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

StakeWise

Liquid Staking · SWISE · $0.3B TVL. StakeWise v3 is architecturally the most solo-staker-friendly liquid staking design in the screen: isolated vaults let individual operators mint osETH against their own stake without pooling counterparty risk. It is a thoughtful answer to Lido's centralization critique that the market has largely declined to reward.

Screened July 27, 2026 Methodology v1.0 (screen) Caps Triggered 0
Solvency
BBB
68 / 100
Will it survive and pay users back?
Legitimacy
BBB
69 / 100
Is it real, credible, delivering its stated aim?
Growth
CCC
25.3 / 100
Adoption toward the protocol's own goal, peer-relative.
Axis I · Credit Grade

Solvency — BBB

Solvency screens at BBB. Break-even fee coverage (~1x), light unlocks, a moderate drawdown, and a 7/10 risk score reflecting the genuine benefit of vault isolation — one operator's failure does not socialize to all osETH holders, which is a real structural improvement over pooled designs.

Solvency ScorecardBBB
MetricRawNormalizedWeightWeighted
Sustainability ratio (revenue / emissions)1x
30%18
Does it earn more than it prints? Above 1x is self-sustaining.
TVL stability (max 90-day drawdown)35%
25%16.3
Bank-run indicator: worst 90-day deposit flight.
Unlock pressure (next 12 months)2%
15%12.8
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 SCORE68 → BBB
Axis II · Legitimacy Score

Legitimacy — BBB

Legitimacy screens at BBB: solid audits, a credible public team, and delivery of a genuinely novel v3 architecture. Governance (5/10) is low-participation, a common fate for small-cap protocols.

Legitimacy ScorecardBBB
MetricRawNormalizedWeightWeighted
Audit coverage8 / 10
25%20
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 SCORE69 → BBB
Axis III · Adoption Trajectory

Growth — CCC

Growth screens at CCC: 2% share, -30% TVL, 3/10 momentum. The isolated-vault model is harder to explain and harder to integrate than a single fungible LST, and distribution has followed simplicity.

Growth ScorecardCCC
MetricRawNormalizedWeightWeighted
TVL 12-month trend-30%
35%8.8
Adoption of the core product, in absolute terms.
Category market share2%
30%6
Peer-relative position: winning or losing its niche.
Momentum & users3 / 10
35%10.5
Usage trajectory and integration growth, filtered for incentives.
FINAL DIMENSION SCORE25.3 → CCC
Verdict

Where StakeWise Lands

Composite CCC. Better risk architecture than most of its category, with almost no commercial traction to show for it. A full rating would be a study in why superior design loses to superior distribution.

Composite — Conservative (Recommended Headline)
CCC
25.3 / 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
osETH; solo-staker-friendly architecture.
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.