RIADeFi
Refusal file · other

Why Ketju rejected Hyperliquid Bridge

Memo v1Published by Ketju Research

A registry memo, published verbatim and versioned. Superseded versions are recorded, never edited away. A rejection is a judgment for Ketju's client base and thesis, not a universal safety claim. Not investment, legal, tax, or compliance advice.

The memo

REJECTED ON A STANDING TRANSPARENCY FACT, not a temporary evidence gap. The bridge locks USDC on Arbitrum and mints it 1:1 as collateral on HyperCore, Hyperliquid's own custom consensus chain, secured by the same roughly two-thirds-of-stake validator quorum that secures the exchange itself — not an Ethereum-native fraud-proof or ZK system, and not economically independent of the exchange it serves. Validator node software has been closed-source since early 2025: validators run a binary they cannot independently audit. That is a standing characteristic of the system, not a fact this review expects to change soon, and it blocks certifying what is actually running regardless of how the validator set's decentralization trends. Hyperliquid's own documentation states the tracked legacy Arbitrum bridge now holds less than 10% of USDC supply on HyperCore, meaning the surveyed TVL figure may already track a shrinking minority path.

What would reopen the file

  • Validator node software becomes open-source or is independently, reproducibly verified against deployed binaries
  • Foundation-affiliated validator stake exceeding 50% of total is reversed and stays below that level for 90 days
  • USDC-specific bridge withdrawal timing and dispute mechanics are independently confirmed and pass a proposed-size stressed-exit test
  • A new independent audit is published covering current bridge code, superseding the 2023 Zellic reports
  • Any confirmed exploit of the bridge contract itself, as distinct from an exchange market-mechanic event

Facts on file

Verdict
Rejected
Exposure
other
Chains examined
Arbitrum
Memo version
v1
Reviewed
Next review

← All published refusals