Marinade (mSOL): liquid staking rating breakdown
The single most honest disclosure in this study, and it is not close. Marinade publishes a public API that returns the two price points from which you can compute your own net yield — you do not have to trust their number, you can derive it. Their docs state plainly that the 6% fee "is already reflected in the displayed net APY". Every protocol on this page could do this. One does.
The single most honest disclosure in this study, and it is not close. Marinade publishes a public API that returns the two price points from which you can compute your own net yield — you do not have to trust their number, you can derive it.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Is “liquid” actually true? | — | 35% | 5 | 4.5 | 4 of 12 | +0.17 |
| Do they tell you what they take? | 6% of rewards — stated as already reflected in the displayed APY fee · published · 2026-07-15 · source | 25% | 10 | 6 | 1 of 12 | +1.00 |
| Net yield against the real ceiling | 5.74 net yield · measured · 2026-07-15 · source | 20% | 9 | 8 | 1 of 12 | +0.20 |
| Custody and slashing | — | 12% | 9 | 8 | 1 of 12 | +0.12 |
| Restaking risk, disclosed | — | 8% | 10 | 10 | 1 of 12 | 0.00 |
Measured 15 July 2026 · weights and method · decided by do they tell you what they take?, worth +1.00 points against the median
Is “liquid” actually true?: 5/10
The question every comparison omits, and the one that has actually cost people money. We take the token’s outstanding value and set it against the depth genuinely available to sell into — on-chain pools, and daily turnover. The ratios are brutal: a token with a billion dollars outstanding and two million dollars of exit is not liquid, it is a building with an emergency exit sized for one person. Backing does not save you. Depth does.
Scored 5 of 10 against a category median of 4.5, which places it 4th of 12 among liquid staking on this criterion. At a 35% weight that is 0.17 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 2.
Do they tell you what they take?: 10/10
Not the fee percentage — whether the yield they SHOW you is the yield you GET. Some publish the formula and hand you the raw numbers to check. Others advertise a rate that explicitly excludes their commission, and say so only in a support article nobody reads. And the worst simply state a number and never mention a take rate at all, which we then have to derive by dividing.
Scored 10 of 10 against a category median of 6, which places it 1st of 12 among liquid staking on this criterion. At a 25% weight that is 1.00 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 3.
Net yield against the real ceiling: 9/10
Measured against the gross rate the network actually pays, which we derive rather than accept: the protocol APR, before anyone’s cut. Every token is scored on how much of that it gives back to you.
Scored 9 of 10 against a category median of 8, which places it 1st of 12 among liquid staking on this criterion. At a 20% weight that is 0.20 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 9, the worst 7.
Custody and slashing: 9/10
Do you hold an asset or an IOU? And when a validator is slashed, what actually covers it — a contractual claim you own, a fund of undisclosed size, or a discretionary vote by token-holders? Note that Solana has no protocol slashing at all, which is a real structural advantage its LSTs are never given credit for.
Scored 9 of 10 against a category median of 8, which places it 1st of 12 among liquid staking on this criterion. At a 12% weight that is 0.12 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 9, the worst 7.
Restaking risk, disclosed: 10/10
A liquid staking token must not quietly become a restaked one. We check whether the product takes on EigenLayer-style obligations, and whether that extra risk is quantified anywhere for the holder. A plain LST scores full marks here by simply not doing it.
Scored 10 of 10 against a category median of 10, which places it 1st of 12 among liquid staking on this criterion. At a 8% weight that is exactly level with the median of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 10.
Other measurements
Its nearest neighbours in this ranking
| # | Entry | Do they tell you what they take? | How it differs |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Origin Ether (OETH) | 7 | Behind by 3 on do they tell you what they take?. |
| 2 | Sanctum (INF) | 5 | Behind by 5 on do they tell you what they take?. |
| 4 | Jito (JitoSOL) | 7 | Behind by 3 on do they tell you what they take?. |
| 5 | Lido (stETH) | 10 | Level on do they tell you what they take?; the gap is elsewhere. |
Incidents priced into this score
- 2023-12-12 — A whale swapped ~68,500 mSOL over 20 minutes (~$8m). mSOL fell about 15% and triggered liquidation cascades across MarginFi and Solend. The underlying SOL was never impaired. [users made whole: n/a] [source]
Questions about this score
How can I verify Marinade's yield myself?
+
Its public API returns the raw price series — the two points you need to compute the net yield over a period — so you can calculate the figure independently rather than taking the front end's word for it. That capability exists at no other protocol in this rating, and it is the reason Marinade scores 10 out of 10 on disclosure.
What happened to mSOL in December 2023?
+
A whale swapped roughly 68,500 mSOL over about twenty minutes — around $8m — and the token fell about 15%, triggering liquidation cascades across two lending protocols. The underlying SOL was never impaired. Its depth today is lower than it was then, which means a similar trade would cause more damage, not less.