Hyperliquid Tests Permissioned Perpetual Markets for Payward

Access controls target a regulated market

Hyperliquid’s proposed access controls could let regulated firms build perpetual futures markets on its infrastructure while limiting participation to approved accounts. That design puts a gate around who can trade without requiring each market to serve every user of the broader network. Payward, Kraken’s parent, plans to be the first CFTC-regulated firm to use the feature, though the arrangement still requires regulatory approval.

The proposal sits at the intersection of two different operating models. Hyperliquid provides shared infrastructure for markets created by third parties, while Payward’s plan assigns specific market and customer functions to regulated businesses. The test will be whether those roles can fit together in a way that satisfies the relevant approval process and works in practice.

Who controls the trading flow

The feature, called HIP-3*, adds optional permission settings to HIP-3, Hyperliquid’s framework for third-party perpetual futures markets. Deployers and their sub-deployers would manage an onchain allowlist, determining which accounts can access a permissioned market. Existing markets would be unaffected, so the proposal doesn’t imply a network-wide change to participation rules.

That distinction matters. An allowlist can make access to a particular market more selective, while leaving other markets on the framework available under their existing terms. The mechanics also place responsibility with the market’s deployers: they would control the list and, according to Hyperliquid, retain responsibility for their markets.

Payward’s planned structure assigns each operational role to one of its regulated businesses. Bitnomial, registered with the CFTC as an exchange and clearinghouse, would launch and operate the markets, then clear and settle trades. NinjaTrader Clearing, a Payward entity registered as a futures commission merchant, would hold client accounts. In practice, that division links market operation and post-trade handling with the accounts used to participate.

Payward first announced the plan on Sept. 16. It said access would be limited to accounts onboarded by NinjaTrader and included on allowlists maintained by both NinjaTrader and Bitnomial. The two-list arrangement gives each business a role in deciding who can enter the market. Payward reported 6.6 million funded accounts as of June 30, though that figure doesn’t establish how many users would qualify for these markets.

“Payward intends to be the first, holding the keys and carrying the regulatory obligations,” co-CEO Arjun Sethi said in the release. The phrase “holding the keys” captures the proposal’s central tradeoff: access is controlled by named operators, while the trading venue relies on Hyperliquid’s infrastructure.

Get Unchained’s crypto news in your inbox with the free Unchained Daily newsletter.

Testnet specifications remain preliminary

Hyperliquid said the first version is available only on testnet. Its specifications may change with feedback, and support for permissioned markets will require a future network upgrade. The companies haven’t announced a live-trading date or released contract details, leaving the proposed operating model clearer than the timing or final implementation.

A testnet gives the companies a place to assess the design before it is used for live trading, but it doesn’t resolve the questions that depend on approval or an upgrade. The access rules, allocation of operational duties, and path from testing to launch will all need to align. For now, the project remains a plan under development.

Hyperliquid described itself as “a neutral infrastructure layer with the goal of supporting large parts of the financial system.” It said deployers would retain control of their markets and responsibility for them. That framing presents the network as a venue for outside operators, rather than the party managing each market’s access. The practical test is whether that separation holds up when a regulated firm’s planned service depends on the infrastructure.

Hyperliquid co-founder Jeff Yan welcomed Payward’s plans on Oct. 27, writing on X: “We’re honored that they are building on Hyperliquid to bring the next evolution of perpetual markets to the United States.” The key milestone now is whether the testnet design can progress to an approved launch and a future network upgrade. Until then, the announcement describes intent, not an operating market.

What the proposal could signal

This is more significant than it looks: permission settings could give a shared trading framework a way to host markets with narrower participation rules. For firms seeking to serve approved customers, that flexibility may make the infrastructure more relevant. But the feature’s value depends on the details of who controls access and how responsibilities are enforced across the businesses involved.

Here’s the thing: the allowlist is only one part of the arrangement. The planned structure also depends on account onboarding, market operation, clearing, settlement, regulatory approval, and a network upgrade. Each piece has a defined proposed role, yet the companies haven’t released contract details or a live date. A working testnet feature alone won’t answer whether the full service is ready.

If you’re working in this space, the distinction to watch is between technical permissioning and an approved, live product. That said, Payward’s plan shows how a regulated firm might seek to combine its own account and market operations with third-party infrastructure. Whether that model can move from proposal to launch remains open.

And this is the part most people overlook: the design leaves deployers with control and responsibility for their markets, even as they rely on a shared network. A useful test of the model.

Related Listen: Could Decentralizing Further Be Hyperliquid’s Best Bet for Handling US Regulation?

The post Hyperliquid Tests Access Controls, and Kraken’s Parent Wants to Use Them appeared first on Unchained.