15 services · Independently tested

Best Liquid Restaking Protocols 2026

Q: How did you pick the top services in Best Liquid Restaking Protocols 2026?

Every service on this list is scored on six weighted criteria — security (25%), fees (20%), UX (15%), features (15%), support (10%), and reputation (15%). The weighted average produces the overall score. Rankings reflect real hands-on testing, not marketing promises. Full methodology is documented on this page.

Q: How often are these rankings updated?

Full re-reviews happen quarterly. In addition, any major change to a service (fee update, security incident, new product launch, regulatory action) triggers an immediate spot check within days. Each card displays a "last checked" date so you can see how current the score is.

Q: Are your scores affected by commercial partnerships?

No. Our editorial and commercial teams are separated. Where a service has an affiliate or partner relationship it is disclosed openly, but partnerships never influence score, rank, or inclusion. Non-partner services routinely rank above partners when they perform better on our criteria.

Q: Why is one service ranked higher than another with a similar score?

When two services score identically on the overall number, we break the tie using Security first, then Reputation & Longevity, then user-reported reliability from the last 90 days. This ensures the higher-ranked service is the one you can safely stake meaningful value on today.

Q: Can I suggest a service to be reviewed?

Yes. Contact our editorial team with the service name, website, and a short note explaining why it deserves inclusion. Qualifying services (public team, live product, 30+ days in production) enter our review backlog and are scored using the same methodology as everything else on this page.

The 15 leading liquid restaking protocols in 2026 — EtherFi, Renzo, Kelp, Puffer, and more. Scored on TVL, operator diversity, slashing exposure, and points-program transparency.

Last updated: August 14, 2026

Filter by:All Beginners Security Derivatives Defi

Jump to:#7 Bedrock (uniETH)#8 ClayStack #9 Restake Finance #10 StakeStone (STONE)#11 Origin (OETH)#12 Karak

Bedrock (uniETH)

Best for: RockX-backed LRT

Overall Score

7.9/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.3

Fees

8.7

8.3

Features

8.3

Support

7.7

Reputation

8.0

Pros

Backed by RockX infrastructure
uniETH is value-accruing
Multi-chain deployment
Solid DeFi integrations

Cons

Smaller than top LRTs
Newer brand

Founded2023TVL~$300MBackingRockXTokenuniETH

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

ClayStack

Best for: Multi-chain LRT + LST

Overall Score

7.5/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.0

Fees

8.3

8.0

Features

8.3

Support

7.5

Reputation

7.5

Pros

Multi-chain LSTs (ETH, MATIC, others)
CSETH restaking token
Growing DeFi partnerships
Small TVL, room to grow

Cons

Very small vs category leaders
Cross-chain complexity

Founded2021ChainsMulti-chainNotableLST + LRT combined

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

Restake Finance

Best for: Compact LRT with strong incentives

Overall Score

7.4/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.0

Fees

8.3

8.0

Features

8.3

Support

7.3

Reputation

7.5

Pros

Simple LRT UX
Fast points accrual mechanism
DeFi integrations growing
Small user base means more attention

Cons

Very small TVL
Newer team

Founded2023TVL< $100MNotableGrowing incentive design

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

#10

StakeStone (STONE)

Best for: Omnichain LRT

Overall Score

8.0/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.5

Fees

8.7

8.3

Features

9.0

Support

7.8

Reputation

7.8

Pros

Omnichain ETH restaking (via LayerZero)
STONE token as universal collateral
Deep cross-chain deployment
Growing partnerships

Cons

Omnichain adds LayerZero dependency
Newer team

Founded2023TVL~$700MNotableLayerZero omnichainTokenSTONE

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

#11

Origin (OETH)

Best for: Highest-yield ETH auto-compounder

Overall Score

8.3/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.5

Fees

9.5

8.7

Features

8.3

Support

7.8

Reputation

8.0

Pros

One of the highest ETH yields
Auto-compounding via multiple LSTs
Origin OETH strategy diversifies
DeFi-friendly

Cons

Complex strategy layer
Smaller than top-tier LSTs

Founded2023TVL~$400MTokenOETHStrategyAuto-compounding basket

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

#12

Karak

Best for: Multi-asset restaking L2

Overall Score

8.4/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.7

Fees

9.0

8.5

Features

9.3

Support

7.8

Reputation

8.0

Pros

Restake many assets (LSTs, stables, BTC LSTs)
Own L2 (K2) live
Broad Distributed Secure Services
Andrew Kang / Kelp DAO team

