Best options vaults in 2026

Options Vaults evaluated across verifiable per-vault track record, published cost to the depositor, documented loss profile in a drawdown, and audit and incident record.

#1 of 8 · published ranking

SOFA.org (Earn and Surge)

79ChainChoice Score

Why it leads

Best in the pool on security and operating record (8/10; next 6/10)

Cost

Not priced · No comparable price is published

Joint #1 · ordered by unrounded weighted total (44.1 against 44.05)

8 compared Ranking-blind · 392 modules checked 2026-09-18Evidence read 2026-08-06Scored under methodology v2026.09.15 (2026-09-16)32 receipts quoted

Filter options vaults8 in the published ranking

Filters change eligibility, not methodology. A requirement can rule a provider out; nothing here changes the order the published criteria produce.

Your setup

Your location

Pick a country to see which options vaults serve it. Nothing is hidden — any that does not is listed with that reason.

Cost

Depositor cost disclosure

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Trust & control

Verifiable track record

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Security and operating record

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Documented drawdown risk

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Whatever misses a requirement is listed under Excluded with the reason — nothing is hidden.

8 results

8options vaults · sorted by chainchoice score

ranked before any payout data is seen

#1 overallcomputed before any payout data is seenOverall

SOFA.org (Earn and Surge)

RFQ-priced structured products settled into ERC-1155 vaults, where the user picks the strike and tenor instead of joining an epoch.

Leads the pool on Audit and incident record · level with Typus Finance DeFi Options Vaults

79ChainChoice Score · first of 8

Catalog strengths

Published cost to the depositorDocumented loss profile in a drawdownAudit and incident record

Why it leads

Best in the pool on security and operating record (8/10; next 6/10)
Tied with Typus Finance DeFi Options Vaults on the published total; the tie-break orders them
Provider states broad availability

Evidence

4/4

criteria scored · 4 receipts quoted

Margin

level

over Typus Finance DeFi Options Vaults, ranked #02

Rank stability

Level

Level with Typus Finance DeFi Options Vaults on the weighted total from different criterion scores; the criteria alone put SOFA.org (Earn and Surge) first (6.64 against 6.62)

Tradeoff

−6

Verifiable per-vault track record — behind this pool's best

Jurisdiction

Global

no restricted market on record

Score breakdowntick = pool best

Verifiable track record3/10

Depositor cost disclosure9/10

Documented drawdown risk8/10

Security and operating record8/10

Ranking-blind · a guided run tailors this to your size, custody & jurisdiction

#ProviderScoreEvidenceKey strengths

Joint #1 · ordered by unrounded weighted total (44.1 against 44.05)

Typus Finance DeFi Options Vaults

Published cost to the depositorDocumented loss profile in a drawdown

3−1

Derive Vaults (Harvest and Safe Harvest, formerly Lyra)

Verifiable per-vault track recordDocumented loss profile in a drawdown

4−6

Rysk (Rysk V12 and Rysk Premium)

Documented loss profile in a drawdownAudit and incident record

5−15

Premia (Premia Blue / Vault Depot)

Audit and incident recordPublished cost to the depositor

6−4

3Jane Options V1 (ETH-X-C covered call vault)

Verifiable per-vault track recordAudit and incident record

7−3

Thetanuts Finance Basic Vaults

Documented loss profile in a drawdownPublished cost to the depositor

8−5

Stryke SSOV (formerly Dopex Single Staking Options Vaults)

Audit and incident recordVerifiable per-vault track record

Ranking-blind — order computed before any payout data is joined

Below the table

How this ranking works

Everything the table draws on continues here: how firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and the full guide to choosing.

Direct answer

What is the best options vaults in 2026?

SOFA.org (Earn and Surge) ranks #1 overall for options vaults on ChainChoice. RFQ-priced structured products settled into ERC-1155 vaults, where the user picks the strike and tenor instead of joining an epoch. 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; full reasoning and the audit receipt are below.

Best picks

Best options vaults in 2026

Start by asking whether the vault still exists, because in this category that is a real question — five of the seven protocols a buyer would search for no longer run an options vault at all. Then ignore the advertised APY, which is a backward-looking premium figure that says nothing about the strategy's worst outcome: a covered call caps your upside and keeps your downside, and that only shows up in a drawdown. What actually separates these is whether you can check the returns yourself. The neutral yield index that tracks more than fifteen thousand pools contains exactly one vault from this pool, so for the rest there is no independent series to compare against a claim — and the one protocol that does publish an auditable per-vault share price is the one whose numbers look worst.

