Provider at a glance
- Category
- Liquid Lockers
- Official website
- clever.aladdin.club
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 67 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO)
CVX locker with clevCVX advances
Liquid Lockers
#5 Overall
Ranked #5 of 5 liquid lockers in the published ranking
67
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption2/10 here; Pirex (pxCVX, Redacted) scores 6
- Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor4/10 here; Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker) scores 7
- What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all4/10 here; Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker) scores 7
- Contract control and dated incident record of the wrapper itself6/10 here; Yearn yCRV scores 8
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best liquid locker shows where it lands for you.
What will CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your stake
- $32k
- Expected gross yield
- 5%
How safe is CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO)
Compare all 4- 2Pirex (pxCVX, Redacted)10 points above · stronger on exit realisability (6 against 2)77
- 3Yearn yCRV9 points above · stronger on vote and bribe pass through (6 against 4)76
- 4Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker)8 points above · stronger on vote and bribe pass through (7 against 4)75
For your setup
Find out if CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best liquid lockerNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) ranks #5
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (11.8 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
352+2.243.06#5/5Loading evidence…
254+3.206.07#5/5Loading evidence…
204+2.565.07#4/5Loading evidence…
206+3.846.08#3/5Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−8behind Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker), #4
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 64–69 and stays #5
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO)’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption 2 → 6 on its ladder · passes Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker)+475#5 → #4
Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor 4 → 10 on its ladder · passes Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker)+676#5 → #3
Smallest climb: the exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption 2 → 6 passes Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker), #4.
Strengths
0 from the score dataWhere it leads
No scored criterion is at or within one point of the category best, so no strength can be stated from the data.
Tradeoffs
4 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption — 2/10 against a category best of 6/10
- Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor — 4/10 against a category best of 7/10
- What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all — 4/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Contract control and dated incident record of the wrapper itself — 6/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- clevCVX is only marginally in this category, and scoring it as a liquid locker flatters and penalises it in ways a buyer must separate. CLever does not swap CVX for a receipt. It takes CVX as collateral, locks it in vlCVX, and lends the depositor up to 50% of it as clevCVX — "synthetic versions of their associated real token, representing the future yield of CLever strategies." So there are two different people. The depositor holds a non-transferable internal position that IS redeemable (vlCVX expires; unlock() then withdrawUnlocked()), yet criterion 3 scores it 4, below cvxCRV (6), sdCRV (7) and yCRV (5), because that unwind rests on a single base protocol reached through two layers (vlCVX, then veCRV) and CLever has published no contingency document. The clevCVX holder holds a transferable debt instrument with no claim on the 3,127,274 CVX of principal (totalLockedGlobal on 2026-09-28) at all — which is why criterion 1 scores 2, below cvxCRV, sdCRV and yCRV, whose holders at least own the underlying position they cannot exit. The 57-58% discount measured on 2026-09-28 is therefore not the same object as cvxCRV's 56.29%. cvxCRV at 56.29% is a permanent claim on veCRV trading at less than half. clevCVX at 57-58% is a claim on a yield stream: at the 528.18 CVX a day the Furnace was paying out on 2026-09-28, its queue would take about 1,710 days to clear. The Furnace is the real instrument and the Curve pool is a fire exit; on 2026-09-28, 903,245 clevCVX sat in the Furnace queue and 329,773 in the pool. One thing that fire exit is not is maintained: CLever's own contracts page now strikes through both the Curve and the Balancer clevCVX/CVX gauges. Three things a buyer must not take from the product's own pages. The fee section is stale in two separate places and by two separate proposals: it says 20% harvest fee (broken by CIP-04, January 2024), 75% to veCLEV (broken earlier, by CLIP-03 in July 2023, then again by CIP-05) and a 1% repayment fee (broken by CIP06), where the chain says 30%, 22.2222223% and 0%. The site links only 2022-era audits while the deployed locker implementation dates from 2026-09-09 (upgraded at block 25,939,803 by PR #278 "fix: clever lock drift", with a SECBIT update report of the same date in the GitHub audit-reports folder). And the repo's own deployment record for the locker names an implementation the proxy no longer uses. All three were resolved only by reading governance and the contracts. Scale: ~$5.88m of vlCVX (3,295,147 vlCVX, 7.50% of supply), reconciling with DefiLlama's CLever TVL of $5,687,944 on 2026-08-12. This is a small protocol, and on 2026-09-28 debt stood at 48.74% of locked collateral against its own 50% debt cap.
