The Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC) made its stance clear in a filing with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) on Thursday, August 27, 2026, pushing the regulator to prioritize perpetual contracts in its innovation agenda.
The HPC’s latest push drops another ping on the radar of US traders who have been shut out of a derivative market that has gone beyond $500 billion in offshore volume.
Perpetual contracts took over CFTC meeting
The statement arrives just after the CFTC held its first Innovation Advisory Committee meeting on August 20. Perpetual contracts were not a part of the main agenda.
The main agenda included digital assets, artificial intelligence, and prediction markets. However, members of the committee could not stop mentioning the topic of perpetual contracts in each of the three sessions, according to HPC.
HPC took this as proof of demand and decided to make four arguments in its statement:
- that perpetuals are critical to CFTC’s innovation work
- that they meet real hedging needs
- that a friendlier CFTC is presently bringing these markets onshore
- and that public blockchains can modernize derivative plumbing, thus rewriting the law.
Jake Chervinsky, chief executive of HPC, signed the statement, alongside senior counsel Brad Bourque. HPC submitted the statement to Commission Secretary Christopher Kirkpatrick.
HPC self-describes as an independent research and advocacy organization with ties to the Hyperliquid Foundation. HPC was founded by the Hyperliquid Foundation in February 2026.
Who spoke at the committee meeting?
In the statement, HPC mentioned the names of the members who brought up perpetuals, citing timestamps in the meeting webcast.
Tyler Winklevoss of Gemini said that US firms are being left behind as perpetual contracts make up a bulk of global digital assets trading volume. Don Wilson of DRW perceives perpetuals to be risk tools that registered funds would rather hold next to dated futures.
Brian Armstrong of Coinbase, Raghu Yarlagadda of FalconX, and Multicoin’s Tushar Jain also spoke in favor of perpetuals
Why a contract can track a price despite it expiring
A huge part of HPC’s filing centers on the mechanics of a perpetual contract. A perpetual contract has no settlement date, cannot be rolled over, nor delivered. Rather than expire, money is transferred between long and short holders by a recurring funding payment. This is done so the price can move back toward a reference price.
HPC views this as a better solution for exposures that do not end. It gave examples like: an airline consuming aviation fuel, a fund that manages portfolio risk, and an AI developer that has rising compute costs. They all have unending costs, and hedging them with dated futures will mean traders get to experience a roll cycle that includes risk with timing and transaction costs.
A kinder CFTC docket with a lawsuit to match
The statement arrives at a perfect time. It comes at a point when the CFTC has developed a friendlier vibe toward perpetuals.
In May, the CFTC approved the first US-listed perpetual futures contract, Kalshi’s BTCPERP. It further released a policy statement and staff guidance that broached continuous trading. In June, it requested comment on extending the product to storable energy commodities.
HPC and the HIP-3 deployer trade[XYZ] issued a joint response to the energy request on August 26. Then, HPC went on to file a separate response on August 24, requesting the SEC and CFTC to see qualifying equity perpetuals as security futures.
Walt Lukken of the FIA released committee figures which showed the agency was in charge of 30 designated contract markets, up from 16 in 2003 and 17 pending applications. The agency also oversees 6,700 listed contracts, up from 2,100 in 2023.
Not everyone is on board, though. CME Group took the CFTC to court in June, arguing perpetuals are swaps and not futures, and CME’s outgoing chief, Terry Duffy, has referred to the product as “a disaster waiting to happen.”
