Flash Loan Venues

Flash Loan Venues evaluated across how much one transaction can borrow, loan cost in basis points, integration surface, and venue incident record.

10providers tracked

8ranked (methodology v2026.11.1)

12 November 2026Ranking snapshot

27 September 2026oldest read · due 11 Nov

Independent. Evidence-based.We rank with a published method and sourced evidence. No one can pay to rank.How it works

Set your country and amount to see your costs ·

8 providers match your requirements

Out of 8 ranked providers. 0 excluded.

What this ranks

Ranked here: flash loan venues that let you borrow and repay inside one transaction, compared on borrowable depth, loan cost in basis points, integration surface and incident record.Not ranked here: lending products that offer no flash loan at all, and older versions of a venue that a newer version has superseded.8 of the 10 assessed are ranked; 2 were turned away by name. Who, and whyRequirements narrow the list; they never change a published ChainChoice Score. How the ranking works

Morpho (Morpho Blue)

How Morpho (Morpho Blue) was chosen

Leads this ranking on Loan cost in basis points

Immutable lending primitive

82 out of 100published score, #1 of all 8 worldwide

Evidence

High

4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.

Loan cost in basis pointsSingle-transaction borrowable depthVenue incident record

Why it leads

Morpho (Morpho Blue) is 1 point ahead of Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash), mainly because it scores higher on its borrowable depth and its loan cost bps.
Best in this ranking on loan cost bps (10/10; next 9/10)
Ahead of Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash) on borrowable depth (+3.7 points) and loan cost bps (+1.7 points)

Tradeoff

Integration surface: 3 points below the best in this ranking

Sort by

#ProviderPriceCompare

ERC-3156 flash mint module

81 out of 100

Singleton PoolManager

77 out of 100

Same score, not joint · ordered by weighted total (47.00 against 46.90)

The deepest venue and the only one in this pool...

77 out of 100

Aave v3 fork charging zero basis points

76 out of 100

Per-pool flash withdrawal of one or both pair...

67 out of 100

SHUTTING DOWN

≤41 out of 100

Tied for #7 · ordered by name, A to Z

SHUTTING DOWN

≤41 out of 100

Balancer V2 has shut down (SHUTTING DOWN: Balancer is winding down; its pools have been moving to withdrawals-only since 30 October 2026 and bug-bounty cover ended that day; do not build on it).

Balancer V3 has shut down (SHUTTING DOWN: Balancer is winding down; its pools have been moving to withdrawals-only since 30 October 2026 (some v3 pools until 30 November) and bug-bounty cover ended; do not build on it).

Compare providers (0)

See key differences in features, fees, security and more.

Loan cost bps

Loan cost in basis points

28% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Loan cost bps (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Morpho (Morpho Blue)	10	82
Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash)	9	81
Uniswap v4 (flash accounting)	9	77
Balancer V3	9	41
SparkLend	8	76
Balancer V2	8	41
Aave V3	5	77
Uniswap v3 flash swaps	3	67

Incident record

Venue incident record

20% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Incident record (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Uniswap v3 flash swaps	9	67
Morpho (Morpho Blue)	8	82
Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash)	8	81
Uniswap v4 (flash accounting)	8	77
Aave V3	7	77
SparkLend	6	76
Balancer V3	6	41
Balancer V2	2	41

Borrowable depth

Single-transaction borrowable depth

30% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Borrowable depth (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Aave V3	10	77
Morpho (Morpho Blue)	9	82
Uniswap v4 (flash accounting)	8	77
SparkLend	8	76
Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash)	7	81
Uniswap v3 flash swaps	6	67
Balancer V2	2	41
Balancer V3	1	41

Integration surface

22% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Integration surface (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash)	10	81
Aave V3	9	77
Balancer V2	9	41
SparkLend	8	76
Uniswap v3 flash swaps	8	67
Morpho (Morpho Blue)	7	82
Uniswap v4 (flash accounting)	6	77
Balancer V3	6	41

All 4 published criteria

Every ranked row’s score on each criterion, in the published order. Choose a column to order by it.

	Provider					ChainChoice Score
1	Morpho (Morpho Blue)	9	10	7	8	82
2	Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash)	7	9	10	8	81
3	Uniswap v4 (flash accounting)	8	9	6	8	77
4	Aave V3	10	5	9	7	77
5	SparkLend	8	8	8	6	76
6	Uniswap v3 flash swaps	6	3	8	9	67
7	Balancer V2	2	8	9	2	41
8	Balancer V3	1	9	6	6	41

How this ranking works

How firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and which flash loan venues were assessed and left out.

