Hyperliquid Overtakes Coinbase With $2.6T Onchain Trading Surge

Hyperliquid surpasses Coinbase in trading volume as Artemis data shows strong growth, widening price gaps, and rising onchain market confidence.

Hyperliquid has moved ahead of Coinbase in trading volume, drawing strong attention across digital asset markets. According to Artemis data, the onchain platform handled much more notional activity. As a result, the development represents a significant change in trader behavior in early 2026.

Hyperliquid Surpasses Coinbase in Onchain Trading Volume

To begin with, based on Artemis data, Coinbase had $1.4 trillion in notional trading volume. In comparison, Hyperliquid had a turnover of $2.6 trillion in the same measuring period. Therefore, Hyperliquid handled almost two times the amount of centralized exchange.

Moreover, this shortfall gives an indication of growing adoption of onchain trading platforms by participants in the global markets. Traders seem to like open execution with 24*7 availability to settle. As such, Hyperliquid’s architecture fits the changing market expectations.

Related Reading: Coinbase Lists HYPE for Spot Trading Launch

In addition, analysts hint that often increased volume reflects improving liquidity and tighter spreads. These factors will usually improve the quality of execution for active traders. As a result, increasing activity can be a source of platform competitiveness.

Meanwhile, Coinbase is a dominant exchange with extensive retail and institutional reach. However, recently available information suggests slower relative volume increases. Thus, the comparison highlights divergent momentum between centralized and onchain venues.

Furthermore, the infrastructure improvements support this transition according to industry observers. Faster block times and better interfaces eliminate earlier usability concerns. Therefore, platforms such as Hyperliquid benefit from technical advancements and confidence in users.

At the same time, increased onchain volume may have an impact on the wider market structure. Higher transparency can serve as a magnet to sophisticated trading strategies. Consequently, the rise of Hyperliquid represents more than mere short-term trend changes.

Price Performance Gap Signals Market Confidence Shift

In addition to the increase in volume, price performance reveals a massive divergence between Hyperliquid and Coinbase. Year-to-date data has Hyperliquid up 31.7%, while Coinbase was down 27.0%. As a result, the short-term performance gap was about 58.7%.

Additionally, this divergence implies higher investor belief in Hyperliquid’s outlook. Positive price movement is often indicative of expectations of sustained platform growth. Therefore, the market sentiment seems more and more favorable about onchain leaders.

Notably, Hyperliquid’s native token, HYPE, was trading at $31.96 on February 10, 2026. The token has increased by about 47% in the last 14 days. Consequently, it outperformed such major assets as Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Meanwhile, broader crypto markets saw mixed performances on the same time period. Macroeconomic uncertainty and regulatory discourses added to volatility. However, Hyperliquid kept moving upwards in spite of these conditions.

Furthermore, analysts believe that token strength can contribute towards higher platform engagement. Rising prices sometimes bring in new users and providers of liquidity. Thus, performance gains may be used to reinforce trading activity.

In contrast, Coinbase had market pressure in its stock performance. Declining prices may be a sign of cautious investor expectations. Therefore, comparative performance reflects the changing trends of capital allocation.

According to Artemis researchers, these figures reflect quantifiable changes in trading preferences. As a result, the data provides a transparent understanding of the evolving market dynamics.

All in all, Hyperliquid’s surge is a sign of an emerging acceptance of onchain trading models. Increased volumes and higher prices suggest structural change. As a result, competition between exchange models is likely to become more intense.