Competitive position
Where CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#1 / 514.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#5 / 58.9 of 30 · best 13.7
Friction#1 / 52.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 53.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 58.3 of 18 · constant here
Where CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption#5 / 5
- Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor#5 / 5
- What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all#4 / 5
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker)#4 of 5 · score 75 · 8.0 points ahead
CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) leads on
- Contract control and dated incident record of the wrapper itself6 vs 4
Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker) leads on
- The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption3 vs 2
- Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor7 vs 4
- What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all7 vs 4
Largest single reason Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker) is ahead: published criteria (+8.1 display points).Scenario cost: Stake DAO (sdCRV Liquid Locker) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Yearn yCRV#3 of 5 · score 76 · 9.0 points ahead
CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) leads onNo scored criterion
Yearn yCRV leads on
- The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption3 vs 2
- Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor6 vs 4
- What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all5 vs 4
Largest single reason Yearn yCRV is ahead: published criteria (+9.1 display points).Scenario cost: Yearn yCRV has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Pirex (pxCVX, Redacted)#2 of 5 · score 77 · 10.0 points ahead
CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) leads onNo scored criterion
Pirex (pxCVX, Redacted) leads on
- The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption6 vs 2
- Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor5 vs 4
Largest single reason Pirex (pxCVX, Redacted) is ahead: published criteria (+10.1 display points).Scenario cost: Pirex (pxCVX, Redacted) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
79 vs 67 · gap 12.0Why Convex Finance (cvxCRV) ranks above CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO)
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 12.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisConvex Finance (cvxCRV)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight8.913.7−12.5, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisConvex Finance (cvxCRV)Points
The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption · w3524−2.24, worse
Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor · w2546−1.60, worse
What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all · w2046−1.28, worse
Contract control and dated incident record of the wrapper itself · w2068−1.28, worse
Net6779−12.0
Your scenario
CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) is not priced for this scenario
The operator's cut of the rewards your stake earns — not a fee on the stake itself. Gross yield is your assumption, not ours. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
commission/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your stake · your input$32k
Expected gross yield · your input5%
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 September 2026.
commission/yrCost is stated as commission/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory medianNot priced0 of 5 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
5 of 5 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 28 September 2026
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #5 across every one-point re-run
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 28 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemptionstrength 2 · weight 35Report an error—28 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositorstrength 4 · weight 25Report an error—28 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at allstrength 4 · weight 20Report an error—28 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Contract control and dated incident record of the wrapper itselfstrength 6 · weight 20Report an error—28 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Contract failure: the code holding the funds is exploited.Scored by What happens if the base protocol changes or dies, and whether the wrapper can unwind at all · 20% (CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) 4/10)Scored by Contract control and dated incident record of the wrapper itself · 20% (CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) 6/10)
- Control failure (CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) 4/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Who controls the votes and the bribes, and what reaches the depositor · 25%
- Exit failure (CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) 2/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by The exit that does not exist: measured discount and any contractual redemption · 35%
Not assessed by this ranking: Regulatory failure, Execution failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Re-fetched 28 September 2026 from https://
docs .aladdin .club /clever /the-clever (HTTP 200). The page still reads: "CLever charges a fixed fee on collateral yields when they are harvested. This fee will vary by strategy, but for CVX it is 20% of the harvested amount. 75% of harvest fees are paid to veCLEV holders, providing major support to the value of CLEV which is used to incentivize crucial liquidity providers. CLever charges no fee on principal, no borrowing fee and no interest on borrowed tokens." and "CLever's CVX early repayment of claimed future yields are subject to a 1% repayment fee." Its footer still reads "Last updated 2 years ago". Both numbers remain contradicted by the deployed contracts (eth_call, Ethereum block 26,074,948, 2026-09-28T09:06:35Z): CLeverCVXLocker 0x96C68D861aDa016Ed98c30C810879F9df7c64154 platformFeePercentage() = 300000000 over FEE_PRECISION 1e9 (30%), harvestBountyPercentage() = 10000000 (1%), repayFeePercentage() = 0; PlatformFeeDistributor 0xD6eFa5B63531e9ae61e225b02CbACD59092a35bE rewards(0) = CVX with gaugePercentage 0 and treasuryPercentage 777777777. Worked example, labelled: the veCLEV remainder is 1e9 - 777777777 = 222222223 parts per 1e9, i.e. 22.22% of the 30% fee (6.67% of gross yield). Governance explains the gap: CIP-04 on Snapshot space veclev.eth (proposal 0x35d42b87c5570c7d26c0e8542b77e59c738e4e13dc9c3be77c538e26e5f3c940, re-read 28 September 2026 through hub.snapshot.org: closed, 126,644.86 For / 1,218.77 Against) says "Raise the fee for CVX harvest yields from 20% to 30%." The getters read the same as on 12 August 2026 even though the locker implementation behind the proxy was replaced on 9 September 2026.CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDCLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
Legal entity on file: AladdinDAO, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO): where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category 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
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
9 methodology entries
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 67, #5 of 5. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
- 16 September 2026
2026.09.15Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources · platform-wide- changed Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
- fixed 66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
- changed Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.
- added availabilitySource (O-04g): for a reader who states a country, a row whose availability in that country rests on a region tag its record gives no source for sorts below every sourced row. It is inert in every order published here, which states no country.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt liquid_lockers:clever_clevcvx:2026.10.18:fb4d2ae4efaf
Are you CLever (clevCVX, AladdinDAO)? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.