万字深扒Trade.xyz数据，谁在链上炒美股？

Azuma

Odaily资深作者

@azuma_eth

2026-04-30 04:59

บทความนี้มีประมาณ 8668 คำ การอ่านทั้งหมดใช้เวลาประมาณ 13 นาที

A Deep Dive into Trade.xyz Data: Who is Trading US Stocks On-Chain?

สรุปโดย AI

ขยาย

Approximately 43% of the addresses are suspected to belong to the same airdrop farming whale.

Source: Arrakis Finance

Compiled by Odaily (@OdailyChina); Translated by Azuma (@azuma_eth)

Earlier this month, we published an article titled "Who's Trading on HIP-3?", which used a statistical inference attribution method, classifying each address based on trading behavior over the past three months. Addresses predominantly making orders were classified as Market Makers, those frequently taking orders were classified as Arbitrageurs, and addresses with low fill rates and orders carrying builder tags were classified as Retail.

While this approach revealed some interesting patterns in market structure, the classification was inherently probabilistic, and approximately 70% of addresses could not be effectively categorized.

In this article, we will replace statistical inference with a mechanical classification attribution method. On HyperliquidX, every order contains a set of deterministic labels, signed and published by the exchange (e.g., time-in-force, builder code, fill flag, hold time). Based on this order metadata, we classified all addresses into four categories: Retail, Market Maker, Arbitrage Bot, or Airdrop Farmer.

The second step was to identify the specific entities behind these categories. We extracted identity and trading behavior data from the Arkham and HyperTracker APIs. The top 450 addresses contributed 78% of the total trading volume. Within this set, we identified several related entities, including addresses associated with Polymarket, Jump, Selini Capital, Wintermute, Abraxas Capital, and other institutions.

Through this two-step classification method, we observed several key findings, which are detailed below.

Address Distribution

Our observation period was from March 10, 2026, to March 31, 2026, a total of 21 days. During this period, we observed four Trade.xyz markets: CL (Crude Oil), SILVER (Silver), TSLA (Tesla), and XYZ100 (Index), recording a total of 79,622 unique participating wallets and $51.95 billion in total trading volume.

Of these 79,622 addresses that traded during the 21 days, when broken down by volume, despite making up less than 0.5% of all addresses, Market Makers contributed 63% of the trading volume.

When categorized by wallet count rather than volume, the Airdrop Farmer category alone comprised 35,091 addresses, nearly half of all identified addresses.

Airdrop farmers are one of the largest categories by address count but the smallest by volume contribution. 35,091 addresses accounted for 44.07% of the total but generated only $0.4 billion in volume during the observation period, representing 0.77% of the platform's $51.95 billion total volume. In other words, nearly half of the active addresses on Trade.xyz contributed less than 1% of the total market volume.

Breaking this down further by the specific markets they participated in reveals another significant pattern.

Address distribution by market shows that the CL market absorbed 99.3% of airdrop farmers due to its best execution efficiency.

Of the 35,091 airdrop farmer addresses, 34,859 (99.3%) traded CL during the observation period, with the remaining 232 wallets distributed across SILVER, TSLA, and XYZ100. This pattern aligns with airdrop farming behavior, where each wallet accumulates volume through continuous, small, bidirectional trades without taking on price risk. This strategy relies on extremely low execution costs and benefits from minimal slippage. CL, being the most liquid of the four Trade.xyz markets, is a natural venue for this type of activity.

Another interesting observation is the entity behind these addresses. The on-chain tracing detailed later in this article links 34,553 of these farmer addresses to a single Polymarket operator, who alone accounted for 43.4% of all participating addresses on Trade.xyz during the observation period.

At the other extreme of this classification are Market Makers. 363 wallets (0.46% of active addresses) executed $32.75 billion in volume during the observation period, representing 63% of total Trade.xyz volume. The remaining three categories fall between these two extremes – 522 SAT/HFT bots contributed $3.5 billion (6.7%), 38,307 addresses classified as Retail contributed $8.7 billion (16.7%), and another 5,339 unclassified addresses contributed $6.61 billion (12.7%).

