The infiniFi USDC vault aims to optimize yield on USDC lending against a wide range of collateral assets from the infiniFi ecosystem.
The contract imposes NO notice period: a redeem settles in the transaction that asks for it. That is not a promise of an instant exit — it is still subject to the vault having the money, which is the liquidity reading and a separate question — but there is no queue, no request step and no lock-up in the contract.
The overall band reads `moderate` while 1 dimension read worse: market severe. The band weighs them against everything else, which is why it can read better without being in conflict.
| Risk | Reads |
|---|
The contract holds 1,205,762.01 USDC, read from the chain by its token. At the price we publish that is $1.21M, against the $1.21M shown above.
Only half of this is ours. The quantity comes from the contract and can be checked by anybody; the price comes from defillama:coins, so a wrong price would move both figures together and this would still agree.
Over 121 daily readings it has ranged from 4.25% to 19.42%, averaging 6.56%. The tile below shows today’s quote alone.
121 readings is 121 days, not a year. We began taking them on 2026-09-19 and this window grows with the record rather than standing in for a longer one.
The published ratio divides the realised rate by the rate this vault quotes TODAY. Over 121 of the 169 days the return covers we hold its own quotes, it advertised between 4.25% and 19.42%, averaging 6.56%, and today's quote is near the BOTTOM of that range, so the published ratio flatters the delivery. Against the average it quoted, the realised rate is 97.79% of it. We hold no quote for the rest of the window, so this says what the venue was advertising while we watched and not across the whole return. 27 of those days we recorded ourselves and 94 come from the venue's own published history, which is the same fact read later rather than a different one.
The verdict band is published with the answer: below 0.5 of the advertised rate is short, above 1.5 is beating, everything between is in line. It is wide on purpose, because the two rates are measured differently: one is what the venue quotes, the other is what its own share price did.
A quoted rate is one input, not a verdict. These are the same seven fields in the same order for every vault, so a high rate and a high rate nobody can withdraw from do not look alike.
$10.0k would be $10.1k , a gain of $144.83, 1.4% over 89 days.
Computed from the price of one share, so another depositor arriving is never counted as this strategy’s performance. Fees the venue charges inside the share price are included; anything charged outside it is not. It says what this vault did between two dates and nothing whatever about what it will do next.
Everything above is reconstructed from public data. A declaration is free, signed from this vault’s own key, and cannot be edited afterwards.Note 28
Six questions, and what we hold for each. This is not a score and there is no letter at the end of it: the answers are different kinds of thing and compressing them into one number would hide exactly the part a reader needs. Where we have nothing, the row says so.
One party holds more than one of the roles, or nobody can veto a change once its timelock expires.
24 transactions moved assets on the vault’s own account, across 1 token.
Counted as manager activity because the transaction carried neither a deposit nor a withdrawal. 130 further transfers travelled with somebody’s own money and are not counted here. A transfer is not a trade: this says the contract acted, not that it acted well.
Timing indicates rules automated management, confidence 67%.
Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good, a losing bot is still a bot.
A vault that is eighty per cent one depositor is a vault whose price can be reset by a single withdrawal, and whose headline TVL says almost nothing about whether anyone else believes in it. Concentration is the risk a return figure never shows, and it moves before the return line does.
See what unlocksAlready a customer? Sign in| In the band |
|---|
| From |
|---|
| Market | Severeworse than the band | Yes | drawdown, crowding |
| Liquidity | Moderate | Yes | exit |
| Concentration | Low | Yes | concentration |
| Operating | Low | Yes | consistency |
| Controller | Low | No | who may move the money |
| Evidence | Not read | No | 5 of 5 components read (100% of the weight) |
The levels come from this vault’s own risk components and controller reading. The bars draw them; they are not a second calculation, and there is deliberately no overall figure.
Figures computed from the share price read from the vault contract as we went: 2026-05-04 to 2026-10-15, 109 observations. 30-day window from 2026-09-15, 90-day window from 2026-07-17. Readings from Morpho’s own daily record of the vault, reconstructed afterwards (562) and the share price read from the contract at past blocks, reconstructed afterwards (47) exist and are not mixed in: one series, one source.
Amber means the evidence is incomplete, never that the vault is risky, and grey means we did not read it rather than that there is nothing to read. Nothing here is a rating, a recommendation, or a statement that this vault is safe.
These fields are empty because nobody has attested them, not because we failed to find them. An operator who registers gets a record that provably cannot be edited after the fact, and a grade no unregistered strategy can reach.
We have watched who controls this vault since 2026-09-19 and nothing we record has moved in that window. That is not the same as a vault that has never changed hands: anything before 2026-09-19 predates this platform holding control state at all, and we do not reconstruct it from history.
Attributed collateral only. A vault accepting many collaterals at once reports less here than it holds, so this is what we can attribute rather than everything it is lent against.
2 markets read, $1.21M attributed. The market by market rows, and this vault’s share of each, are part of the crowding data.