Loading
Platforms
Every venue we know of, including those we cannot yet read vault by vault.Note 21
Why our figure for a lending platform is larger than an aggregator’s
Both numbers are right and they answer different questions. We publish what depositors supplied to a vault; DefiLlama and most aggregators publish what is left in it after borrowers took some away. The difference is the loan book, and it is read from the vaults themselves rather than inferred: on every vault tested, what was supplied equals what is on loan plus what is sitting there, to the dollar.
| Platform | Supplied — what we publish | Lent out | Left in the vaults | Utilised |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morpho | $1.94B | $968.26M | $969.79M | 50% |
| Euler | $860.43M | $508.75M | $351.68M | 59% |
| Lista Lending | $591.68M | $252.86M | $338.83M | 43% |
Utilisation is worth reading for its own sake rather than only as a reconciliation: a vault that has lent out most of what it holds cannot honour a large withdrawal until somebody repays, which is a liquidity risk a size figure alone never shows. Covers only the vaults whose contracts answer — a blank is a vault we did not read, never a vault with no loan book.
Covered29 platforms we read vault-by-vault
29 platforms
| # | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | lending vault | mixed | 154 | 54 | $1.94B | $969.79M50% | — | ||
| 2 | strategy vault | mixed | 28 | — | $1.22B | not disclosed | $1.14B | ||
| 3 | lending vault | mixed | 208 | 10 | $860.43M | $351.68M41% | — | ||
| 4 | lending vault | mixed | 24 | — | $591.68M | $338.83M57% | — | ||
| 5 | perp vault | mixed | 306 | 124 | $424.56M | not disclosed | — | ||
| 6 | strategy vault | mixed | 4 | — | $364.23M | not disclosed | $394.98M | ||
| 7 | strategy vault | mixed | 4 | — | $107.47M | not disclosed | $1.68B | ||
| 8 | strategy vault | mixed | 46 | — | $94.64M | not disclosed | $139.11M | ||
| 9 | strategy vault | mixed | 22 | — | $72.78M | not disclosed | $110.33M | ||
| 10 | strategy vault | mixed | 7 | — | $64.19M | not disclosed | $383.93M | ||
| 11 | strategy vault | mixed | 6 | — | $44.34M | not disclosed | $42.89M | ||
| 12 | strategy vault | mixed | 8 | — | $31.70M | not disclosed | $31.76M | ||
| 13 | strategy vault | mixed | 1 | — | $27.94M | not disclosed | $31.55M | ||
| 14 | strategy vault | mixed | 9 | — | $24.57M | not disclosed | $24.07M | ||
| 15 | strategy vault | mixed | 11 | — | $13.10M | not disclosed | $14.14M | ||
| 16 | strategy vault | mixed | 5 | — | $12.64M | not disclosed | $13.32M | ||
| 17 | strategy vault | mixed | 4 | — | $9.50M | not disclosed | $9.50M | ||
| 18 | strategy vault | mixed | 1 | — | $6.91M | not disclosed | $8.05M | ||
| 19 | strategy vault | mixed | 1 | — | $6.54M | not disclosed | $8.50M | ||
| 20 | strategy vault | mixed | 4 | — | $1.44M | not disclosed | $1.43M | ||
| 21 | strategy vault | mixed | 2 | — | $496.4k | not disclosed | $498.3k | ||
| 22 | strategy vault | mixed | 1 | — | $472.5k | not disclosed | $481.4k | ||
| 23 | strategy vault | mixed | 4 | — | $246.9k | not disclosed | $165.7k | ||
| 24 | strategy vault | mixed | 1 | — | $213.3k | not disclosed | $204.2k | ||
| 25 | strategy vault | yes | 276 | 276 | $107.3k | not disclosed | $477.3k |
1–25 of 29 platforms
Known but unread30 platforms holding $338.2k we could read and have not
These have vaults. None publishes a per-vault API, so each needs its own adapter or on-chain indexing, and until one is written the protocol total from DefiLlama is all we carry. This is the honest coverage gap.
30 platforms
| # | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | strategy vault | yes | $237.8k | ||
| 2 | strategy vault | yes | $37.4k | ||
| 3 | strategy vault | yes | $29.8k | ||
| 4 | strategy vault | yes | $29.2k | ||
| 5 | strategy vault | yes | $3.2k | ||
| 6 | strategy vault | yes | $790.87 | ||
| 7 | strategy vault | yes | $40.34 | ||
| 8 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 9 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 10 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 11 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 12 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 13 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 14 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 15 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 16 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 17 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 18 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 19 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 20 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 21 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 22 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 23 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 24 | strategy vault | yes | — | ||
| 25 | strategy vault | yes | — |
1–25 of 30 platforms
No vault to read4 platforms holding $10.49M in users’ own accounts
Every depositor gets their own smart account and the agent works inside it, so there is no shared contract with a share price and no strategy to rate — the “vault list” would be a list of customers. Their capital is real and it is counted here; what cannot exist is a per-vault record. Listing these as unread would claim a gap we could close, and we cannot.
4 platforms
| # | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | strategy vault | yes | $9.85M | ||
| 2 | strategy vault | yes | $623.4k | ||
| 3 | strategy vault | yes | $13.7k | ||
| 4 | strategy vault | yes | — |
4 platforms
Not strategies at allone platform holding $21.15M in staking rather than vaults
Capital staked into a single contract that allocates emissions. There are no per-strategy vaults, no share prices and nothing to rate. This sat inside the unread total for weeks, which overstated what we are missing by more than half — a venue with nothing to read is not a venue we failed to read.
1 platforms
| # | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | strategy vault | yes | $21.15M |
1 platforms