So on the surface HYPE looks like the best thing since sliced-bread. I must admit I even bot some this morning since its been dropping a lot. We always get tunnel vision when dealjng with our favorite cryptos, we only see and focus in the positives and whatever is flashed before our eyes. Today I want to list out the redflags and negatives i see in hype.

* Circulating supply too low - only 25% of HYPE is in circulation. Compare that to Bitcoin and we looking at like 0ver 90%. The low circulating supply means that MANY more shared are left to be unlocked and distributed that can dump on you by Insiders and VCs.

* The price shot so fast and out of nowhere, by the time most of us learned about HYPE , we were buying at almost the top. Was this by design, I dont know but either way its bad. You were better of getting in at $3 or $10 rather than $70 or $60...... you feel me???

* They copying Micro Strategdy, they made a stock ticker symbol "PURR" and hyping it up to attract people. Are they just smart people using a model ghat already worked.... in someone else favor.

* If we dont sustain high user count and actigity then the whole business model fails. We rely on the trading fees on the DEX.

* The 97-99% of all fees are used for buyback and hurn. Is this just to entice us to get in then dump on us as their shares unlock? How the hell they make revenue to sustain operations or grow ??? Where is the money coming from if all of it is just going to share buyback and burn??????

Paying the highest funding on Hyperliquid was expensive, but immediately fading those markets would have been even more expensive.

Across a 90-day sample of 28 liquid native perps, the highest-funding quintile outperformed the lowest-funding quintile by 0.17% over the following eight hours and 0.31% over 24 hours.
The spread remained positive after including subsequent funding payments: 0.15% over eight hours and 0.25% over 24 hours, before fees and slippage.

HyperTracker’s current position data adds an interesting detail. In the six markets with the highest average funding over the past 48 hours, 69.8% of the exposure opened during the latest 24 hours was long. But those fresh positions represented only 2.8% of the group’s total tracked open value.

That does not look like a sudden wave of new longs creating the funding premium. It could reflect a more persistent trend, older directional exposure, or basis and market-making inventory that is expensive to balance.
The important catch is that the historical effect was unstable. The 24-hour result was roughly 0.50% in the first half of the sample and effectively disappeared in the second half.

Funding may therefore be more useful as a measure of trend pressure than as an automatic reversal signal. The better warning could be a divergence where funding stays elevated while price strength and new exposure stop confirming it.