Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
m
Liquid Staking

mETH Protocol

Best for independently tracked protocol

Total value locked:$457m at this checkChains:1Audits recorded:0Audit report linked:Not foundRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Kayla PetersonKayla PetersonDeFi Research Analyst· Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence ARubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
5.5
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Counterparty & contract risk · 35%4.0
Cost transparency · 20%7.0
Market quality · 15%6.0
Transparency & track record · 20%6.0
Public documentation surface · 10%6.0
Pros
  • TVL of $457m recorded independently
Cons
  • No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check
  • 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% weight4/10 points · 4.0/10
Cost transparency · 20% weight7/10 points · 7.0/10
Market quality · 15% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10
Transparency & track record · 20% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10
Public documentation surface · 10% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10

A liquid staking protocol holding $457m within the Mantle ecosystem, with no audit report retrievable at a public address at this check.

Our assessment

mETH Protocol holds $457m as the staking layer of the Mantle ecosystem, which is backed by one of the larger treasuries in crypto. No audit report was retrievable at a public address at this check, which is what holds the score at 5.5.

Treasury backing is a real but partial comfort

A well-capitalised ecosystem behind a protocol means resources for development, potential recourse after a loss, and an incentive to avoid reputational damage. It is not a guarantee: a treasury can decline to cover a shortfall, and there is no contractual claim on it. Treat it as context, not as insurance.

Ecosystem staking derivatives are inward-facing

A derivative issued by and for one ecosystem gets deep integration inside it and limited acceptance outside. That is fine while you remain in the ecosystem and becomes a liquidity problem the moment you want to exit into something else — which is exactly when you are likely to want to.

The missing evidence

No audit report at a public address, with thin results on several transparency indicators. Counterparty and contract risk carries 35% of the score in this category, so this single gap accounts for most of the distance between mETH and the leaders.

Who it suits

mETH fits users committed to the Mantle ecosystem who want staking yield within it. Users wanting audited liquid staking with broad acceptance should use Lido, Rocket Pool or StakeWise.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

ServiceScoreBest for
Lido9.6audited protocol with published methodologyRead →
Stader9.5audited protocol with published methodologyRead →
StakeWise V29.4audited protocol with published methodologyRead →
Reference

Frequently asked

Does this score mean mETH Protocol 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.