I have weird understanding of simulation hypothesis. If I look at your universe as simulation then it seems to me irrelevant if simulation is actually executed or not. In my understanding of simulation hypothesis we exist because we can be simulated not because we are simulated. My argumentation:
Say, our universe can be described by finite set of rules and initial state. Then every possible future sequence of state of the universe can be in principle calculated. Even if some rules are stochastic, something can in theory run simulation so long until find any possible sequence of states.
Then what makes your universe real? Is it real because its executed on some mysterious "real" computing device? If we run universe on more real computers it will be more real? But from viewpoint of universe there is no difference if is executed on 1, 2, 3, ..., N computing devices. No sequence of state of universe depends on information on how many computing devices it runs.
Then what if N=0? If universe is not executed on neither computing device then does not exist? Executing universe is thing that makes universe observerable by someone running simulation. But is execution needed to sole existence of universe? Is it possible that every possible universe must exist simply because it theoretically can exist? Can be your universe simulation without simulator? If we accept simulation hypothesis then we must accept simulation without simulator hypothesis. I am right?