One point from changingMorpho (Morpho Blue) leads Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash) by 1 point

A one-point change on one criterion puts Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash) first, so read both.

See the arithmetic

Move single-transaction borrowable depth — the heaviest criterion that changes it, weighted 30 — by a single point and Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash) takes first place. Both are worth reading. The published rankings file

Why this score4 published criteria · leads 1 of 4

Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap out of 10Pts

Single-transaction borrowable depth7.2−198.6

Loan cost in basis points6.7·109.0

Integration surface5.3−374.9

Venue incident record4.8−185.1

Σ methodology points27.6/32

Each bar is the score on that criterion’s own 0–10 scale, never rescaled to the pool. The dark line is the best any product here reached on that axis. Wt is the most the criterion can add to the 86-point weighted total. Pts is weight × score × 32; the sum is the methodology score, and each weighted point behind the leader costs 2.6 on the displayed score. how these are weighted

Why it ranks first

Why Morpho (Morpho Blue) leads this category right now

Immutable lending primitive whose flashLoan draws on the entire token balance of the singleton contract, one asset per call. Strongest on loan cost in basis points (10/10): The Morpho Blue interface states that `flashFee` is zero, and the flashLoan code sends out and pulls back the same amount with no fee term and no fee parameter governance could raise. Weakest on integration surface (7/10): One dedicated call, morpho.flashLoan(token, amount, data), answered by one callback, onMorphoFlashLoan; it lends one asset per call, pulls repayment itself, and its interface warns that it is not ERC-3156 compliant. Published price: Zero, and structurally so. The interface source at raw.githubusercontent.com/morpho-org/morpho-blue/main/src/interfaces/IMorpho.sol, fetched 2026-09-27, states in the natspec directly above flashLoan, across four consecutive comment lines: "Warning: Not…

Best for

Loan cost in basis points — 10/10

Main tradeoff

The callback is not told which asset it received. onMorphoFlashLoan(uint256 assets, bytes calldata data) passes the amount and your own calldata and nothing else, so a receiver written to handle more than one token must carry the token address through `data` itself; and because repayment is pull-based, a receiver that forgets to approve Morpho reverts the whole transaction after the gas has been spent — the docs put it as 'If your callback fails to approve the repayment, the entire transaction will revert'.

Verify before signup

Zero, and structurally so. The interface source at raw.githubusercontent.com/morpho-org/morpho-blue/main/src/interfaces/IMorpho.sol, fetched 27 September 2026, states in the natspec directly above flashLoan, across four consecutive comment lines: "Warning: Not ERC-3156 compliant but compatibility is easily reached:" / "`flashFee` is zero." / "`maxFlashLoan` is the token's balance of this contract." / "The receiver of `assets` is the caller." The implementation, raw.githubusercontent.com/morpho-org/morpho-blue/main/src/Morpho.sol fetched the same day, has no fee arithmetic anywhere in the path (lines 422-432): "IERC20(token).safeTransfer(msg.sender, assets);" then "IMorphoFlashLoanCallback(msg.sender).onMorphoFlashLoan(assets, data);" then "IERC20(token).safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), assets);". The amount pulled back is the amount sent out, and there is no fee parameter for governance to raise. Unchanged since the 7 August 2026 read.

Recommendation summary

What should decide this category

Can the venue actually fund your size, today, in the asset you need?

What is the fee in basis points - read from the contract, not the docs?

Is an incident in its record an exploit OF the venue, or one that merely used it?

Quick picks

Strong options in this category

Start with the lead choice first, then use the shortlist only if you still need a challenger or stronger fit for a specific setup.

Best overall

Morpho (Morpho Blue)

Immutable lending primitive whose flashLoan draws on the entire token balance of the singleton contract, one asset per call.

Best for: Loan cost in basis points — 10/10

Single-transaction borrowable depth · weight 30%9/10Loan cost in basis points · weight 28%10/10Integration surface · weight 22%7/10Venue incident record · weight 20%8/10

Quick pick

Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash)

ERC-3156 flash mint module that creates Dai on demand up to a governance ceiling and burns it at the end of the transaction.

