Provider at a glance
- Category
- Lending & Borrowing
- Official website
- fluid.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 73 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Fluid (Instadapp)
Shared-liquidity money market
Lending & Borrowing
#7 Overall
Ranked #7 of 8 lending & borrowing in the published ranking
73
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Fluid (Instadapp) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Contagion between markets8/10; the category best is 9
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Liquidation price6/10 here; the category best is 9
- Who sets your rate8/10 here; Compound scores 9
- Loss record published7/10 here; Compound 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 crypto lending platform shows where it lands for you.
What will Fluid (Instadapp) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Amount borrowed
- $10k
How safe is Fluid (Instadapp)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Fluid (Instadapp)
Compare all 4- 5Kamino Lend1 point above · stronger on contagion between markets (9 against 8)74
- 6Compound1 point above · stronger on who sets your rate (9 against 8)74
- 8Aave2 points below · stronger on who sets your rate (9 against 8)71
For your setup
Find out if Fluid (Instadapp) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Fluid (Instadapp) 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 crypto lending platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Fluid (Instadapp) ranks #7
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (22.9 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
326+6.146.59#5/8Loading evidence…
248+6.149.010#6/8Loading evidence…
248+6.148.09#4/8Loading evidence…
207+4.487.09#4/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Compound, #6
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 71–75 and ranks #5–#8
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 Fluid (Instadapp)’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.
What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift? 6 → 7 on its ladder · passes Compound+175#7 → #5
Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator? 8 → 9 on its ladder · passes Compound+174#7 → #5
If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it? 8 → 9 on its ladder · passes Compound+174#7 → #5
Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it? 7 → 9 on its ladder · passes Compound+275#7 → #5
What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift? 6 → 5 on its ladder · Aave passes it−171#7 → #8
Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator? 8 → 7 on its ladder · Aave passes it−171#7 → #8
If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it? 8 → 7 on its ladder · Aave passes it−171#7 → #8
Smallest climb: “What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift?” 6 → 7 passes Compound, #6.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it? — 8/10, category best 9/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift? — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator? — 8/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it? — 7/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- Read the Resolv post-mortem on the governance forum, not the recap on the blog — they do not agree, and each omits what the other has. https://gov.fluid.io/t/post-mortem-treasury-actions-and-forward-strategy-following-resolv-incident/1774 (11 May 2026) states 'Fluid incurred ~$21M in bad debt due to the Resolv incident' and splits the remaining ~$19.3M as ~$9.7M Resolv / ~$8.2M Fluid governance treasury / ~$1.5M team, but never dates the event. The H1 2026 recap on fluid.io (5 Aug 2026) dates it — 'On March 22nd, a malicious actor gained unauthorized access to Resolv's signing infrastructure, minting approximately $80M of uncollateralized USR' — then restates the loss as 'The resulting shortfall — about $9.7M, or roughly 10% of total exposure — was covered directly from the DAO treasury.' That figure is Resolv's share presented as the whole loss and attributed to the wrong payer, at under half the number Fluid gave its own DAO. The mechanism that produced it is still the one you are underwriting: Fluid's own risk page says the oracle takes a Uniswap TWAP, runs a 'difference check' against Chainlink and falls back 'If the TWAP is within parameters' without ever stating what those parameters are; 'heartbeat' appears on none of the 46 pages of Fluid's buyer-facing GitBook and only as an unvalued rebalance condition in its autogenerated contract docs; and the one numeric deviation figure Fluid has published — 'revert all operates if deviation > 2%' — is by its own wording operate-only and therefore does not constrain the price that liquidates you.
Competitive position
Where Fluid (Instadapp) 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 / 814.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#7 / 817.2 of 30 · best 20.4
Friction#1 / 82.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 83.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 88.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Fluid (Instadapp) leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator?#6 / 8
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.
