Head to head · Exchange market data · October 2026 research run
Bithumb Open API vs Hyperliquid
Bithumb Open API and Hyperliquid score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 50.6 (D) and 50 (D). Hyperliquid leads on reliability and payments & pricing. Both do exchange market data.
Best crypto exchange APIs and MCP servers for AI agents · All 210 exchanges comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for KRW-market trading for agents acting for a verified Korean account, with a vendor-built MCP server, CLI and skills.
Ahead on
- Schema & documentation, 64 against 42
- Maintenance & community, 69 against 39
- Transparency & trust, 47 against 26
Also in its favour
- Runs on your own machine
Watch for
No sandbox or testnet; every order uses real funds
Best for An agent trading perpetuals or spot on chain from its own wallet with no account, or acting for a master account through an approved API wallet.
Ahead on
- Reliability, 40 against 34
- Payments & pricing, 55 against 15
Watch for
No official MCP server; the 23 registry entries are all third parties, several selling data by x402
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Payments & pricing Hyperliquid +40
Bithumb Open API 15
No machine payment protocol (0). The fee page timed out on every attempt, so no price is recorded (0 of 20, unchecked). Public market data needs no key, card or account; trading needs a verified Korean account. Judgement call (15 of 20). A person must sign up, pass identity checks and issue keys in the browser (0). 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 15.
Hyperliquid 55
No machine payment protocol (0). Fees published per tier without login (20). No card anywhere; public info endpoints are free and the testnet faucet gives 1,000 mock USDC, though only to an address that has deposited on mainnet (15 of 20). No signup; an agent with a funded EVM wallet deposits USDC on a bridged chain and trades, subject to the unread terms (20). Total 55.
Maintenance & community Bithumb Open API +30
Bithumb Open API 69
Read as a closed service. Rate limits updated 27 October 2026 and the ticker cap effective 13 October 2026 (30). Batch orders 20 August, Private v1 retired 30 September, the ticker cap 13 October and the limits page 27 October 2026 (20). A phone support line, dated notices and a GitHub repository with no open issues and one commit; replies not observed (9 of 15). The MCP server is not in the official MCP registry and there is no SDK; the CLI and MCP packages are current (5 of 15). The MCP package depends only on @modelcontextprotocol/sdk ^1.26 on Node 18, with no public source or CI (5 of 10). 30 + 20 + 9 + 5 + 5 = 69.
Hyperliquid 39
Read as a closed hosted service with open SDKs. The API has no dated changelog, so the last dated change is the Python SDK's 0.24.0 on 4 June 2026, 152 days before this check; the node repository was pushed on 10 August 2026 and the docs describe newer actions (HIP-4 outcome markets, borrow and lend) without dates. Judgement call (10 of 30). No three dated releases in 90 days (0). Support through Discord and the docs' FAQ, 112 open issues on the SDK whose replies couldn't be read (8 of 25). Official Python and Rust SDKs, the Rust one last pushed 21 October 2025; no MCP registry entry (15). CI on Python 3.9 and 3.13 with Poetry, Dependabot badge, a lock file (6 of 10). Total 39.
Schema & documentation Bithumb Open API +22
Bithumb Open API 64
No OpenAPI found; the reference is a readme.io site with Markdown twins, and the MCP tool schemas weren't read since the server's source isn't published (5 of 25). llms.txt on apidocs.bithumb.com (10). Reference pages state purpose and the skills say when to use each module and when not to (15 of 20). Typed parameters with enums for side, order type and time in force (10 of 15). Examples in several languages and an error-code page with names, statuses and meanings (12 of 15). Versions per endpoint (v1, v2, v2.1.5) and notices with effective dates (12 of 15). 5 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 12 + 12 = 64.
Hyperliquid 42
No OpenAPI or other machine-readable contract; request and response shapes are tables and JSON examples in the docs (0 of 25). llms.txt and a Markdown twin of every page by appending .md (10). Each info type and exchange action has a short description of what it does, and the signing page lists common mistakes, but little says when to use one call over another (12 of 20). Fields are one-letter keys (a, b, p, s, r, t, c) with numbers as strings, enums such as tif Alo, Ioc or Gtc, and required fields marked in tables (9 of 15). An example for every call and a list of order and cancel error strings, with no HTTP error table (11 of 15). No API version, no changelog and no dated release notes; deprecated actions such as userDexAbstraction are marked in place (0 of 15). Total 42.
