That is a fair question. Honestly, no, I wouldn't hand over the code, and that is not what I'm asking for. Hyperliquid doesn't ask you to trust its code. Every order, trade and liquidation happens on its own chain where anyone can look it up, and it publishes exactly how its mark price is calculated. If your stop gets hit, you can check the price that hit it was real. Vest is different. Their book runs on their own servers, it looks like a single quoter on both sides, and your drawdown is marked to the mid of that book. Nobody outside Vest can check what set that price. On gaming: if the price is tied to CME through a published method, knowing the method doesn't help you, because CME's price is public anyway. The only way to "trade the gap" is if Vest's price wanders off CME, which is the exact problem I'm pointing at. On competitors: a pricing method isn't the secret sauce. Exchanges compete on fees, liquidity and products. CME publishes how it settles every contract. So the ask is small. Publish the method: what reference price they use, how they adjust overnight, how the mark is calculated.

Vest’s CEO has said Vest is the only A book prop firm, and has said repeatedly that they win when traders win and that “your profits don’t come from our losses”. I ran the numbers using Vest’s own prices, order book and terms. Even granting every A book claim in full, the evaluation fees are what pay the funded traders