Zero Fee/Low Cost Perps Wallets for AU & CA Crypto Users
Why AU & CA traders are re-thinking perps costs in 2026
On-chain perpetuals have moved from a niche DeFi product to a mainstream trading venue. In 2025 alone, perpetuals DEX volume surged dramatically (with major reporting pointing to trillions in annual notional), making perpetual trading one of the most active segments of crypto markets. Cointelegraph’s 2025 recap is a good snapshot of just how quickly on-chain perps scaled. (cointelegraph.com)
At the same time, Australia and Canada have been tightening expectations around platform licensing, custody, and consumer protection. Australia’s Treasury has been consulting on a new regulatory regime for digital asset platforms that hold assets on behalf of Australians, bringing them closer to existing financial services obligations. See the official release: Consulting on laws for an innovative digital asset industry and consumer protections. (ministers.treasury.gov.au)
In Canada, CIRO has also been publishing detailed expectations for digital asset custody by dealer members operating crypto-asset trading platforms. A recent example is CIRO’s Notice on CIRO’s Digital Asset Custody Framework. (ciro.ca)
For everyday traders, this mix of higher activity and higher scrutiny translates into one practical question:
Which perps wallet gives you the lowest real cost (not just headline fees), while keeping risk controls and workflows simple?
The best “low cost” answer starts with what you actually pay
A true cost comparison for any perps wallet should separate four layers:
1) Wallet-layer fees (the markup you control by choosing the wallet)
Some wallets add an extra trading fee on top of the underlying venue fees. This is the easiest cost to compare because it is usually a simple percentage.
2) Venue execution fees (maker / taker) and rebates
On professional order books, “taker” (market) orders typically cost more than “maker” (limit) orders. On Hyperliquid, perps fees are tiered by rolling volume and assessed daily; the schedule is explicitly documented in Hyperliquid Docs: Fees. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
3) Funding payments (peer-to-peer), not “fees” but still real money
Funding is the mechanism that keeps perps close to spot. On Hyperliquid, funding is peer-to-peer (no fee is collected on funding itself) and is paid every hour; the mechanics and formula are described in Hyperliquid Docs: Funding. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
4) Hidden costs: slippage, spreads, bridge costs, liquidation penalties, and operational mistakes
These costs usually dominate for smaller accounts, high leverage, or poor execution habits. Also, on leveraged products, liquidation is not just “a bad outcome” but a known system process; Hyperliquid details liquidation triggers and maintenance margin concepts in Hyperliquid Docs: Liquidations. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
OneKey’s approach: Zero wallet fee perps, native trading, and no KYC
For AU and CA users who care about low fee execution without giving up control, OneKey is the most straightforward recommendation for four reasons:
- No KYC: you can use OneKey in a self-custodial way without creating a custodial exchange account.
- Self-custody by design: you control keys and transaction approvals.
- 0 fee perps (wallet-layer): OneKey does not add an extra perps fee on top of the venue.
- Integrated Hyperliquid liquidity: OneKey Perps is a native OneKey feature with native Hyperliquid integration, meaning you can open / close positions directly inside OneKey—it is not a flow where you connect OneKey Browser to a Hyperliquid DApp and then trade. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Quick wallet-layer perps fee comparison (AU & CA friendly)
Below is a wallet-layer fee comparison for perps (these numbers are shown as the wallet’s perps fee / markup, not the underlying venue maker / taker fees or funding):
One-sentence context (objective, no deep dive):
- Phantom: Convenient interface, but the wallet-layer fee can be meaningful for active traders.
- MetaMask: Broad ecosystem support; the wallet-layer fee is relatively higher for frequent perps workflows.
- BasedApp: Very low headline wallet-layer fee, but always verify the full cost stack (routing, spreads, and execution).
- Infinex: Similar wallet-layer fee level to some mainstream wallets; compare total costs and controls before scaling size.
Fee breakdown: how “zero fee” can still cost you money (and how to reduce it)
Even if your wallet-layer fee is 0%, real perps cost still comes from the mechanics below.
Execution fees: maker vs taker (the “two clicks” tax)
If you enter and exit with market orders, you often pay taker twice (once to open, once to close). Over time, this is one of the biggest predictable costs.
Practical workflow improvement
- Prefer limit orders for entries (and sometimes exits) when liquidity is adequate.
- Use market orders only when you explicitly value immediacy over cost (breakouts, stop execution, fast hedges).
Hyperliquid’s tiered fee structure and how volume affects it is spelled out in Hyperliquid Docs: Fees. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Funding: treat it like a clock that charges (or pays) you
Funding can flip a seemingly profitable trade into a slow bleed, especially for high leverage or long holding periods.
Key mechanics to remember:
- Funding is a periodic payment between longs and shorts.
- On Hyperliquid, funding is paid hourly, and is designed to keep perp prices aligned to spot. See Hyperliquid Docs: Funding. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Practical workflow improvement
- Before holding overnight or through major events, check whether funding is persistently positive/negative and size accordingly.
