Mellow Restaking
Best for independently tracked protocol
How it rates
- Tracked and verifiable from public sources at this check
- No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check
- No accounting methodology published at this check
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/mellow-restaking - Not met
- MetTracked by an independent analytics platform
Listed with published TVL and history.
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking - Not metAccounting methodology published in the dataset
No methodology published at this check.
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking - Met
- Met
- MetProtocol economics published independently
TVL and change history published.
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking - Not met
- PartialFee or reward model documented publicly
Application reachable for review; specific rates not captured at this check.
mellow.finance/ - MetNo account required to reach the application
Reachable without an account at this check.
mellow.finance/
- MetTotal value locked published independently
TVL $21m at this check.
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking - Not met
- Not met
- Met
- MetListed on the dataset for over a year
Listing date recorded in the dataset.
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking
- MetIndependent analytics page published
Public protocol page with history.
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking - Not met
- MetChains and category disclosed
Category Liquid Restaking, 5 chain(s).
defillama.com/protocol/mellow-restaking - Met
- Not met
- Met
- Met
- Not met
- Not met
- Met
A modular restaking protocol holding $21m across five chains, where independent curators define each vault's strategy and risk.
Our assessment
Mellow holds $21m across five chains through modular vaults, where independent curators rather than the protocol decide which services a vault restakes into and how the allocation is sized.
The curator is the product
As with modular lending, the protocol provides infrastructure and someone else makes the risk decisions. Two Mellow vaults can have entirely different exposure profiles, and the protocol's own quality tells you nothing about the one you are in. Depositors must evaluate the curator, not the brand.
Modularity in a young category compounds uncertainty
Restaking already involves services with untested slashing conditions. Adding a curator layer means a third party is choosing which of those untested services your capital secures, in proportions you did not set. The yield reflects those choices, and so does the downside.
The evidence gap
No audit report was retrievable at a public address at this check, and the transparency indicators are thin. For a curated model, disclosure of curator identity, mandate and allocation would matter as much as the contract audit.
Who it suits
Mellow fits sophisticated users who will read a specific vault's curator and allocations before depositing. Users wanting a single documented risk surface should use Kelp or Swell.
Frequently asked
Does this score mean Mellow 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.