Cons

Distinct from EigenLayer
Ecosystem still forming

Founded2023TVL~$1B+NotableMulti-asset restakingL2Karak K2

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

Side by side

Quick Comparison

#	Name	Score	Best for	Founded	TVL
7	Bedrock (uniETH)	7.9	RockX-backed LRT	2023	~$300M	Review →
8	ClayStack	7.5	Multi-chain LRT + LST	2021	Multi-chain	Review →
9	Restake Finance	7.4	Compact LRT with strong incentives	2023	< $100M	Review →
10	StakeStone (STONE)	8.0	Omnichain LRT	2023	~$700M	Review →
11	Origin (OETH)	8.3	Highest-yield ETH auto-compounder	2023	~$400M	Review →
12	Karak	8.4	Multi-asset restaking L2	2023	~$1B+	Review →

How we rate every service

Every service on this ranking is evaluated on six criteria, each scored 0–10, with the following weights: Security & Trust (25%), Fees & Costs (20%), User Experience (15%), Features & Coverage (15%), Support & Documentation (10%), and Reputation & Longevity (15%). The weighted average is the overall score.

What each criterion measures

Security & Trust — custody model, audit history, insurance or proof-of-reserves, incident record. This is the highest weight for a reason: security failures compound in ways that no yield or feature advantage can offset.
Fees & Costs — headline trading/withdrawal/deposit fees, hidden costs (spread, slippage, gas), and value at both entry-level and power-user volumes.
User Experience — interface clarity, mobile support, onboarding friction, and how well the product supports both first-time and daily users.
Features & Coverage — asset/chain/integration breadth, advanced tooling, and ecosystem depth vs the segment leader.
Support & Documentation — response times, doc quality, community channels, and how well problems get resolved when they happen.
Reputation & Longevity — years operational, team transparency, community sentiment, and how the service performed through crypto’s hardest moments (bear markets, exchange failures, exploits).

How we test

Our reviewers personally open accounts, transfer funds, execute test transactions, and contact support before publishing a score. We do not accept payment for higher ranking; commercial partnerships (where they exist) are disclosed and never influence position or score. Non-partner services regularly rank above partner services when they perform better.

Rankings are refreshed quarterly. Major changes (fee updates, security incidents, product launches) trigger immediate re-review. Every card shows a "last checked" timestamp so you can see how current the assessment is.

How we rate every service

What each criterion measures

Security & Trust — custody model, audit history, insurance or proof-of-reserves, incident record. This is the highest weight for a reason: security failures compound in ways that no yield or feature advantage can offset.
Fees & Costs — headline trading/withdrawal/deposit fees, hidden costs (spread, slippage, gas), and value at both entry-level and power-user volumes.
User Experience — interface clarity, mobile support, onboarding friction, and how well the product supports both first-time and daily users.
Features & Coverage — asset/chain/integration breadth, advanced tooling, and ecosystem depth vs the segment leader.
Support & Documentation — response times, doc quality, community channels, and how well problems get resolved when they happen.
Reputation & Longevity — years operational, team transparency, community sentiment, and how the service performed through crypto’s hardest moments (bear markets, exchange failures, exploits).

How we test

Frequently asked

Frequently Asked Questions

How did you pick the top services in Best Liquid Restaking Protocols 2026?

Every service on this list is scored on six weighted criteria — security (25%), fees (20%), UX (15%), features (15%), support (10%), and reputation (15%). The weighted average produces the overall score. Rankings reflect real hands-on testing, not marketing promises. Full methodology is documented on this page.

How often are these rankings updated?

Full re-reviews happen quarterly. In addition, any major change to a service (fee update, security incident, new product launch, regulatory action) triggers an immediate spot check within days. Each card displays a "last checked" date so you can see how current the score is.

Are your scores affected by commercial partnerships?

No. Our editorial and commercial teams are separated. Where a service has an affiliate or partner relationship it is disclosed openly, but partnerships never influence score, rank, or inclusion. Non-partner services routinely rank above partners when they perform better on our criteria.

Why is one service ranked higher than another with a similar score?

When two services score identically on the overall number, we break the tie using Security first, then Reputation & Longevity, then user-reported reliability from the last 90 days. This ensures the higher-ranked service is the one you can safely stake meaningful value on today.

Can I suggest a service to be reviewed?

Yes. Contact our editorial team with the service name, website, and a short note explaining why it deserves inclusion. Qualifying services (public team, live product, 30+ days in production) enter our review backlog and are scored using the same methodology as everything else on this page.

Explore more