Mantle Restaking
Best for audited protocol with published methodology
How it rates
- Audit report linked from a public dataset
- Accounting methodology published
- 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.
- MetIndependent audit report linked publicly
Audit report linked from the public protocol dataset.
docs.mantle.xyz/meth/security/audits - Not met
- MetTracked by an independent analytics platform
Listed with published TVL and history.
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking - MetAccounting methodology published in the dataset
Methodology published.
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking - MetApplication reachable at a public address
Reachable without an account at this check.
www.methprotocol.xyz/
- MetApplication reachable without an account
Reachable without an account at this check.
www.methprotocol.xyz/ - MetProtocol economics published independently
TVL and change history published.
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking - Met
- PartialFee or reward model documented publicly
Application reachable for review; specific rates not captured at this check.
www.methprotocol.xyz/ - MetNo account required to reach the application
Reachable without an account at this check.
www.methprotocol.xyz/
- MetTotal value locked published independently
TVL $33m at this check.
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking - Not met
- Not met
- Not met
- MetListed on the dataset for over a year
Listing date recorded in the dataset.
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking
- MetIndependent analytics page published
Public protocol page with history.
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking - Met
- MetChains and category disclosed
Category Liquid Restaking, 1 chain(s).
defillama.com/protocol/mantle-restaking - Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
The restaking layer of the Mantle ecosystem, holding $33m with an audit report published and linked.
Our assessment
Mantle Restaking holds $33m with an audit report linked, serving as the restaking layer within an ecosystem backed by one of the larger treasuries in crypto.
Layered derivatives compound dependencies
A restaked token here typically represents ETH that was staked, wrapped into a liquid staking token, then restaked and wrapped again. Each wrapper is a contract that can fail, and each adds a step to the exit path. The yield accumulates across the layers and so does the risk — which is the part the yield display never shows.
Ecosystem backing, and its limits
A large treasury behind the ecosystem provides development resources and a reputational incentive to make users whole after a failure. There is no contractual claim on it. Several protocols in this comparison rest partly on this kind of implicit backing; it is worth naming as implicit.
Evidence position
An audit report linked at a public address is more than most restaking protocols in this table provide, and it is the main reason this sits in the eights. Depth at $33m is modest, so redemption rather than sale is the realistic exit.
Who it suits
Mantle Restaking fits users committed to that ecosystem who want restaking yield inside it. Users wanting the broadest liquidity and strongest documentation should use Kelp.
Frequently asked
Does this score mean Mantle Restaking 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.