In late October, ICE, which holds dual identities as the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange and a global key exchange and clearing infrastructure operator, suddenly positioned itself at the forefront of crypto perpetual contracts. Bloomberg was the first to disclose that ICE planned to collaborate with Trade.xyz to bring Hyperliquid-based perpetual contract products to the U.S. regulated market; soon after, according to Jinse Finance, on October 29, ICE's official X account published an original tweet formally announcing this collaboration and its implementation path, while simultaneously retweeting Trade.xyz's promotional message. However, the wind quickly shifted — several Chinese media outlets noticed that ICE had quietly deleted the original collaboration post, which had an "official endorsement" implication, while retaining the retweet of Trade.xyz's tweet. Meanwhile, PANews pointed out that Trade.xyz's own tweet regarding the collaboration and the entry of Hyperliquid perpetual contracts into the U.S. is still online. This subtle combination of deleting a post while keeping the retweet, in the context of the stringent restrictions on crypto derivatives from the CFTC and SEC and the categorization of perpetual contracts as high-risk products in multiple jurisdictions, was swiftly interpreted by the market as a signal game that remains unclear: as of now, neither ICE nor Trade.xyz has provided any explanation for this action, and what truly warrants questioning is within the existing regulatory framework in the U.S., how likely is it that this Hyperliquid-based perpetual contract experiment will be fully pushed into the compliant market.

Deleting Posts but Not Retweets: Collaborative Signals Become Ambiguous

Shortly after Bloomberg reported on the collaboration plans and ICE's personal statement on the matter, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange made a sudden reversal in its actions on X. According to Jinse Finance and several Chinese media outlets, ICE's official X account has deleted the original collaboration tweet posted on October 29 — which was one of the few public signals confirming that the infrastructure giant would bring Hyperliquid-based perpetual contract products into the U.S. regulated market. Strangely, ICE did not delete the entire related content but only removed its original post, leaving the retweet of Trade.xyz's promotional message intact, thereby placing the entire matter in a gray area between "retracting a commitment" and "not yet denying."

On the other hand, reports from PANews indicate that Trade.xyz's own tweet regarding collaborating with ICE to bring Hyperliquid perpetual contracts to the U.S. market remains online, presenting a complete narrative and assertive tone, contrasting sharply with ICE's deleted original post and the retained retweet. As of now, neither ICE nor Trade.xyz has issued any official statement regarding the deletion of the post or the status of the collaboration, with various media outlets merely recording the superficial fact of "deleted original post but retained retweet," unable to get closer to the true motives — whether it was due to a reassessment of the regulatory environment, a customary adjustment to internal compliance processes, or simply a cautious revision of public expression wording. In this vacuum of asymmetric information, the market amplified speculation, leaving the outside world with a temporarily unverifiable observational conclusion: in the crevice between high regulatory pressure and innovative impulses, the collaboration surrounding Hyperliquid perpetual contracts is currently in a state of ambiguous signals and unsettled outcomes.

A Leap from the NYSE Parent Company to On-Chain Perpetuals

To understand the weight of this post-deletion turmoil, one must first place the main character back into its original coordinate system. The parent company of the New York Stock Exchange is the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), which operates significant global exchanges and clearing infrastructures — it controls the core "pipeline" within the traditional financial world, responsible for facilitating transactions, managing risk, and ensuring settlement. In this context, when Bloomberg reported that ICE planned to collaborate with Trade.xyz to bring Hyperliquid-based perpetual contract products into the U.S. regulated market, the event immediately escalated from an industry news item to a "formal probe" of traditional finance into on-chain derivatives.

The detailed design of this collaboration also reveals that it is not merely a technical integration. According to Odaily Planet Daily, the related products intend to establish an independent clearing system in the U.S. regulated market, coupled with customer identification (KYC) and anti-money laundering systems, with underlying assets linked to stock indices, commodities, and currency prices, clearly aligning with the risk structures familiar to traditional finance. In other words, ICE is not simply transferring Hyperliquid's perpetual contracts into the compliant market verbatim but attempting to find a "regulated version" pathway for this type of contract, which is considered high-risk across multiple jurisdictions, under the premise of meeting the cautious attitudes of regulatory bodies like the CFTC and SEC, making subsequent deletion actions appear as if they are occurring within a cross-border experiment that has not yet completed.

Under High Regulatory Pressure, How Difficult Is It for Crypto Perpetuals to Enter the U.S.?

In the U.S., crypto derivatives are already placed in a highly sensitive drawer, with perpetual contracts being the most glaring category. The market, constrained by institutions like the CFTC and SEC, has always maintained caution towards high-leverage structures targeting retail investors, concerned both about the risk of liquidation and significant losses under drastic price fluctuations, and about the potential misuse of funds through complex contracts in cross-border environments for shell games and money laundering. Several jurisdictions have previously categorized perpetual contracts as "high-risk products," enforcing either strict entry thresholds for retail sales or outright prohibitions. Given this background, U.S. regulators will naturally examine any attempts to introduce a "perpetual version" under compliant licensing in light of these global precedents.

