Hyperliquid vs Aster vs Lighter: Funding Rates & Fees Compared (2026)

This article contains affiliate links. Yieldo may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.

Updated 10 September 2026

Lighter publishes a public funding API, but Yieldo has not integrated a Lighter provider. Its absence from our live table is an integration gap, not the absence of an exchange API. Lighter funding API. Standard accounts have zero maker/taker trading fees; Premium uses a paid schedule with different latency and staking discounts. Funding, spread, slippage and transfer costs still matter. Lighter account fees.

TL;DR — Quick Verdict

Snapshot as of 10 September 2026:

• Live data: Hyperliquid and Aster funding rates are tracked and shown below, normalized to an annualized basis so a 1-hour Hyperliquid print and an 8-hour Aster print are actually comparable. Raw per-settlement percentages are not — see the annualization section for why.
• Fees: Hyperliquid runs a fully on-chain central limit order book with published tiers around 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker before volume discounts. Aster's Pro Mode order book advertises lower headline tiers, roughly 0.005–0.02% maker and 0.035–0.04% taker depending on pair and mode — always check the exchange's own current fee page before sizing a trade.
• Lighter: a zk-rollup perp-DEX on Ethereum L2 that launched mainnet in October 2025. Yieldo has no live funding-rate feed for Lighter, so this article does not show or estimate any Lighter numbers.
• Verdict in one line: in a Hyperliquid vs Aster vs Lighter comparison, Hyperliquid wins on liquidity depth and hourly funding responsiveness, Aster competes hardest on headline fees and points, and Lighter is the one to watch once its data becomes trackable.
• Where to trade: Hyperliquid (self-custody, order-book DEX) or Aster (Binance-style API, Pro/Shield modes) for the DEX side; Bybit or OKX if you also want a CEX benchmark to arbitrage against.

Live Funding Rates: Hyperliquid vs Aster vs CEX Median

The table below is the reason this article exists: a live, side-by-side view of Hyperliquid's and Aster's funding rates against the median rate across the centralized exchanges Yieldo tracks, for the coins traders actually watch, refreshed continuously and accurate as of 10 September 2026. Every column is already annualized — you are looking at apples-to-apples yield, not raw per-settlement percentages from two venues with different clocks.

Hyperliquid funding rate BTC — live table

BTC is the pair most traders check first, and it's usually the calmest row in the table above — deep open interest on both Hyperliquid and every CEX we track keeps BTC funding closer to the median than almost any altcoin. If you want BTC funding broken out by every exchange we cover, including Hyperliquid specifically, the dedicated BTC funding page refreshes on the same cadence as this widget. For Hyperliquid's full pair list and its own funding history, see the Hyperliquid funding page; for Aster's, see the Aster funding page.

How to read the Δ column

The Δ column is the gap, in annualized percentage points, between the median across perp-DEX venues and the CEX median for the same coin — not any single venue's own rate, so it can differ from what you'd get comparing one DEX's column straight against the CEX median column (the formula holds unchanged when only one perp-DEX venue is live, since the median of a single value is that value). A positive Δ means perp-DEX venues are, on the whole, paying (or charging) more than the typical centralized exchange right now; a negative Δ means the opposite. A wide Δ on a coin you already hold — or are willing to hold delta-neutral — is the raw material for the arbitrage pairs further down this article. One honest caveat: Aster went live in Yieldo's funding tracker on 2026-08-04, so its column may show fewer coins than Hyperliquid's until coverage broadens — a missing cell means we don't have a fresh print for that pair yet, not that the rate is zero.

Why Raw Funding Rates Are Not Comparable: 1h vs 8h Intervals

This is the single most common mistake in every Hyperliquid vs Aster comparison we've read: lining up two raw percentages from a settlement-notice or exchange UI and calling the bigger number "the better rate." It isn't, because Hyperliquid and Aster don't settle funding on the same clock.