This 12.7% of unclassified volume cannot be attributed to a clear strategy based solely on metadata. A reasonable assumption is that a significant portion comes from retail users placing limit orders via the Hyperliquid frontend, or users submitting market and limit orders via the Trade.xyz frontend. Since orders from these two channels carry neither a specific builder code nor dedicated TIF labels, these fills are invisible in a metadata-based classification.

The time-in-force (TIF) distribution weighted by order count shows that 98.5% of orders from Market Makers are ALO, while Arbitrage Bots use 100% IOC orders; the unclassified category has 71.5% GTC, a typical characteristic of manual limit orders placed by frontend users.

The TIF structure further supports this assumption. Among the aggregated orders in the unclassified category, 71.5% carry a GTC (Good Till Cancel) time-in-force label, commonly used for persistent limit orders placed by frontend users.

Introducing the Real Power Player, Themino

Over the past few weeks, a controversy has been brewing around Trade.xyz – whether its apparent user count reflects genuine human participation or is artificially inflated by airdrop farming activities in anticipation of the platform's upcoming TGE. While we cannot comment comprehensively on the interaction patterns across the entire trading platform, our analysis of tick-by-tick trade data for the four Trade.xyz markets in March revealed a noteworthy clue.

Of the 34,602 addresses classified as airdrop farmers, 34,553 (99.9%) can be traced back to a single Polymarket user named Themino.

Themino Cluster: A single user identity on Polymarket spawned 70 independent linear chains, covering 34,553 airdrop farmer addresses.

Here's how Themino operates. Hyperliquid's Layer 1 provides an `internalTransfer` primitive that allows transferring USDC between addresses for a flat fee of $1, regardless of amount. The operator of Themino uses this mechanism to "pass" an initial amount of funds sequentially across tens of thousands of new addresses. Each address executes the same five-step process in approximately 26 seconds:

Receive funds from the previous address via `internalTransfer` (paying the $1 transfer fee on incoming).
Transfer $14 to its `xyz` sub-account.
Execute two IOC orders on the CL market (one buy, one sell), generating two fills and thus recording a certain amount of volume.
Transfer approximately $13.99 back to the main account (the cent difference arises from execution slippage and trading fees).
Transfer funds to the next address via `internalTransfer` (paying another $1 fee).
Repeat the process...

Throughout Themino's operation, 34,510 `internalTransfer` events occurred, resulting in the entity paying a cumulative $34,510 in protocol fees, a behavioral pattern consistent with its trading history on Polymarket.

Furthermore, Themino once bet "No" on the Polymarket event "Will the U.S. strike Iran before February 28, 2026?", eventually losing approximately $80,000 – the airstrike did occur on February 28.

Different Groups Behind the Builders Tag

Hyperliquid attaches an identifier to orders routed through third-party frontends to facilitate the collection of custom frontend fees. This identifier is the Builder Code, and it's the most direct way to determine which interface an address uses to trade (if any). The entities behind these Builder tags for addresses participating in the four markets can be grouped into three categories.

Algorithmic Builders. These products are mainly used by retail traders to maximize trading volume on DEXs to accumulate points for potential airdrops. Before the end of 2025, interacting with a Perp DEX typically meant executing wash trades or non-directional taker-taker orders via algorithms, which was not only costly for participants but also net-negative value for the exchange. Retail market-making bots like tread.fi, Planemo Trading, and Origami Tech replaced wash trading with "value-added market making." Orders submitted through these products are post-only, meaning the wallet provides liquidity to the order book rather than consuming it.

