All insights

2025-11-228 min readExecution Engineering

Latency Budget Report: HyperAgent vs PMM Bots

Instrumented comparison of HyperAgent’s execution latency versus passive market-maker scripts on Hyperliquid.

Measurement setup

We timestamped every stage: market data ingestion, prompt evaluation, decision propagation, order submission, and exchange acknowledgment. Tests ran on the same hardware.

Results

HyperAgent averages 274ms total cycle time. PMM scripts hovered around 780ms because they polled REST and recalculated state naively. That delta let our agent capture 63 additional micro-trends during the +80% campaign.

Engineering choices

Executor keeps persistent WebSocket pools, batches updates, and only calls expensive models when Boss requires it. It also runs close to Hyperliquid’s matching engine for deterministic latency.

Reproduce it

This article links Grafana dashboards plus the instrumentation snippet. Run it against your bots and see exactly where HyperAgent saves precious milliseconds.

Continue

Ready to inspect the logs or launch your own HyperSniper session? Book a live walkthrough with our desk.

Latency Budget Report: HyperAgent vs PMM Bots | HyperAgent Insights | HyperAgent - Institutional Algo Execution