Hyperliquid pays every hour

Hyperliquid settles funding once per hour, on every pair, all the time. Under the hood, the formula still borrows the interest-plus-premium structure common to traditional 8-hour funding models — it's simply distributed across 24 smaller hourly payments instead of three larger ones. Practically, that means Hyperliquid's positions react to positioning shifts faster: if the crowd flips from long-heavy to short-heavy, the rate can adjust within the hour rather than waiting up to eight.

Aster settles every 8 hours

Aster's base funding interval is 8 hours, but that's not universal across its pair list — a portion of Aster's symbols settle every 4 hours instead. In practice this means you should check the specific pair's interval before assuming "Aster = 8h" as a blanket rule; the live table above already accounts for each pair's actual interval when it computes the annualized figure, so you don't have to do that math by hand.

The correct way to annualize and compare

The fix is a single formula, applied consistently: convert every raw per-settlement rate to a common annual basis before you compare anything.

annualized_rate (%) = raw_rate_per_settlement × (24 / interval_hours) × 365 × 100

Where raw_rate_per_settlement is the exchange's fractional rate at each funding event (for example 0.0003 for a 0.03% print) and interval_hours is that specific pair's funding interval — 1 for Hyperliquid, 4 or 8 for Aster depending on the pair. Every figure in the live table above is already the output of this formula, not a raw exchange value, which is exactly why it's safe to read the Hyperliquid and Aster columns side by side. If you'd rather see the full worked example with dollar amounts and round-trip costs, our CEX vs DEX funding arbitrage guide walks through it end to end.

Fees Compared: Hyperliquid vs Aster

Funding is only half of what a perp position costs you — the other half is the maker/taker fee you pay to open and close it. Fee schedules below reflect each exchange's published base tier as of 2026; both platforms run volume-based discount tiers on top, so always confirm the current numbers on the exchange's own fee page before sizing a large trade.

Taker and maker fees

Venue	Maker (base tier)	Taker (base tier)	Architecture
Hyperliquid	~0.015%	~0.045% (tiers down toward ~0.024% at very high 14-day volume)	Fully on-chain custom L1 central limit order book; the HLP vault market-makes as a community-funded liquidity provider with no performance fee, and roughly 97% of protocol fees route to the Assistance Fund, which buys back HYPE
Aster	~0.005–0.02% (varies by pair and mode)	~0.035–0.04%	Hybrid: Pro Mode is a conventional order book with off-chain matching and on-chain settlement (its API mirrors Binance's futures API); Shield Mode is an AMM-style interface with private positions and higher available leverage

Neither model is simply "cheaper" in every case — Hyperliquid's taker fee sits higher at the base tier but its architecture keeps the entire order book on-chain and verifiable, while Aster's lower headline taker fee comes with a choice between a conventional order book (Pro Mode) and a privacy-oriented AMM interface (Shield Mode) that trades some transparency for discretion on open positions.

Referral discounts (-4% Hyperliquid; Aster referral, EN only)

Using Yieldo's own referral links carries a real, non-live discount that doesn't depend on any funding rate: Hyperliquid currently offers −4% off trading fees for six months through Yieldo's link, and Aster currently offers up to 20% in fee rebates plus points. Both figures come from the exchanges' own current program terms, which can change — check the link before you sign up if the exact number matters to your math.

Referral economics across the wider perp-DEX industry are structured differently venue to venue, and it's worth knowing that before you assume every "referral program" pays the same way. Aster's standard referral program splits roughly 10% of a referred trader's fees back to the referrer by default; edgeX's program pays up to 30% of referred fees, calculated daily. Paradex takes a different approach entirely — its standard affiliate tier pays 10% of a referred trader's weekly XP rather than a cut of trading fees, and only approved, high-volume affiliates unlock up to 25% of referred takers' fees. Yieldo doesn't carry a referral link for edgeX or Paradex; they're mentioned here purely for context on how differently these programs are built.