ERC-3156 flash mint module that creates Dai on demand up to a governance ceiling and burns it at the end of the transaction. Strongest on integration surface (10/10): The Dai flash mint conforms to ERC-3156: the standard's reference borrower works unchanged, maxFlashLoan and flashFee answer on-chain, and the module's source writes out its revert reasons (token-unsupported, ceiling-exceeded, callback-failed). Weakest on single-transaction borrowable depth (7/10): One asset on one chain: the module mints up to a 500,000,000 DAI ceiling per transaction on Ethereum and rejects USDS, the successor stablecoin. Published price: Zero, and structurally so in the deployed contract, although the vendor's developer page still describes a fee.

Best for: Integration surface — 10/10

Single-transaction borrowable depth · weight 30%7/10Loan cost in basis points · weight 28%9/10Integration surface · weight 22%10/10Venue incident record · weight 20%8/10

Quick pick

Uniswap v4 (flash accounting)

Singleton PoolManager whose transient delta accounting lets a caller take tokens and settle them within one unlock, with no dedicated loan function.

Singleton PoolManager whose transient delta accounting lets a caller take tokens and settle them within one unlock, with no dedicated loan function. Strongest on loan cost in basis points (9/10): Uniswap v4 has no flash-loan function and so no loan fee: a caller takes tokens as a delta against the PoolManager and must clear it before the lock closes; a fee arises only if the caller actually swaps. Weakest on integration surface (6/10): The loan is assembled by hand: unlock the PoolManager, take the tokens, then sync, transfer and settle before control returns; any unresolved delta reverts the whole transaction. Published price: There is no flash-loan fee because there is no flash-loan function: the price is structural.

Best for: Loan cost in basis points — 9/10

Single-transaction borrowable depth · weight 30%8/10Loan cost in basis points · weight 28%9/10Integration surface · weight 22%6/10Venue incident record · weight 20%8/10

Quick pick

Same score, not joint · ordered by weighted total (47.00 against 46.90)

Aave V3

The deepest venue and the only one in this pool charging a headline premium, with multi-asset loans and an option to exit into debt.

The deepest venue and the only one in this pool charging a headline premium, with multi-asset loans and an option to exit into debt. Strongest on single-transaction borrowable depth (10/10): Aave V3 funds multi-reserve flash loans from nine-figure balances in USDT, USDC, WETH and WBTC on Ethereum, and DefiLlama shows nine-figure deposits on at least seven chains. Weakest on loan cost in basis points (5/10): Aave V3 charges 5 bps, readable as FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TOTAL() on every Pool and identical on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base and Polygon; governance can change it, and the protocol currently takes all of it. Published price: The flash-loan guide (aave.com/docs/aave-v3/guides/flash-loans, fetched 2026-09-27) states "The flash loan fee is initialized at deployment to 0.05% and can be updated via Governance Vote." and sets out the split as "Fee to LP: FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TOTAL -…

Best for: Single-transaction borrowable depth — 10/10

Single-transaction borrowable depth · weight 30%10/10Loan cost in basis points · weight 28%5/10Integration surface · weight 22%9/10Venue incident record · weight 20%7/10

Considered and not ranked

2 products we looked at and left out

A shortlist is only honest if it says who it turned away. Each of these was assessed against the same published criteria as the ranked table and excluded for a stated reason — not overlooked.

We assessed 10 products here and rank 8 — 80% of what we looked at. That share is of the products we assessed, not of the category: how many exist is not something we can count, so we do not claim a number for it.

MoonwellAave V2· No longer operating

What this ranking does not assess

Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.

These can still cost you money here; the ranking does not measure them, so a high place says nothing about them. Which criterion scores each family, and why the others do not apply, is in /data/risk-coverage.json.

How this ranking is built

Reviewed on single-transaction borrowable depth, loan cost in basis points, integration surface, and venue incident record.

Data checked Sep 2026 · Independent rankings · We show our work

Reviewed 27 September 2026

Re-read due since 11 November 2026

The published cadence is 45 days; this page's next read was due on 11 November 2026.

Published 7 August 2026Methodology v2026.11.1

How this page is reviewed

Reviewed means every product ranked on this page was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.

Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.

How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money

Direct answer

What is the best flash loan venue in 2026?

