Costs
The obvious objection to isolation is that splitting activity across ten sleeves should split your fee tier ten ways. It does not work like that, and the reason is worth understanding before you compare cost models.
In short
Hyperliquid assesses fee tiers on the trading volume of an account and its sub-accounts together, so isolating leaders does not fragment your volume for tier purposes. Isolation is therefore a risk and accounting decision, not a fee penalty. What does drive your cost is turnover: high-frequency leaders generate more mirrored notional, and both exchange fees and the 0.1% builder fee scale with notional.
| Cost | Who charges it | What it scales with |
|---|---|---|
| Taker / maker fee | Hyperliquid | Notional traded, reduced by volume tier |
| Volume tier | Hyperliquid | Account plus sub-account volume, aggregated |
| Funding | The market | Position size, holding period and funding rate |
| Builder fee | HyperMirror, natively via Hyperliquid | 0.1% of mirrored notional volume |
| Performance fee | Nobody | Not charged |
Three separate costs apply to a mirrored basket and they behave differently. Confusing them is the most common reason people misjudge the economics.
Because every one of those costs scales with notional traded, the leader mix determines cost far more than the number of sleeves. A scalper mirrored at the same capital as a swing trader can produce many times the notional, and therefore many times the fee load, for the same account size.
This is why turnover is part of how leaders are evaluated rather than an afterthought: a strategy has to clear its own cost to be worth mirroring.
Isolation does not add a per-sleeve charge, does not duplicate notional, and does not require extra approvals. The same trades that would have happened in one account happen in several, and the cancelled-out volume that netting would have wasted is no longer wasted.
Fees and funding are certain; returns are not. A high-turnover leader must out-earn its own cost load consistently to be worth mirroring, and past cost efficiency does not guarantee future returns.
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Perpetual futures are leveraged instruments and carry a substantial risk of loss, including the loss of your entire position.
Methodology
Scoring and replacement are documented in full on How it works and in the Docs (Policy v3). In short: the Elite basket is sticky, emergencies remove a leader immediately, and soft issues accrue at most one strike per UTC day with three strike-days triggering replacement. Read how it works or the documentation for the full table.
Questions
No. Volume across your account and its sub-accounts aggregates for fee-tier purposes.
No. Cost tracks mirrored notional, not the number of sleeves. Leader turnover is what moves the number.
No. The 0.1% builder fee on mirrored notional volume is the only revenue taken.
Score-weighted allocation across up to 10 elite Hyperliquid traders, each isolated in its own sub-account. Your funds never leave your account.
Non-custodial · Agent cannot withdraw · Cancel delegation anytime
