Best Hyperliquid RPC providers in 2026

Hyperliquid RPC providers play a critical role for builders and traders using Hyperliquid in 2026. This guide compares the top Hyperliquid RPC providers and explains how to choose and set up the right one for trading bots, staking, and smart contracts.

Quick verdict: best Hyperliquid RPC providers in 2026

Our top pick is Chainstack. Chainstack publishes this page and is one of the 6 providers listed, so treat the ranking as a vendor view. Chainstack measured the lowest latency in every percentile and region among the four providers in the Chainstack Labs October 2026 benchmark, but also the lowest probe success rate (99.74%). Dwellir and HypeRPC were not part of that benchmark. Last reviewed October 29, 2026.

• Best for low-latency HyperEVM bots with full tooling: Chainstack (our top pick). Trade-off: lowest probe success rate of the four benchmarked providers.
• Best for HyperCore streaming and isolated clusters: Dwellir. gRPC streaming and the Order Book API are add-ons; dedicated clusters start at $4,000/mo.
• Best for flat pay-as-you-go pricing: dRPC. $6 per 1M requests, no fixed quotas.
• Best for Hyperliquid-only teams: HypeRPC. It was acquired by Hyperdash, so verify current plans before committing.
• Best for teams reusing Ethereum tooling: Alchemy. 30M CUs/month free tier; compute-unit billing.
• Best for multi-chain teams that want Streams and HyperCore gRPC: Quicknode. No permanent free tier.

Whichever provider you choose, order placement and other proprietary HyperCore trading methods stay on Hyperliquid’s public RPC (see the HyperCore section below).

Hyperliquid has become a popular choice thanks to its high throughput, EVM compatibility, and native order book design. The order book is directly tied to HyperEVM, meaning Solidity contracts execute against the same state as live trades. With sub-second finality via HyperBFT, negligible fees, and high throughput, Hyperliquid is well suited for high-speed trading bots, on-chain funds, and real-time applications.

Naturally, the free public Hyperliquid RPC is your first stop for testing, though limits vary by method, and some public endpoints are capped near ~100 requests/min. So, if you’re moving into production, you’d look for a private RPC provider. Yet performance differs between these providers (see the benchmark section below) (and some proprietary HyperCore trading methods remain public-RPC-only, regardless of provider).

That’s why we lined up the main Hyperliquid RPC providers and put them side by side on speed, scale, and reliability so you can see which one matches your build.

Comparison of the best Hyperliquid RPC providers

Here’s a quick look at how the top Hyperliquid RPC providers stack up on rate limits, latency, pricing, and network coverage.

Rank	Provider	Best for	Free plan	Paid plans & pricing	Latency & uptime	Developer Experience
1	Chainstack	Low-latency HyperEVM bots, full tooling (top pick)	3M requests/mo, 25 RPS	250–600 RPS by plan; subscription tiers with included quota + overage. Unlimited Nodes option for unmetered requests at a flat monthly rate	Measured (benchmark, Oct 2026): P50 10 ms, P95 22 ms, probe success rate 99.74%. Platform uptime 99.99%+ (Hyperliquid Mainnet, 99.99%+ over the 90 days to October 29, 2026, per status.chainstack.com). Contractual 99.9% quarterly SLA on Enterprise	Comprehensive docs, MCP server, Access rules, Hyperliquid faucet, dashboard analytics, Node comparison tool, HyperEVM archive + HyperEVM WebSockets
2	Dwellir	HyperCore streaming, dedicated clusters	Free — 100k responses/day, 20 RPS	Shared plans $49–$999/mo up to 5,000 responses/s; Unlimited Nodes from $119/mo; dedicated clusters from $4,000/mo on Hyperliquid	Not measured in the benchmark. 99.99% uptime SLA stated on its marketing pages (contract terms not read); public status page	HyperEVM debug/trace on every plan, HyperCore gRPC streaming and Order Book API as add-ons
3	dRPC	Flat pay-as-you-go pricing	Available, 100 RPS on public nodes	100 RPS on pay-as-you-go (Scale plan 600 RPS); flat $6 per 1 M requests	Measured (benchmark, Oct 2026): P50 23 ms, P95 129 ms, probe success rate 100.00%	Analytics dashboard, unlimited API keys
4	HypeRPC	Hyperliquid-only teams (verify post-acquisition plans)	10k requests/mo, 5 RPS	50–300 RPS; tiered monthly plans, custom on request	Not measured in the benchmark. Provider claims low, region-based latency and 99.99% uptime	Real-time metrics, trader-focused console
5	Alchemy	Teams reusing Ethereum tooling	30M CUs/mo, ~15 RPS (300 CU/s)	Pay-as-you-go $0.525/M CUs from 300 RPS; enterprise for higher throughput	Measured (benchmark, Oct 2026): P50 19 ms, P95 40 ms, probe success rate 100.00%	Webhooks (Notify), Gas Manager, Debug API, analytics dashboards
6	Quicknode	Multi-chain teams wanting Streams and HyperCore gRPC	No free tier; 10M credits trial only	50–500 RPS; credit-based monthly plans	Measured (benchmark, Oct 2026): P50 53 ms, P95 76 ms, probe success rate 99.98%. 99.99% stated uptime; contractual SLAs on Enterprise	Streams, Webhooks, analytics dashboard

