Yield · PENDLE · $1B TVL. Screen grades as of November 12, 2026: Solvency BBB, Legitimacy A, Growth BB. Category-defining yield-splitting; revenue tied to yield-trading cycle.
| Input / Grade | July 27, 2026 | November 12, 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| TVL | $5B | $1B |
| 12-month TVL change | -25% | -82% |
| Worst 90-day drawdown | 40% | 25% |
| Drawdown scored | 40% (90-day only, v1.0) | 82% (worse of 90-day and 12-month, v1.1) |
| Solvency (credit grade) | A · 70.8 | BBB · 64.5 |
| Growth | BB · 59.8 | BB · 54.5 |
TVL figures: DefiLlama, parent-level listing. The July 27, 2026 TVL was an analyst estimate and may have used a narrower definition, so part of the TVL difference can be definitional. Only these three inputs were refreshed in the re-screen; sustainability, unlocks, risk, audits, team, delivery, governance, category share and momentum were left as the July 27, 2026 estimates.
Solvency screens at BBB (64.5 / 100), previously A in the July 27, 2026 screen. The worst 90-day TVL drawdown is 25% and 12-month TVL change is -82%. TVL stability is scored on the 12-month decline of 82%, because it is worse than the latest 90 days. Sustainability ratio (2x), unlock pressure (3%) and risk quality (8 / 10) are carried over from July 27, 2026.
Legitimacy screens at A (76 / 100). No Legitimacy input was refreshed in the November 12, 2026 re-screen, so the grade is unchanged from July 27, 2026.
Growth screens at BB (54.5 / 100), unchanged from the July 27, 2026 screen. TVL is $1B, -82% over twelve months (it was -25% at the previous screen). Category share (70%) and momentum (6 / 10) are carried over from July 27, 2026.
The credit grade is Solvency BBB. Legitimacy is A and the Growth outlook is BB; the weakest axis is Growth. These grades use TVL data as of November 12, 2026 and qualitative inputs from July 27, 2026.
The credit grade answers one question: can Pendle survive stress and pay its users back. Legitimacy (A) and the Growth outlook (BB) are published beside it and are never averaged into it. Weakest axis: Growth.
Pendle invented and still defines on-chain yield-splitting — separating principal from yield so both can be traded — and at $5B TVL it owns roughly 70% of its category. It has been the venue where every major yield narrative (LSTs, restaking points, stablecoin yields) came to be priced.
Solvency screens at A, the best in the mid-cap cohort. Fees cover emissions ~2x, unlock pressure is low (~3%) with the token largely distributed, and the AMM's architecture has aged without incident — the risk score (8/10) reflects that maturity. The 40% drawdown is the one soft input: yield-trading TVL rotates violently with each narrative cycle.
Legitimacy screens at A. The team has shipped relentlessly — V2, cross-chain expansion, and product iterations arrived on cadence — audits are layered, and vePENDLE governance actually functions, though concentration among large lockers earns the usual deduction.
Growth screens at BB. Dominant share and decent momentum are offset by a ~25% twelve-month TVL decline as the points-trading boom normalized. The protocol's growth is structurally episodic — it booms when a new yield source needs price discovery.
Composite BB, held there by cycle-dependent growth rather than any quality concern. On balance-sheet and execution metrics Pendle screens as one of the strongest mid-caps in the universe and a natural early candidate for full coverage.
