Staking, Lending & Yield
Best Liquid Restaking Protocols
Yield stacked on yield, with the risks stacked the same way. We weight custody and performance hardest and treat short track records as the material fact they are.
All 3 compared
Sorted by computed score. Column headers carry this category's weighting; the highest score in each pillar is marked. Tap a name for the full assessment.
| # | Service | Score | Custody35% | Cost15% | Regulation5% | Performance35% | Access10% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | EtherFiWidely accepted staked ETH from a team that publishes its incidents | 7.5Solid | 7.6 — best in table | 7.6 — best in table | 6.0 — best in table | 7.4 — best in table | 8.0 — best in table |
| 02 | Puffer FinanceA thoughtful operator design, if you can use the slow exit | 6.8Adequate | 7.6 — best in table | 7.2 | 5.8 | 5.8 | 7.4 |
| 03 | RenzoRestaking without choosing operators, if you can wait out a withdrawal | 6.6Adequate | 7.0 | 7.4 | 5.8 | 5.6 | 7.6 |
The assessments
what each score rests on- 017.5/10
EtherFi
Best for widely accepted staked ETH from a team that publishes its incidents
Company file: ether.fi, owners, incidents →Solid◆ Sources checked · 27 Sept 2026Behind eETH and weETH, about $5.59B TVL (27 Sep 2026). Per ether.fi's current docs, eETH and weETH now earn plain Ethereum staking rewards; restaking is a separate, optional product. Both 2026 incidents came from the surface around weETH (Liquid vaults, old approvals), not the staking contracts.
Pillar scores
- Custody & Security35%
- 7.6
- Cost & Fee Transparency15%
- 7.6
- Regulation & Legal Standing5%
- 6.0
- Performance & Reliability35%
- 7.4
- Access & Support10%
- 8.0
Strengths
- eETH/weETH carry plain staking rewards; restaking is opt-in
- 45+ published audits and detailed incident write-ups
- weETH is accepted almost everywhere in DeFi
Against it
- Liquid vault withdrawals paused for about a day on 18 Apr 2026
- Sep 2026 legacy-approval exploit (~$43K); reimbursement promised, not yet shown
- Surface area keeps growing: vaults, bridges on many chains, a card business
Full assessment of EtherFi →solid · 7.5/10 - 026.8/10
Puffer Finance
Best for a thoughtful operator design, if you can use the slow exit
Company file: Puffer Finance, owners, incidents →Adequate◆ Sources checked · 27 Sept 2026Native restaking on EigenLayer since 31 January 2024: operators post a 2 ETH bond plus prepaid Validator Tickets, lose the bond if slashed, and the protocol caps itself at 22% of Ethereum validators. The market has not rewarded it: TVL fell about 98%, from $1.84B in June 2024 to about $32.1M (27 Sep 2026).
Pillar scores
- Custody & Security35%
- 7.6
- Cost & Fee Transparency15%
- 7.2
- Regulation & Legal Standing5%
- 5.8
- Performance & Reliability35%
- 5.8
- Access & Support10%
- 7.4
Strengths
- Operator bond is first loss; slashed operators lose the whole 2 ETH
- Self-imposed cap at 22% of Ethereum validators
- Free standard withdrawal (about 14 days)
Against it
- TVL down about 98% from the 2024 peak; exit liquidity is thin
- Instant withdrawal costs 1%
- Early-stage governance
Full assessment of Puffer Finance →adequate · 6.8/10 - 036.6/10
Renzo
Best for restaking without choosing operators, if you can wait out a withdrawal
Company file: Renzo, owners, incidents →Adequate◆ Sources checked · 27 Sept 2026Makes restaking approachable by picking the operators and services for you, which means you are trusting someone else’s choices. The April 2024 ezETH de-peg shows what a closed exit does under pressure. TVL has fallen about 97%, from $4.05B in May 2024 to about $125.5M (27 Sep 2026).
Pillar scores
- Custody & Security35%
- 7.0
- Cost & Fee Transparency15%
- 7.4
- Regulation & Legal Standing5%
- 5.8
- Performance & Reliability35%
- 5.6
- Access & Support10%
- 7.6
Strengths
- An approachable entry point into restaking
- Multi-chain access without managing operator selection
- Protocol withdrawals now open (7–15 days)
Against it
- ezETH de-pegged sharply in April 2024 while redemptions were closed
- TVL down about 97% from the 2024 peak; market exits are thin
- Operator selection is abstracted away, so you are trusting someone else’s risk choices
Full assessment of Renzo →adequate · 6.6/10
Restaking takes assets already securing one network and pledges them to secure others, stacking yield and stacking slashing conditions in the same motion. Every protocol here is young relative to the risk it carries, and we treat a short track record as the material fact it is rather than something to be polite about.
Frequently asked questions
Is restaking just staking with more yield?+
It is staking with more yield and more ways to lose the principal. The same collateral is pledged to multiple services, each with its own slashing conditions, and those conditions are not independent of one another. The extra return is compensation for a risk most depositors have not actually enumerated.
Why does this table score below Lido, Rocket Pool and Jito?+
Short track records, layered slashing surfaces and, for Renzo and Puffer, collapsing scale: both have lost about 97–98% of their 2024 peak TVL, which thins every exit. ether.fi is the exception on size, and its eETH now carries plain staking rewards only, with restaking opt-in.
What does a receipt-token de-peg actually cost me?+
It depends entirely on whether redemption is open. Where it is, the peg is only a secondary-market price and you can exit through the protocol at fair value. Renzo in April 2024 is the case that shows what happens when it is not: redemptions were closed pending a token launch, so holders had no route out except selling, and ezETH traded as low as about $700 on Uniswap. Check that the exit is actually available before treating a de-peg as cosmetic.
Assessed by
By Emily Volker
Editor-in-Chief · September 27, 2026