# Canonical: https://www.uddalak.xyz/hyperliquid-academy/article/18-fees-maker-taker
# Author: Uddalak Das
# Last source: https://www.uddalak.xyz/hyperliquid-academy/article/18-fees-maker-taker

---
title: "Hyperliquid Fees, Makers, and Takers"
description: "How fee tiers, maker rebates, staking discounts, spot weighting, and HIP-3 deployer fees fit together."
track: "Trading & Risk"
level: "Intermediate"
primary_icp: ["trader", "institutional decision-maker"]
secondary_icp: ["builder", "DeFi-native user"]
reading_time: "5 min"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-07"
---

# Hyperliquid Fees, Makers, and Takers

Trading cost on Hyperliquid depends on how an order interacts with liquidity, the account's rolling volume, market type, staking related discounts, and any builder or deployer economics that apply.

The first distinction is maker versus taker. A maker order rests and adds liquidity before it fills. A taker order immediately consumes resting liquidity.

```mermaid
flowchart LR
    A[Order executes] --> B{Rested before fill}
    B -->|Yes| C[Maker]
    B -->|No| D[Taker]
    C --> E[Maker fee or rebate]
    D --> F[Taker fee]
    E --> G[Adjusted by account tier and market rules]
    F --> G
```

## Maker and taker describe execution behavior

A limit order is not automatically a maker order. If it crosses the current book and fills immediately, it acts as a taker.

Likewise, a post only order is specifically designed to avoid taker execution. If it would cross, the protocol rejects it rather than allowing it to remove liquidity.

This distinction matters because fee economics reward or charge different behaviors. Market makers may accept inventory and queue risk in exchange for lower fees or rebates, while takers pay for immediate access to available liquidity.

## Rolling volume changes the base tier

Hyperliquid evaluates fee tiers using rolling weighted volume. Spot and perpetual activity can contribute differently to that calculation, and subaccount activity can roll up to the master account's fee tier under the current rules.

That means the marginal cost of a trade can depend on account history rather than only the current order.

For institutional models, fees should therefore be estimated using expected account volume and actual market type instead of one headline rate copied from a screenshot.

## Maker rebates change high frequency economics

Active liquidity providers can qualify for maker rebates based on their contribution under the current fee program.

A strategy that earns a small spread can become unprofitable if it repeatedly crosses the book and pays taker fees. The same strategy can look very different when it reliably provides liquidity and earns rebates.

Fees should therefore be included in backtests at the order behavior level, not applied later as one average percentage.

## Staking can affect trading costs

Hyperliquid also supports staking linked fee benefits. The live schedule determines the actual discount, so cost models should use current protocol data.

The account relationship used to link staking benefits can carry security implications under the current system. Fee optimization should therefore be evaluated alongside account control rather than treated as a purely economic toggle.

## Builder codes add application fees

[Builder codes](/hyperliquid-academy/article/19-builder-codes) let an application charge an additional user approved fee on eligible trades. This fee is separate from the protocol's ordinary maker and taker schedule.

A trader using two interfaces can therefore face different all in costs even when both ultimately route orders into HyperCore.

## HIP 3 can add market specific economics

Builder deployed perpetual markets can include deployer economics under HIP 3. Market configuration can therefore affect the final fee path in addition to the user's own trading tier.

For professional execution, the cost model should include protocol fees, builder fees, deployer fees where relevant, expected rebates, and slippage.

## Continue reading

Read [What Are Builder Codes?](/hyperliquid-academy/article/19-builder-codes) for application monetization and [Hyperliquid Protocol Economics and Fee Flow](/hyperliquid-academy/article/40-protocol-economics-fee-flow) for where different fee streams can go.

## Sources

- https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/trading/fees
- https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/trading/builder-codes