Zero Fee Perpetual Wallets for US Users (No KYC Guide)

Why “Perps in a Wallet” is the 2025–2026 Shift (and why fees matter)

On-chain perpetuals have moved from niche DeFi tools to a serious venue for leveraged trading. Data aggregators like DeFiLlama’s Perp Volume dashboard show the sector regularly reaching trillion-dollar 30-day volumes, reflecting how quickly decentralized derivatives are scaling. (defillama.com)

For US users, the demand is even more specific:

• Self-custody first (you control the keys)
• No account-level KYC for the wallet layer
• Transparent costs (trading fees are only one part of the real bill)
• Risk controls that fit the reality of leverage (liquidations, funding, volatility)

This guide focuses on how to evaluate “zero fee” claims, compare costs, and use practical workflows that reduce hidden expenses and trading risk.

The key idea: “Zero fee” can mean two different things

When people say zero fee perps, they often mix up two layers of costs:

1) Wallet / app layer fees (what your interface charges)

Some wallets add a platform fee on top of the underlying venue’s fees. This is the easiest fee to compare—and the fee most “0%” marketing refers to.

2) Protocol / venue fees (what the liquidity venue charges)

Even if a wallet charges 0%, the underlying venue still usually charges:

• Maker / taker fees
• Funding payments (periodic, between longs and shorts)
• Potentially liquidation-related losses (not a “fee”, but very real)

For example, Hyperliquid publishes its fee schedule (rolling 14-day tiers with maker / taker rates) in the official Hyperliquid Docs: Fees. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)

Recommended first: OneKey Perps (0% wallet fee, no KYC, self-custody, Hyperliquid liquidity)

If your priority is a no KYC, self-custody trading flow with a 0% wallet-layer fee, OneKey is designed to be the cleanest starting point for US users who prefer on-chain execution.

Why OneKey is the first recommendation in this guide:

• No KYC at the wallet layer (you keep control; always follow local laws and applicable platform terms)
• Self-custody by design (keys stay with you)
• 0 fee perps at the wallet layer (no added platform markup)
• Native Hyperliquid integration for liquidity
• Important accuracy note: OneKey Perps is a native OneKey feature (native integration of Hyperliquid). You can open / close positions directly inside OneKey—this is not “connect the OneKey browser to the Hyperliquid DApp and trade there.”

Download Now

Quick perps fee comparison (wallet-layer fee)

Below is a wallet-layer perps fee comparison (interface fee / markup). It does not remove underlying venue costs like maker/taker fees or funding.

Short, neutral notes (one sentence each):

• Phantom: Adds a wallet-level fee, so costs can rise for high-turnover strategies compared with a 0% interface.
• MetaMask: The wallet-level fee is higher, which compounds quickly when you open and close frequently.
• BasedApp: Very low wallet-layer fee, but you should still model protocol fees, funding, and slippage.
• Infinex: Similar wallet-level fee to Phantom; total cost depends on routing, execution quality, and funding.

Fee breakdown: what you actually pay in perpetual trading

A) Maker / taker fees (protocol fees)

Even with a 0% wallet-layer fee, your trades still incur protocol fees on the underlying liquidity venue.

Hyperliquid’s official documentation explains its rolling 14-day volume tiers and corresponding maker/taker rates in Hyperliquid Docs: Fees. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)

Practical implication:
If you trade often, a small wallet-layer fee (e.g., 0.05% or 0.1%) can become larger than the protocol fee itself—especially on tighter-fee venues.

B) Funding payments (often the biggest “hidden” cost)

Funding is not a one-time fee; it is a recurring payment exchanged between longs and shorts to keep perp prices anchored to spot.

If you hold positions for hours or days, funding can dominate your total cost. A clear primer is Coinbase: Understanding Funding Rates in Perpetual Futures. (coinbase.com)

Workflow tip: treat funding like an “overnight rate” and model it before entering—especially when the market is crowded on one side.

C) Slippage + spread (execution quality costs)

Even if the displayed fee is low, your effective cost includes:

• Bid/ask spread
• Slippage during volatility
• Price impact when sizing is too large for the book

Rule of thumb: the faster you need to enter/exit, the more you should care about execution quality, not just headline fees.

