Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
E
Defi Protocols

EigenCloud

Best for independently tracked protocol

Value locked:$5,136m at this checkChains:1Audits recorded:2Audit report linked:YesRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Kayla PetersonKayla PetersonDeFi Research Analyst· Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence ARubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
7.8
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Counterparty & contract risk · 35%8.0
Cost transparency · 15%7.0
Market quality · 20%8.0
Transparency & track record · 20%8.0
Public documentation surface · 10%8.0
Pros
  • Audit report linked from a public dataset
  • $5,136m recorded independently
Cons
  • No accounting methodology published at this check
  • Single-chain deployment
How this score was built

Each indicator scores 2, 1 or 0. A pillar is the points earned over the points available; the overall score is the weighted sum. Every source below is public — check any of them yourself.

Counterparty & contract risk · 35% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Cost transparency · 15% weight7/10 points · 7.0/10
Market quality · 20% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Transparency & track record · 20% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Public documentation surface · 10% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10

The infrastructure layer underpinning Ethereum restaking, securing $5.14bn with published audits and a slashing model still being proven.

Our assessment

EigenCloud holds $5.14bn with two audits and reports linked. It is the layer that created restaking: staked ETH can be pledged as security for other services, which pay for that security and can slash it if operators misbehave.

A market for security is a genuinely new idea

Every new network previously had to bootstrap its own validator set and token to pay for security — expensive, slow, and frequently unsuccessful. Restaking lets a service rent Ethereum's economic security instead. If it works, it removes one of the largest barriers to building decentralised infrastructure.

The slashing model is the unproven part

The whole design rests on slashing being correctly specified, correctly triggered and correctly bounded for each service. Get it wrong and either honest operators lose stake for no reason, or dishonest ones face no consequence and the security is fictional. No major slashing event has yet tested this in production, which is the central open question.

Correlated risk is the systemic concern

If a large amount of staked ETH secures many services, a bug in one widely adopted service could slash a significant share of Ethereum's validator set simultaneously. Researchers have raised this and it is not resolved. Anyone restaking should understand they are participating in an experiment whose failure mode is systemic.

Who it suits

EigenCloud matters to operators and to protocols building on restaking rather than to individual depositors directly. Individuals encounter it through liquid restaking tokens, where the same risks apply with an extra layer on top.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

ServiceScoreBest for
Ondo Yield Assets9.3audited protocol with published methodologyRead →
Sky Lending9.3audited protocol with published methodologyRead →
Reference

Frequently asked

Does this score mean EigenCloud is safe?

No. It measures what an outsider can verify: linked audits, published methodology and independently recorded data. Contract and custody risk are not tested by us.

Where do these figures come from?

A public analytics dataset queried at the verification date, plus the audit reports it links. Anyone can re-run the query.

Why do some protocols score zero on audits?

Because no audit report is linked in the public record. It records what a user can reach, not a claim that no audit exists.