Important: HyperCore proprietary methods

Critical for trading applications: Several HyperCore methods remain exclusive to
Hyperliquid’s public RPC and are not served by standard node providers such as Chainstack (a few specialist providers, such as Quicknode and Dwellir, sell their own order-book and streaming products on top):

• l2Book — Order book depth
• order — Submit orders
• cancel — Cancel orders
• recentTrades — Recent trade history

This means all trading bots must use the public RPC for order execution, regardless
of which private RPC provider you choose for HyperEVM and other HyperCore info methods.

Private RPC providers (including Chainstack) support:
✅ HyperEVM methods (smart contracts, events, archive)
✅ Non-proprietary HyperCore info methods (account data, fills, user state)
❌ Proprietary trading methods (order placement, cancellation, book queries)

How we compared Hyperliquid RPC providers

Disclosure: this comparison is published by Chainstack. Chainstack is one of the 6 providers listed and is ranked first, so read the ranking as a vendor perspective and check the figures against the official pricing pages linked in each provider section.

Criteria. Each provider is compared on the same attributes: free tier, paid-plan pricing, published rate limits (RPS), uptime and SLA evidence, HyperEVM and HyperCore coverage, and developer tooling. The order of the ranking is editorial judgment on those attributes for production Hyperliquid workloads. It is not a benchmark result: the October 2026 benchmark below measured only four of the six listed providers (Chainstack, dRPC, Alchemy and Quicknode), not Dwellir or HypeRPC, and among those four it ordered Chainstack, Alchemy, Quicknode, dRPC, which differs from the order in the table.

Sources. Prices, limits and uptime figures come from each provider’s public pricing, documentation and status pages, with the checked date shown where it was recorded. Where a provider publishes no Hyperliquid-specific latency figure, the provider section says so instead of estimating one. Chainstack’s platform uptime comes from its public status page (status.chainstack.com, 90 days to October 29, 2026) and covers Chainstack only. Status-page figures are for the Mainnet component of each chain; testnet and devnet components are tracked separately. Platform uptime is not an SLA and not a guarantee; uptime figures for other providers are the ones they state themselves. Plans change often, so confirm current figures on the official pricing page linked in each section.

Not covered. Other providers may also support Hyperliquid and are not listed here. Hydromancer is covered separately under “Beyond RPC” because it is a data provider, not an RPC provider, and is not ranked.

Latency data. The benchmark section below reports measured latency for four of the six listed providers. For Dwellir and HypeRPC no measurement is cited, so test them from your own region with the method in How to measure RPC latency.

Hyperliquid RPC latency benchmark: October 2026

Disclosure: the Chainstack Labs Research Team published this benchmark (Research Note No. 051) and Chainstack operates the monitoring service, the public dashboard and the scoring formula. Chainstack is one of the four providers measured. In the report and on Chainstack Compare this column is labelled “availability”; here it is called probe success rate because it is the share of probe requests that succeeded, not platform uptime. Read the full report: Hyperliquid RPC provider benchmark: latency and uptime, October 2026.

Method in brief: probes every 1 to 3 minutes for 7 days ending October 8, 2026, from three cloud regions (DE, US and JP), against each provider’s first paid plan. A request counts as failed after 55 seconds. The score is response time divided by the cube of the success rate, per region, then averaged across the three regions (lower is better).

Provider	Score	Probe success rate	P50	P95	P99	DE P95	US P95	JP P95
Chainstack	0.019	99.74%	10 ms	22 ms	82 ms	18 ms	31 ms	18 ms
Alchemy	0.036	100.00%	19 ms	40 ms	131 ms	28 ms	43 ms	51 ms
Quicknode	0.065	99.98%	53 ms	76 ms	122 ms	19 ms	81 ms	128 ms
dRPC	0.124	100.00%	23 ms	129 ms	248 ms	76 ms	127 ms	183 ms

Takeaways from the Hyperliquid benchmark:

• Chainstack had the lowest P50, P95 and P99, and the lowest P95 in each of the three regions (DE is nearly tied with Quicknode at 18 ms versus 19 ms). Alchemy, the second-ranked provider, scored 1.9 times higher.
• Chainstack also had the lowest probe success rate of the four providers at 99.74% (share of probe requests that succeeded; this is not platform uptime, which is shown on the status page), against 100.00% for Alchemy and dRPC and 99.98% for Quicknode. In the report this costs Chainstack about 0.8% of its score and does not change its rank.
• JP was the weakest region for Alchemy, Quicknode and dRPC. Chainstack’s weakest region was US (31 ms P95).
• Quicknode’s P50 (53 ms) was the highest of the four even though its DE P95 (19 ms) was close to Chainstack’s.

