Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
S
Dex

Sanctum Infinity

Best for documented on-chain trading

Total value locked:$156m 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
7.1
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Counterparty & contract risk · 30%6.0
Cost transparency · 20%9.0
Market quality · 25%6.0
Transparency & track record · 15%8.0
Public documentation surface · 10%8.0
Pros
  • Documentation published at a public address
Cons
  • No audit report linked in the public dataset 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 · 30% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10
Cost transparency · 20% weight9/10 points · 9.0/10
  • Met
    Documentation published where fees are described

    Documentation reachable for fee review.

    learn.sanctum.so/
  • Met
    Application reachable without an account

    No account required to reach the app.

    www.sanctum.so
  • Met
    Independent dataset publishes protocol economics

    TVL and change history published independently.

    defillama.com/protocol/sanctum-infinity
  • Partial
    Fee model documented publicly

    Documentation available; specific fee tiers not captured at this check.

    learn.sanctum.so/
  • Met
    No account required to read protocol documentation

    Open documentation.

    learn.sanctum.so/
Market quality · 25% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10
Transparency & track record · 15% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Public documentation surface · 10% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10

A Solana liquidity layer holding $156m in a shared pool that lets any supported liquid staking token trade against any other instantly.

Our assessment

Sanctum Infinity solves a specific problem: Solana has dozens of liquid staking tokens and each one used to need its own liquidity. Infinity is a single pool holding many of them, so any supported LST can be swapped for any other without a dedicated market.

Shared liquidity beats fragmented liquidity

Without it, a new liquid staking token launches with no exit route, which forces users toward the incumbents and entrenches them. A shared pool means a small validator's LST is tradeable from day one. That is a structural contribution to Solana staking decentralisation, not just a trading convenience.

The risk is inside the pool

Every asset in a shared pool is exposed to every other. If one supported LST loses value — a validator failure, a slashing event, a bug in its own contract — the pool absorbs it and every depositor shares the loss. The economics depend entirely on how carefully assets are admitted, which is a governance question rather than a code one.

No audit report linked

No audit report was retrievable at a public address at this check. For a pooled-risk design where admission criteria determine the safety of everyone's deposit, published review of both the contracts and the listing process would be worth a great deal.

Who it suits

Sanctum Infinity fits Solana stakers moving between liquid staking tokens or supporting smaller validators. Users who simply want to stake should compare individual liquid staking providers directly.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

ServiceScoreBest for
Uniswap V39.8audited, multi-chain deploymentRead →
Curve DEX9.6audited, multi-chain deploymentRead →
PancakeSwap AMM9.6audited, multi-chain deploymentRead →
Reference

Frequently asked

Does this score mean Sanctum Infinity is safe to use?

No. It measures what an outsider can verify: linked audits, published documentation and independently recorded market data. Contract behaviour is not tested by us.

Where does the TVL figure come from?

An independent public analytics platform, queried at the verification date. Anyone can re-run the same query.

Why do some protocols score zero on audits?

Because no audit report is linked in the public dataset. It records what a user can reach, not a claim that no audit was ever performed.