[afterbelldev]

What this changes

Adds Afterbell as a Hyperliquid builder row on bench 030 (hyperliquid-frontends), the 107th.

• What it is. Afterbell (https://afterbell.pro) is a Hyperliquid trading front-end for stock, index and commodity perps (HIP-3) and crypto perps, which reads each stock perp against its home exchange's session (desks for Seoul, Tokyo, New York, Hong Kong, Shanghai and Mumbai). On mainnet since 2026-11-03. X @Afterbell_pro.
• Builder address 0xda5584eb1dff6ee2ae383b077b4dca9c0df1d4f6, the VITE_BUILDER_ADDRESS the live bundle ships. {"type":"referral"} gives it the referrer code AFTERBELL.
• Fee, published at https://afterbell.pro/fees: 0.03% standard; 0.015%, 0.01% and 0.008% from $10M, $50M and $250M of 30-day volume; 0.005% for a wallet's first 30 days; 0.04% on copied fills (following a trader); 0.001% on every order until 2026-12-31.
• Activity, and so far it is ours. Every fill that has carried this builder code came from one wallet, the builder address itself: our own orders, not users'. Its fill history (userFillsByTime) holds 17 of them, from 2026-11-03 20:16 UTC to 2026-11-07, paying $0.016748 of builder fees in all, which is exactly the builderRewards that {"type":"referral"} reports. The public fills bucket answers 403 for every day from 2026-10-01 to 2026-11-03 and has a file for 2026-11-04, 2026-11-05 and 2026-11-06 (checked day by day on 2026-11-08): 10 of those fills, $849 of notional, $0.0111 of builder fees. The other 7 fall after the export's cutoff, so 2026-11-03 and 2026-11-07 have no file at all. None of the 10 was matched against that same wallet. They read 0.10 bp at the launch rate, and 4.0 bp on the two xyz:CL fills of 2026-11-05, which is the copied-fill rate. The row will read about $0.00 for now. We are asking for it on the cohort policy in add Nova as the 105th Hyperliquid builder, and not as a perp DEX #3130, every known builder measured whatever the number says, so that the row exists when outside flow arrives.
• Changed together, same shape as Perpex (add Perpex as a Hyperliquid builder #3208): the builders.json entry (valid_from 2026-11-04 from the day-by-day scan), a provider block in benchmarks/hyperliquid-frontends.yml on the same seven queries, and url, description and X handle in src/data/provider-registry.ts. Plus our mark as public/logos/afterbell.png (256 px PNG, the image on our X profile) with its line in src/lib/logo-manifest.ts.

Type

• New benchmark spec (benchmarks/<slug>.yml)
• New harness (harnesses/<slug>/)
• Site / component changes
• Docs / tutorial
• Other (a new builder row on bench 030)

Checklist

• pnpm validate passes (not run locally)
• pnpm typecheck passes (not run locally)
• pnpm build passes (not run locally)
• If a new spec: queries dry-run successfully against the Prometheus URL (n/a: the existing queries with builder="afterbell")
• If a new harness: README documents inputs, regions, timeouts, and how to run it locally (n/a)
• No API keys, secrets or private endpoints committed

Also: builders.json parses and passes the checks loadBuilders makes (107 entries, unique slugs and addresses); the YAML parses (107 providers, unique slugs, each one in builders.json, ours on Perpex's queries with our slug, the rest of the spec unchanged); both TS files transpile without syntax errors.

Disclosure: opened by the Afterbell team.

[Flotapponnier]

Thanks @afterbelldev, merged and live in production.

• Bench 030: Afterbell is the 107th builder row on https://openchainbench.com/benchmarks/hyperliquid-frontends. It reads the last complete UTC day of the public fills feed, so today it shows the 2026-11-07 file: 1 fill, $99 of volume, $0.001 of builder fees.
• Product page: https://openchainbench.com/products/afterbell, with your logo, description and X handle.

I checked the claims before merging. The builder address is the one in the live afterbell.pro bundle, Hyperliquid's referral info gives it the code AFTERBELL with $0.016748 of builderRewards, and afterbell.pro/fees publishes the schedule quoted in the notes.

One change on top of yours: adding a provider changes the set behind the site's caches, so I moved the cache keys and re-pinned the provider-set hash in a second commit. Without that, the new row would not have appeared on the page.

As you noted, the row will mostly reflect your own test fills until outside flow arrives.