What this benchmark does not show: Dwellir and HypeRPC were not measured, so no result is claimed for them. The probes ran on each provider’s entry paid plan from cloud regions rather than from end-user locations, over a single 7-day window. The report does not measure throughput under load, cost or correctness, and the scoring formula was chosen by Chainstack, so a different formula could reorder close pairs. Measure from your own region before committing: How to measure RPC latency.

Hyperliquid RPC rate limits and free tiers compared

Billing units differ between providers, so the same traffic can cost different amounts. This table summarizes the figures from the provider sections below (HypeRPC figures are the pre-acquisition plans).

Provider	Free tier	Entry paid plan	Highest published throughput	Billing unit
Chainstack	3M requests/month, 25 RPS	Growth: $49/month, 20M requests, ~250 RPS	~600 RPS on Business; custom on Enterprise	Requests
Dwellir	100,000 responses/day, 20 RPS	Developer: $49/mo, 25M responses, 100 responses/s	5,000 responses/s (10,000 burst) on Scale	Responses
dRPC	100 RPS on public nodes (210M CU pool)	$6 per 1M requests, flat; 100 RPS on pay-as-you-go	600 RPS on the Scale plan ($199/month); unlimited RPS on Enterprise	Requests
HypeRPC	10K requests/month, 5 RPS	Professional: $99/month, 1M requests, 50 RPS	300 RPS on Unlimited ($499/month)	Requests
Alchemy	30M CUs/month, ~15 RPS (300 CU/s)	Pay-as-you-go: $0.525 per 1M CUs, from 300 RPS	Pay-as-you-go starts at 10,000 CU/s (300 RPS); extra capacity $160/month per 5,000 CU/s block (self-serve ceiling not verified)	Compute Units
Quicknode	No permanent free tier; 10M-credit one-month trial at 15 RPS	Build: $49/month, 80M credits, ~50 RPS	~500 RPS on Business ($999/month)	Credits

Chainstack alternatives for Hyperliquid RPC

If Chainstack is not the right fit, these are the head-to-head differences between Chainstack and each alternative on Hyperliquid:

• Chainstack vs Dwellir: Dwellir sells HyperCore gRPC streaming (from $299/mo) and an Order Book API (from $199/mo) as add-ons and offers dedicated clusters from $4,000/mo. Chainstack was measured in the October 2026 benchmark and Dwellir was not.
• Chainstack vs dRPC: dRPC charges a flat $6 per 1M requests with no fixed quotas, while Chainstack uses plans with included requests. In the benchmark Chainstack had a 22 ms P95 against dRPC’s 129 ms, while dRPC had 100.00% probe success rate against Chainstack’s 99.74%.
• Chainstack vs HypeRPC: HypeRPC serves only Hyperliquid, from EU and JP regions, and has been acquired by Hyperdash. Chainstack covers Hyperliquid plus 70+ other chains. HypeRPC was not measured in the benchmark.
• Chainstack vs Alchemy: Alchemy bills in Compute Units and has a 30M CU/month free tier. In the benchmark Alchemy had a 40 ms P95 against Chainstack’s 22 ms, and 100.00% probe success rate against 99.74%.
• Chainstack vs Quicknode: Quicknode has no permanent free tier and documents HyperCore gRPC streaming on Build and higher plans. In the benchmark Quicknode had a 76 ms P95 against Chainstack’s 22 ms, and 99.98% probe success rate against 99.74%.

Choose Hyperliquid RPC providers by use case

High-frequency trading bots and market makers need the lowest possible latency on HyperEVM plus non-proprietary HyperCore info methods, since order placement itself stays on the public RPC regardless of provider. Chainstack and HypeRPC are the strongest fits here — Chainstack for multi-region routing and archive access, HypeRPC if you’re fully committed to Hyperliquid and want servers sitting closest to its validators.

Teams already running multi-chain infrastructure on Ethereum or Polygon get the fastest path to Hyperliquid through Alchemy or Quicknode, since both let you reuse the same libraries (ethers.js, web3.py) and dashboards you already have for other chains, at the cost of Hyperliquid-specific tooling like a faucet.

Cost-conscious teams testing before committing to production should look at dRPC’s flat per-request pricing with no fixed quota, or Chainstack’s free Developer tier, before scaling into a paid plan.

Teams that need fully isolated, dedicated infrastructure rather than shared capacity are better served by Dwellir’s Dedicated Node Clusters or Chainstack’s Dedicated Node tier.

1. Chainstack: best for low-latency HyperEVM bots with full tooling

Verdict: Lowest latency in every percentile and region of the October 2026 benchmark, with request-based plans from free to Enterprise. Trade-off: lowest probe success rate of the four benchmarked providers (99.74%), fixed RPS per plan, and proprietary HyperCore trading methods stay public-RPC-only. Official pricing: Chainstack pricing.

Chainstack is a multi-chain infrastructure platform and one of the first providers to bring full Hyperliquid RPC support to production. By choosing Chainstack Hyperliquid RPC endpoints, you get private access to HyperEVM (smart contracts) over HTTP and WebSocket and to a subset of HyperCore (the native order book) info queries over HTTP, backed by 99.99%+ platform uptime (Hyperliquid Mainnet, 99.99%+ over the 90 days to October 29, 2026, per status.chainstack.com), with proprietary market-data methods remaining public-only per Hyperliquid’s own setup.

