Questions

Philidor is an independent risk infrastructure platform for DeFi yield markets. We provide systematic risk scoring, verified on-chain performance data, and transparent methodology across major lending and savings protocols. The platform is designed for capital allocators, fund managers, and institutional participants who need consistent, comparable risk metrics before deploying capital into on-chain yield.

No. Philidor operates independently of all indexed protocols. We have no commercial relationships, revenue-sharing agreements, or advisory arrangements with any protocol team. Scores are produced deterministically by the Vector Risk Framework. Protocols cannot pay for higher ratings or preferential placement.

Yes. In addition to providing independent risk analytics, Philidor operates as a vault curator on Morpho. Our curated vaults apply the same rigorous risk framework we use to score the broader market. We select underlying markets, set risk parameters, and manage allocations based on systematic criteria rather than discretionary judgment.

That means we score a market we also take part in. We treat it as a conflict worth naming, and we set out how it is handled at Who pays us.

View all Philidor-curated vaults

We currently index 11 protocol modules across 10 EVM networks, covering 800+ vaults and $43B+ in TVL.

• Aave V3 (incl. Lido and Horizon) on Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, Avalanche, Monad, and Plasma
• Aave V4 on Ethereum and Avalanche
• Morpho on Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Monad, and Stable
• Spark with SparkLend (v1) and Spark Savings (v2) on Ethereum, Base, and Arbitrum
• Compound V3 on Ethereum, Base, and Arbitrum
• Uniswap V2, V3, and V4 on Ethereum, Base, and Arbitrum
• Yearn V2 and V3 on Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, and Polygon
• Beefy on Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, and Avalanche
• Nest on Ethereum and Plume

Protocol additions are evaluated quarterly based on TVL, code maturity, and user demand.

Each vault is scored on a 0-10 scale across four independent risk vectors, then combined into a weighted composite:

• Asset Composition (30%): collateral quality, evidence, and caps.
• Platform and Strategy (30%): code maturity (Lindy), audits, strategy complexity, and dependency pressure.
• Control and Governance (20%): timelocks, immutability, and depositor reaction window.
• History (20%): recent Critical/Warning pressure, unresolved incidents, and confirmed lifetime Critical losses. Weak history can also apply a post-composite tier ceiling.

The composite score determines the tier: Prime (8.0-10.0), Core (5.0-7.9), Edge (0.0-4.9). Full methodology documentation

Tiers define a risk spectrum based on measurable security fundamentals:

• Prime (8.0 - 10.0): Strong observed controls and evidence quality relative to tracked vaults, typically with mature code, meaningful audit coverage, and tighter governance constraints. This is the lowest-risk segment of on-chain yield in our framework.
• Core (5.0 - 7.9): A moderate risk profile with meaningful constraints or uncertainty, such as audited protocols with shorter track records or more permissive governance.
• Edge (0.0 - 4.9): An elevated or unresolved risk profile. Common drivers include newer code, limited audit coverage, concentrated admin powers, or weak recent history. Higher yield often accompanies higher tail risk.

A tier is a risk classification, not a recommendation. Prime does not mean “safe”. It means the measurable risk factors score favorably relative to the universe we track.

No. Prime indicates the lowest relative risk within our scoring framework, not the absence of risk. All on-chain yield carries smart contract risk, oracle risk, governance risk, and market risk that cannot be fully eliminated. Prime-tier protocols have historically experienced exploits, though less frequently on average. The tier helps you understand where a vault sits on the risk spectrum. The capital allocation decision remains yours.

Each protocol version is scored independently. Aave V2 and V3 have different Lindy scores and audit histories. Spark SparkLend (v1) and Spark Savings (v2) are separate products with distinct risk profiles. The version is clearly labeled on every vault to prevent confusion between deployments that share a protocol name but run different codebases.

APR is derived from historical share price appreciation over rolling windows, annualized. For ERC-4626 vaults, this reflects the actual rate at which the share price has increased, including protocol fees, compounding, and slippage as experienced by depositors.

For lending protocols (Aave, SparkLend), we read the current supply rate from the protocol contracts. For savings vaults (Spark Savings), we use the protocol's canonical rate API, which reflects the ERC-4626 share price accrual.

We do not use forward-looking rate projections or protocol marketing numbers. All rates reflect realized or current on-chain state.

The indexer runs continuously. API-sourced protocols (Aave, Morpho, Spark, Compound, Uniswap, Beefy, Yearn, Nest) sync every 30 minutes. On-chain event monitoring polls with chain-specific finality confirmation (64 blocks on Ethereum, 128 on Polygon, immediate on L2s). Each vault detail page shows its last sync timestamp so you can verify freshness.

We strive for accuracy but make no guarantees. Data is sourced from on-chain reads and protocol APIs, both of which can contain errors. Our calculations may have implementation bugs. You should independently verify any data point before using it for capital allocation decisions.

What we can say: we have no incentive to misrepresent data. We don't earn referral fees, we don't take protocol payments, and our scoring model is publicly documented. If you find an error, we want to know about it.

The vault explorer supports filtering by risk tier, chain, protocol, and asset type. For meaningful comparisons:

• Same-asset comparison: Filter by asset (e.g., USDC) to compare yields across protocols at similar risk levels.
• Risk-adjusted comparison: Filter by tier to compare vaults with similar security profiles, then sort by APR.
• Cross-chain comparison: Hold protocol and asset constant, then compare across chains to identify chain-specific yield premiums.

Each vault detail page shows the per-vector score decomposition: asset composition, platform and strategy, control and governance, and history. You can see exactly which factors lift or drag the composite score. This is more useful than the tier alone. Two Core-tier vaults can still have very different risk profiles. For example, one may score high on code maturity but low on governance, while another shows the reverse pattern.

No. Philidor provides data and risk analytics for informational purposes. Nothing on this platform constitutes investment advice, a recommendation to allocate to any vault, or an endorsement of any protocol. Risk scores reflect our methodology. They are not guarantees of safety or performance.

You should conduct independent due diligence and consult qualified advisors before making allocation decisions. All DeFi activity carries risk of total capital loss.

Read our full Disclaimer