Sanctum vs StakeWise
How Sanctum vs StakeWise compare on our ratings, staking protocol specs, funding, pros and cons.
| Feature | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ratings | ||
| Our score | 4.5/5 | 3.7/5 |
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Yield | 4.5 | 3.5 |
| Security | 4.5 | 4.0 |
| Liquidity | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| Decentralization | 4.0 | 4.5 |
| Ease of use | 4.5 | 3.5 |
| Specs | ||
| KYC required | Not disclosed | No |
| Type | Liquid staking | Liquid staking |
| Stakeable assets | SOL | ETH |
| Receipt token | INF and validator LSTs | osETH |
| Protocol fee | 0.1% | Not disclosed |
| Chains | Solana | Ethereum |
| Node operators | Permissionless validator set with custom white-label pools | Decentralized operator vaults with DVT support |
| Audited | Yes | Yes |
| Typical reward rate | 5.65%-5.69% | Not disclosed |
| Company | ||
| Founded | — | 2018 |
| Headquarters | — | Estonia |
| Investors | Not disclosed | Greenfield Capital, Collider Ventures, Lionschain Capital, gumi Cryptos Capital |
| Strengths and weaknesses | ||
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Best for | Solana holders seeking diversified yield, Validators launching branded LSTs, DeFi traders swapping liquid tokens | Ethereum stakers choosing specific operators, DeFi users seeking osETH liquidity, Solo stakers running personal vaults |
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.