P2P.org vs Sanctum

P2P.org3.9/5

VS

Sanctum4.5/5

Feature	P2P.orgVisit	SanctumVisit
Ratings
Our score	3.9/5	4.5/5
User rating	No reviews yet	No reviews yet
Yield	4.0	4.5
Security	4.5	4.5
Liquidity	3.0	5.0
Decentralization	4.0	4.0
Ease of use	3.5	4.5
Specs
Type	Native staking, Restaking	Liquid staking
Stakeable assets	ETH, SOL, DOT, ATOM, XTZ, GRAM, TRX, ADA, APT, POL, TIA, HYPE, NEAR, SEI, SUI, MON	SOL
Receipt token	Not disclosed	INF and validator LSTs
Protocol fee	Not disclosed	0.1%
Minimum stake	32 ETH for Ethereum validator	Not disclosed
Chains	Ethereum, Bitcoin, Solana, Polygon, Sui, Aptos, Tron, Hyperliquid, Cosmos, Other	Solana
Node operators	P2P.org validator infrastructure	Permissionless validator set with custom white-label pools
Audited	Yes	Yes
Restaking	Yes	Not disclosed
Typical reward rate	2.2% - 20.69%	5.65%-5.69%
Company
Founded	2018	—
Headquarters	—	—
Investors	Not disclosed	Not disclosed
Strengths and weaknesses
Pros	Over $10B in assets under validation across 40+ proof-of-stake networks Independent SOC 2 Type II certification verified by KirkpatrickPrice Zero slashing incidents recorded across seven years of validator operations MixBytes-audited smart contract infrastructure for institutional integrations	Connects over 1,360 Solana liquid staking tokens into shared liquidity Audited by six firms including Quantstamp, OtterSec, and Halborn Program upgrades secured by an 11-member multi-organization multisig Enables immediate unbonding through liquidity pools rather than epoch waits
Cons	Native Ethereum validator setup requires a minimum of 32 ETH Withdrawal timing remains subject to native chain unbonding rules and network queues EigenLayer restaking adds smart-contract risk and protocol-specific slashing conditions Primary API products and sales support cater to institutional and intermediary clients	Withdrawal instructions incur a 0.10% fee Restricted exclusively to the Solana blockchain Underlying custom LSTs remain subject to individual validator slashing risks Secondary pool trades face potential depeg risk during liquidity shocks
Best for	Institutional digital asset treasuries, Custodians and wallet developers, Delegators seeking SOC 2-audited nodes	Solana holders seeking diversified yield, Validators launching branded LSTs, DeFi traders swapping liquid tokens

Highlighted cells show the stronger value in each row. Data comes from each provider's site and public sources; check details before you sign up.

More comparisons