Provider at a glance
- Category
- Liquid Staking
- Entity
- All 2 Frax products
- Official website
- frax.finance
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 61 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read on file.
Frax Ether
ETH liquid staking from Frax
Liquid Staking
#8 Overall
Ranked #8 of 11 liquid staking in the published ranking
61
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $160 commission/yr
Is Frax Ether right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Unstake path5/10 here; Coinbase Staking scores 6
- Peg stability6/10 here; the category best is 9
- Operator set2/10 here; Rocket Pool scores 10
- Commission6/10 here; the category best is 10
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: United States, Europe, Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best liquid staking protocol shows where it lands for you.
What will Frax Ether cost you?
$160 commission/yr
- Your stake
- $32k
- Expected gross yield
- 5%
- Commission on rewards
- 10%
Level with the median of 10 priced liquid staking.
How this is calculatedHow safe is Frax Ether?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Frax Ether
Compare all 4- 5Rocket Pool6 points above · stronger on operator set (10 against 2)67$224
- 6Coinbase Staking4 points above · stronger on unstake path (6 against 5)65$160
- 7Stride4 points above · stronger on operator set (7 against 2)65$160
For your setup
Find out if Frax Ether fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Frax Ether 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 staking protocolNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Frax Ether ranks #8
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (15.0 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
285+4.486.08#9/11Loading evidence…
266+4.995.09#4/11Loading evidence…
262+1.664.010#9/11Loading evidence…
206+3.846.010#4/11Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind Stride, #7
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 60–63 and stays #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 Frax Ether’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.
Redemption mechanics 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes Stride+265#8 → #7
Peg resilience & exit depth 6 → 8 on its ladder · passes Stride+265#8 → #7
Operator decentralisation 2 → 4 on its ladder · passes Stride+265#8 → #7
Commission take-rate 6 → 9 on its ladder · passes Stride+365#8 → #7
Smallest climb: redemption mechanics 5 → 7 passes Stride, #7.
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
- Redemption mechanics — 5/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Peg resilience & exit depth — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Operator decentralisation — 2/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Commission take-rate — 6/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- Yield concentration in sfrxETH means frxETH holders forgo native staking yield
- Liquidity and integrations less broad than stETH
Competitive position
Where Frax Ether 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 / 1120.0 of 20 · pool best
Published criteria#9 / 1111.2 of 30 · best 19.5
Friction#2 / 112.7 of 10 · best 7.3
Trust record#1 / 113.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#4 / 116.9 of 18 · best 9.7
Where Frax Ether leads
- Peg resilience & exit depth#4 / 11
- Commission take-rate#4 / 11
Where it trails
- Redemption mechanics#9 / 11
- Operator decentralisation#9 / 11
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.
Stride#7 of 11 · score 65 · 4.0 points ahead
Frax Ether leads on
- Peg resilience & exit depth6 vs 3
Stride leads on
- Operator decentralisation7 vs 2
Largest single reason Stride is ahead: published criteria (+3.4 display points).Scenario cost: Stride is the same.
Coinbase Staking#6 of 11 · score 65 · 4.0 points ahead
Frax Ether leads on
- Peg resilience & exit depth6 vs 5
Coinbase Staking leads on
- Redemption mechanics6 vs 5
Largest single reason Coinbase Staking is ahead: friction (+12.0 display points).Scenario cost: Coinbase Staking is the same.
Rocket Pool#5 of 11 · score 67 · 6.0 points ahead
Frax Ether leads on
- Redemption mechanics5 vs 4
- Peg resilience & exit depth6 vs 5
- Commission take-rate6 vs 3
Rocket Pool leads on
- Operator decentralisation10 vs 2
Largest single reason Rocket Pool is ahead: published criteria (+6.0 display points).Scenario cost: Rocket Pool is +$64 against Frax Ether.
Against the leader
83 vs 61 · gap 22.0Why Jito ranks above Frax Ether
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 22.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisJitoGap share
Availability · 23% weight20.020.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight11.219.5−21.6, worse
Friction · 12% weight2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight6.96.9same
Published criterionThisJitoPoints
Redemption mechanics · w2858−2.69, worse
Peg resilience & exit depth · w2668−1.66, worse
Operator decentralisation · w2627−4.16, worse
Commission take-rate · w20610−2.56, worse
Net6183−22.0
Your scenario
What Frax Ether costs on your 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%
Commission on rewards · published rate10%
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 30 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.
$160
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median$16010 of 11 rows priced · Frax Ether at the median
Cheapest priced$64 · JitoFrax Ether costs +$96 more · availability not applied — set your country to filterCompare with Jito
1 of 11 quote a zero fee that leaves costs out, so they are absent from the median and the cheapest row, not counted as free.
Evidence
No evidence reading date recorded
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 #8 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.Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Redemption mechanicsstrength 5 · weight 28Report an error——
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.Peg resilience & exit depthstrength 6 · weight 26Report an error——
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.Operator decentralisationstrength 2 · weight 26Report an error——
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.Commission take-ratestrength 6 · weight 20Report an error——
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
- Verification failure (Frax Ether 2/10): an invalid state or transfer is accepted.Scored by Operator decentralisation · 26%
- Exit failure: you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Redemption mechanics · 28% (Frax Ether 5/10)Scored by Peg resilience & exit depth · 26% (Frax Ether 6/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Insolvency failure, Regulatory failure, Execution 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: Commission take-rate (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Frax Ether overview (docs.frax.finance, fetched 30 September 2026): "10% of the income is retained, with 8% as a protocol fee for the benefit of the Frax Ecosystem and FXS holders, and 2% for an insurance fund." Only sfrxETH earns; the frxETH page says "Holding frxETH on its own is not eligible for staking yield". Native exit is the frxETH Redemption Queue, which the docs describe as converting "frxETH to ETH 1-to-1 without fees or slippage". On-chain at block 26086354 the queue in use (0x82bA8da44Cd5261762e629dd5c605b17715727bd) gives new tickets a 30-day wait (queueLengthSecs 2592000) with no redemption fee; cancelling a ticket back into frxETH early costs 0.5% (earlyExitFee 5000 at 1e6 precision). The V2 queue contract listed in the docs is set to a 1,000-day wait and is not in use. Ethereum gas applies.Frax Ether — official page at docs.frax.finance ↗ · 30 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDFrax Ether — official page at docs.frax.finance ↗ · 30 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- minimal
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum
- Markets served
- us, europe, global
- Primary markets
- Global Ethereum stakers, Frax ecosystem DeFi users
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Validator delegation managed by Frax; sfrxETH yield depends on share of frxETH not deployed in liquidity pools.
- Availability note
- Protocol access is globally available onchain.
Legal entity on file: Frax, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Frax Ether: 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
- currentCurrent verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 61, #8 of 11. 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_staking:frax-ether:2026.10.18:519206225f87
Are you Frax Ether? 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.