Hyperliquid Confirms Registration Headquarters in Singapore
Hyperliquid Labs confirmed to the media that the company's registered headquarters is located in Singapore, as stated in company documents, and recent job postings indicate that there is an office in the area.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore does not include the platform within its regulatory scope. Insiders say that regulators do not view it as a jurisdictional entity in Singapore due to its decentralized nature and are unclear whether it is subject to any major jurisdiction's regulation.
Hyperliquid Labs stated that the platform is currently unregulated, has never claimed to have obtained permission or authorization from the Monetary Authority, and has never applied for relevant licenses. Transactions are settled on-chain, and users manage their own assets.
The platform primarily offers high-leverage perpetual contracts, covering price fluctuations in crypto assets, crude oil, and stocks. On June 26, 2026, the Monetary Authority included Hyperliquid on its investor warning list, which includes the foundation's website and trading applications; being listed does not equate to a ban or enforcement action.
The core team of about 11 people is led by co-founder Jeff Yan and will relocate to Singapore in 2024. The platform has stated that being on the warning list does not change its unlicensed infrastructure and will not alter user self-custody and on-chain settlement arrangements.
Funds continue to flow into the on-chain perpetual order book rather than into custodial accounts of licensed exchanges. The situation is driven by a mismatch between headquarters location and regulatory jurisdiction, with market makers and leveraged traders continuing to transact in an unlicensed environment, while licensed platforms and compliant intermediaries face pressure, benefiting from unlicensed perpetual flow.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
Hyperliquid, driven by Jeff Yan's team, is relocating its core team of about 11 people to Singapore in 2024, but is not pursuing a license from the Monetary Authority. This aligns with the trend of many offshore derivatives teams using Singapore as an operational base while keeping trading layers offshore or on-chain since 2022. After the Monetary Authority tightened the loophole allowing "serving only overseas clients to avoid licensing" in May 2025, most institutions either applied for licenses or ceased related operations, while Hyperliquid chose to position itself outside the licensing definition through on-chain settlement and user self-custody.
Capital is not entering custodial banks or local brokerage licenses, but remains in the order book, market-making inventory, and HYPE-related incentives. Recruitment and registration documents place personnel and legal entities in Singapore, while clearing and margin remain on-chain, effectively exchanging the registered location for talent and company identity, using a decentralized structure to avoid regulated activities related to exchanges, brokers, and custodial client assets. After being listed on the investor warning list in June 2026, the team publicly stated that the infrastructure remains unchanged, indicating that their strategy is to maintain an unlicensed status while continuing to communicate with regulators, rather than seeking to obtain a license.
This path is similar to the early dYdX making its order book on-chain or near-chain, partitioned from licensed perpetual platforms like Coinbase Derivatives and CME, and is close to the compliance friction faced by Bybit, KuCoin, and Bitget after being placed on the same warning list. The industry's position is not to expand licensing but to compete for crypto, crude oil, and stock price exposure that should be controlled by licensed venues using protocol forms.
This represents a jurisdictional gap under regulatory changes, not a sudden replacement of exchanges by technology itself. The Monetary Authority's regulatory grip is tied to operating exchanges, matching brokers, and holding client assets. When transactions are self-custodied and settled on-chain, the registered headquarters can be recognized by the company, but the regulatory territory can be deemed non-existent; the warning list can only inform the public and cannot automatically translate into licensing enforcement.
ABAB News · Cognitive Laws
Registered location determines taxation, clearing level determines regulation.
Licenses govern custody, code governs transactions.
The warning list is a label, not jurisdiction.