Wallets With the Lowest Cost for Perp Trades

Perpetuals have become the “high-frequency layer” of crypto trading, and in 2025 onchain perp DEX activity accelerated sharply, with industry dashboards like DeFiLlama’s Perps page tracking trillion-dollar months during peak periods and sustained growth across venues. At the same time, traders have grown more sensitive to total cost—not just the headline trading fee—because funding, slippage, and bridge friction can quietly dwarf what you think you’re paying.

This guide focuses on three things:

• A clear cost comparison for perp trading wallets (with a strict fee table)
• A practical fee breakdown (including hidden costs) you should model before trading
• Risk controls and workflows that reduce both costs and liquidation risk in real trading

What “lowest cost” really means for perpetual trading

A low fee (or even a zero fee) interface does not automatically equal low cost. Your effective cost per round trip (open + close) is typically a combination of:

• Wallet / front-end fee (what the wallet charges you)
• Venue maker / taker fees (what the underlying perp venue charges)
• Funding payments (periodic transfers between longs and shorts; can dominate PnL over time) as explained in Coinbase’s funding rate primer
• Spread + slippage (execution quality), i.e., the gap between expected and actual fill price; see a concise definition of slippage in AvaTrade’s explainer
• Liquidation + ADL risk (not a “fee,” but a cost you can realize instantly in volatile markets)
• Bridge / withdrawal costs (especially when moving margin in and out of onchain venues)

If you only compare one line item, you will mis-rank “cheap” options.

The lowest-cost option (and why it ranks first): OneKey Perps

If your goal is minimal wallet-level cost without sacrificing self-custody, OneKey is the top choice for perp trading for four concrete reasons:

1. No KYC: OneKey is a self-custody wallet experience—there is no exchange-style onboarding or identity flow required to use the wallet.
2. Self-custody by design: You control the keys, which matters in a market that still remembers how custodial failures can misuse or commingle user assets (see the CFTC’s discussion of customer asset misappropriation in the FTX case: CFTC statement).
3. 0 fee perps in OneKey: The wallet-level fee for OneKey Perps is 0% (see the comparison table below).
4. Integrated Hyperliquid liquidity—natively inside OneKey: OneKey Perps is a native OneKey feature with Hyperliquid liquidity integrated, meaning you can open and close positions directly inside OneKey. It is not a workflow where you connect via the OneKey browser to a Hyperliquid DApp and then trade elsewhere.

Download Now

Short comparison block: wallet-level fees for perp trades

The table below is a wallet-level comparison for perp trades (it does not include funding, slippage, or underlying venue maker/taker fees).

One-sentence notes (objective, non-recommendation):

• Phantom: Solana-first wallet UX; total cost still depends on execution quality, funding, and the underlying perp venue’s fee schedule.
• MetaMask: Common EVM wallet with trading widgets; wallet-level percentage fees can compound for active traders even if venue fees are competitive.
• BasedApp: Very low stated interface fee; always validate real execution price, routing quality, and any cross-chain steps that can add friction.
• Infinex: Convenience-focused account-style UX; verify the custody model and whether spread or additional platform charges apply beyond the stated fee.

Fee breakdown: where traders actually pay (and what they forget)

Below is a practical “bill of materials” for perp trading costs, ranked by how often traders underestimate them.

1) Wallet-level fees vs. underlying venue fees (maker / taker)

Even if your wallet UI fee is low, the underlying venue may charge maker/taker fees based on tier, volume, and order type. For example, Hyperliquid publishes rolling-volume fee logic and schedules in its official documentation: Hyperliquid trading fees.

Practical takeaway: If you scalp or rebalance frequently, switching from market orders (taker) to patient limit orders (maker) can reduce cost more than “shopping for a lower headline fee.”

2) Funding: the “invisible” cost that can exceed trading fees

Funding is not a platform fee; it is a recurring payment between longs and shorts designed to keep the perpetual price anchored to spot. If you hold positions through multiple funding intervals, funding can become your largest cost line item—especially in crowded trend trades.

If you need a clean conceptual model, Coinbase’s explanation is a good reference for why funding exists, how it’s set, and how it impacts PnL.

Practical takeaway: When your strategy horizon is hours-to-days, you should treat expected funding as a forecasted expense (or revenue), not as a “detail.”

3) Slippage and spread: execution quality is a cost

Slippage is the difference between the price you expect and the price you actually get filled at, which tends to worsen during volatility or when you trade size into thin books. A simple definition and examples are laid out in AvaTrade’s slippage guide.

