Frax Ether on peg & exit design
8.0/ 35% of the score
Redemption runs through the protocol's own mechanism with published parameters; the token has held close to parity on modest volume.
Journalism for the digital-asset economy
Best Liquid Staking Protocols · Rank 08 of 8
Users comfortable with a two-token yield structure
Last verified August 12, 20264 scored axes
Self-reported only
Frax Ether scores 7.8 out of 10 and ranks #8 of 8 in the best liquid staking protocols table, strongest on contract security (8.2) and weakest on validator decentralisation (7.4).
Splits the staking position into a liquid token and a yield-bearing one, which concentrates rewards for those who want them. The design is clever and the added complexity is a real cost for ordinary holders.
4 axes, weighted as published in the table’s methodology. Each score below is read from the fact printed under it.
8.0/ 35% of the score
Redemption runs through the protocol's own mechanism with published parameters; the token has held close to parity on modest volume.
7.4/ 25% of the score
Validators are run by the protocol and selected partners rather than by a permissionless set.
8.2/ 20% of the score
Contracts in production since 2022 with published audits; no exploit of the staking contracts on record.
7.6/ 20% of the score
Deeply integrated within its own ecosystem's pools; acceptance elsewhere is limited.
Frax separates the position into a liquid token and a yield-bearing one, which concentrates rewards for holders who want them and leaves a clean liquid asset for everyone else. Financially it is elegant; practically it confuses users who expected a single LST that simply accrues, and that confusion is a cost.
The token is deeply integrated in its own ecosystem's pools and much less so elsewhere, so both the yield and the exit route depend on Frax's continued health. Contracts have run since 2022 with published audits and no exploit of the staking contracts on record.
Run by the protocol and selected partners rather than a permissionless set, which places it with the curated designs rather than with Rocket Pool.
Users already active in the Frax ecosystem who understand the two-token split and want the concentrated yield. Outside that context, a simpler LST with deeper liquidity is the better instrument.
Integration and exit liquidity outside its own pools. Both are what would turn the design's elegance into a practical problem if the wider ecosystem contracts.
If you are choosing between this and a plain liquid staking token, the question is whether you will actively use the split. Holders who simply want staked ETH that trades everywhere gain nothing from the extra token and inherit the extra dependency.
It splits the staking position into a liquid token and a separate yield-bearing token, so rewards concentrate in the second rather than accruing to every holder.
Its staking contracts have no exploit on record since 2022, but both its yield and its liquidity are tied to the wider Frax ecosystem, which is a concentration to weigh.
The protocol and selected partners, not a permissionless operator set.
8 services in best liquid staking protocols