Best overall

SOFA.org (Earn and Surge)

RFQ-priced structured products settled into ERC-1155 vaults, where the user picks the strike and tenor instead of joining an epoch.

Data checked Sep 2026

RFQ-priced structured products settled into ERC-1155 vaults, where the user picks the strike and tenor instead of joining an epoch. Strongest on published cost to the depositor (9/10): SOFA takes 15% of the depositor's option premium as a base fee and a further 5% of the gross upside payout on a winning outcome. Both rates appear inside the published payoff equations. The fee page carries no date. Weakest on verifiable per-vault track record (3/10): SOFA publishes payoff equations that let a depositor recompute a single trade, but no per-vault share price and no realised-return series. Prices come by request-for-quote from market makers rather than fixed epochs, and DefiLlama's yield index has no SOFA pool. Published price: "SOFA will collect 15% of the user's option premium as a base trading fee.

Best for: Published cost to the depositor — 9/10

Why this score4 published criteria · leads 2 of 4

Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap/10Pts

Verifiable per-vault track record7.7−633.1

Published cost to the depositor5.8·96.9

Documented loss profile in a drawdown5.3−185.6

Audit and incident record5.3·85.6

Σ methodology points21.2/32

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 SOFA.org (Earn and Surge) leads this category right now

Best for

Published cost to the depositor — 9/10

Main tradeoff

The 5% settlement fee is charged on the gross upside payout, so the winning scenario is the expensive one - the fee stack reaches 20% precisely when the structure pays. And the FAQ's "strong capital protection" language should not be read literally: SOFA is the settlement layer, the market maker sets the price, and the user carries the short-option outcome.

Verify before signup

"SOFA will collect 15% of the user's option premium as a base trading fee. Furthermore, in the event of a 'winning' payout occurring for the user, a further 5% settlement fee will be charged against the total Gross Upside Payout." (Protocol Fees page, docs.sofa.org/technical-design/fees.html, fetched 2026-09-27; wording unchanged since 2026-08-06, preceded in the source by a money-bag emoji). The same page carries both fees in the payoff formulas. If knocked out: "Payoff_{inUSDT} = Notional_{Deposit} + AAVEInterest_{Actual} - Premium * (1 + 0.15)". If not knocked out: "Payoff_{inUSDT} = Notional_{Deposit} + AAVEInterest_{Actual} + Premium * (1 - 0.15 - 0.05) + MM'sCollateral * (1 - 0.05)". The 5% is charged on the gross upside, so the fee stack reaches 20% of premium plus 5% of the market maker's collateral in exactly the scenario where the structure pays.

Recommendation summary

What should decide this category

Does this vault still run, and when did the protocol last ship one?

Can you verify the per-vault return anywhere other than the vendor's own dashboard?

What does the protocol itself document that the strategy loses when the market moves against 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

SOFA.org (Earn and Surge)

RFQ-priced structured products settled into ERC-1155 vaults, where the user picks the strike and tenor instead of joining an epoch.

Best for: Published cost to the depositor — 9/10

Verifiable per-vault track record · 32%

3/10

Published cost to the depositor · 24%

9/10

Documented loss profile in a drawdown · 22%

8/10

Audit and incident record · 22%

8/10

Quick pick

Joint #1 · ordered by unrounded weighted total (44.1 against 44.05)

Typus Finance DeFi Options Vaults

Covered-call, call-selling and put-selling vaults on Sui that auction each epoch's options to whitelisted bidders.

Covered-call, call-selling and put-selling vaults on Sui that auction each epoch's options to whitelisted bidders. Strongest on published cost to the depositor (9/10): Typus's fee page, updated 10 February 2026, lists 0.0% deposit, withdrawal and claim fees for its option vaults and a 10-15% fee on harvested rewards charged to the depositor, with the 15% tier named for aggressive hourly SUI vaults and memecoin vaults. Weakest on verifiable per-vault track record (5/10): Typus links vault history to an operator-maintained Google Sheet and a third-party Sentio dashboard. No per-vault share price is published at a machine-readable endpoint, and DefiLlama's yield index carries no Typus pool. Published price: From the DeFi Options Vaults section of the Fees page (docs.typus.finance/fees), fetched 2026-09-27; the page footer still reads "Updated 10 Feb 2026".

