Trevor Flipper

Yeah, and I think the short answer there, that's a good question.

The short answer is yes, it's different.

And I think the first and most obvious is zero fees.

And why does that matter?

It really affects their distribution strategy and the way in which they onboard new users and sell to existing platforms.

And to expand on that a little bit is if like recently they integrated with Insilico and Insilico is also integrated with Hyperliquid.

Well, Hyperliquid has a base builder code fee of 4.5.

And in Silico, most OEM assets or an execution management systems charge one bit to their users for those type of orders.

And so the total cost for the user is 5.5 bps.

First, if you use LIDAR, which has zero fees for their partner attribution program, which is just builder codes.

I know the team would hate me saying that, but it's essentially a builder code.

There's zero fees.

So in Silico can still charge one BIP, but the trader, you save 4.5, which matters a lot for people who trade volume.

So the way in which they go about their distribution strategy is very different than a hyperliquid.

And this also goes into the team's density, the engineering team.

They have quite a large engineering team.

One of the sharpest teams I've met in crypto and the talent is very much so on par with a lot of the startups you see in AI now.

And their talent density on the engineering side allows them to have a white glove treatment to integrating different partners, like integrating Telegram.

Eventually, you know, hopefully they integrate with brokers, the IBKRs of the world, is they have the talent density to go integrate this tech stack for IBKR, where the competitors don't quite have the same resources to go do that.

And nor do they take that approach.