Uniswap: defi protocols rating breakdown
AMM · 48 chains
The only protocol on this page whose core cannot be changed by anybody, including its own creators. Uniswap’s pool contracts are immutable: there is no admin key that can pause a pool, migrate liquidity or alter a fee inside a deployed pool, and governance’s power stops at protocol-level switches. Eight years, billions of dollars, forty-eight chains, and no exploit of that core.
The only protocol on this page whose core cannot be changed by anybody, including its own creators. Uniswap’s pool contracts are immutable: there is no admin key that can pause a pool, migrate liquidity or alter a fee inside a deployed pool, and governance’s power stops at protocol-level switches.
How the score is built
Each criterion is scored 0–10 and weighted. The median column is the middle score across every entry in this ranking, so a row reads as a position rather than a number.
| Criterion | What we measured | Weight | Score | Category median | Rank | Weighted gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who can change the contract holding your money | — | 32% | 10 | 6.5 | 1 of 8 | +1.12 |
| Track record, and who paid when it broke | none in eight years core exploits · sourced · 2026-08-27 | 25% | 10 | 7.5 | 1 of 8 | +0.63 |
| Value secured | $3.46bn total value locked · sourced · 2026-08-27 · source$49.95bn 30-day volume · sourced · 2026-08-27 · source | 20% | 8 | 8.5 | 5 of 8 | -0.10 |
| Can an outsider verify it? | — | 13% | 9 | 8 | 1 of 8 | +0.13 |
| Chains and integration | — | 10% | 10 | 8 | 1 of 8 | +0.20 |
Measured 27 August 2026 · weights and method · decided by who can change the contract holding your money, worth +1.12 points against the median
Who can change the contract holding your money: 10/10
Sourced to each protocol’s own documentation: are the contracts immutable, upgradeable behind a timelock, or upgradeable by a multisig that can act immediately. If there is an emergency power — a pause, a freeze, a guardian — we record who holds it and how fast they can use it. Uniswap’s pool contracts cannot be upgraded at all. Most of this page can be changed by a vote, and some of it by a handful of signers.
Scored 10 of 10 against a category median of 6.5, which places it 1st of 8 among defi protocols on this criterion. At a 32% weight that is 1.12 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 4.
Track record, and who paid when it broke: 10/10
Years of continuous operation holding real money, every incident with its date and amount, and whether users were made whole. Age alone is not evidence — plenty of protocols were old on the day they failed — but age combined with an unbroken record of not losing user funds is the strongest signal this category offers.
Scored 10 of 10 against a category median of 7.5, which places it 1st of 8 among defi protocols on this criterion. At a 25% weight that is 0.63 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 5.
Value secured: 8/10
Total value locked at a stated timestamp, and thirty days of protocol fees as evidence that the value is being used rather than parked. Scale matters here in a specific way: a protocol securing tens of billions has been a standing target for years and has not been taken.
Scored 8 of 10 against a category median of 8.5, which places it 5th of 8 among defi protocols on this criterion. At a 20% weight that is 0.10 points below the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 5.
Can an outsider verify it?: 9/10
Open-source contracts, published audits, public parameter and risk documentation, and whether the numbers a front end shows can be independently recomputed from public data. A protocol that publishes the formula behind its yield is making a checkable claim; one that publishes only the number is not.
Scored 9 of 10 against a category median of 8, which places it 1st of 8 among defi protocols on this criterion. At a 13% weight that is 0.13 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 9, the worst 6.
Chains and integration: 10/10
Chains with real deployments, and how deeply the protocol is used as infrastructure by others, from public data at a stated timestamp.
Scored 10 of 10 against a category median of 8, which places it 1st of 8 among defi protocols on this criterion. At a 10% weight that is 0.20 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 4.
Other measurements
Its nearest neighbours in this ranking
Questions about this score
Who controls Uniswap?
+
Nobody controls the pools. Governance can adjust protocol-level parameters such as the fee switch, and it cannot reach into a live pool to change its terms, pause it or move what is inside it. That is unusual even among protocols that describe themselves as decentralised, most of which retain upgradeability behind a timelock or a multisig.
If immutability is so good, why doesn't everyone do it?
+
Because it removes your ability to fix mistakes. Several protocols in this rating have used upgrade powers to patch bugs before they cost users money — that is what those powers are for. Immutability trades the ability to repair for the guarantee that nobody can rewrite your position, and which of those you want depends on whether you trust the people holding the keys more than you trust the code.