What’s more, with Chainstack, you get a full set of tools that make building on Hyperliquid easier, all from the same platform, including:

• One of the first built-in Hyperliquid faucet to grab testnet HYPE.
• HyperEVM archive for historical reads, plus HyperEVM WebSockets for live contract events.
• A method table showing 100+ HyperEVM calls (with notes on which HyperCore methods are public-RPC-only), an API reference, MCP Server, and even a ready-to-clone trading bot repo.
• Access rules to set limits on keys, requests, and IPs directly from the dashboard.

Backed by a globally distributed, multi-cloud network, Chainstack delivers predictable performance for builders moving from test to production. And the setup takes just a few minutes in the console.

How much does Chainstack cost?

Chainstack has cost-effective plans, so infra costs are easy to track and estimate:

• Developer — free, 3M requests/month (~25 RPS), $20 per extra million.
• Growth — $49/month, 20M requests (~250 RPS), $15 per extra million.
• Pro — $199/month, 80M requests (~400 RPS), $12.5 per extra million.
• Business — $499/month, 200M requests (~600 RPS), $10 per extra million.
• Enterprise — from $990/month, 400M requests (custom RPS), extra from $5 per million.
• Unlimited Node Add-on — flat monthly fee for unmetered requests starting from $149.
• Dedicated — billed per node (compute plus storage) for exclusive Hyperliquid nodes; see Chainstack pricing for current node rates.

Chainstack lets you start for free and scale into predictable tiers as traffic grows.

Performance of Chainstack among Hyperliquid RPC providers

Chainstack’s performance and reliability profile on Hyperliquid:

• Global routing: Deploy nodes in the US, EU, or Asia regions to minimize latency.
• Uptime: Chainstack platform uptime: 99.99%+ for Hyperliquid Mainnet over the 90 days to October 29, 2026, as shown on status.chainstack.com (99.99%+). This is platform uptime shown on the status page, separate from the benchmark’s probe success rate (99.74%, see the benchmark section) and from the contractual 99.9% quarterly SLA on Enterprise.
• Performance: Lowest P50 (10 ms) and P95 (22 ms) of the four providers in the October 2026 benchmark; upper tiers support ~400–600 RPS for heavy use.
• Monitoring: Built-in tools and compare benchmarks to validate endpoint performance against competitors.

Pros & cons of Chainstack

Chainstack pros	Chainstack cons
One provider for Hyperliquid plus 70+ other chains	Free plan (3M calls, 25 RPS) may be too limited for bots or indexers
Predictable pricing with flat monthly plans and high included quotas	Fixed RPS caps per plan; very latency-sensitive apps may need Unlimited or Dedicated
99.99%+ platform uptime (status.chainstack.com, Hyperliquid Mainnet, 99.99%+ over the 90 days to October 29, 2026), contractual 99.9% quarterly SLA on Enterprise, SOC2 compliance, globally distributed nodes	Dedicated Nodes require at least a Pro plan
Supports both elastic scaling and dedicated nodes. Can handle heavy load (hundreds of RPS) with an unlimited tier for nonstop throughput	Lowest probe success rate of the four benchmarked providers (99.74%, October 2026; separate from platform uptime)
Clear docs, built-in Hyperliquid faucet, unified dashboard for metrics and logs	Proprietary HyperCore trading methods are public-RPC-only, as with other private providers

You get everything you need for Hyperliquid on Chainstack: private HyperEVM and HyperCore endpoints, a faucet for testnet HYPE, HyperEVM archive + HyperEVM WebSockets, and monitoring in the same console. The pricing model is clear, nodes are distributed globally, and there’s a free tier to try it out before committing to a paid plan.

2. Dwellir: best for HyperCore streaming and dedicated clusters

Verdict: One credit per response, flat-rate Unlimited Nodes and gRPC streaming. Trade-off: HyperCore products are paid add-ons, no SOC 2 or ISO 27001 attestation found, and it was not measured in the October 2026 benchmark. Official pricing: Dwellir pricing.

Dwellir is a Swedish RPC provider best known for its Polkadot work, and it now serves 150+ networks, including Hyperliquid, Base, Ethereum, Polygon, and Robinhood Chain. On Hyperliquid it offers HyperEVM (chain ID 999) over HTTPS and WebSocket with the debug and trace namespaces enabled on every API plan, and it layers HyperCore products on top: a gRPC streaming API for raw node feeds with replay, an Order Book API for L2, L4, and BBO data, and archive node files.

Shared plans bill one credit per response with no compute-unit weighting, so a heavy call costs the same as a light one. The same HyperEVM endpoint is included in every Dedicated Node Cluster for teams that need isolation. The trade-offs: the HyperCore products are add-ons priced on top of the RPC plan, and we found no SOC 2 or ISO 27001 attestation published on Dwellir’s pricing or dedicated-cluster pages.

How much does Dwellir cost?

