15 services · Independently tested

Best Liquid Restaking Protocols 2026

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:#13 Symbiotic #14 Mellow Protocol #15 Nucleus Earn

#13

Symbiotic

Best for: Permissionless restaking framework

Overall Score

8.5/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.7

Fees

9.0

8.5

Features

9.5

Support

7.8

Reputation

8.0

Pros

Permissionless collateral + operator sets
Modular restaking primitive
Backed by Cyber Fund + Paradigm
Strong developer traction

Cons

Very new to market
Primarily a framework, not consumer product yet

Founded2023TVL~$1B+ModelPermissionless restakingBackersCyber Fund, Paradigm

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

#14

Mellow Protocol

Best for: LRT vault construction platform

Overall Score

7.8/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.3

Fees

8.7

8.0

Features

8.7

Support

7.5

Reputation

7.7

Pros

Modular LRT vault framework
Curator-run vault design
Multi-restaking-network support
Symbiotic + EigenLayer integrations

Cons

Complexity of curator model
Newer product

Founded2023ModelCurator-run vaultsNotableRestaking meta-layer

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

#15

Nucleus Earn

Best for: Omnichain LRT strategies

Overall Score

7.6/10

Score breakdown

Security

8.0

Fees

8.5

8.3

Features

8.7

Support

7.5

Reputation

7.5

Pros

LayerZero-native omnichain yield strategies
Cross-chain LRT positioning
Simple deposit UX
Growing ecosystem

Cons

LayerZero dependency
Newer product

Founded2024NotableLayerZero omnichainTVL~$200M

Full Review →Visit Site ↗

Side by side

Quick Comparison

#	Name	Score	Best for	Founded	TVL
13	Symbiotic	8.5	Permissionless restaking framework	2023	~$1B+	Review →
14	Mellow Protocol	7.8	LRT vault construction platform	2023	Curator-run vaults	Review →
15	Nucleus Earn	7.6	Omnichain LRT strategies	2024	LayerZero omnichain	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

All Categories

Best Crypto Cards 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best NFT & AI Tools 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Stablecoins 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Crypto Bridges 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Yield Aggregators 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Liquid Restaking Protocols 2026

Current

15 services · View rating →

Best Liquid Staking Protocols 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Hardware Wallets 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Crypto Trading Tools 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Instant Crypto Exchangers 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Perpetual DEXs 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs) 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Crypto Lending Platforms 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best NFT Marketplaces 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Crypto Staking Platforms 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best DeFi Protocols 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Crypto Wallets 2026

15 services · View rating →

Best Crypto Exchanges 2026

15 services · View rating →

Name

Score

Best for

Founded

TVL

Symbiotic

8.5

Permissionless restaking framework

2023

~$1B+

Review →

Mellow Protocol

7.8

LRT vault construction platform

2023

Curator-run vaults

Review →

Nucleus Earn

7.6

Omnichain LRT strategies

2024

LayerZero omnichain

Review →