Matt

WATCH: 16-year-old lifeguard rescues a drowning little boy who was being swept away by powerful waves in California. Absolute hero.

Some context on the team behind TxFlow, since people keep asking. We are close to 100 people and still growing. Engineers and product builders from Stanford, MIT, Tsinghua, spread across 20+ countries. To be clear: headcount is not a moat. Hyperliquid proved a small team can build something great, and we respect that. Our bet is different. We think the next generation of onchain financial infrastructure (matching, risk, liquidity standards, decentralization roadmap) is a scope problem, and we are staffing for that scope. What I think actually matters more than team size: We are building through a bear market, not waiting for one to end. That is a statement about conviction, not timing. We are committing to a 100% fair launch. Team tokens locked for a minimum of 2 years. No quiet unlocks, no “strategic partners” getting early exits. And one internal benchmark we hold ourselves to: we do not consider this working until TxFlow volume catches Hyperliquid. Regardless of price, regardless of market. All of these are verifiable. Hold us to them. Personal thoughts only, not financial advice. What would make you trust a new perp DEX team: track record, lockups, or shipped product?

Good question. Different trust assumptions, honestly: Variational: RFQ against a single LP, zero fees, cost in the spread. Extended: hybrid CLOB, matching off-chain, settlement onchain. TxFlow: full CLOB onchain, liquidity via open TIP standards. None of these is “wrong.” We just believe execution and liquidity should be verifiable, not trusted. Our decentralization milestones are public and dated, judge us against them.

People keep being surprised that TxFlow has close to 100 people. Honestly, I expect 300 to 500 in the coming years, and I think that is normal. Here is the reasoning. Everything on an exchange costs headcount. Security is not a feature, it is a permanent staffing line. Then matching, liquidations, risk, wallets, infra, audits, incident response, and actual product delivery on top. Small teams ship demos. Exchanges that hold user funds need depth. And there is a competitive fact nobody should dodge: Hyperliquid is ahead. They earned it. If you show up with fewer people AND a weaker bench than the leader, the math never closes. You do not catch a stronger team by being smaller than them. So we hire. On the BloFin question, since it keeps coming up: the teams are fully independent, and so is the money. BloFin has USD funds as shareholders, and every dollar there is contractually spent on BloFin. TxFlow is funded out of my own pocket. Different cap tables, different teams, different books. That is the whole story. The milestones are public and dated: sequencer witness Q3, MPC withdrawals Q4. Judge the strategy by whether we hit them.

People keep being surprised that TxFlow has close to 100 people. Honestly, I expect 300 to 500 in the coming years, and I think that is normal. Here is the reasoning. Everything on an exchange costs headcount. Security is not a feature, it is a permanent staffing line. Then matching, liquidations, risk, wallets, infra, audits, incident response, and actual product delivery on top. Small teams ship demos. Exchanges that hold user funds need depth. And there is a competitive fact nobody should dodge: Hyperliquid is ahead. They earned it. If you show up with fewer people AND a weaker bench than the leader, the math never closes. You do not catch a stronger team by being smaller than them. So we hire. On the BloFin question, since it keeps coming up: the teams are fully independent, and so is the money. BloFin has USD funds as shareholders, and every dollar there is contractually spent on BloFin. TxFlow is funded out of my own pocket. Different cap tables, different teams, different books. That is the whole story. The milestones are public and dated: sequencer witness Q3, MPC withdrawals Q4. Judge the strategy by whether we hit them.

People keep being surprised that TxFlow has close to 100 people. Honestly, I expect 300 to 500 in the coming years, and I think that is normal. Here is the reasoning. Everything on an exchange costs headcount. Security is not a feature, it is a permanent staffing line. Then matching, liquidations, risk, wallets, infra, audits, incident response, and actual product delivery on top. Small teams ship demos. Exchanges that hold user funds need depth. And there is a competitive fact nobody should dodge: Hyperliquid is ahead. They earned it. If you show up with fewer people AND a weaker bench than the leader, the math never closes. You do not catch a stronger team by being smaller than them. So we hire. On the BloFin question, since it keeps coming up: the teams are fully independent, and so is the money. BloFin has USD funds as shareholders, and every dollar there is contractually spent on BloFin. TxFlow is funded out of my own pocket. Different cap tables, different teams, different books. That is the whole story. The milestones are public and dated: sequencer witness Q3, MPC withdrawals Q4. Judge the strategy by whether we hit them.

Some context on the team behind TxFlow, since people keep asking. We are close to 100 people and still growing. Engineers and product builders from Stanford, MIT, Tsinghua, spread across 20+ countries. To be clear: headcount is not a moat. Hyperliquid proved a small team can build something great, and we respect that. Our bet is different. We think the next generation of onchain financial infrastructure (matching, risk, liquidity standards, decentralization roadmap) is a scope problem, and we are staffing for that scope. What I think actually matters more than team size: We are building through a bear market, not waiting for one to end. That is a statement about conviction, not timing. We are committing to a 100% fair launch. Team tokens locked for a minimum of 2 years. No quiet unlocks, no “strategic partners” getting early exits. And one internal benchmark we hold ourselves to: we do not consider this working until TxFlow volume catches Hyperliquid. Regardless of price, regardless of market. All of these are verifiable. Hold us to them. Personal thoughts only, not financial advice. What would make you trust a new perp DEX team: track record, lockups, or shipped product?

Some context on the team behind TxFlow, since people keep asking. We are close to 100 people and still growing. Engineers and product builders from Stanford, MIT, Tsinghua, spread across 20+ countries. To be clear: headcount is not a moat. Hyperliquid proved a small team can build something great, and we respect that. Our bet is different. We think the next generation of onchain financial infrastructure (matching, risk, liquidity standards, decentralization roadmap) is a scope problem, and we are staffing for that scope. What I think actually matters more than team size: We are building through a bear market, not waiting for one to end. That is a statement about conviction, not timing. We are committing to a 100% fair launch. Team tokens locked for a minimum of 2 years. No quiet unlocks, no “strategic partners” getting early exits. And one internal benchmark we hold ourselves to: we do not consider this working until TxFlow volume catches Hyperliquid. Regardless of price, regardless of market. All of these are verifiable. Hold us to them. Personal thoughts only, not financial advice. What would make you trust a new perp DEX team: track record, lockups, or shipped product?