There is no overall band for these dimensions to disagree with.
Evidence · Not scored · 2 of 5 components read, 1 refused (24% of the weight)
Point at a risk to read what it rests on.
The contract holds 1,000,161.72 YUTY, read from the chain by its token. At the price we publish that is $1.14M, against the $1.14M shown above.
This vault issues one share per unit of the asset and its contract reports exactly as many assets as shares, so the unit price CANNOT move. A flat price here is a fact about the design and not a measurement of performance: any return has to be paid some other way than through the price, and we do not read one. EVERY UNIT OF IT IS SITTING IN THE VAULT AS CASH: nothing has been borrowed from it and nothing is deployed, so there is no interest for it to earn and the flat price is the proof rather than a gap in our reading.
Pick or type an amount to weigh it against both: what the venue says could leave now, and the largest single withdrawal anybody has made here.
The contract imposes no notice period and no request step: a redeem that succeeds settles in the transaction that asks for it, and it succeeds only if the vault holds enough to pay at that moment, which is the liquidity reading and a separate question.
There is no queue and no lock-up in the contract.
Uninvested cash reads $6 MORE than this vault is said to hold, which is 0.0005% of it: two readings rounding against each other rather than a disagreement, taken 7 minutes apart.
Not lent counts money supplied to markets and not borrowed and money in no market we read alike; the capital account above splits the two for the latest reading. Not lent is not what could be withdrawn, which is read separately.
A quoted rate is one input, not a verdict.
It moves only when the strategy earns or loses; deposits do not move it.
Not computed: the share price is not read as a return here, because its share price is fixed by construction — the contract mints one share per unit — so the return is not in the price and cannot be read from it.
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. 1 of 6 is not measured for this vault.
| Source mark | Question | What we hold | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| What does it hold or lend into? | 1 collateral read, $1.13M suppliedRead from the vault’s own holdings. Concentration and the assets themselves are below. | Measured | |
| How much could leave now? | $1.14MWhat the contract will pay out now, read from it. Not the same as what is idle. | Measured | |
| Who runs it, and what else have they run? | 0x0000…0000A named operator with a record across every vault they run, including the ones that closed. | Measured | |
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.
Read over 30 days and no asset movement could be attributed to the manager. That is a reading, not an absence of one, every transfer in the window travelled with a deposit or a withdrawal.
Locked here: every depositor we read with their share of the vault, the largest single wallet, and the ledger of each deposit and withdrawal. 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.
See what unlocksAlready a customer? Sign inWhat this page cannot show yet, and why.
| Risk | Reads | In the band | From |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marketlimited scope: past share-price falls, markets shared with other vaults and, where the vault borrows, distance to liquidation; excludes collateral and borrower credit risk | Not read | Yes | nothing fed it |
| Liquidity | Not read | Yes | nothing fed it |
| Depositor concentration | Severe | Yes | concentration |
| Operatinglimited scope: continuity of the observed record; not a review of operations | Low | Yes | consistency |
| Controller | Not read | No | who may move the money |
| Evidence | Not scored | No | 2 of 5 components read, 1 refused (24% 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.
That is our coverage, not a finding.
It measures how much of the vault its largest depositor holds, not how much the vault lends into one market; that is the allocation table. Input: largest wallet holds 99.98%, by the address's position; addresses are not merged by who owns them, and whether the largest is a person, another vault or a custodian is not established. The reading 1.00 is that share less 25%, over 75%: a quarter or less reads 0, the whole vault 1. The overall band weighs every component together instead, so it can read better than this and is not in conflict with it: a dimension says how bad its worst reading is, the band says what the whole weighs.
Low observed risk is not zero risk. The overall band weighs every component together instead, so it can read better than this and is not in conflict with it: a dimension says how bad its worst reading is, the band says what the whole weighs.
Unexamined is not acceptable, and this is not part of the overall band either way.
By weight, 20 of the 82.5 points that apply were read, which is 24% of the component weight the band could draw on (a different denominator: components are not equally weighted); the rest of the 100 is the weight of what does not apply. This is a statement about our coverage and carries no level of its own, because how much we could read is not a risk the vault runs.
Figures computed from the share price read from the vault contract as we went: 2026-05-07 to 2026-11-02, 307 observations. 30-day window from 2026-10-03, 90-day window from 2026-08-04. Readings from the share price read from the contract at past blocks, reconstructed afterwards (35) exist and are not mixed in: one series, one source.
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.
| What does it depend on? |
| Euler on BaseThe venue and the chain are known; what the strategy routes into underneath them has not been read. |
| Declared |
| Who can change it, and how fast? | —Access control has not been read for this vault. Who can move the money, and how quickly, is unknown. That is not the same as nobody being able to. | Not measured |
| How much of the above was measured? | 1 of 5 not measuredCounted from the rows above rather than asserted. Every figure on this page carries when it was read and what it was read from; the gaps are listed on /reconciliation with their size. | Measured |
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.
The mark says where an answer came from, never whether it is good: a filled circle is a reading we made, a half circle an inference from readings we hold, quotation marks what the venue or operator states, and a dashed ring 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.