The CZ-linked exchange Aster failed an attack on Hyperliquid: losses were 4 times greater than the victim's damage
The competition between the two largest decentralized derivatives exchanges has escalated into open conflict. A trading address, allegedly funded through the Aster platform, attempted to artificially crash the liquidity of its direct competitor, Hyperliquid. It is worth noting that Aster is publicly supported by Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ), making this confrontation particularly significant for the entire market.
The attack organizers employed an old, well-known manipulation scheme. However, this time the mechanism worked differently: the attacker lost four times more than their victim. Let's break down exactly how this happened.
Chronicle of a Failed Manipulation
The attempted attack was recorded by analysts on June 16. According to blockchain analysis data, the attacking address belonged to a group of wallets that had withdrawn $2.3 million from the Aster exchange a week earlier.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 Accumulation | $7.1 million | Reached 20% of open interest |
| Forced Closure | $0 | Full liquidation and loss of $540,000 |
| Outcome for HLP Pool | Loss of approximately $130,000 | Successfully absorbed and closed the position |
As shown in the table, the plan failed completely. The identity of the wallet owner remains undisclosed.
Why the Strategy Failed
Analyst il.hl described in detail the classic attack scheme, which consists of five steps: accumulating about 20% of open interest in a low-liquidity asset; artificially inflating the price through spot purchases; triggering protective liquidations of large positions; forcibly transferring these positions to the HLP liquidity pool; and finally, mass dumping of tokens, leaving the pool with huge losses.
Attackers had used a similar algorithm during previous incidents on Hyperliquid. However, this time the strategy failed from the very beginning. After four hours of continuous buying, the attacker's wallet was liquidated, so the organizer did not 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 of the Aster vs. Hyperliquid Conflict
Aster is a multi-chain DEX without mandatory user verification. The project was created through the merger of the Astherus and APX Finance platforms with support from YZi Labs. The exchange offers clients enormous leverage — up to 1000x.
Changpeng Zhao openly calls this project Hyperliquid's main competitor. The businessman has been repeatedly accused of organizing attacks on the platform through Aster. This incident only confirms that the battle for leadership in the DEX derivatives segment is becoming increasingly fierce.
My opinion: This story is a vivid example of how an aggressive marketing strategy and attempts to squeeze out a competitor using unethical methods can backfire on the initiator. The decentralized derivatives market is too young and volatile to rely on the brute force of capital. Hyperliquid, in turn, has demonstrated the resilience of its risk management system, which strengthens trust in the platform.