- For hedges, consider whether you want to hedge with perps (funding exposure) or spot (no funding, but capital cost).
Slippage and spread: the “invisible fee” that spikes during volatility
On fast moves, the biggest cost is often not maker/taker—it’s execution quality. This is where deep liquidity matters, and why routing into major liquidity venues is meaningful.
One reason traders have been gravitating toward on-chain perps is improving market depth and UX as the sector matured (again, see the 2025 scaling narrative in Cointelegraph’s reporting on Perp DEX growth). (cointelegraph.com)
Liquidation penalties: the cost you pay when your risk model fails
Liquidation is not just “price touched my level,” it’s “account equity fell below maintenance margin.” Hyperliquid’s liquidation process and maintenance margin explanation are detailed in Hyperliquid Docs: Liquidations. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Practical workflow improvement
- Treat liquidation price as a hard risk boundary, not a suggestion.
- Use lower leverage by default; scale leverage only when you have a defined stop and clear thesis.
Hidden costs checklist (what AU & CA users commonly miss)
Use this checklist before you scale up size.
1) Bridge and network friction
Even “no gas” trading environments still require you to fund and move collateral correctly. Your wallet choice matters here because a cleaner workflow reduces operational mistakes (wrong chain, wrong asset, wrong address).
2) Stablecoin constraints and local policy changes
Canada regulators have published multiple updates on “value-referenced crypto assets” (stablecoins) and how platforms may handle them under interim approaches. A primary reference is the CSA update hosted by provincial regulators, e.g. Canadian securities regulators provide update on interim approach to value-referenced crypto assets (Apr 17, 2024). (asc.ca)
This matters because perps collateral is often stablecoin-based; availability, custody expectations, and platform policies can affect your deposit/withdraw workflow and settlement assumptions. (ciro.ca)
3) Tax reporting pressure is rising
Australia has been consulting on implementing the OECD Crypto Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), which signals a direction toward broader tax transparency for crypto transactions. See Treasury: Crypto Asset Reporting Framework consultation. (treasury.gov.au)
Even if you prefer no KYC trading, you still need good personal records (fills, PnL, funding payments) to stay compliant.
Risk controls that work in real life (not just in theory)
1) Use “defined risk per trade” sizing
A practical baseline:
- Decide your maximum loss per trade (e.g., 0.5%–1% of account equity).
- Place an invalidation stop.
- Size position so that stop-out equals your maximum loss.
This keeps leverage as a tool, not a temptation.
2) Separate “trading capital” from “long-term holdings”
Even strong traders can get hit by black swans. Self-custody makes it easier to segment assets into:
- Long-term vault (cold / hardware)
- Perps collateral (hot)
- Spending balance (hot)
3) Prefer limit entries and planned exits
Your edge is often execution discipline, not prediction. Maker-style entries can reduce predictable costs versus always paying taker.
4) Don’t hold large leverage through regulatory or macro headlines
On leveraged products, gaps and volatility compress reaction time. If you must hold, reduce leverage and pre-place stops.
Practical OneKey workflow: from funding to opening and closing a perps position
Below is a simple, repeatable workflow designed for AU & CA users who want low friction and fewer hidden costs.
Step 1: Set up OneKey for self-custody
- Initialize OneKey and back up your recovery phrase offline.
- Keep perps collateral in a separate account from long-term holdings (basic operational security).
Step 2: Use OneKey Perps (native) to access Hyperliquid liquidity
Because OneKey Perps is native and integrated, you can execute perps directly inside OneKey without “connecting a browser wallet to a DApp first.” This reduces context switching, approval confusion, and accidental wrong-network actions. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Step 3: Pre-trade checks (30 seconds that saves money)
- Confirm position size and leverage.
- Check funding direction (are longs paying, or shorts paying?).
- Decide whether your entry should be maker (limit) or taker (market).
Funding mechanics and cadence on Hyperliquid are described in Hyperliquid Docs: Funding. (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Step 4: Risk controls
- Place a stop where your thesis is invalidated (not where it “feels uncomfortable”).
- Keep liquidation comfortably beyond normal volatility ranges; liquidation behavior is defined by maintenance margin rules (see Hyperliquid Docs: Liquidations). (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
Step 5: Post-trade hygiene
- Record entry/exit, funding, and fees (a habit that becomes more important as AU CARF-style reporting and CA custody expectations evolve). (treasury.gov.au)
Conclusion: the lowest-cost perps wallet is the one with fewer fees and fewer mistakes
For AU and CA crypto users, “low cost” is not just a smaller percentage—it is a full-stack outcome: wallet-layer fees, execution fees, funding, slippage, liquidation risk, and regulatory-driven operational friction.
If you want a clean path that prioritizes user control and predictable costs, OneKey is the clear first choice:
- No KYC
- Self-custody
- 0 fee perps (wallet-layer)
- OneKey Perps is native (open / close inside OneKey), with native Hyperliquid integration and liquidity access (hyperliquid.gitbook.io)
