Perpetual futures linked to tokenised stocks and commodities generated $61.7 billion in seven-day volume on Hyperliquid and Binance, according to Talos. The total equaled 99.2% of Bitcoin perpetual volume across both venues during the week ending July 31, 2026.
Perpetual futures have no expiry date, allowing traders to maintain leveraged positions while meeting funding requirements. Periodic funding payments help keep contract prices near the referenced asset.
Tokenized equity contracts produced 57.8% of tracked RWA volume, while commodities contributed 28.2%. These contracts provide price exposure without requiring traders to own tokenized shares or commodities.
Meanwhile, RWA.xyz placed on-chain real-world asset value near $36.8 billion, excluding stablecoins. Trading turnover can grow faster because the same contract may change hands repeatedly.
Hyperliquid recorded $25.1 billion in RWA perpetual volume from July 13 to July 19, Talos reported. That amount represented about 52% of its $48.2 billion weekly total. RWA derivatives also surpassed every other perpetual category combined on Hyperliquid for the first time. The exchange uses on-chain execution, oracle pricing, and automated liquidation systems.
By contrast, Binance operates through centralized custody and exposes users to exchange counterparty risk. Both venues still concentrated most of the reported RWA perpetual activity. Early figures for the next week showed RWA perpetual volume reaching $37.2 billion. That total exceeded Bitcoin perpetual volume by about 9%, according to the Talos dashboard.
Equity-linked contracts contributed $22.8 billion, commodities added $9.1 billion and indexes produced $4.2 billion. ETF contracts generated about $338 million, while other categories supplied the balance. Despite this growth, RWA perpetuals represented about 7.5% of the broader $821.4 billion futures market tracked by Talos. The provider described its figures as a market snapshot.
Bitcoin traded at $63,012 on August 2, down 2.46% over seven days, according to CoinPaprika. Its market value stood near $1.26 trillion, with $12.9 billion in daily volume. Against that market backdrop, Craig Wright argued that Bitcoin’s base protocol should remain permanently fixed. He said competition should occur above rules that developers, miners, companies or foundations cannot change.
Wright accused supporters of developer-led upgrades of defending committee control while calling fixed rules centralised. His comments revived a long-running dispute over Bitcoin governance.
Should immutable rules outweigh the need to address vulnerabilities and new technical demands? Bitcoin supporters broadly oppose control by one party, yet they differ on whether permanent rules strengthen decentralisation.
RWA perpetual contracts also carry liquidation risks when leveraged positions move sharply against traders. Near parity with Bitcoin on two venues therefore does not represent dominance across the entire crypto-derivatives market.
RWA perpetuals nearly matched Bitcoin turnover on Hyperliquid and Binance, led by equity and commodity contracts. However, they remained a small share of total futures activity. At the same time, Wright’s fixed-protocol argument reopened debate over how Bitcoin should balance stable rules with technical change.