The post Outdated algorithm caused $650M excess losses on Hyperliquid, report appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Two months on from October 10’s crypto market meltdown, which saw $19 billion of positions liquidated, Gauntlet CEO Tarun Chitra argues that common autodeleveraging (ADL) mechanisms led to massive losses on Hyperliquid. In a lengthy post to X, Chitra says an excess of $650 million was autodeleveraged from profitable traders’ positions. The amount, he claims, was 28x more than the potential bad debt facing the exchanges who used ADL. This “massacre of the innocent” could allegedly be avoided with new ADL algorithms, described in an accompanying 95-page report. Did @HyperliquidX autodeleverage (ADL) $650m of PNL that it didn’t have to? Was this 28x more than the minimal necessary? Did almost every exchange (incl. @binance) copy-pasta a Huobi heuristic from 2015? Can we do better in 2026? 𝐘𝐞𝐬 (+ a new paper) https://t.co/XNeohPg1pN — Tarun Chitra (@tarunchitra) December 9, 2025 Read more: How Binance’s USDe ‘depeg’ cost the exchange millions Autodeleveraging on autopilot Chitra describes ADL as a “last resort” which applies a “haircut” to profitable traders to “cover the bad debt of insolvent positions.”  The 10-year-old “Queue” algorithm is widely used by perpetual futures platforms such as Binance, Hyperliquid, and Lighter. However, under extreme market conditions, when ADL is activated repeatedly, “the greedy Queue strategy completely fails.” The strategy assigns “haircuts” as a function of profits and leverage which, Chitra says, concentrates losses on the biggest winners, while overshooting the necessary amount to be liquidated. He suggests a “risk-aware pro-rata” algorithm which assigns ADL based on the leverage of each position. The post recognizes that “a perfect [ADL] strategy does not exist.” However, optimizing for three elements of a so-called ADL Trillema (solvency, fairness and revenue), and running on October 10 Hyperliquid data, the new approach appears to significantly outperform Queue. Chitra ends by urging for further innovation in the… The post Outdated algorithm caused $650M excess losses on Hyperliquid, report appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Two months on from October 10’s crypto market meltdown, which saw $19 billion of positions liquidated, Gauntlet CEO Tarun Chitra argues that common autodeleveraging (ADL) mechanisms led to massive losses on Hyperliquid. In a lengthy post to X, Chitra says an excess of $650 million was autodeleveraged from profitable traders’ positions. The amount, he claims, was 28x more than the potential bad debt facing the exchanges who used ADL. This “massacre of the innocent” could allegedly be avoided with new ADL algorithms, described in an accompanying 95-page report. Did @HyperliquidX autodeleverage (ADL) $650m of PNL that it didn’t have to? Was this 28x more than the minimal necessary? Did almost every exchange (incl. @binance) copy-pasta a Huobi heuristic from 2015? Can we do better in 2026? 𝐘𝐞𝐬 (+ a new paper) https://t.co/XNeohPg1pN — Tarun Chitra (@tarunchitra) December 9, 2025 Read more: How Binance’s USDe ‘depeg’ cost the exchange millions Autodeleveraging on autopilot Chitra describes ADL as a “last resort” which applies a “haircut” to profitable traders to “cover the bad debt of insolvent positions.”  The 10-year-old “Queue” algorithm is widely used by perpetual futures platforms such as Binance, Hyperliquid, and Lighter. However, under extreme market conditions, when ADL is activated repeatedly, “the greedy Queue strategy completely fails.” The strategy assigns “haircuts” as a function of profits and leverage which, Chitra says, concentrates losses on the biggest winners, while overshooting the necessary amount to be liquidated. He suggests a “risk-aware pro-rata” algorithm which assigns ADL based on the leverage of each position. The post recognizes that “a perfect [ADL] strategy does not exist.” However, optimizing for three elements of a so-called ADL Trillema (solvency, fairness and revenue), and running on October 10 Hyperliquid data, the new approach appears to significantly outperform Queue. Chitra ends by urging for further innovation in the…

Outdated algorithm caused $650M excess losses on Hyperliquid, report

2025/12/11 02:33

Two months on from October 10’s crypto market meltdown, which saw $19 billion of positions liquidated, Gauntlet CEO Tarun Chitra argues that common autodeleveraging (ADL) mechanisms led to massive losses on Hyperliquid.

In a lengthy post to X, Chitra says an excess of $650 million was autodeleveraged from profitable traders’ positions. The amount, he claims, was 28x more than the potential bad debt facing the exchanges who used ADL.

