Hyperliquid vs AsterDex: 233 markets against 556, and what that hides

AsterDex lists far more markets and reaches into asset classes Hyperliquid does not carry: at least 40 non-crypto markets (31 equity, 5 commodity and 4 ETF) against no confirmed non-crypto market. Its routable list is 2.4 times Hyperliquid's. Pick AsterDex when the market you want is only listed there. When it is listed on both, the deciding factor is the book on that one market, and that is something you look at rather than infer from a listing count.

AsterDex's exchangeInfo returns 590 symbols, 570 of them perpetuals with a TRADING status. The gap is two separate things and worth splitting: 15 symbols are settling and 5 are not open yet, and nothing in the trading set is anything other than a perpetual. Our own gateway routes 556 of them, against 233 on Hyperliquid, and the two numbers differ from the venue's own because the gateway counts only what it can actually place an order into. So the headline is real: AsterDex is 2.4 times the routable list. What it does not tell you is where the liquidity is. Breadth and depth are different properties; a list of 500 markets can be a list of 20 liquid ones, and neither venue publishes per-market depth in a form that can be compared, so no depth claim appears on this page. Check the book on the market you actually trade.

• AsterDex: 570 perpetuals with a TRADING status out of 590 symbols (15 settling, 5 not open yet)
• Routable through our gateway in September 2026: 556 AsterDex, 233 Hyperliquid
• Hyperliquid's own universe: 234 entries, 178 live

Hyperliquid lists no non-crypto market that our catalog and a price check can confirm: 169 of its 178 live markets are crypto by our catalog's column, one is on tokenized gold (PAXG), and the other 8 (NXPC, SPX, kBONK and five more) are tickers our catalog does not carry or prices as a different instrument. Watch out for one lookalike: its SPX book is SPX6900, a memecoin marking under a dollar, not the S&P 500, and a ticker list is not enough to tell them apart. AsterDex tags its own symbols by underlying, and on the trading set those tags include STOCK on 110 symbols, ETF on 14 and Commodities on 11. The tags overlap, so those are tag counts rather than a clean partition of the book: QQQ carries both STOCK and ETF. Read them as an indication of reach rather than an exact inventory. The practical point stands either way. If you want leveraged exposure to a US-listed name, an ETF or the gold price itself, Hyperliquid does not list it, its PAXG perp on tokenized gold aside, and AsterDex does: commodity books on gold, silver, platinum, palladium and WTI crude (CL, XAG, XAU, XPD and XPT) once our catalog's classes are price-checked against its own marks. Ostium and Lighter both cover some of the same ground by different mechanisms, which are comparisons of their own.

Hyperliquid runs its own L1, so the venue and the chain are the same thing and margin is a single collateral asset. AsterDex is deployed on existing chains, BNB Chain among them, rather than running its own, and its book is not margined in one asset: across the trading set the margin asset is USDT on most of it, with USD1 and one further collateral asset on a small tail. That matters more than it sounds. On AsterDex the market you want can be quoted against a collateral asset you do not hold, which is a funding step before it is a trading decision.

Across the venues we route to, the order size field means three different things. Hyperliquid and AsterDex both consume size in units of the asset, so 0.5 is half a coin on either. GMX and Ostium expect a USD notional and derive collateral by dividing by leverage. In our own app the Lighter path takes USD collateral and derives the asset size from it. Hyperliquid and AsterDex are the one pair where the same order body means the same trade, which makes moving between them unusually painless and makes moving from either to GMX or Ostium the place to be careful.

Hyperliquid publishes a volume-tiered maker and taker schedule. AsterDex charges a maker and taker fee too, but it does not carry one in exchangeInfo and its commission endpoint rejects an unauthenticated call, so no AsterDex rate is quoted here. What can be said without a number is the shape: both are schedule venues, and neither is zero-fee. If a zero fee is the thing you are optimising, Lighter is the venue in this set whose own API reports maker and taker of exactly zero on all 226 of its active books.

Hypertradeworx routes to Hyperliquid and AsterDex from one order ticket and one self-custodial wallet, along with Lighter, GMX and Ostium, and shows positions from both in a single portfolio. Because the two share a sizing convention, switching the venue field on the same ticket does what you would expect. Margin does not cross venues: each holds the collateral for the positions opened on it.