Dwellir has a free plan you can start on, then moves to credit-based shared plans, flat-rate Unlimited Nodes, and fixed-price dedicated clusters (pricing checked on October 9, 2026).

• Free — 20 responses/second, 100,000 responses per day.
• Developer — $49/mo, 25M responses, 100 responses/second.
• Growth — $299/mo, 150M responses, 500 responses/second, eth_getLogs over up to 10,000 blocks.
• Scale — $999/mo, 500M responses, 5,000 responses/second (10,000 burst).
• Unlimited Nodes — from $119/mo flat, 25 to 1,000 RPS.
• HyperCore add-ons — gRPC streaming from $299/mo and Order Book API from $199/mo, both plus usage.
• Dedicated Node Cluster — from $4,000/mo for Hyperliquid, with gRPC and Order Book included and no usage fees.

Performance on Hyperliquid with Dwellir

Dwellir runs shared endpoints for quick starts and dedicated clusters for isolated performance. Dwellir’s marketing pages state a 99.99% uptime SLA; the contractual terms were not read, and shared plans run within their plan limits.

• Throughput: Plan-based, up to 5,000 responses/second on Scale, unmetered on a Dedicated Node Cluster.
• Latency: Not measured in the October 2026 benchmark, and no Hyperliquid-specific latency figures on its product pages; the Order Book API is served from Singapore and Tokyo edge servers.
• Real-time data: gRPC streaming of blocks, fills, order statuses, and book diffs with replay, plus HyperEVM WebSockets for contract events.
• Monitoring: A dashboard for usage and a public status page.

Pros & cons of Dwellir

Dwellir pros	Dwellir cons
Shared, flat-rate Unlimited Node, and dedicated cluster options	HyperCore streaming and order book data are add-ons billed on top of the RPC plan
Debug and trace on HyperEVM on every API plan, 1 credit per response	No SOC 2 or ISO 27001 attestation found on its public pricing pages
gRPC streaming and Order Book API cover HyperCore data directly	Dedicated Node Clusters start at $4,000/month on Hyperliquid

If you need Hyperliquid with HyperCore streaming and the option to move to an isolated cluster, Dwellir is a good fit. Budget for the add-ons and the dedicated starting price, and request its compliance documents if your team needs SOC 2 or ISO 27001 on file.

3. dRPC: best for flat pay-as-you-go pricing

Verdict: $6 per 1M requests with no fixed quotas. Trade-off: a newer platform with limited long-term data and community-based support; measured P95 was 129 ms in the October 2026 benchmark. Official pricing: dRPC pricing.

dRPC is one of the newer names in the industry, built around a decentralized model and supporting Hyperliquid from day one. Here, instead of a single backend, traffic is routed through a network of independent node operators, with an AI balancer deciding where each request goes.

With this setup, dRPC aims to combine redundancy with ease of use. That said, since the platform is still fairly new, there’s not a ton of long-term data yet on how it performs under constant production load. dRPC exposes HyperEVM archive and HyperEVM WebSockets; consult docs for any HyperCore streaming options.

How much does dRPC cost?

dRPC pricing is pretty simple, as you just pay for what you use.

• Free plan — $0/month, public nodes only, with a 210M CU pool and a 100 RPS limit.
• Premium plan — $6 per 1M requests, flat rate across all chains and methods.
• Volume discounts — Available for high-traffic users.

dRPC’s pay-as-you-go model is a good setup if you’re testing or ramping up a smaller Hyperliquid project. However, teams already in production may prefer something with defined quotas and guaranteed support.

Performance on Hyperliquid with dRPC

dRPC’s setup moves traffic across eight regional clusters, sending each call to whichever node is both close and under-loaded. That system helps balance speed and consistency across a decentralized network. So you can generally expect:

• Throughput: 100 RPS on pay-as-you-go, 300 RPS on Pro, 600 RPS on Scale; unlimited RPS only on Enterprise.
• Latency: Routing that favors the fastest available node; measured P50 23 ms and P95 129 ms in the October 2026 benchmark.
• Uptime: 100.00% probe success rate in the October 2026 benchmark (entry paid plan, 7-day window); paid plans list 99.96% uptime and the Enterprise plan lists committed SLAs.
• Scalability: No fixed rate limits on premium, with unlimited API keys.
• Infrastructure: Built-in redundancy, so if one node stalls, another picks up the load.

Pros & cons of dRPC

dRPC pros	dRPC cons
Flat $6-per-million pricing that keeps billing simple	Still a new platform without long-term reliability data
Pay-as-you-go with no fixed quotas (100 RPS limit on pay-as-you-go; 600 RPS on Scale)	No broader dev tools like webhooks or indexing
Decentralized routing provides automatic failover	Support is community-based, and Hyperliquid-specific docs are limited

In short, dRPC is a flexible choice for builders who want raw RPC access and are open to using a newer service that’s still proving itself.

4. HypeRPC: best for Hyperliquid-only teams

Verdict: Built only for Hyperliquid with EU and JP regions. Trade-off: acquired by Hyperdash, so plans may have changed, small monthly quotas, and not measured in the October 2026 benchmark. Official site (current plans unverified): HypeRPC site.

