What a risk decision about this vault can rest on

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. 1 of 6 is not measured for this vault.

• What does it hold or lend into?Measured0 collaterals read, $0.00 supplied, across 2 marketsRead from the vault’s own holdings. Concentration and the assets themselves are below. Its largest single market holds 100% of what anybody has supplied there.
• How much could leave now?Measured$200.4kWhat the contract will pay out now, read from it. Not the same as what is idle.
• Who runs it, and what else have they run?MeasuredFeatherA named operator with a record across every vault they run, including the ones that closed.
• What does it depend on?DeclaredMorpho Vaults V2 on PolygonThe venue and the chain are known; what the strategy routes into underneath them has not been read.
• Who can change it, and how fast?Not measured—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.
• How much of the above was measured?Measured1 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.

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.

The rate, and the seven things that qualify it

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.

Current quoted rate

0.1%As the venue states it, from Morpho Vaults V2. Passed on rather than adopted, and whether rewards are inside it is the next row.

Rewards inside that rateweakens it

13.5% of it is a reward rateA published rate, not a verified payment. Promotional projections and amounts actually accrued are different things and this is the first.

Realised return

<0.1% over 30 daysDerived from the share price we read, over the window stated. Annualisation is secondary: the window is the measurement.

Fee basis

Already inside the share priceA return derived from the share price is net of whatever the venue already deducted. Fees charged outside it are not in either number.

Withdrawable now

$200.4k · 98% of the vaultA reading of now, not a promise about the day somebody tries. An accruing rate with nothing withdrawable is the case this section exists for.

History quality

81 readingsHow many observations the derived figure rests on. A rate from three readings and one from three hundred are not the same claim.

23 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. 26 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 discretionary management, confidence 50%.

• · No strong automation signature in the reallocation timing.

Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good, a losing bot is still a bot.

What is still missing

• Operator cohort. We show what the venue still exposes; strategies deleted before we began observing are invisible, and only pre-registration can make a cohort provably complete.
• Gross-to-net waterfall. Returns are venue-reported and not yet decomposed into fees, funding and slippage.
• Off-chain exposure. Anything held on a centralised exchange is invisible to us, so the risk shown is a floor.