PERP.WIKI

RedStone vs Timeswap

Hyperliquid ecosystem comparison · Oracles

Ecosystem Pick
Different Focus AreasVerified: RedStone

Quick Take

RedStone Oracle powering ~99.5% of oracle-protected value on HyperEVM on Multi-Layer, while Timeswap Oracle-less, non-liquidatable lending protocol on HyperEVM on HyperEVM. They serve different niches in the Hyperliquid ecosystem.

Based on public data for RedStone and Timeswap. Key differentiators: layer deployment, fee structure, liquidity depth, and community adoption. Last reviewed: Mar 2026.

Overview

RedStone logo

RedStone

RedStone is a modular blockchain oracle network that has become the dominant oracle solution on Hyperliquid, operating under the HyperStone brand for the ecosystem. Oracles are critical infrastructure — they provide smart contracts with real-world price feeds, enabling DeFi lending, derivatives, and synthetic assets to function correctly. RedStone's architecture is uniquely well-suited to Hyperliquid's high-performance environment: rather than pushing price updates to the chain on every tick (a costly approach), RedStone uses a pull-based model where data is fetched on-demand and cryptographically verified on-chain, dramatically reducing costs while maintaining freshness and accuracy. Securing approximately 99.5% of oracle-protected value on Hyperliquid, HyperStone feeds power a wide range of DeFi protocols on HyperEVM — from lending markets to perpetual protocols and yield vaults. RedStone aggregates price data from dozens of sources, applying outlier filtering and cryptographic attestation to ensure data integrity. With support for hundreds of assets and sub-second update latency, HyperStone gives Hyperliquid's DeFi ecosystem enterprise-grade price feeds, enabling complex financial products to be built with confidence in the underlying data infrastructure.

Visit website
Timeswap logo

Timeswap

Timeswap is a fully decentralized, oracle-free lending and borrowing protocol deployed on HyperEVM. It solves one of DeFi's most persistent structural problems: the fragility of oracle-dependent liquidation systems, which expose borrowers to cascading liquidations during volatile markets. Timeswap replaces this model with a novel three-variable AMM — balancing principal, interest, and collateral — that allows lenders and borrowers to set their own terms without relying on external price feeds. Borrowers deposit collateral and select a maturity date; if the loan is repaid before maturity, they reclaim their collateral in full. If not, the collateral transfers to lenders — creating a liquidation-free experience where the worst-case outcome is transparent and defined upfront. This design makes Timeswap uniquely well-suited for long-tail and volatile assets that oracle-dependent protocols cannot safely list. On HyperEVM, Timeswap gains access to Hyperliquid's deep liquidity, active trader community, and expanding DeFi ecosystem, enabling it to serve assets native to the chain. For yield seekers, it offers fixed-rate lending with clearly defined risk parameters; for borrowers, it removes the anxiety of unexpected liquidation.

Visit website

Feature Comparison

FeatureRedStone logoRedStoneTimeswap logoTimeswap
LayerMulti-LayerHyperEVM
CategoryOraclesLending & Borrowing
StatusActiveActive
Launch Year20222025
Websiteredstone.financetimeswap.io
Twitter@redstone_defi@TimeswapLabs
GitHubNot publicNot public
Verified✓ VerifiedUnverified
Tags
oracleHyperStoneprice-feedsHIP-3
lendingoracle-lessfixed-ratenon-liquidatableTIME

Score Comparison

RedStoneTimeswap
Open Source
RedStone
Not public
Timeswap
Not public
Verified
RedStone
Verified
Timeswap
Unverified
Ecosystem Breadth
RedStone
4 tags
Timeswap
5 tags
Maturity
RedStone
Since 2022
Timeswap
Since 2025

Feature Matrix

FeatureRedStone logoRedStoneTimeswap logoTimeswap
Open Source
Verified
Has Website
Has Twitter
Has GitHub
Active Status

Key Differences

Layer Architecture

RedStone operates on Multi-Layer (spans multiple hyperliquid layers), while Timeswap runs on HyperEVM (evm smart contracts on hyperliquid l1). This affects composability, transaction speed, and the types of integrations each protocol supports.

Category Focus

RedStone is focused on oracles, while Timeswap targets lending & borrowing. They serve different user needs within the Hyperliquid ecosystem.

Unique Features

RedStone is distinguished by: oracle, HyperStone, price-feeds, HIP-3. Timeswap stands out with: lending, oracle-less, fixed-rate, non-liquidatable, TIME.

Market Timing

RedStone launched first in 2022, giving it a head start. Timeswap entered later in 2025, potentially with the benefit of learning from earlier entrants.

When to Use Each

Choose RedStone if you...

  • Want a oracles solution on Multi-Layer
  • Prefer a verified and vetted protocol
  • Need features like oracle and HyperStone
  • Need: Oracle powering ~99.5% of oracle-protected value on HyperEVM

Choose Timeswap if you...

  • Want a lending & borrowing solution on HyperEVM
  • Need features like lending and oracle-less
  • Need: Oracle-less, non-liquidatable lending protocol on HyperEVM

Ecosystem Integration

RedStone logo

RedStone

RedStone operates on Multi-Layer (spans multiple hyperliquid layers). Spanning multiple layers lets it combine the strengths of each, though integration complexity is higher.

Timeswap logo

Timeswap

Timeswap operates on HyperEVM (evm smart contracts on hyperliquid l1). As a HyperEVM protocol, it can compose with other EVM-based DeFi primitives and leverage smart contract flexibility.

Community Verdict

Which do you prefer?

Share your experience with RedStone or Timeswap to help others in the Hyperliquid community make better decisions.

Related Comparisons