HypeRPC is a bit different from most RPC providers, as it’s built solely for Hyperliquid. Everything in its setup, from caching layers to where servers sit, is tuned around this one network. The team works closely with Hyperliquid’s core devs, which likely helps them stay ahead on updates and performance tweaks. Update: as of 2026, HypeRPC has been acquired by Hyperdash — verify current product and pricing directly at hyperpc.app before committing, since the plans below reflect the pre-acquisition offering.

You can pick between shared global endpoints or a dedicated setup that’s fully isolated. HypeRPC’s focus is aimed at speed, though it ties you to a single ecosystem. Therefore, HypeRPC is a great fit if you are all-in on Hyperliquid, but less ideal if you’re managing a stack that spans multiple chains. By default, HypeRPC covers HyperEVM archive and HyperEVM WebSockets; review HypeRPC docs for current HyperCore stream availability.

How much does HypeRPC cost?

Pre-acquisition, HypeRPC offered plans focused on performance over high quotas, sitting at the premium end of the market (confirm current tiers post-acquisition):

• Starter — Free, 10K requests/month, 5 RPS.
• Professional — $99/month, 1M requests, 50 RPS.
• Enterprise — $299/month, 3M requests, 150 RPS.
• Unlimited — $499/month, 5M requests, 300 RPS.
• Dedicated nodes — Custom pricing with no hard caps.

There are no public overage fees; once you reach your plan’s limit, you’ll likely need to upgrade. The cost is higher compared to general RPC providers, but it reflects HypeRPC’s focus on one network and its optimized setup for Hyperliquid.

Performance on Hyperliquid with HypeRPC

HypeRPC is built only for Hyperliquid and says its servers sit close to the chain’s validators to keep latency low. HypeRPC was not part of the October 2026 benchmark, so the claims below are not independently measured here:

• Uptime: 99.99% uptime as claimed by the provider.
• Latency: Low latency claimed from regional nodes in Europe and Japan.
• Scalability: Enough headroom to handle short market spikes or steady high-frequency traffic.
• Visibility: A live dashboard that lets you watch latency and request counts in real time.
• Security: Enterprise-grade DDoS protection and routing safeguards for live trading environments.

Pros & cons of HypeRPC

HypeRPC pros	HypeRPC cons
Runs close to the network’s validators, which HypeRPC says keeps latency low (not independently measured)	Plans start high for what’s included, with 1–5M monthly calls that can run out quickly on data-heavy bots or analytics pipelines
Claimed 99.99% uptime and scaling headroom during trading spikes	Only EU and JP regions are available for now, which can add latency for users in other parts of the world
WebSockets, archive data, and responsive support are available, making it easy to monitor and react in real time	HypeRPC is new and focused only on Hyperliquid, so teams running multi-chain systems might need another provider

HypeRPC gives you exactly what you’d expect from a Hyperliquid-only provider: a setup tuned for trading workloads. HypeRPC is a strong candidate if your whole stack runs on Hyperliquid, but verify the post-acquisition plans and measure latency yourself. But if you’re running multi-chain systems or want broader flexibility, pairing it with another provider might make more sense.

5. Alchemy: best for teams reusing Ethereum tooling

Verdict: 30M CU/month free tier and familiar ethers.js and web3.py workflow. Trade-off: Compute Unit billing and no Hyperliquid-specific tooling; measured P95 was 40 ms in the October 2026 benchmark. Official pricing: Alchemy pricing.

Alchemy recently rolled out Hyperliquid support through HyperEVM endpoints, making it easy for developers already familiar with Ethereum tools to plug in. You can still use the same libraries, like ethers.js, web3.py, and the workflow feels the same.

The platform carries over much of what it’s known for on Ethereum and Polygon: Webhooks (Notify), Gas Manager, Bundler and Transfers APIs, analytics dashboards, and a Debug API. On Hyperliquid, this translates to full RPC access to chain data, along with the ability to trigger trading functions through HyperEVM. WebSockets and archive are for HyperEVM. Alchemy’s own Hyperliquid page lists the Debug API as supported and gRPC and the Trace API as not supported, and we found no HyperCore stream support.

How much does Alchemy cost?

One thing to note is that Alchemy measures usage in Compute Units (CUs) rather than raw requests. For Hyperliquid teams making lots of lightweight, latency-sensitive calls, this can make costs less predictable than flat request-based models.

That said, Alchemy does offer a free tier: 30 million CUs per month at about 15 RPS (300 CU/s), enough for many small projects. Beyond that, the pricing options are:

• Pay-as-you-go — $0.525 per 1M CUs, with throughput from 300 RPS
• Extra capacity — $160/month per additional 5,000 CU/s block (self-serve ceiling not verified)
• Enterprise — custom pricing, with lower per-unit costs at very high volumes

Performance on Hyperliquid with Alchemy

Alchemy publishes no Hyperliquid-specific latency figures of its own. In the Chainstack Labs October 2026 benchmark, Alchemy measured P50 19 ms, P95 40 ms and 100.00% probe success rate.