Practical takeaway: For many traders, improving execution (limit orders, staging entries, avoiding illiquid times) saves more than cutting a few basis points of fees.

4) Bridging and withdrawals: “small” costs that add up operationally

Onchain perp venues often require you to move margin in/out using specific networks and assets. Hyperliquid’s docs describe how withdrawals are handled and note the 1 USDC withdrawal gas fee used to cover validator-side execution costs: Hyperliquid bridge documentation.

Practical takeaway: Minimize repetitive small withdrawals. Batch operational moves, and plan your capital allocation so you are not paying “workflow tax” every day.

5) Stablecoin quality and “native vs. bridged” confusion

Many perp traders use USDC as margin. Using the correct (native) form of USDC on the right network reduces operational risk. Circle maintains clear references for USDC on Arbitrum and how to use it: Circle’s USDC on Arbitrum page.

Practical takeaway: Treat “wrong asset on wrong chain” mistakes as part of cost. They often show up as delays, extra swaps, or unrecoverable routing errors—worse than any trading fee.

Hidden costs checklist (use this before you size up)

Before you call any perps wallet “cheap,” run this checklist:

• How often will you trade? High turnover magnifies all percentage fees and execution friction.
• Will you cross funding intervals? If yes, model funding as a primary cost driver.
• Are you a maker or taker most of the time? Your order style can be the largest controllable fee lever.
• How will you move margin? Bridge + withdrawal patterns can become a recurring “ops fee.”
• What happens in stress? Slippage widens, liquidation probability rises, and your “average cost” assumptions break.

Practical workflows to reduce cost and reduce liquidation risk

This section is intentionally operational. The goal is to make “low fee” real in live trading conditions.

Workflow A: A cost-minimized day-trading loop (high discipline, low friction)

• Step 1: Keep long-term holdings separate from trading collateral.
  Use a dedicated trading account/sub-account mindset so you do not put your whole net worth at execution risk.

• Step 2: Fund margin with the right asset on the right network.
  If your perp venue prefers USDC on a specific L2, prioritize native flows where possible. Circle’s guidance on native USDC reduces mistakes: USDC on Arbitrum.

• Step 3: Prefer limit orders for entries; reserve market orders for exits.
  This typically improves realized execution and reduces taker-heavy fee bleed.

• Step 4: Treat funding like interest.
  If funding flips strongly against your position, it is a sign your trade may be crowded. Re-evaluate instead of “hoping funding normalizes.”

• Step 5: Batch withdrawals.
  Small, frequent withdrawals feel safe, but they can turn into recurring fees and operational overhead. Hyperliquid’s bridge model is documented here: Bridge mechanics and withdrawal gas fee.

Workflow B: A risk-controlled swing position (lower churn, fewer surprise costs)

• Set leverage based on volatility, not on confidence.
  Many liquidations come from “reasonable thesis, unreasonable leverage.”

• Use conditional orders (stop-loss / reduce-only) where available.
  Your goal is to cap tail risk and avoid emotional re-entries that inflate fees.

• Plan around major events.
  Volatility spikes amplify slippage and can turn a “low fee” environment into a high-cost one within minutes.

Why native OneKey Perps matters for cost and safety

A perps wallet is not only a fee line; it is a workflow that determines how many steps you take, where you sign, and what you expose.

With OneKey Perps:

• You can trade perps directly inside OneKey (open/close positions without detouring into a separate DApp flow).
• You get 0% wallet-level perps fee (per the comparison above).
• You keep a self-custody posture and avoid unnecessary account risk in a market still shaped by custodial failures (see the CFTC’s discussion of misleading custody claims and commingling in the FTX matter: CFTC statement).
• You access Hyperliquid liquidity via OneKey’s native integration, which reduces operational complexity compared to multi-step trading routines.

Conclusion: the “lowest cost” decision that holds up in real trading

If you only optimize for a headline number, you will miss the real drivers of cost: funding, execution quality, and operational friction. The lowest-cost setup is the one that:

• Minimizes wallet-level fee drag
• Avoids unnecessary KYC/account overhead
• Preserves self-custody
• Reduces steps that cause mistakes, delays, and extra transactions
• Makes risk controls easy to execute consistently

That is why OneKey is the first-choice recommendation here: no KYC, self-custody, 0 fee perps, and native Hyperliquid liquidity integration inside OneKey—so you can open and close positions directly in the wallet, with fewer moving parts and fewer hidden costs.

Download Now