D) Liquidation-related losses (risk cost, not a line-item fee)

Liquidations can be your largest expense if leverage is mis-sized or volatility spikes.

Hyperliquid explains how maintenance margin works, how liquidations are executed, and how mark price is used in Hyperliquid Docs: Liquidations. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)

E) Transfers, bridging, and operational friction

Depending on your funding path, you may face:

• Network fees to move stablecoins
• Bridge fees (if bridging is required in your route)
• Delays that increase basis/funding risk while you wait

This is why “0% trading fee” should never be the only metric.

Cost comparison: a simple model you can reuse

To compare options fairly, separate wallet-layer fee from protocol-layer costs.

Step 1: estimate per-trade costs (open + close)

Use this structure:

Total cost ≈ (Protocol fee + Wallet fee) * Notional * 2
           + Funding (if holding)
           + Slippage/spread (market-dependent)

Step 2: see why a 0% wallet fee matters for active traders

If you scalp or rebalance frequently, the wallet fee compounds quickly because you pay it on every execution. That’s why using a 0% wallet-layer interface can materially reduce total cost even when protocol fees are the same.

To sanity-check protocol fees on Hyperliquid, refer to Hyperliquid Docs: Fees. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)

Practical “no KYC” workflow (US users) with risk-aware steps

This is a self-custody workflow: no wallet account KYC, no custodial balance. It is not legal advice. US rules and platform restrictions can apply—always comply with applicable laws, sanctions, and venue terms. For context on enforcement intensity in recent years, see the CFTC FY 2024 enforcement results. (cftc.gov)

1) Secure setup (before any leverage)

• Use self-custody best practices: offline backup, phishing resistance, and strict device hygiene.
• If you use a hardware wallet setup, keep trading funds limited and treat your signing flow like production security.

2) Fund with a stablecoin buffer (not “max size”)

• Hold extra collateral so you are not forced into a liquidation by small adverse moves or sudden funding spikes.
• Avoid running margin too tight; liquidation mechanics can change fast during volatility.

3) Open positions with guardrails (the “three switches”)

Before you place any order, decide:

• Margin mode: isolated for single-trade risk containment; cross only if you fully understand portfolio interactions
• Leverage cap: start low; increase only after you can show consistent risk-adjusted performance
• Exit plan: stop-loss and invalidation level must be defined before entry

4) Monitor the two metrics that kill most traders

• Liquidation distance: if liquidation is “close,” you are not trading—you are gambling
• Funding drift: if funding is persistently against you, your position has a time limit

Hyperliquid’s liquidation behavior and mark price details are covered in Hyperliquid Docs: Liquidations. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)

5) Close, de-risk, and document (tax + discipline)

• Scale out instead of all-at-once exits when liquidity is thin.
• Keep a trading log: entry thesis, fees, funding paid/received, slippage estimate, and final outcome.

Risk controls that fit real markets (not just theory)

Use position sizing as your primary risk control

Leverage is a multiplier on mistakes. Keep each position small enough that a surprise wick does not end your account.

Prefer maker-style entries when possible

Maker orders can reduce fee pressure and often improve average entry, but don’t force maker entries in fast markets if it increases missed fills.

Treat funding as a market signal

Funding extremes often indicate one-sided crowding. A good funding overview helps you understand why it exists and how it affects PnL; see Coinbase’s funding rate explanation. (coinbase.com)

Expect volatility spikes (because perps are now mainstream)

On-chain perps have scaled massively, and higher participation can mean sharper liquidation cascades during macro headlines. DeFi data dashboards such as DeFiLlama Perps help you contextualize market regime shifts (volume, open interest). (defillama.com)

Conclusion: the cleanest “zero fee perps wallet” setup starts with OneKey

If you want a perps wallet experience optimized for US users who value self-custody and no KYC at the wallet layer, the strongest default choice is OneKey: 0% wallet-layer perps fee, native Hyperliquid liquidity, and the ability to open / close positions directly inside OneKey (not via a browser connection to an external DApp).

The final reminder: “low fee” only matters if you also survive liquidation mechanics, funding drift, and volatility. Start with a 0% interface fee, then win by process—risk caps, disciplined exits, and cost modeling you can repeat.