• Uptime: ~99.9% historical uptime; 100.00% probe success rate in the October 2026 benchmark.
• Latency: Global routing; measured P50 19 ms and P95 40 ms in the October 2026 benchmark.
• Throughput: about 15 RPS (300 CU/s) on free, from 300 RPS on pay-as-you-go, scales higher with enterprise plans.
• Architecture: “Supernode” tech handles parallel requests through caching and load balancing.

Pros & cons of Alchemy

Alchemy pros	Alchemy cons
Free tier with 30M monthly CUs	The compute unit system can be confusing, and the free tier caps throughput at 300 CUs per second (about 15 RPS)
Pay-as-you-go at $0.525 per million CUs beyond the free tier	Lacks Hyperliquid-specific tooling like order book websockets or custom data streams, and advanced monitoring sits behind enterprise pricing
Solid developer experience	Limited regional control since endpoints are auto-routed rather than manually deployed by region

While Alchemy doesn’t include Hyperliquid-specific tools, it’s still an easy way to get started and connect through a familiar setup. Pricing runs on compute units instead of raw requests, so costs can fluctuate if you’re sending a high number of simple calls.

6. Quicknode: best for multi-chain teams wanting Streams and HyperCore gRPC

Verdict: Global network, Streams and documented HyperCore gRPC on Build and higher plans. Trade-off: no permanent free tier and credit-based pricing; measured P95 was 76 ms in the October 2026 benchmark. Official pricing: Quicknode pricing.

Quicknode has recently added Hyperliquid to its lineup of supported chains. The provider runs on a globally distributed, auto-scaling network of RPC nodes, routing traffic to the closest region to keep latency low. Hyperliquid support covers the standard JSON-RPC methods for HyperEVM, with private endpoints over HTTP and WebSocket.

Unlike platforms that bundle in extras like a faucet or Hyperliquid-specific monitoring, Quicknode keeps its offer focused on RPC delivery. The additional tooling available — Streams, Webhooks, and analytics APIs — is broader but geared more toward other networks in its stack rather than Hyperliquid itself. WebSockets and archive refer to HyperEVM by default. Quicknode also documents HyperCore gRPC streaming and a HyperCore JSON-RPC/WebSocket endpoint on Build and higher plans.

How much does Quicknode cost?

Quicknode runs on a credit system across its monthly plans. It gives flexibility, but once your quota burns through, you’ll need to watch usage to avoid extra costs.

With Quicknode, you get a free trial for one month, which includes 10 million credits at 15 RPS, but there’s no permanent free tier for Hyperliquid. Other paid plans available on the platform are:

• Build — $49/month, 80M credits, ~50 RPS
• Accelerate — $249/month, 450M credits, ~125 RPS
• Scale — $499/month, 950M credits, ~250 RPS
• Business — $999/month, 2B credits, ~500 RPS

Overage runs around $0.50–$0.62 per million requests, depending on plan. Every plan includes access to Quicknode’s wider multi-chain stack, Streams for WebSocket feeds, archived data, and the developer dashboard.

Performance on Hyperliquid with Quicknode

Quicknode focuses on speed and uptime for Hyperliquid. That said, request-per-second limits are enforced per plan, so scaling heavy workloads may mean upgrading or spreading the load across endpoints.

• Uptime: 99.99% stated uptime; contractual SLAs are Enterprise-only. Measured probe success rate was 99.98% in the October 2026 benchmark.
• Latency: Global routing and caching; measured P50 53 ms and P95 76 ms in the October 2026 benchmark.
• Throughput: Capped by plan (50–500 RPS), so higher loads need larger tiers or multiple endpoints.
• Scale: Network handles 400B+ requests monthly across all supported chains.
• Hyperliquid tooling: unlike some providers, Quicknode does not offer Hyperliquid-specific extras such as a faucet or dedicated monitoring tools.

Pros & cons of Quicknode

Quicknode pros	Quicknode cons
Global low-latency network with auto-routing to the nearest region	Credit-based pricing is complex, as some RPC methods consume more credits than others
99.99% stated uptime with 24/7 support channels	No permanent free tier; access after trial requires paid plan
Scales underlying infra during traffic spikes, up to ~500 RPS on its Business plan	RPS limits per plan (50–500) can throttle high-frequency bots unless on higher tiers or multiple endpoints

Quicknode measured a 76 ms P95 and 99.98% probe success rate in the October 2026 benchmark and offers contractual SLAs on Enterprise, though its credit-based pricing can add complexity. A solid choice if you need scale and multi-chain tooling, but for Hyperliquid-specific features like faucets or dedicated monitoring, other providers fit better.

Beyond RPC: Hyperliquid data providers

Some HyperCore workloads aren’t a good fit for any RPC. A node only answers questions about current state, so historical and aggregated reads, like a user’s full fill history, candles, or liquidations, pass through to Hyperliquid’s public API.

Hydromancer is a Hyperliquid data provider built for this layer. Unlike Chainstack, Hydromancer is not an RPC provider and doesn’t replace one. It runs its own nodes, stores what they produce, and serves it as an API.

