DeFiScoreAudit shield logo
DeFiScoreAudit
Detecting DeFi Risk, Before It Breaks
← Back to DeFiScoreAudit
Rating Screen · Methodology v1.0

Moonwell

Lending · WELL · $0.3B TVL. Moonwell is a Compound-lineage lending protocol on Base and Optimism that has staked its differentiation on consumer accessibility — clean app design, fiat on-ramps, and mobile-first distribution aimed at users who would never navigate a raw money market.

Screened July 27, 2026 Methodology v1.0 (screen) Caps Triggered 0
Solvency
BB
58.8 / 100
Will it survive and pay users back?
Legitimacy
BBB
66.5 / 100
Is it real, credible, delivering its stated aim?
Growth
CCC
28.8 / 100
Adoption toward the protocol's own goal, peer-relative.
Axis I · Credit Grade

Solvency — BB

Solvency screens at BB. Fee coverage (~1.5x) from a small base, a 40% drawdown, and moderate unlocks. The 7/10 risk score benefits from a conservative forked codebase with a long audit lineage — inheriting Compound's architecture is a genuine safety advantage at this size.

Solvency ScorecardBB
MetricRawNormalizedWeightWeighted
Sustainability ratio (revenue / emissions)1.5x
30%18
Does it earn more than it prints? Above 1x is self-sustaining.
TVL stability (max 90-day drawdown)40%
25%10
Bank-run indicator: worst 90-day deposit flight.
Unlock pressure (next 12 months)5%
15%9.8
Incoming insider sell pressure vs circulating supply.
Risk quality (collateral, oracle, exploit posture)7 / 10
30%21
Combined collateral quality, price-feed dependence, and loss history.
FINAL DIMENSION SCORE58.8 → BB
Axis II · Legitimacy Score

Legitimacy — BBB

Legitimacy screens at BBB: a public, communicative team, adequate audits, steady delivery of the consumer product roadmap. Governance (5/10) functions but with limited participation.

Legitimacy ScorecardBBB
MetricRawNormalizedWeightWeighted
Audit coverage7 / 10
25%17.5
Code credibility: firms, recency, findings resolved.
Team & transparency8 / 10
25%20
Doxxed vs anonymous; track record; disclosure quality.
Delivery vs stated roadmap7 / 10
20%14
Does shipped product match the promise? The core legitimacy test.
Governance & decentralization5 / 10
30%15
Real distributed control vs theater; participation quality.
FINAL DIMENSION SCORE66.5 → BBB
Axis III · Adoption Trajectory

Growth — CCC

Growth screens at CCC on the screen's inputs — 1.2% category share is the smallest in the universe — against a relatively contained -25% TVL and 4/10 momentum. The consumer thesis targets a market the screen's metrics cannot see.

Growth ScorecardCCC
MetricRawNormalizedWeightWeighted
TVL 12-month trend-25%
35%8.8
Adoption of the core product, in absolute terms.
Category market share1.2%
30%6
Peer-relative position: winning or losing its niche.
Momentum & users4 / 10
35%14
Usage trajectory and integration growth, filtered for incentives.
FINAL DIMENSION SCORE28.8 → CCC
Verdict

Where Moonwell Lands

Composite CCC. The screen measures DeFi-native share, which is precisely the wrong lens for a protocol trying to reach non-DeFi users. A full rating would need user-cohort data — retention and fiat-funded deposits — to judge whether the consumer angle is working.

Composite — Conservative (Recommended Headline)
CCC
28.8 / 100 · lowest of the three dimensions

"A chain is as strong as its weakest link." The conservative composite takes the weakest dimension and inherits any notching cap, so a single structural weakness cannot be diluted by strength elsewhere.

Analyst Note
Base/Optimism lender; consumer-app angle.
Screen vs full rating. This is Methodology v1.0 applied in screening form: the same bands, weights, caps and grade scale as the full Aave workbook, reduced to the highest-signal metrics per dimension so the whole universe stays comparable in one table. Screen grades are provisional. A full rating — per-metric sourcing plus four stress scenarios — is produced when a protocol is selected for publication. Every input is an analyst estimate as of July 27, 2026, drawn from public data (DefiLlama, protocol docs, governance forums, rekt.news) and judgment, and should be verified before being relied upon.
Want the full treatment? See the complete Aave rating — per-metric sourcing, four stress scenarios, and notching-cap analysis — for what a published rating looks like. Join the waitlist to get each new full rating as it publishes.