Transparency & trust Bithumb Open API +21
Bithumb Open API 47
The editorial half. A closed service whose terms couldn't be read (timeouts and a title-only page); the kit is MIT with a disclaimer naming Bithumb Co., Ltd. (10 of 30). No privacy policy read (0 of 30, unchecked). Dated retirement of WebSocket Private v1 and effective dates on breaking notices (14 of 20). No subprocessor or data-location statement read (0 of 20). 10 + 0 + 14 + 0 = 24.
Hyperliquid 26
The editorial half. The SDKs are MIT and the node repository Apache-2.0 with a Dockerfile around a binary; the API servers and front end are closed and the terms were unreadable (12 of 30). No privacy policy read and nothing in the docs on data handling (0 of 30). Deprecated actions are marked in the docs without dates or a policy (8 of 20). No subprocessors or data locations (0 of 20). Total 20.
Reliability Hyperliquid +6
Bithumb Open API 34
Read with the hosted lines. No status page found on apidocs.bithumb.com or in llms.txt; wallet-status and notices endpoints stand in (0). No readable incident history, though two notices record a public WebSocket interruption and a brief service break (5). Rate limits documented per category with numbers, updated 27 October 2026 (15). A breach is described only as a temporary restriction, with no status code, header or Retry-After, and no client order id or idempotency key is documented; 422 order_not_ready and 500 server_error say to retry later (4 of 15). No SLA found (0). The API is generally available; the MCP server and CLI are at 0.8.5 (10). 0 + 5 + 15 + 4 + 0 + 10 = 34.
Hyperliquid 40
Read with the hosted lines on the REST API at api.hyperliquid.xyz, the surface an agent calls; the chain behind it is noted under details. No status page found in the docs, on hyperliquid.xyz or at status.hyperliquid.xyz, which did not resolve (0). No readable history (5). Rate limits documented with numbers per IP, per address and per WebSocket connection (15). When limited, an address gets one request every 10 seconds; no 429 shape or Retry-After is documented, but cloid, per-signer nonces, expiresAfter and noop make retries safe (10 of 15). No SLA (0). Mainnet is generally available (10). 0 + 5 + 15 + 10 + 0 + 10 = 40.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Bithumb Open API | Hyperliquid | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 34 | 40 | Hyperliquid +6 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 64 | 42 | Bithumb Open API +22 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 67 | 70 | Hyperliquid +3 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 60 | 64 | Hyperliquid +4 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 15 | 55 | Hyperliquid +40 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 69 | 39 | Bithumb Open API +30 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 47 | 26 | Bithumb Open API +21 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 50.6/100 | D 50/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Bithumb Open API | Hyperliquid |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |
| Vendor | Bithumb Co., Ltd. | Hyperliquid Labs |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | stdio | |
| Auth | API key | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Pay per use | Pay per use |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | none | The exchange runs on the Hyperliquid chain (HyperCore), whose node is distributed as a binary under an Apache-2.0 repository; the Python and Rust SDKs are MIT. The API servers and front end are closed |
| Tools exposed | 41 | 0 |
| Read-only variant documented | yes | no |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-13 | 2026-06-04 |
| Terms last updated | couldn't be read | couldn't be read |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | couldn't be read | couldn't be read |
| Terms restrict automated access | couldn't be read | couldn't be read |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | couldn't be read | couldn't be read |
| Terms or service can change without notice | couldn't be read | couldn't be read |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | couldn't be read | couldn't be read |
| Popularity | 6 stars | 1.9k stars, 167k PyPI/wk |
Verdicts
Bithumb Open API
Bithumb runs an official local MCP server with 41 tools, module selection and a read-only flag, beside a CLI with per-profile read-only gating and six agent skills, over an API with scoped one-year keys and a mandatory IP list. There is no sandbox, no status page, no documented 429 behaviour, and the fees and terms couldn't be read.
