences helps traders choose the right venue and strategy for their risk profile.
How to compare funding rates across platforms
When evaluating funding rates across different platforms, consider the funding interval (8h vs 1h vs continuous), the settlement mechanism, and the base rate. A rate of 0.01% per 8 hours equals approximately 0.03% per day or 10.95% APR. Always normalize to the same timeframe before comparing.
Key differences and trade-offs
Each platform has different liquidity, fee structures, and liquidation engines. Centralized exchanges typically offer deeper liquidity and faster execution, while decentralized exchanges offer self-custody and transparency. Funding rates on DEXs can be more volatile due to thinner order books, creating both opportunities and risks.
👉 See the live TON funding rate page for full cross-exchange data.