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.
SO
#1 of 8 · published ranking
SOFA.org (Earn and Surge)
79ChainChoice Score
4199
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)
No provider can pay for a position in this table. The code that computes this order cannot read which links earn us a commission, and every build proves it. Every score below rebuilds from the published criteria.Ranking 2026.08 · 4 criteria · 8 products · same inputs, same order
Personal comparison
Options Vaults ranked comparison
No comparable price is published; ranking still uses verified product evidence.
RankProviderBest fitScore
1
SOSOFA.org (Earn and Surge)RFQ-priced structured products settled...Top ranked
Published cost to the depositor — 9/10Trade-off: The 5% settlement fee is charged on the gross upside payout, so the winning scenario...
Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure
Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.
2 more assessed and ranked below — none of them hidden for commercial reasons.
Ranking blindCommercial terms excludedDated primary sourcesCrypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.
Ranked on 4 published criteria weighted 32/24/22/22, which set goal alignment — 30 of the 86 points. The rest: regional access 20, evidence depth 18, ease of use 10, institutional trust 8. Profile match is shown in breakdowns but carries no weight.
Audit
Infrastructure
Methodology
2026.09.15
published 2026-09-16
Providers tracked
980+
across 119 categories
Last verified
2026-09-27
newest dated pricing or sentiment read
Named on the roster
2 people
managing directors · 6 automated processes
Decision guide
What matters most before choosing in this category
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.
What matters most before choosing in this category
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.
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?
Current editor lead
Expert review and scoring weights
SO
SOFA.org (Earn and Surge)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.
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 forPublished cost to the depositor — 9/10
Main tradeoffThe 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.
Methodology
How this category is reviewed
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.
The order on this page is the published ranking for this category. Every criterion, weight and source behind it is on the methodology page.
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.
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
//Analytics consent·GDPR · ePrivacy · TTDSG
ChainChoice measures page views and conversions with two cookieless, EU-hosted services: Plausible and Cloudflare Web Analytics. Nothing loads until you accept, and rankings are identical either way.ChainChoice measures how the engine is used — page views, conversions, referrer — through two cookieless, EU-hosted services: Plausible and Cloudflare Web Analytics. No advertising cookies, no cross-site profile, no data resale. Neither script loads until you accept, and rankings are identical whether you accept or decline.