As David Jeong (CEO of tread.fi) puts it: "Before retail market-making solutions existed, farming on Perp DEXs meant wash trading – inflating volume by paying execution fees, taking on slippage costs, and even facing the risk of bans. We solved this by building a new interaction method where bots only place maker orders on both the bid and ask side. Users interact at a lower cost, often profiting by capturing the spread, and a byproduct is providing genuine top-of-book liquidity to the market – exactly what HIP-3 stock-style perpetuals need during nights and weekends when traditional market makers aren't quoting. It's a superior way to interact and the reason why HIP-3 markets now have good execution quality."

The contribution of these market-making bots is particularly evident during periods when traditional market makers are not quoting. CME WTI crude oil futures close on Friday afternoon and reopen on Sunday evening; stock-style perpetuals face similar overnight and weekend gaps. During these windows, retail market-making bots fill the top-of-book liquidity in markets like CL and TSLA.

It's important to note that although addresses routed through these algorithmic products are classified as Airdrop in this analysis, their trading behavior and market impact are structurally different from sybil behavior.

Wallet-integrated Builders are perpetual contract trading interfaces embedded within user wallets. Since early 2026, this type of integration has become one of the largest sources of retail order flow on HIP-3. This category includes Phantom, MetaMask, Rabby, Rainbow, and OneKey. The median trading volume per wallet is between $1,000 and $3,000, consistent with convenience-oriented retail users who prioritize accessibility over minor differences in builder fees.

Apps Builders are standalone perpetual trading frontends and integrated products – tools for traders that offer a more complete workflow than wallet-embedded interfaces, including better order placement, charts, position management, and execution tools. This category has fewer addresses than wallet-integrated channels but higher volume per address, characteristic of power users who value functional depth over out-of-the-box convenience. Related products include Insilico Terminal, Liquid, Hyperdash, Based, Dreamcash, Infinex, Pear Protocol, Defi App, and pvp.trade.

VKTR (Head of Growth at Insilico Terminal) summarized: "At Insilico, we see HIP-3 markets as the next step in bringing real-world asset exposure natively onto crypto rails. Traders aren't just looking for another frontend; they need fast execution, clear market access, and the ability to switch seamlessly between crypto assets and macro assets without leaving their existing workflow. Trade.xyz is one of the clearest examples of this demand. The order flow routed through Insilico shows that when a trading venue has sufficient depth, a practical product, and an experience designed for professional participants, there is indeed a real cohort of sophisticated users on-chain perpetual markets."

Market Maker Address Analysis

The market making landscape on Trade.xyz is highly concentrated. The top 5 market makers contributed 50% of market making volume, the top 13 contributed 80%, and the top 21 contributed 90%. In other words, the vast majority of the market making order book is dominated by a small number of trading desks.

Cumulative share of market making volume by address rank shows the top 5 desks contributed 50% of all market making flow, the top 13 reached 80%, and the top 21 reached 90%.

The second-largest market making address is one of the most interesting in the entire sample. 0xc926ddba…98d3 executed $4.39 billion in volume with a fill rate of 0.52%, a classic market making behavior signature. Arkham marks this address as Powell from Polymarket. This means one of the largest market makers on Trade.xyz is actually a Polymarket user providing two-sided quotes across multiple HIP-3 markets.

Other notable market making desks include:

Jump Crypto operated two addresses with a combined volume of $3.15 billion, funded from 0xf584…d621 (identified by Arkham as Jump's fund pool address), which holds over $160 million in a diversified portfolio including LINK, LIT, EIGEN, BNB, ETH, USDC, and USDT.
Selini Capital operated three addresses: two executing pure market making quotes (0x44a3e1…35dd, 0x76987c…4480) and one executing pure aggressive taker orders (0x427be6…d1d9), all running via API, with a total trading volume of $1.03 billion. Hyperliquid's order flow tag mechanism allows Selini's market making wallet to be distinguished from its high-frequency trading wallet, showing the same desk operating on both sides of the order book.
Wintermute operated one market making address with a volume of $229.6 million (0xecb63caa…2b00), smaller in scale than Jump and Selini, with funding sourced from OKX.