➥ @phantom generated 29% more protocol revenue than Aave trailing 30d via Defillama: → Phantom: $6.37M revenue → Aave: $4.94M revenue → Phantom Perps: $2.35B trading volume Phantom's revenue breakdown is even more interesting: → $5.06M from Solana activity → $1.26M from Hyperliquid activity nearly 20% of its tracked revenue now comes through Hyperliquid and Phantom doesn't operate its own perp exchange, it routes orders to @HyperliquidX and collects frontend fees Phantom charges 0.85% on most wallet swaps and adds a 0.05% fee to Hyperliquid perp trades it monetizes users directly thru the interface, without needing to bootstrap its own trading liquidity of course, the @aave comparison needs context Aave generated $37.43M in total fees over the same 30D, with most going to liquidity suppliers its $4.94M represents the protocol's retained share these are different business models and Phantom's revenue momentum is cooling since its latest 7D revenue was $1.17M, below the pace implied by its 30D total i'm paying more attention to the wallet and trading-interface layer on top of $HYPE so the distribution angle is worth tracking third-party wallets can bring trading vol to Hyperliquid while building their own revenue businesses on top of it owning user distribution is becoming a serious business in crypto imho