LRT · PUFFER · $0.02B TVL. Screen grades as of November 12, 2026: Solvency B, Legitimacy BB, Growth CCC. Restaking-beta; anti-slashing tech differentiator.
| Input / Grade | July 27, 2026 | November 12, 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| TVL | $0.5B | $0.02B |
| 12-month TVL change | -45% | -85% |
| Worst 90-day drawdown | 50% | 67% |
| Drawdown scored | 50% (90-day only, v1.0) | 85% (worse of 90-day and 12-month, v1.1) |
| Solvency (credit grade) | B · 44.5 | B · 38.3 |
| Growth | B · 31.3 | CCC · 26 |
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. Since then, some of those inputs have been checked against public data (November 13, 2026); see Input Sources. Where that changed a scored value, the grades in the right-hand column include it.
Solvency screens at B (38.3 / 100), unchanged from the July 27, 2026 screen. The worst 90-day TVL drawdown is 67% and 12-month TVL change is -85%. TVL stability is scored on the 12-month decline of 85%, because it is worse than the latest 90 days. Sustainability ratio (0.8x), unlock pressure (12%) and risk quality (6 / 10) are carried over from July 27, 2026.
Legitimacy screens at BB (59 / 100). No Legitimacy input was refreshed in the November 12, 2026 re-screen, so the grade is unchanged from July 27, 2026. All four inputs are analyst judgment; the evidence behind each is linked under Input Sources.
Growth screens at CCC (26 / 100), previously B in the July 27, 2026 screen. TVL is $0.02B, -85% over twelve months (it was -45% at the previous screen). Category share (7%) and momentum (3 / 10) are carried over from July 27, 2026.
Of the 11 scored inputs, 2 are taken from public data, 7 are analyst estimates with the evidence linked, and 2 are under review because the public data disagrees with the estimate or the definition is not settled. An input under review keeps its previous scored value until the review is published.
| Input | Scored Value | Status | Source Or Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sustainability ratio Solvency | 0.8x | Under review | DefiLlama: protocol revenue $0.09M over 12m; total fees $1.79M. DefiLlama has no unlock schedule for PUFFER, so emissions are not sourced. The methodology does not yet say whether "revenue" means what the protocol keeps or all fees paid by users, so the July estimate is still the scored value. |
| TVL stability Solvency | 67% / -85% | Sourced | Worst 90-day drawdown and 12-month TVL change, from DefiLlama, parent-level listing, as of November 12, 2026. |
| Unlock pressure (next 12 months) Solvency | 12% | Estimate | Analyst estimate. DefiLlama has no unlock schedule for PUFFER and no other public schedule has been linked yet. |
| Risk quality Solvency | 6 / 10 | Estimate | Analyst judgment. DefiLlama's hacks database lists no incident for Puffer. |
| Audit coverage Legitimacy | 7 / 10 | Estimate | Analyst judgment. DefiLlama lists no audit links for Puffer; the reports behind this score have not been linked yet. |
| Team & transparency Legitimacy | 7 / 10 | Estimate | Analyst judgment. |
| Delivery vs stated roadmap Legitimacy | 6 / 10 | Estimate | Analyst judgment. |
| Governance & decentralization Legitimacy | 4 / 10 | Estimate | Analyst judgment. Voting record is public on Snapshot. |
| TVL 12-month trend Growth | -85% | Sourced | 12-month TVL change, from DefiLlama, parent-level listing, as of November 12, 2026. |
| Category market share Growth | 7% | Under review | Puffer holds $19M of the $937M in DefiLlama's Liquid Restaking category, about 2%, below the 7% estimate. The peer set has not been settled, so the July estimate is still the scored value. |
| Momentum & users Growth | 3 / 10 | Estimate | Analyst judgment. Evidence: fees in the last 30 days were $0.06M, an annual run rate about 59% below the 12m total of $1.79M. |
"12m" is the twelve months to November 13, 2026. Token amounts are valued at DefiLlama prices on that date. Found an error? Tell us; corrections are published with a date.
The credit grade is Solvency B. Legitimacy is BB and the Growth outlook is CCC; 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 Puffer survive stress and pay its users back. Legitimacy (BB) and the Growth outlook (CCC) are published beside it and are never averaged into it. Weakest axis: Growth.
| Protocol | Solvency | Legitimacy | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|
| Puffer (this page) | B | BB | CCC |
| ether.fi | A | A | BB |
| Kelp DAO | BB | BBB | B |
| Renzo | BB | BBB | CCC |
| Bedrock | B | BB | CCC |
Puffer's differentiator is genuinely technical: Secure-Signer, a hardware-enclave-based anti-slashing layer intended to make node operation safer and more accessible, paired with pufETH as its LRT. The screen scores strong engineering attached to a category in retreat.
Solvency screens at B. Sub-1x fee coverage means emissions exceed revenue, 12% of supply unlocks within the year, and the 50% drawdown is among the deepest in the LRT cohort. The anti-slashing technology genuinely reduces one tail risk, but it does not address the economic problem the screen is measuring.
Legitimacy screens at BB. Audits are adequate and the research is credible, but delivery (6/10) reflects a roadmap — particularly the L2 ambitions — that has moved slower than announced, and governance is minimal.
Growth screens at B: 7% category share, momentum 3/10, TVL down 45%. Better technology has not translated into deposit share against ether.fi's distribution advantage.
Composite B. The screen's recurring lesson in miniature: in liquid staking, distribution beats engineering. A full rating would ask whether Secure-Signer is a product or a feature.
