Hyperliquid Policy Center, the advocacy arm of the crypto exchange, has filed a comment with U.S. regulators asking them to harmonize how they treat perpetual contracts. The filing, sent to both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, argues that a consistent classification is the missing piece for bringing more perpetual markets under U.S. oversight.
Why Perpetuals Sit in a Regulatory Gap
Perpetual contracts are a type of derivative that lets traders bet on an asset's price without a fixed expiration date. They're popular in crypto because they allow leverage and can be traded nearly around the clock. But unlike traditional futures or options, they don't fit neatly into the existing rules. Depending on the underlying asset and how the contract is structured, a perpetual could be a security or a commodity. That ambiguity has kept many platforms from offering them to U.S. customers.
The policy center's comment doesn't just ask for clarity. It asks the SEC and CFTC to coordinate with each other, so that a perpetual contract isn't subject to contradictory standards depending on which agency gets involved. Without that coordination, firms face the risk of running afoul of one agency while complying with the other.
Why the SEC and CFTC Can't Agree on Their Own
The two agencies have overlapping but distinct mandates. The CFTC oversees commodity futures and options. The SEC covers securities, including many investment contracts. A perpetual that tracks Bitcoin, for example, might look like a commodity future to the CFTC, but if the contract is tied to a token that the SEC considers a security, the rules could collide.
Hyperliquid's filing argues that clearer classification would provide a path for more perpetual markets to operate under U.S. regulatory oversight. That could mean more platforms feeling comfortable entering the U.S. market, and more investors having access to these products through regulated venues. It could also mean more oversight, which would give regulators a direct view into how these contracts are being sold and managed.
What Clearer Rules Could Unlock
The comment isn't just a technical complaint. It's a roadmap. If the SEC and CFTC agree on a single treatment for perpetuals, the companies behind them would know exactly which box to check. That could reduce the need for legal workarounds, like blocking U.S. IP addresses or using offshore subsidiaries. It could also pave the way for new products from existing exchanges and clear the ground for new entrants.
There's no timeline for a response. The comment is now on file with both agencies. Whether they take up the suggestion—or even acknowledge it—remains an open question. For now, the future of perpetual trading in the U.S. depends on how willing the SEC and CFTC are to talk to each other.