The design of the collaboration product revealed by Odaily can be viewed as a cautious exploration around these concerns: an independent clearing system means that relevant risks are minimized on both accounting and technical levels, keeping the volatility of crypto perpetuals from being directly superimposed onto existing clearing networks; complete KYC and anti-money laundering processes proactively expose participant identities, sources of funds, and transaction pathways within a regulatory-visible framework, indicating to the compliant market that this is not an anonymous leveraged playground with no list or boundaries. However, even so, when perpetual contracts are to genuinely launch in the regulated market, the approval, compliance, and risk control aspects still encompass significant uncertainty: how to define their regulatory attributes, how to establish appropriate leverage and margin rules, and how to assess chain risks in extreme scenarios are all questions that must be directly answered between regulators and platforms, while the specific progress and timeline of the collaborative product regarding U.S. regulatory approval remain undisclosed, making the extent to which this cross-border attempt can proceed a core variable that the market needs to continuously observe.

Behind the Silence: How the Market Interprets ICE's Every Move

At a time when the approval and implementation prospects of the collaboration remain undecided, ICE's action of "deleting posts but not retweeting" quickly became the focal point of market discourse. Jinse Finance, PANews, Deep Tide TechFlow, Odaily Planet Daily, BlockBeats, and other Chinese media outlets followed closely, frequently quoting Bloomberg's report on "bringing Hyperliquid perpetual contracts into the U.S. regulated market," and almost unanimously considering "deleting the original post but retaining the retweet of Trade.xyz's promotional message" as the most noteworthy detail. In Chinese communities and social media platforms, this action was viewed as one of the few visible signals breaking the silence, leading to a continuous fermentation of analysis, screenshots, and secondary retellings, thereby forming a discussion atmosphere of "everyone is watching ICE's next move."

In this atmosphere, several mainstream interpretations began to emerge: some views interpret the deletion as an indication that compliance review is still underway, with ICE opting to retract public statements during regulatory communications; others see it as a public relations strategy adjustment, preferring to retain third-party promotions rather than withdraw its overly clear official wording before finalizing the collaboration details and external expressions; still, there are speculations that negotiations around product structure or cooperation terms have not fully concluded, with the deletion serving merely as a temporary "brake" signal. It is essential to emphasize that these interpretations remain at the level of public discourse: as of now, neither ICE nor Trade.xyz has issued official statements regarding deletion actions or collaboration progress, and no public documents or authoritative channels have disclosed the specific reasons for ICE's post deletion. For readers, the only verifiable fact is the behavioral evidence recorded by Bloomberg and several Chinese media — a collaboration original tweet was once issued and was later withdrawn while retaining the retweet — but regarding the underlying motives and regulatory considerations, without more explicit documents or statements emerging, they can only be regarded as unverified market speculation rather than conclusions.

Options Remaining at the Table: The Next Step for Hyperliquid

Reflecting back on the collaboration between ICE and Trade.xyz along with the post-deletion turmoil, this scenario resembles a tentative match between traditional financial infrastructure and crypto perpetual contracts: on one side is the global trading and clearing hub controlling the New York Stock Exchange, while on the other side is the technology and product solution attempting to deliver Hyperliquid-based perpetual contracts into the U.S. regulated market, with the unvoiced regulatory attitude and risk boundaries standing in between. To date, the initial collaboration concept reported by Bloomberg has not been publicly denied by either party, Trade.xyz's tweet about "bringing Hyperliquid perpetual contracts to the U.S. market" is still online, and ICE has retained the retweet of this promotional content, implying that the direction of bringing related products into the U.S. regulated market has not been completely retracted on the public level. However, the market is also faced with a key void: no timetable, no explanation on whether the plan has been adjusted or if the structure of the collaboration has changed. Considering that the U.S. crypto derivatives market is overseen by institutions like the CFTC and SEC and maintains a consistent caution towards high-leverage contracts targeting retail investors, while previous media-disclosed plans emphasized establishing independent clearing, KYC, and anti-money laundering systems within the regulated market and linking with traditional asset prices, what will truly determine whether Hyperliquid perpetuals can be realized in the U.S. is how regulators assess this design and how ICE and Trade.xyz continue to navigate between pressure and opportunity. For readers, observable signals to look for include whether the three parties finally break the silence to issue formal statements, whether the product terms undergo structural adjustments regarding leverage, risk control, and compliance processes, and whether the path of collaboration maintains the existing framework or features new roles and resets, as only these specific actions and documents can provide credible answers regarding the trajectory of this post-deletion turmoil and the actual prospects of Hyperliquid in the U.S. regulated market.

Join our community to discuss together and grow stronger!
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。