Futures giants press Washington on DeFi perpetuals

TLDR

Large futures exchanges are pushing US regulators to rein in DeFi perpetuals, with Hyperliquid at the center of a new fight over onchain derivatives rules.

1. CME Group and ICE/NYSE are lobbying the CFTC and lawmakers to put Hyperliquid under US-style derivatives oversight over manipulation and sanctions concerns.
2. The pressure reflects Hyperliquids rapid rise in 24/7 crypto and commodity perps, which now matter for oil and equity price discovery alongside traditional venues.
3. Hyperliquid and its Policy Center are arguing that onchain perps improve transparency, so the outcome will hinge on CFTC decisions and broader bills like the CLARITY Act.

Deep Dive

1. What CME And ICE Are Pushing

Reports say CME Group and Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), parent of the New York Stock Exchange, have been in Washington urging the CFTC and lawmakers to bring Hyperliquid under federal oversight and CFTC registration, citing risks of market manipulation and potential sanctions evasion on its offshore, pseudonymous markets for assets like oil and other commodities. One detailed account highlights fears that large, anonymous positions on Hyperliquids perps could distort global oil benchmarks or be used by sanctioned entities.

Another report notes CME and ICE want Hyperliquid treated more like a registered futures exchange, with formal customer identification and trade surveillance obligations, framing this as necessary to protect commodity markets and US national security interests. A separate analysis links this lobbying to CMEs own expansion in crypto derivatives, including Bitcoin volatility futures and multi-asset crypto index futures aimed at institutions.

2. Why DeFi Perps Worry TradFi

Hyperliquid is an onchain perpetuals platform with its own layer 1 that has quickly become the dominant decentralized derivatives venue; by early May it had processed about 2.9 trillion dollars in 2025 trading volume and around 60 percent of global onchain derivatives open interest, according to recent fund filings and coverage.

It does not just list crypto pairs. Hyperliquid offers synthetic trading in oil, metals and even pre-IPO equity exposures, with pre-IPO contracts on Cerebras reportedly seeing over 230 million dollars in daily volume versus roughly 30 million dollars in Nasdaq premarket trading, according to one market commentary. That puts its 24/7 order book directly up against legacy exchanges in some of their core products.

For traditional futures giants, this is both a competitive threat and a structural one: DeFi perps allow high-leverage, round-the-clock trading outside US market hours and outside traditional KYC regimes, yet the resulting prices can influence wider benchmarks and hedging behavior.

3. Responses And What To Watch

In response, a US-based Hyperliquid Policy Center, led by industry lawyers and lobbyists, argues that onchain perps improve market integrity because every trade and position is published in real time on a public ledger, which they say makes hidden manipulation harder and enhances regulatory surveillance. They also claim 24/7 trading fills gaps in price discovery left by limited legacy exchange hours, as described in an advocacy-focused writeup.

Hyperliquids founder has been in Washington meeting policymakers, tying the debate to broader legislation like the CLARITY Act, which recently advanced out of the Senate Banking Committee and would explicitly address DeFi protocols and market oversight, according to a summary of the bill. Outcomes range from strict CFTC-style registration that forces heavy KYC and US user restrictions, through a bespoke onchain derivatives regime, to a chillier environment where US access to DeFi perps is pushed further offshore.

Conclusion

Traditional futures giants are not just competing with DeFi perps on product menus, they are now competing in Washington over whose market structure should set the rules for leveraged trading in crypto and commodities. Hyperliquids scale and 24/7 synthetic markets have made it impossible for regulators and incumbents to ignore, and the current lobbying battle will shape whether onchain perpetuals evolve under a tailored, transparent framework or face heavier constraints and geofencing for US participants.