Compound#6 of 8 · score 74 · 1.0 point ahead
Fluid (Instadapp) leads on
- If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it?8 vs 7
Compound leads on
- Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator?9 vs 8
- Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it?8 vs 7
Largest single reason Compound is ahead: published criteria (+1.3 display points).Scenario cost: Compound has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Kamino Lend#5 of 8 · score 74 · 1.0 point ahead
Fluid (Instadapp) leads onNo scored criterion
Kamino Lend leads on
- If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it?9 vs 8
Largest single reason Kamino Lend is ahead: published criteria (+1.6 display points).Scenario cost: Kamino Lend has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Aave#8 of 8 · score 71 · 2.0 points behind
Fluid (Instadapp) leads on
- If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it?8 vs 6
Aave leads on
- Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator?9 vs 8
Largest single reason Fluid (Instadapp) is ahead: published criteria (+1.6 display points).Scenario cost: Aave has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 73 · gap 8.0Why Venus ranks above Fluid (Instadapp)
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 8.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisVenusGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight17.220.4−8.3, 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 criterionThisVenusPoints
What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift? · w3269−3.07, worse
Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator? · w2489−0.77, worse
If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it? · w2487+0.77, better
Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it? · w2079−1.28, worse
Net7381−8.0
Your scenario
Fluid (Instadapp) is not priced for this scenario
Interest on what you borrow at the published rate. Variable rates move; excludes origination and liquidation penalties. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
interest/yr · default scenario — set your own
Amount borrowed · your input$10k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 September 2026.
interest/yrCost is stated as interest/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 median and cheapestNot statedOnly 1 of 8 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
7 of 8 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.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #5 to #8 across one-point re-runs
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
What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift?strength 6 · weight 32Report 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 sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator?strength 8 · weight 24Report 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.If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it?strength 8 · weight 24Report 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.Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it?strength 7 · 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
- Control failure (Fluid (Instadapp) 8/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator? · 24%
- Oracle failure (Fluid (Instadapp) 6/10): a wrong price or outcome liquidates or settles a position.Scored by What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift? · 32%
- Insolvency failure: the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by If one market goes bad, how much of yours goes with it? · 24% (Fluid (Instadapp) 8/10)Scored by Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it? · 20% (Fluid (Instadapp) 7/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Regulatory failure, Execution failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Fluid's guides publish no fee schedule for lenders or borrowers; the costs are the floating rate and, if liquidated, a per-vault liquidation penalty. The Liquidity Layer page (https://
fluid .guides .instadapp .io /liquidity-layer /unifying-liquidity, fetched 28 September 2026) states: "Fluid boasts the most advanced liquidation mechanisms, with penalties as low as 0.1%." The live penalties and rates are API fields, not page text: https:// api .fluid .instadapp .io /v2 /borrowing /1 /vaults on 28 September 2026 returned liquidationPenalty 10 basis points (the 0.1% floor) on the wstETH/ETH vault (id 13) and 100 basis points on the ETH/USDC (id 11) and ETH/USDT (id 12) vaults, with borrow rates of 243, 584 and 567 basis points and a vault feeRate of 0 on all three. Rates float with utilisation, so no fixed APY is quoted.Fluid (Instadapp) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDFluid (Instadapp) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- ethereum, arbitrum, base, polygon, bnb-chain, solana
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Permissionless smart-contract protocol; no account and no KYC on any surface read 17 August 2026, and no geo-gate or restricted-territory list appeared on any page loaded. This is NOT a positive finding of unrestricted availability. The Fluid site footer links https://
instadapp .io /terms as BOTH 'Terms' AND 'Privacy' (verified in the page markup: two anchors, identical href, labels 'Terms' and 'Privacy'), and that URL returns HTTP 200 with ~95KB of markup but only ~511 characters of visible text, all of it site chrome — zero occurrences of 'restricted', 'prohibited', 'jurisdiction', 'OFAC' or 'sanction' in the server response. Any restricted-jurisdiction clause is therefore unverified and recorded as inconclusive, and Fluid publishes no separately readable privacy policy at all.
Legal entity on file: Fluid (Instadapp), placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Fluid (Instadapp): 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.
10 methodology entries
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 73, #7 of 8. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 11 October 2026
2026.10.9No live feed or market rate moves a score- fixed Lending and borrowing: the borrow rate leaves the fee term, which now scores every protocol alike, so the category ranks on its four published criteria. Venus, first on those criteria, moves from #7 to #1; Spark stays #2; Morpho moves from #1 to #3 and Compound from #8 to #6.
- fixed Exchanges: the fee term reads each exchange's taker fee from the catalog instead of a table dated 1 April. Kraken (0.80 %) moves from #6 to #9 and Gemini (1.20 %) from #10 to #11; Coinbase, Luno, Bitvavo and VALR each move up one place, and Bybit stays #1.
- removed Staking: a yield no longer stands in for a staking provider's missing commission. No published score moves.
- added /methodology/live-data publishes which numbers may move a score; on every build a test fills each live feed with extreme values and fails if a single score moves.
- 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.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt lending_borrowing:fluid-protocol:2026.10.18:57a5bb9ffe4f
Are you Fluid (Instadapp)? 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.