Top Delta-Neutral Funding Pairs Right Now

For comparable contracts and equal underlying exposure, go long where the funding rate normalized to the same time horizon is lower and short where it is higher. Settlement schedules, basis, fees, slippage and margin still matter. Absence from a top-ranked list does not prove that a route fails to cover its costs.

Equal long and short exposure reduces directional price exposure, but does not eliminate basis risk, independent liquidation, execution failures or counterparty risk. Annualizing a current funding quote is a hypothetical projection, not realized profit or guaranteed net yield.

Full Cost of a Route: Funding Arbitrage Calculator

A wide annualized spread on paper is not the same thing as a wide spread in your account after costs. Opening and closing two legs means paying taker fees round-trip on both sides, and if the position involves moving collateral between a CEX and a self-custody DEX wallet, you're also paying a withdrawal fee that a simple funding-rate comparison ignores entirely.

What the calculator subtracts (taker round-trip, withdrawal)

Yieldo's funding arbitrage calculator takes the raw annualized spread and nets out the round-trip taker cost on both legs plus the withdrawal fee for moving collateral, so what you see is the actual expected return on the trade — not the headline number from a comparison table. It's built specifically to handle mixed intervals (a 1-hour Hyperliquid leg against an 8-hour or 4-hour Aster or CEX leg), so you don't have to run the annualization formula from earlier in this article by hand before you can trust the output.

Lighter: What We Know (No Live Data Yet)

Lighter publishes a public funding API, but Yieldo has not integrated a Lighter provider. Its absence from our live table is an integration gap, not the absence of an exchange API. Lighter funding API. Standard accounts have zero maker/taker trading fees; Premium uses a paid schedule with different latency and staking discounts. Funding, spread, slippage and transfer costs still matter. Lighter account fees.

Hyperliquid vs Aster: Which One Fits Your Strategy

Between the two venues Yieldo tracks live, the honest answer is "it depends on what you're trading and why" — not a single universal winner. As of mid-2026, per third-party market-share trackers, Hyperliquid has held roughly a quarter to a third of perp-DEX open interest (having briefly exceeded 70% in March 2026), with Aster among the fastest-growing challengers behind it — context worth knowing even though market share alone doesn't tell you which venue is right for your specific trade.

For BTC/ETH majors

For BTC, ETH, and other deep-liquidity majors, Hyperliquid's combination of hourly funding settlement and the largest order-book depth of the two venues tends to matter most: you feel positioning shifts sooner, and large orders move the book less. The HLP vault's market-making also concentrates liquidity specifically around the pairs with the most open interest, which are disproportionately the majors.

For altcoin funding hunters

If you're chasing wider funding swings on smaller-cap alts, Aster's lower headline taker fee matters more per round-trip, and its Shield Mode gives you the option to keep a position's size private on thinner pairs where a visible large order can move the market against you before you've finished entering it. Just remember: Aster's coverage in Yieldo's live tracker is newer than Hyperliquid's, so double-check a specific alt pair's current funding print in the table above rather than assuming coverage matches Hyperliquid's breadth yet.

Where to Trade

• Hyperliquid — self-custody, fully on-chain order-book perp-DEX; hourly funding; deepest liquidity of the two venues Yieldo tracks live. −4% trading fees for six months via Yieldo's link.
• Aster — Binance-style API, Pro Mode order book plus Shield Mode private/AMM-style trading; base funding interval 8 hours (a portion of pairs on 4 hours). Up to 20% fee rebate plus points via Yieldo's link. Not available to traders in Russia or Ukraine under Aster's terms of service.
• Bybit — a solid CEX benchmark for the median side of the comparison table above, and a common venue for the CEX leg of a DEX-vs-CEX funding arbitrage trade.
• OKX — another CEX benchmark with broad pair coverage, useful for the same DEX-vs-CEX arbitrage structure.

For a direct, structured head-to-head between Hyperliquid and Aster specifically, see the Aster vs Hyperliquid exchange comparison; for background on Hyperliquid's mechanics beyond funding, see our full Hyperliquid review. Exchange profile pages for both venues — Hyperliquid and Aster — carry the same live highlights in a different format if you want a quick overview beyond funding alone.

