Price manipulation of XPL on Hyperliquid led to massive liquidations. The core issue lies in low liquidity and the lack of restrictions on large players dominating the order book. By leveraging big capital and high leverage, the order book was wiped out instantly, yet it’s hard to define this as a hacking incident. This is currently the biggest challenge for Perps DEX. Balancing openness and risk control is an art. CEXs have faced similar issues, but their ultimate trump card is simply blocking withdrawals. During the last JELLY incident, Hyperliquid made some adjustments and restrictions, such as limiting the OI threshold and improving liquidation logic. However, these measures couldn’t prevent this round of market manipulation. The dilemma for Perps DEX is that it can’t take the one-size-fits-all approach of CEXs, nor can it fully embrace the unrestricted ethos of traditional DeFi. On a deeper level, many users trading contracts or hedging might not necessarily care about decentralization—they just want protection. So, for now, my judgment is that Perps DEXs won’t be able to fully adopt the DeFi model for a long time. They’ll need more centralized intervention or backstopping. Ideally, a set of rules would be established and perfected, allowing the Perps market to operate under these rules without manual intervention. These rules would include comprehensive restrictions for various scenarios and emergency handling mechanisms. But the difficulty of achieving this is incredibly high.