Best for: Published cost to the depositor — 9/10

Verifiable per-vault track record · 32%

5/10

Published cost to the depositor · 24%

9/10

Documented loss profile in a drawdown · 22%

8/10

Audit and incident record · 22%

5/10

Quick pick

Derive Vaults (Harvest and Safe Harvest, formerly Lyra)

Tokenised covered-call and covered-call-spread vaults on an on-chain options exchange, with each vault's share price served from a public API.

Tokenised covered-call and covered-call-spread vaults on an on-chain options exchange, with each vault's share price served from a public API. Strongest on verifiable per-vault track record (9/10): Derive publishes a timestamped share price (base_value) for each of its ten vaults at a public, unauthenticated API endpoint. Eight carry marks from 27 September 2026, and both covered-call-spread vaults sit below 1.0. Two vaults, rsETH and rswETH Covered Call, have not re-marked since 24 July 2026. Weakest on published cost to the depositor (2/10): Derive publishes no vault fee rates. Its Terms of Use, updated 23 September 2026, say a vault may charge management, performance, withdrawal and other fees and leave the rates to vault terms or the vault operator. Its fee article covers exchange trading, liquidation and borrow fees only. Published price: No depositor-facing vault fee is published; the absence was re-tested on 2026-09-27, not assumed.

Best for: Verifiable per-vault track record — 9/10

Verifiable per-vault track record · 32%

9/10

Published cost to the depositor · 24%

2/10

Documented loss profile in a drawdown · 22%

8/10

Audit and incident record · 22%

6/10

Quick pick

Rysk (Rysk V12 and Rysk Premium)

Covered-call and cash-secured-put positions priced through an RFQ network, plus curator-run pooled vaults on HyperEVM.

Covered-call and cash-secured-put positions priced through an RFQ network, plus curator-run pooled vaults on HyperEVM. Strongest on documented loss profile in a drawdown (9/10): Rysk's Premium documentation states that LPs could lose a significant portion of deposited capital if written options expire deep in the money, works through in-the-money settlement examples, and explains that withdrawals stay escrowed while capital is deployed and are paid at the first epoch with enough liquidity. Weakest on verifiable per-vault track record (3/10): Rysk's pooled Premium NAV is calculated off-chain from a committee of option desks and submitted by the Governor at each epoch, and the retail headline APR is the annualised upfront premium. No independent per-vault return series is published. Published price: Rysk Premium Explainer, section 8 Fees (docs.rysk.finance/rysk-premium/rysk-premium-explainer.md), fetched 2026-09-27: "The pool has two fee tiers, both expressed in basis points (bps):".

Best for: Documented loss profile in a drawdown — 9/10

Verifiable per-vault track record · 32%

3/10

Published cost to the depositor · 24%

5/10

Documented loss profile in a drawdown · 22%

9/10

Audit and incident record · 22%

6/10

Frequently asked

Questions people ask before choosing options vaults

Why is the advertised APY not the main criterion here?

Because it is a description of premium already collected, not a forecast, and the risk it omits is the entire product. Selling a covered call caps your upside at the strike while leaving your downside intact, so a vault can post an attractive annualised premium through a calm quarter and hand back more than that in a single move. That is why the heaviest weight here is on whether the per-vault record is verifiable at all, and the second on what the protocol documents about its own loss profile. An APY with no checkable series behind it is a claim, and this comparison treats it as one.

Can I check these returns independently?

Almost never, which is the most uncomfortable finding in the category. The neutral yield index that tracks 15,635 pools contains exactly one options vault from this pool — the other seven protocols have zero indexed pools, verified by enumerating the index rather than searching it. So for most of these, the only record of performance is the vendor's own dashboard. One protocol does publish an auditable per-vault share price through a public endpoint, and it is scored highest on track record precisely because you can check it, even though what you find there is not flattering.

How many of these protocols are actually still operating?

Fewer than the search results suggest. Five of the seven names a buyer would naturally look for have stopped running options vaults — one after its vaults were exploited, with the operator stating that all of them would be stopped and decommissioned immediately. Products that stop are listed under discontinued here with what is actually published about them, rather than ranked, because a vault you cannot deposit into is not a choice. Check the operating record before the yield: in this category the base rate of disappearance is higher than the spread between the yields.

Free advisorNo signup needed

Still unsure? Get your best options vaults 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

Browse this network

How this ranking is built

Reviewed on whether the per-vault track record is verifiable, what the depositor actually pays, what the documentation says the strategy loses in a drawdown, and the audit and operating record.

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

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