What it covers:

• History: fills, orders, funding, and liquidations, backfilled to July 2025, plus a free archive through Reservoir.
• Batch reads: positions for up to 1,000 wallets in a single request.
• Streams: fills for many addresses on one connection, live liquidations, and L2, L4, and BBO order books.
• Builder data: fills and liquidations attributed to a builder code.

When to use it: copy trading, wallet tracking, liquidation dashboards, analytics, and builder-code apps, or anything that reads HyperCore across many accounts. Requests use the same POST /info format as the official API, so existing code needs few changes. Orders still go through Hyperliquid.

How to get a Hyperliquid RPC

There are several ways to connect to Hyperliquid, and the right RPC setup depends on your workload and performance requirements. If you want something reliable, quick to set up, and with extras like a faucet and archive data, Chainstack is a good place to start. You can spin up a private Hyperliquid RPC in minutes and start building right away in a few clicks:

1. Log in to your Chainstack account (or create one if you don’t have it yet).
2. Create a new project or select an existing one.
3. Pick Hyperliquid as the network and choose mainnet or testnet.
4. Deploy a node configured for RPC access.
5. Once deployed, you’ll find your private RPC URLs, including /evm and /info, in the dashboard.

Once your endpoint is live, HyperEVM behaves like any standard EVM JSON-RPC — for example, checking the latest block:

curl -X POST https://YOUR_CHAINSTACK_ENDPOINT/YOUR_API_KEY -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d '{"jsonrpc": "2.0", "method": "eth_blockNumber", "params": [], "id": 1}'

For more details, you can check our How to get a Hyperliquid RPC endpoint guide

Conclusion

The Hyperliquid RPC landscape in 2026 has matured into a competitive space shaped by production trading, automated strategies, and latency-sensitive applications. As real volume and on-chain execution scale, RPC infrastructure becomes a defining factor not only for reliability and execution quality, but also for enterprise-grade requirements like predictable performance, isolation, and operational stability.

In our assessment, Chainstack offers the most balanced option overall, combining private HyperEVM and HyperCore access, predictable pricing, global and dedicated deployments, and a full set of Hyperliquid-specific tools. This makes it a strong fit for teams running trading bots, smart contracts, and production workloads that need low latency, as measured in the October 2026 benchmark above, though Chainstack’s probe success rate (99.74%) was the lowest of the four providers tested.

HypeRPC stands out for teams fully committed to Hyperliquid, prioritizing proximity to validators for live trading environments (HypeRPC was not measured in the benchmark above). Quicknode and Alchemy provide solid multi-chain platforms with familiar tooling, while Dwellir adds HyperCore streaming and dedicated clusters, and dRPC offers a different approach for teams optimizing around cost or decentralization.

In 2026, choosing the right Hyperliquid RPC provider is less about basic connectivity and more about execution reliability at scale. Teams that invest early in stable, production-ready infrastructure are better positioned to operate as Hyperliquid continues to grow as a trading-first network.

• Trading bots and latency-sensitive execution: Chainstack or HypeRPC.
• Multi-chain teams already using Ethereum tooling: Alchemy or Quicknode.
• Cost-conscious testing and smaller projects: dRPC, or Chainstack’s free Developer tier.
• Isolated, dedicated infrastructure: Dwellir or Chainstack Dedicated Nodes.

Recommended reading

If you want to go deeper into the Hyperliquid ecosystem and start building production-ready trading systems, we also recommend checking out the following guides:

• What is Hyperliquid? — an overview of Hyperliquid’s architecture.
• How to build a Hyperliquid trading bot — a step-by-step guide to set up and wire a trading bot.
• Hyperliquid On-Chain Activity Tracker — build automated alerts with Hyperliquid RPC.
• Mastering Hyperliquid — guides to Hyperliquid APIs, authentication, and trading.

Reliable Hyperliquid RPC infrastructure

Getting started with Hyperliquid on Chainstack is fast and straightforward — deploy a reliable node in seconds through an intuitive console, no hardware or complex setup required.

• Private HyperEVM and HyperCore access
• Built-in faucet for testnet HYPE
• Archive data and WebSocket support
• 99.99%+ platform uptime (status.chainstack.com, Hyperliquid Mainnet, 99.99%+ over the 90 days to October 29, 2026)

FAQ

Changelog

We review this comparison regularly so that the information stays accurate, clear, and easy to verify. This page was reviewed to improve how the comparison is structured and sourced.

• October 29, 2026: Added a quick verdict, Rank and “Best for” columns, a Hyperliquid RPC latency benchmark section with October 2026 figures for four of the six providers, measured latency and probe success rate in the comparison table and provider sections, numbered provider sections with one-line verdicts and official pricing links, a methodology and disclosure section, a rate limits and free tiers comparison, Chainstack alternatives, corrected vendor pricing, limits and certification details, and wording corrections (Chainstack uptime statements now cite the status page and keep the benchmark probe success rate and the Enterprise SLA distinct).
• October 16, 2025: Original publication.