Hyperliquid has recorded its first reported builder-deployed outcome exchange after OUT completed deployment through the network’s permissionless market framework.
Hyperliquid’s block explorer shows a successful on-chain transaction registering the Outcome DEX under the name OUT through the HIP-4 deployment framework. The transaction confirms the deployment, but does not establish whether OUT has opened markets for live trading.
No separate announcement or verifiable website detailing OUT’s markets, liquidity, or trading activity was available at the time of writing.
How Hyperliquid’s HIP-4 framework works
According to Hyperliquid’s developer documentation, HIP-4 allows approved deployers to create outcome markets without seeking validator approval for each individual contract. Every market must still use a template previously approved by the validator set.
Templates define a contract’s basic structure, possible results, and settlement process. After validators approve a template, deployers can use it to create separate markets that meet the framework’s requirements.
A YES/NO template gives traders two possible outcomes. Multi-result templates can cover questions with several possible answers, although Hyperliquid’s main HIP-4 documentation says multi-outcome support was not included in the initial mainnet release and would be introduced in stages.
Hyperliquid’s deployer page, updated on Aug. 13, lists functions for activating a DEX, selecting templates, setting a deployer fee scale, and creating markets. The documentation currently labels HIP-4 deployer actions as testnet-only. As a result, OUT’s deployment should not yet be described as a confirmed permissionless mainnet launch without additional evidence.
As crypto.news previously reported in July, Hyperliquid’s permissionless deployment plan was scheduled to begin on testnet before moving to mainnet. The proposal required market operators to stake 500,000 $HYPE and allowed validators to slash deployers for incorrect or delayed settlement, according to the July report.
Hyperliquid’s framework also requires separate stakes for HIP-3 and HIP-4 operations because a single $HYPE allocation cannot support both deployments simultaneously. At current prices, that requirement could create a substantial entry cost for independent teams seeking to operate both perpetual and outcome exchanges.
HIP-4 outcome contracts avoid leverage and liquidations
Hyperliquid introduced HIP-4 on testnet in February and activated its first outcome contracts on mainnet on May 2. A July explainer described the products as fully collateralized contracts that settle within a fixed range at expiration.
Unlike perpetual futures, an outcome position does not use borrowed funds or recurring payments between long and short traders. HIP-4 has no funding rate, while fully funded positions eliminate the liquidation process used to close leveraged trades when collateral falls below maintenance requirements.
In a binary market, a YES token settles at 1 if the stated event occurs and at 0 if it does not. The NO side receives the opposite result. A trader who buys YES at 0.60 can earn 0.40 per contract if the event occurs, while the purchase price represents the maximum possible loss.
Hyperliquid’s documentation presents HIP-4 as a general-purpose tool rather than a system limited to conventional prediction questions. Its fixed-range structure can also support bounded, options-style products with known maximum payouts and losses when positions open.
Trading takes place through HyperCore, Hyperliquid’s on-chain order-book engine. HyperCore also powers the network’s spot, perpetual, and HIP-3 builder-deployed markets, allowing HIP-4 products to use the same matching infrastructure and order types.
Protocol documentation states that fees are not charged when an outcome position opens. Charges may apply when a trader closes, burns, or settles a position, although Hyperliquid waived outcome-market fees during the initial testing period.
Bitcoin and CPI contracts tested HIP-4 settlement
Hyperliquid’s first mainnet HIP-4 product was a recurring Bitcoin binary contract. The market settled each day at 06:00 UTC against the $BTC mark price published through HyperCore, providing an objective data point for determining whether YES or NO tokens received the payout.
The network later expanded beyond crypto prices. In May, a U.S. CPI contract allowed traders to take positions on the annual inflation rate reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The CPI market offered three possible results: below 4.3%, exactly 4.3%, or above 4.3%. It used USDC as collateral and was scheduled to settle using the official BLS release. Early activity stood at approximately $3,000 in volume and $5,000 in open interest.
According to Galaxy Research, validator-settled markets later covered Federal Reserve decisions and sporting events. The research firm said validators could publish approved off-chain results through regular network operations, reducing reliance on a separate oracle provider.
Galaxy reported that HIP-4 recorded $2.38 million in 24-hour Bitcoin outcome volume by its 25th day. The figure represented about 20% of the combined $BTC prediction-market volume measured between Hyperliquid and Polymarket during that period, according to the firm’s June report.
Activity later declined after an initial increase linked to World Cup markets. Blockworks data cited in a July market report placed HIP-4 open interest at about $182,000 and cumulative notional activity at approximately $881,000 at the time. Those figures covered a later snapshot and used a different measurement period.
U.S. access depends on event-contract regulation
For American traders, OUT does not have the same regulatory status as Kalshi, which offers event contracts through a Commodity Futures Trading Commission-registered designated contract market. Hyperliquid has not announced that OUT is registered with the CFTC or available to U.S. users.
Hyperliquid Policy Center and Multicoin Capital addressed the regulatory divide in a July prediction-market rules filing. The groups asked the CFTC to publish clear federal standards for reviewing event contracts and to explain publicly why specific contracts are approved or rejected.
Their submission said settlement terms should determine whether a contract falls into restricted categories involving gaming, war, assassination, or unlawful activity. The filing was an industry policy request and did not authorize HIP-4 exchanges to serve U.S. traders.
State and federal regulators have also disputed whether some sports event contracts qualify as federally regulated derivatives or state-regulated wagers. Kalshi, Crypto.com, and Robinhood have faced state challenges over sports-related products even when the contracts were offered through federally regulated market structures.
Users in the United States remain unable to access Hyperliquid, according to an August filing cited by Hyperliquid Strategies. The company said it was unaware of a pending CFTC approval process for the network and warned that a route into the regulated U.S. market could not be assured.