Risk warning: Perpetual futures trading involves substantial risk, including leverage-amplified losses and liquidation. Funding rates are volatile, can flip sign at the next settlement, and do not offset price risk. Self-custody perp-DEXs carry smart-contract and protocol risk in addition to normal market risk. Nothing in this article is financial advice. Do your own research and never risk more than you can afford to lose.

FAQ

Is Hyperliquid or Aster better for funding rate arbitrage?

For comparable contracts and equal underlying exposure, go long where the funding rate normalized to the same time horizon is lower and short where it is higher. Settlement schedules, basis, fees, slippage and margin still matter. Absence from a top-ranked list does not prove that a route fails to cover its costs. Equal long and short exposure reduces directional price exposure, but does not eliminate basis risk, independent liquidation, execution failures or counterparty risk. Annualizing a current funding quote is a hypothetical projection, not realized profit or guaranteed net yield.

Why can't you compare Hyperliquid's and Aster's raw funding rates directly?

Annualized rate (%) = raw decimal rate × (24 / interval in hours) × 365 × 100. Use the actual interval of each instrument. If the input is already a percentage, do not multiply by 100 again. This is a projection at an unchanged rate.

How do you annualize a 1-hour funding rate to compare it with an 8-hour rate?

Annualized rate (%) = raw decimal rate × (24 / interval in hours) × 365 × 100. Use the actual interval of each instrument. If the input is already a percentage, do not multiply by 100 again. This is a projection at an unchanged rate.

What are Hyperliquid's fees vs Aster's fees?

As published base tiers, Hyperliquid runs roughly 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker (with volume tiers down toward 0.024% taker at very high 14-day volume), while Aster's Pro Mode runs roughly 0.005-0.02% maker and 0.035-0.04% taker depending on pair and mode. Both platforms layer volume discounts on top and can change published tiers, so confirm the current schedule on each exchange's fee page.

What is Lighter, and does it have live funding rate data yet?

Lighter publishes a public funding API, but Yieldo has not integrated a Lighter provider. Its absence from our live table is an integration gap, not the absence of an exchange API. Lighter funding API . Standard accounts have zero maker/taker trading fees; Premium uses a paid schedule with different latency and staking discounts. Funding, spread, slippage and transfer costs still matter. Lighter account fees .

Can traders in Russia or Ukraine use Aster?

No. Aster's terms of service exclude traders in Russia and Ukraine, and Yieldo's referral gate reflects that restriction - Aster's referral link only appears on Yieldo's English-language content. Hyperliquid, Bybit, and OKX remain available options for traders located in Russia or Ukraine among the venues covered in this article.

Which perp DEX currently pays the higher funding rate, Hyperliquid or Aster?

There is no permanent lower-rate venue. Compare the same contracts over the same historical window, account for missing observations, and use the current table for the latest snapshot.

Bottom Line

A real Hyperliquid vs Aster vs Lighter comparison has to be honest about what's live and what isn't: Hyperliquid and Aster both have funding rates you can check on Yieldo right now, correctly annualized so the 1-hour and 8-hour clocks don't distort the comparison; Lighter doesn't yet, and pretending otherwise would just be a guess dressed up as data. Hyperliquid still leads on liquidity depth and reacts fastest to positioning shifts thanks to hourly settlement; Aster competes on headline fees, points, and a privacy-oriented trading mode; Lighter is the one worth watching once its own data becomes trackable. Use the live table above for today's numbers, run any spread through the funding arbitrage calculator before trading it, and revisit this page — it updates with the market, not on a fixed publishing schedule.

This article contains affiliate links. Yieldo may earn a commission at no extra cost to you — it never changes the fees or rates you see.

Written by Eugen Voyager — crypto analyst and founder of Telochain blockchain.

Last updated 10 September 2026.