It's been a long time coming... But it's finally time Part of evolving as a business is recognising where your focus should be while remembering who your users are. The reality is that we spent an incredible amount of time purpose-building a network that is specifically designed to cater to HFT and everything that it encompasses. Execution needed to be faster and limitations to throughput hindered our ability to run real time risk checks as we think about scaling to 100,000 to 1,000,000 users and beyond. For those who have been following along, its no secret that there has been friction between how we execute and what the preference is from Solana leadership. I understand and respect their stance, however to continue to frame BULK a solana dex would be reductive to the actual offering, so we’re officially putting this on the record. The stronger case is that multichain access expands BULK’s distribution and usable capital while bringing more activity into the same market. Distribution follows where users hold their money. As more people enter crypto through neobanks, wallets and payment applications, their first chain may simply be whichever network their provider uses. Their choice of trading venue will depend on execution quality, liquidity and convenience. Requiring those users to move to a particular chain before they can trade creates an acquisition barrier: another transaction, another fee, another interface and another opportunity to abandon onboarding. It also asks wallets and neobanks to move customers away from their existing infrastructure to integrate BULK. Multichain access lets BULK meet that distribution where it already exists. A wallet or neobank could offer its customers BULK markets through the rails they already use. The lesson from multicurrency products like Wise is that a single financial relationship can span across several underlying currencies and payment systems. We expect users to increasingly demand the same convenience across chains. A unified clearing layer can make capital more productive and markets more liquid. The strongest clearinghouse analogy is capital efficiency. Traditional clearing infrastructure brings eligible collateral and positions into a common risk framework, allowing qualifying exposures to offset and reducing the capital required to support them. This today belongs to CME Group. For BULK, the opportunity is to connect capital held across supported chains to a common margin system and shared order book. A trader’s access to liquidity should not depend on which chain funded their account. A market maker should be able to serve that combined demand through the same BULK markets. This creates an economic advantage: more sources of capital and order flow can support deeper books; deeper books can improve execution; better execution can attract more traders and integrations. That advantage depends on keeping liquidity concentrated. Multichain access should bring users into the same markets, with eligible collateral recognized under a consistent risk framework. It should also let users withdraw available capital through supported destination chains, making BULK useful within their wider financial activity. BULK’s specialised execution layer gives it a natural role connecting these rails. BULK is a purpose-built trading L1 rolled into an order book, matching engine and risk engine. Its value comes from how efficiently it executes trades and manages risk. That specialization gives it a reason to serve capital from multiple ecosystems. Today, collateral lives on Solana, and BULK’s ledger tracks the corresponding balances, positions and margin. Extending that model to supported networks such as Arc, Tempo, Arbitrum and HyperEVM would allow more funding and withdrawal routes to connect to the same execution system. The architectural principle is to handle each chain’s confirmation and settlement requirements at the funding boundary. Once collateral is securely recognised, trading should run through BULK’s own execution and risk process. This allows BULK to preserve its performance while broadening access. The intended experience is straightforward: fund from a supported chain, trade against BULK’s shared liquidity, and withdraw available balances to a supported destination. A user could enter from Solana and exit on HyperEVM, with BULK coordinating the accounting, settlement and destination liquidity required. For wallets and neobanks, that would make BULK an exchange and clearing integration they can use across their supported networks. Each additional rail would expand access to the same venue, and strengthen the market already serving everyone else.

Travis has a 95% win rate by banking directional wins while holding a longer term, part hedged portfolio. His capital required for his open positions is 58% less than anywhere else and his liquidation price is 16% wider than anywhere else Be like Travis, Be on BULK🫡

Looking at how we can enable spot margin -> trade perps without the need for borrowing One of the biggest considerations for this is ensuring a deep spot book Looking like choosing @solana was the right choice

I’m not sure I can be convinced that there is any meaningful activity on an L1 beyond Solana Purpose built applications can still do some things better, but as a general purpose L1… The debate is settled for who wins

After over 2 years of blood, sweat and sacrifice… Mainnet is imminent. We have spent an inhumane amount of hours building what we believe to be not only the most complete trading venue in the world... But also infrastructure that will serve as the blueprint for the largest technological advancement for financial products in recent history. We have come along way since the birth of perpetual contracts, but we are still a considerable distance away from offering an environment that real size is willing to deploy on In a game of never ending exchanges, the question we have repeatedly asked ourselves is "why would people switch?" The answer for us is simple, we offer that environment. For the longest time the debate has been between globally distributed, or fast… And although you absolutely need both, this misses the point entirely. The heart of an exchange is the risk engine. Where real people trade real money, you must offer the most efficient venue for protecting and enabling capital. BULK approaches risk management like a tradfi clearing house - precise and robust. Our key differentiator is SPAN style portfolio margining, where every asset has a correlation that adjusts required margin dynamically based on market conditions. A result of this is positions hedge each other resulting in lower margin requirements. Leading CEXs and DEXs don’t offer anything close to this, but instead they view your portfolio on a per position basis, which puts capital at risk. For over 3 decades SPAN has been the gold standard for futures and we are brining it on chain. Liquidations are like precise surgeries where it’s an optimisation being run in realtime. During market momentum bulk removes positions that don’t correlate and reduces your protfolio risk, instead of liquidating an entire position To build an engine like this is incredibly expensive when it comes to compute, which is why no L1 today is able to offer the same. There has never been a better environment for someone to disrupt this space and offer an experience that the industry so desperately needs Competing between ourselves in crypto is too short sighted, as the true TAM for this is EVERYTHING The best thing about this, is that because we are a complete stack, every market participant from traders and hedge funds to validators and market makers, get to become part of the network and benefit in the growth of it. As an ecosystem, we have repeatedly told each other not to let the traditional giants come and take everything we have worked so hard to build… This is our chance to see that reality. We are not only committed, but obsessed with building something truly capable of advancing modern finance on a global scale One Exchange. Infinite Markets.