This “massacre of the innocent” could allegedly be avoided with new ADL algorithms, described in an accompanying 95-page report.

Read more: How Binance’s USDe ‘depeg’ cost the exchange millions

Autodeleveraging on autopilot

Chitra describes ADL as a “last resort” which applies a “haircut” to profitable traders to “cover the bad debt of insolvent positions.” 

The 10-year-old “Queue” algorithm is widely used by perpetual futures platforms such as Binance, Hyperliquid, and Lighter.

However, under extreme market conditions, when ADL is activated repeatedly, “the greedy Queue strategy completely fails.”

The strategy assigns “haircuts” as a function of profits and leverage which, Chitra says, concentrates losses on the biggest winners, while overshooting the necessary amount to be liquidated.

He suggests a “risk-aware pro-rata” algorithm which assigns ADL based on the leverage of each position.

The post recognizes that “a perfect [ADL] strategy does not exist.” However, optimizing for three elements of a so-called ADL Trillema (solvency, fairness and revenue), and running on October 10 Hyperliquid data, the new approach appears to significantly outperform Queue.

Chitra ends by urging for further innovation in the design of algorithmic clearing: “ADL was invented as a band-aid in 2015. We haven’t even begun to explore the design space!

Read more: Aster vs Hyperliquid: inside the high-stakes perp DEX war

Hyperlivid

In response to Chitra’s post, Hyperliquid’s Jeff Yan quipped, “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, fud.” 

However, rather than responding directly to the claims of inefficient autodeleveraging, he takes issue with the description of the relationship between ADL and Hyperliquid’s HLP insurance fund.

He accused Chitra of “spread[ing] lies masked by fancy ML terms to sound smart.”

Other Hyperliquid supporters pitched in, pointing to apparent inaccuracies and bias due to investments in competitors.

Read more: ZKasino exploiter saw $27M liquidated on Hyperliquid trade

In the wake of the October 10 crash, Yan argued that “ADLs net made users hundreds of millions of dollars by closing profitable short positions at favorable prices.”

He highlighted that the platform’s ADL queue incorporates “both leverage used and unrealized pnl,” while thanking users for feedback. He also alluded to research “on whether there can be substantial improvements that merit more complexity.”

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news, follow us on XBluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Source: https://protos.com/outdated-algorithm-caused-650m-excess-losses-on-hyperliquid-report/

Piyasa Fırsatı
Common Protocol Logosu
Common Protocol Fiyatı(COMMON)
$0.003469
$0.003469$0.003469
-12.59%
USD
Common Protocol (COMMON) Canlı Fiyat Grafiği
Sorumluluk Reddi: Bu sitede yeniden yayınlanan makaleler, halka açık platformlardan alınmıştır ve yalnızca bilgilendirme amaçlıdır. MEXC'nin görüşlerini yansıtmayabilir. Tüm hakları telif sahiplerine aittir. Herhangi bir içeriğin üçüncü taraf haklarını ihlal ettiğini düşünüyorsanız, kaldırılması için lütfen service@support.mexc.com ile iletişime geçin. MEXC, içeriğin doğruluğu, eksiksizliği veya güncelliği konusunda hiçbir garanti vermez ve sağlanan bilgilere dayalı olarak alınan herhangi bir eylemden sorumlu değildir. İçerik, finansal, yasal veya diğer profesyonel tavsiye niteliğinde değildir ve MEXC tarafından bir tavsiye veya onay olarak değerlendirilmemelidir.

Ayrıca Şunları da Beğenebilirsiniz

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Paylaş
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
XRP ETF’s bereiken belangrijke mijlpaal: $1 miljard aan netto instroom

XRP ETF’s bereiken belangrijke mijlpaal: $1 miljard aan netto instroom

De markt voor crypto-exchange-traded funds (ETF’s) heeft opnieuw een belangrijke mijlpaal bereikt. XRP ETF’s hebben gezamenlijk meer dan 1 miljard dollar aan netto
Paylaş
Coinstats2025/12/16 21:01
XSGD And XUSD Launch On Solana’s Blazing Network In 2025

XSGD And XUSD Launch On Solana’s Blazing Network In 2025

The post XSGD And XUSD Launch On Solana’s Blazing Network In 2025 appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. StraitsX Stablecoins Unleash Power: XSGD And XUSD Launch
Paylaş
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/16 20:59