Hyperliquid
Hyperliquid's API needs no signup or key, an approved API wallet can trade but not withdraw, fees and rate limits are published with numbers, and a testnet mirrors mainnet. There is no official MCP server, OpenAPI file, status page, changelog or readable terms, and signing uses two schemes the docs say to leave to an SDK.
Before you call either
Bithumb Open API
- Ask for a key with asset and order inquiry plus order placement only, never withdrawals, with your IP registered; keys expire after one year and a wrong IP answers 401 NotAllowIP
- Start the server with
--modules market,account,trade --read-onlyfor analysis and drop--read-onlyonly when the person asks to trade; deposit and withdraw modules stay off - Prefer the
bithumbCLI for writes, as the skills do, and checkbithumb config show --jsonfor a read-only profile before any order - Keep the ticker's markets parameter at 200 or fewer, batch orders at 30 and cancels at 30 per request, and stay under 140 private calls a second per category
- Retry 422 order_not_ready and 500 server_error after a pause; there is no sandbox, so start with the smallest order the market allows
Hyperliquid
- Generate a fresh API wallet, approve it with
approveAgentwith a name and expiry, sign with it, and query with the master address, never the agent address - Use the Python SDK's
sign_l1_actionandsign_user_signed_action; mixing the two, field order in msgpack or an uppercase address gives "User or API Wallet ... does not exist" - Set a
cloidon every order and read the per-orderstatusesarray; one batch-level error rejects the whole batch - Budget address limits by volume (one action per 1 USDC traded after 10,000); batch orders to lower IP weight, and use WebSocket for data
- Arm
scheduleCancelbefore unattended trading so open orders are cancelled if the agent stops
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Bithumb Open API or Hyperliquid?
Bithumb Open API and Hyperliquid score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 50.6 (D) and 50 (D). Hyperliquid leads on reliability and payments & pricing.
Do Bithumb Open API and Hyperliquid need an API key?
Bithumb Open API needs an API key. Hyperliquid takes an API key or an OAuth sign-in.
Can an agent call Bithumb Open API and Hyperliquid without installing anything?
Bithumb Open API runs on your own machine, with no hosted endpoint listed. No hosted endpoint is listed for Hyperliquid.
Other comparisons with Bithumb Open API or Hyperliquid
- Bitfinex API vs Bithumb Open API
- Bitfinex API vs Hyperliquid
- Bitget vs Bithumb Open API
- Bitget vs Hyperliquid
- Bithumb Open API vs Bitstamp API
- Bithumb Open API vs Bybit
- Bithumb Open API vs Coinbase Advanced Trade API
- Bithumb Open API vs Coinbase MCP server (Coinbase for Agents)
- Bithumb Open API vs Crypto.com Exchange API
- Bithumb Open API vs Deribit
- Bithumb Open API vs dYdX
- Bithumb Open API vs Gate
- Bithumb Open API vs Gemini Exchange API
- Bithumb Open API vs HTX trading API
- Bithumb Open API vs Kraken API
- Bithumb Open API vs KuCoin
- Bithumb Open API vs MEXC API
- Bithumb Open API vs OKX API
- Bithumb Open API vs Uniswap Trading API
- Bithumb Open API vs Upbit Open API
- Bitstamp API vs Hyperliquid
- Bybit vs Hyperliquid
- Crypto.com Exchange API vs Hyperliquid
- Gate vs Hyperliquid
- Gemini Exchange API vs Hyperliquid
- HTX trading API vs Hyperliquid
- Hyperliquid vs Upbit Open API
- Binance API vs Bithumb Open API
- Binance API vs Hyperliquid
- Coinbase Advanced Trade API vs Hyperliquid
- Coinbase MCP server (Coinbase for Agents) vs Hyperliquid
- Hyperliquid vs Uniswap Trading API
- Deribit vs Hyperliquid
- dYdX vs Hyperliquid
- Hyperliquid vs Kraken API
- Hyperliquid vs KuCoin
- Hyperliquid vs MEXC API
- Hyperliquid vs OKX API
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/bithumb-vs-hyperliquid.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/bithumb.json·/api/v1/tools/hyperliquid.json - From a terminal
anchor compare bithumb hyperliquid(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "bithumb", "b": "hyperliquid"}at/mcp, no key