TL;DR
Every major trading venue now runs some version of a points program. The surface mechanics look identical. The design choices underneath are not.
Points programs were originally a loyalty mechanic borrowed from traditional finance — airlines, credit cards, hotel chains. You spend, you accumulate, you redeem. The exchange benefits from retention; you benefit from a discount. The logic is transactional.
When perpetual DEXs started building points programs, the format looked familiar. But the underlying intent — at least when done correctly — is different. On a DEX, a points balance is a record of how a user contributed to the protocol’s health: liquidity depth, volume in less-traded pairs, time in position, actual market engagement. What gets measured is not just spend. It is participation quality.
What CEX Points Do
On a centralized exchange, points exist to prevent churn.
The exchange sets the rules unilaterally: how points are earned, how they convert into fee discounts or tier status, when they expire. The point balance in an account is a number the platform controls, redeemable on its terms, adjustable at its discretion.
A trader moving through VIP tiers on a CEX does not see how their volume compares to the exchange’s total revenue. They do not see the fee pool their activity feeds. They hold a discount code — not a contribution log.
What Perp DEX Points Track
On a perp DEX, what gets measured reflects what the protocol needs.
Aster uses a multi-factor Rh points formula: trading volume, holding time, asset exposure, profit score, and loss score — each weighted, with team boost multipliers and referral layers. Taker trades earn 2x over maker trades. The program has run across multiple stages, with each allocating a defined percentage of total
supply. The explicit scoring of holding time and position quality — not just raw volume — reflects an attempt to measure genuine trading engagement rather than pure capital throughput.
dYdX’s Surge program (launched April 2025) allocates $20 million in DYDX over nine months across three categories: general taker fees (50%), retail interface activity (25%), and ecosystem activation (25%). Non-top-5 markets earn at 2x — a deliberate weighting toward depth in less-trafficked pairs, rather than concentration in high-volume instruments.
Hyperliquid took a more direct approach. Season 1 rewarded perpetual trading, naturally favoring active users. Season 2 expanded to spot activity and asset holding, broadening participation beyond high-frequency traders. Distribution was public, updated weekly, with affiliate points tied fractionally to referred user activity.
The pattern across these programs is consistent: what gets measured reflects what the protocol values. Volume alone is too easy to game. Well-designed programs add dimensions that make manipulation expensive.
The Design Spectrum
Not all DEX points programs are built with the same intent. The design — and the token structure that follows — varies considerably.
Lighter launched its LIT token on December 30, 2025, with 25% of supply distributed as an immediate, fully unlocked airdrop to points holders. The community allocation looks generous. But Lighter raised $68 million prior to launch (Founders Fund, Ribbit Capital, Haun Ventures, Robinhood), and 50% of total supply was held by insiders. Community sentiment at launch was divided: the airdrop percentage attracted attention, but the insider allocation raised questions about long-term distribution alignment. Pre-market perpetuals drew over $94 million in daily volume on competing venues — genuine interest was there. The token reached its all-time high two days before TGE; by launch, broader market conditions had already begun tightening and liquidity across the sector was contracting. LIT has since declined roughly 74% from that peak — a move shaped more by the macro environment and reduced market depth than by the points program design itself.
Backpack launched its BP token on March 23, 2026. The structure was different: 24% of total supply to points holders, 1% to Mad Lads NFT holders, and no allocation to founders, executives, or venture investors at inception — insiders are prohibited from receiving tokens until the protocol launches in the United States. Initial trading opened at $0.214, with post-launch price movement reflecting both community demand and broader market conditions.
Hyperliquid distributed 310 million HYPE tokens to over 94,000 users in November 2024 with no VC participation and no pre-sale. The users who held the largest points balances were, by construction, the users who had contributed the most to platform liquidity. Post-TGE, trading volume and TVL continued setting records — the user base stayed because the product warranted it.
Farmer vs. Participant
The perp DEX sector has spent the past two years designing around this problem.
An airdrop farmer treats a points program as a yield optimization problem: maximize points per dollar deployed, then exit. A genuine participant trades where the product is strongest and accumulates points as a byproduct. Both generate similar on-chain activity in the short term.
The difference shows up after. Protocols that designed their programs around active, verifiable participation — weighted activity criteria, anti-sybil measures, explicit prohibitions on wash trading — tend to retain users who were there for the product. The alternative plays out predictably: activity falls once the incentive structure changes.
What This Means on Antarctic
Antarctic is a perpetual futures exchange built for professional traders. AX Points accumulate through real trading activity on the platform, tracking productive protocol engagement rather than raw volume.
A point balance on Antarctic reflects something specific: engagement during a period when the protocol is building toward execution quality, market integrity, and on-chain settlement infrastructure. That is a different category from a CEX tier that resets quarterly and carries no information about the protocol’s direction.
FAQ
Q: How are AX Points different from CEX tier rewards? A: CEX tier rewards are set and controlled unilaterally by the exchange, with no external verification and no claim on the underlying business. AX Points track verifiable trading activity and reflect actual engagement with Antarctic’s protocol.
Q: How do different perp DEX points programs compare? A: Programs vary significantly in what they measure. Aster weights holding time and position quality alongside volume. dYdX’s Surge program incentivizes activity in less-traded markets. Hyperliquid expanded from trading volume to include spot activity and asset holding over successive seasons. The design choices reflect what each protocol needs from its user base.
Q: What should traders look for when evaluating a perp DEX points program? A: Three things are worth examining: what behaviors are rewarded and how they’re weighted; whether anti-gaming measures are in place; and how the program relates to the protocol’s broader distribution structure. A program that tracks volume only, with no quality or holding dimension, measures spend — not participation.
For updates on AX Points or program mechanics:
Start trading →
Read the docs →
Discord →
discord.com/invite/antarcticexchange
Made better, Trade better.