Morpho (Morpho Blue) ranks #1 overall for flash loan venues on ChainChoice. Immutable lending primitive whose flashLoan draws on the entire token balance of the singleton contract, one asset per call. It holds that rank under an affiliate-blind methodology scored across 4 published, weighted criteria — the code that ranks providers physically cannot read affiliate payouts (CI-enforced), so a payout can't move a rank. The verdict re-computes on every fee change, incident, or regulatory action; the full reasoning and the audit receipt are under Methodology.

How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores

Contract failure: the code holding the funds is exploited.
Scored by Venue incident record · 20% (Morpho (Morpho Blue) 8/10, Dai Flash Mint (DssFlash) 8/10, Uniswap v4 (flash accounting) 8/10)

Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.

Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Single-transaction borrowable depth (30%), Loan cost in basis points (28%), Integration surface (22%).

FAQs

3 questions readers ask before choosing flash loan venues.

Frequently asked

Questions people ask before choosing flash loan venues

Which venue is cheapest?

Several charge zero, and the useful question is which of those can fund you. SparkLend returns FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TOTAL() = 0 with $4.51bn on Ethereum and 274,141,154.96 USDS plus 112,668,695.62 DAI available at the block read. Balancer V2 is the famous free venue and is now largely empty: its own live documentation still says "On mainnet the vault holds over a billion dollars worth of assets", while the Vault held 306,263.69 USDC, 1,298.08 WETH, 96,231.44 DAI and 11.79 WBTC at Ethereum block 25698583, against all-chain V2 TVL of roughly $26.4m. That is off by about 38x, on the single sentence a developer is most likely to act on. Aave v3 charges 5 bps and buys breadth rather than a better loan.

Does the flash-loan fee still go to suppliers?

At Aave, no, and the documentation has not caught up. The guide presents the split as "Fee to LP: FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TOTAL - FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TO_PROTOCOL" and reassures that "At initialization, FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TO_PROTOCOL is set to 0". Read on 2026-08-06, FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TO_PROTOCOL() returns 10000 on all five Pools checked, and the Pool reference documents that parameter as "expressed in bps" - so 10000 bps is 100%. The documented "Fee to LP" line evaluates to zero, while the same reference still describes a design where "A part is sent to aToken holders as extra, one time accumulated interest". Suppliers whose liquidity funds every flash loan now receive none of the 5 bps, and nothing on the guide says so.

Are flash loans responsible for all those exploits?

Usually they are the tool, not the hole, but the honest version is narrower than the usual defence. DefiLlama's hacks dataset carries 612 records, 93 of which name "Flashloan" as a technique - the largest being Euler V1, 2023-03-13, $197,000,000. In most of those the flash-loan venue was repaid within the transaction and lost nothing; the loss sat at whatever the borrowed capital was pointed at. But it is not true that none is a loss at a venue: CREAM, Rari, Sonne and UwU were themselves flash-loan lenders when they were exploited. When you read a venue's incident record, separate an exploit OF the venue from one that merely borrowed through it - the two say completely different things about the code you are about to integrate.

Free advisorNo signup needed

Still unsure? Get your best flash loan venues pick

Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — then review the evidence before deciding.

No signupFree first pass · PrivateNo spam · No account

Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research

Best picks

Best flash loan venues in 2026

Weighted on single-transaction borrowable depth (30), loan cost in basis points (28), integration surface (22), and venue incident record (20). This deliberately scores nothing a supply-APY comparison scores. The headline: SparkLend runs Aave v3 code - its own docs describe what it changed relative to "Upstream Aave v3" - and returns FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TOTAL() = 0 against Aave's 5, on a pool DefiLlama values at $4.51bn on Ethereum. On a $100m USDS or DAI flash loan, both sizes SparkLend can fund, the identical operation with the identical executeOperation callback costs $50,000 at Aave and nothing at SparkLend. What Aave's premium buys is breadth of asset and chain, not a better flash loan.

Best overall

Morpho (Morpho Blue)

Immutable lending primitive whose flashLoan draws on the entire token balance of the singleton contract, one asset per call.

Data checked Sep 2026

Best for: Loan cost in basis points — 10/10

Browse this network

Keep exploring flash loan venues

The same published ranking, read for your country, side by side, or one provider at a time.

Every ranked provider, its full verdict

Best flash loan venues by country

How this category is defined

Flash Loan Venues: overview, criteria and weights

Written and reviewed by Mathias Siemonsmeier Founder

Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research

Your setup

8 providers match your requirements

Why it leads

Tradeoff

Compare providers (0)