Reducing Hyperliquid Market Data and Order Latency

Summary

This guide outlines ways to reduce read and write latency when trading on Hyperliquid. For market data, it recommends running a non-validating node with adequate compute and disk capacity, consuming node outputs directly, and constructing the order book locally. Streaming transactions before they enter client blocks can provide earlier inputs, though execution results are not yet available; users may estimate outcomes for simple orders. Priority fees are also described as a faster route for reading raw network data.

For order submission, the guide recommends fast cancels where applicable and write priority fees. It explains that cancels and add-liquidity-only orders generally receive sequencing priority over other order types, including across blocks. The stated latency improvements and timing observations are specific to this system and are not guaranteed. End-to-end delay includes API, mempool, and consensus stages, so it should not be compared directly with centralized matching engines. Earlier transaction visibility also comes with incomplete execution information.

Key ideas

• A local node and locally maintained order book can provide market data more directly than an API.
• Streaming pre-commit transactions offers earlier inputs but omits execution results.
• Fast cancels and write priority fees are presented as ways to reduce order submission delay.
• Hyperliquid sequencing prioritizes cancels and add-liquidity-only orders ahead of other order types.
• End-to-end latency includes several system stages and is not directly comparable with centralized venues.

Tags

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.