The attack on Hyperliquid failed: the CZ-linked exchange Aster lost 4 times more than it planned.
The competition between the two largest decentralized derivatives exchanges has entered a stage of open conflict. A trading address, allegedly funded through the Aster platform, attempted to artificially crash the liquidity of its direct competitor, Hyperliquid. Aster is publicly backed by Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ), placing the confrontation in the spotlight.
The organizers used an old, well-known manipulation scheme. However, this time the system worked differently: the attacker lost four times more than their victim. Let's break down how this happened.
Chronicle of a Failed Manipulation
Analysts from the Markets Alpha channel recorded the attempted deception of the trading platform on June 16. According to blockchain analysis, the address belonged to a group of wallets that had withdrawn $2.3 million from Aster a week earlier. Approximately 20 hours before the incident, this wallet transferred $635,000 to Hyperliquid. Immediately after, the trader began aggressively opening a long position on the Fartcoin token.
| Operation Stage | Position Size | Result for Participant |
| Position Building | $7.1 million | Reached 20% of open interest |
| Forced Closure | $0 | Full liquidation and loss of $540,000 |
| Outcome for HLP Pool | Loss of about $130,000 | Successfully absorbed and closed the position |
Consequently, the plan completely failed, and the identity of the wallet owner remains undisclosed.
The Scenario That Didn't Work
Analyst il.hl detailed the classic attack scheme, consisting of five sequential steps:
- Accumulating about 20% of open interest in a low-liquidity asset.
- Artificially inflating the price through spot market purchases.
- Provoking the protective liquidation of large positions.
- Forcibly transferring these positions to the HLP liquidity pool.
- Mass dumping of tokens, leaving the pool with massive losses.
Attackers had already used a similar algorithm of actions during past incidents on Hyperliquid. However, this time the strategy failed at the very beginning. After four hours of continuous buying, the wallet was liquidated, so the organizer didn't even have time to start inflating the price. As a result, the attacker suffered much greater financial damage than the targeted platform itself. Later, on June 18, well-known trader MartyParty confirmed that Aster was openly attacking Hyperliquid.
Context: The Aster vs. Hyperliquid Standoff
The Aster platform is a multi-chain DEX without mandatory user verification. The project was created by merging the Astherus and APX Finance platforms, followed by a rebranding with support from YZi Labs. The exchange offers clients enormous leverage of up to 1000x. Changpeng Zhao openly calls this project Hyperliquid's main rival. Consequently, the businessman has been repeatedly accused of attacking the platform through Aster.
My professional opinion: This incident is a clear confirmation that even well-tuned manipulative schemes fail if the counterparty has sufficient liquidity depth. Hyperliquid demonstrated the resilience of its system, while Aster's reputation as a "Hyperliquid killer" suffered a serious blow. In the long term, such episodes only strengthen trust in protocols with transparent liquidity pool architectures.