The Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC) has formally asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to clarify whether equity perpetual contracts can qualify as security futures. The request follows the CFTC's approval in May of the first U.S.-listed perpetual contracts as futures. Perpetuals — derivatives with no expiry date that stay tethered to the underlying asset through periodic funding payments — originated in offshore crypto markets, where BitMEX introduced the structure in 2016, and equity versions give traders derivative exposure to stocks and indexes without owning the underlying shares.

HPC argues that a clear classification could bring more perpetual trading into U.S. markets while reducing regulatory uncertainty. The group points to substantial activity on its associated platform: more than $480 billion in perpetual contract volume was recorded on Hyperliquid over the past 10 months.

Perpetual Classification Remains Unsettled

According to HPC, perpetual contracts share several core features with futures, including standardized terms, fungibility, and the ability to exit a position through an opposite trade. Their lack of a fixed expiry date, however, has complicated their treatment under U.S. law.

The group noted that similar contracts have received different classifications in past enforcement actions, and that this uncertainty has helped push perpetual markets offshore despite their large trading volumes.

The CFTC and SEC have spent the past year examining the issue. In June, both agencies requested comments on how swap definitions apply to novel products, and asked specifically whether cash-settled equity perpetuals could qualify as security futures. HPC submitted its comment in response to that request.

HPC Seeks One Framework Across Markets

HPC urged regulators to classify perpetuals according to their contract features and trading structure. It argued that the reference asset should determine regulatory oversight, not whether the contract qualifies as a future or a swap.

The group also asked regulators to confirm that qualifying equity perpetuals can be listed as security futures, and said exchanges should retain their existing flexibility when deciding which products to list.

In addition, HPC called for consistent classifications across both agencies and asked regulators to modernize the security futures framework to accommodate newer product structures. Security futures fall under the joint oversight of the SEC and CFTC, and exchanges registered with either agency can list them through the existing framework. The category dates to the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which lifted a long-standing federal ban on single-stock futures, though the product has remained a small corner of U.S. markets compared with equity options.

Hyperliquid Cites $480 Billion in Volume

HPC reported that more than $480 billion in perpetual contract volume traded on Hyperliquid during the past 10 months, across markets including oil, metals, currencies, equity indexes, and single stocks.

The group suggested that regulators could provide clarity without formal rulemaking, noting that interpretive guidance, policy statements, and staff action could establish the framework initially.

CFTC Chairman Selig has said the issue concerns whether perpetual markets operate under American oversight and standards. HPC said it will continue its discussions with the SEC and CFTC.

Primary source: Hyperliquid Policy Center on X | Crypto Front News