Kyros
Best for independently tracked protocol
How it rates
- Accounting methodology published
- No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check
- Single-chain deployment
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.
- Not metIndependent audit report linked publicly
No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check.
defillama.com/protocol/kyros - Not met
- MetTracked by an independent analytics platform
Listed with published TVL and history.
defillama.com/protocol/kyros - Met
- Met
- Met
- MetProtocol economics published independently
TVL and change history published.
defillama.com/protocol/kyros - Met
- PartialFee or reward model documented publicly
Application reachable for review; specific rates not captured at this check.
kyros.fi - Met
- Met
- Not met
- Not met
- Not met
- MetListed on the dataset for over a year
Listing date recorded in the dataset.
defillama.com/protocol/kyros
- Met
- Not met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Not met
- Met
- Met
A restaking vault protocol holding $9m, with no audit report retrievable at a public address at this check.
Our assessment
Kyros holds $9m in restaking vault products. No audit report was retrievable at a public address at this check, which is the main constraint on its score.
Vault wrappers add a layer to evaluate
A restaking vault sits on top of a restaking protocol, which sits on top of a staking protocol, which sits on Ethereum. Each layer has its own contracts, its own operators and its own fee take. The headline yield is net of all of them; the risk is the sum of all of them, and the second fact gets far less attention than the first.
The curator is the decision
With vault products, what determines your outcome is which services the curator chose to restake into and how they sized those allocations. That is an active management decision made on your behalf. Without published disclosure of the strategy, a depositor is trusting an unnamed process.
What is missing
No audit report at a public address, with thin transparency results. Contract risk carries 35% of the score in this category, so this gap dominates the outcome.
Who it suits
Kyros fits users already engaged with its ecosystem who have assessed the vault strategy themselves. Users wanting audited restaking should use Kelp, Bedrock or Eigenpie.
Frequently asked
Does this score mean Kyros is safe?
No. It measures what an outsider can verify: linked audits, published methodology and independently recorded market data. Contract risk is not tested by us.
Where do the TVL and audit figures come from?
A public analytics dataset queried at the verification date, plus the audit reports it links. Both are re-runnable by anyone.
Why do some protocols score zero on audits?
Because no audit report is linked in the public record. The indicator records what a user can reach, not a claim that no audit exists.