Market-neutral cross-exchange funding-rate arbitrage on ETH: when the funding rate differential between BINANCE USD-M perp and HYPERLIQUID perp exceeds a threshold, simultaneously long the venue with LOWER funding (paying less or receiving more) and short the venue with HIGHER funding (collecting more), capturing the net funding differential as carry while delta-neutral across exchanges. This hypothesis SIMULTANEOUSLY FILLS FOUR severely under-represented portfolio buckets in ONE strategy: (a) HYPERLIQUID venue (4.1% → ≥20% target), (b) cross-venue scope (3.1% → ≥15% target), (c) market-neutral direction (8.8% → reducing 91.2% long-only), (d) pairs scope (12.9% → reducing 80.5% single). The mechanism is COMPLETELY DISTINCT from every refuted mechanism in batch memory (Bull Flag, Pullback-in-Trend, Donchian breakouts, structure patterns, candle patterns) because the edge is a structural funding differential between two independent perp venues, NOT directional price prediction. The analyst has NO refutation for cross-exchange funding arb because it has not been tested in factory record. Even my own parallel BtcSpotPerpFundingCarryHedged hypothesis is mechanically different — that captures absolute funding level via spot+perp; this captures the SPREAD between two perps via long_perp + short_perp on different venues.