Provider at a glance
- Category
- Fixed-Rate Yield
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- spectra.finance
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 71 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Spectra V2
Permissionless yield tokenisation
Fixed-Rate Yield
#6 Overall
Ranked #6 of 7 fixed-rate yield in the published ranking
71
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Spectra V2 right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- What happens at maturity6/10 here; Exponent Yield Exchange scores 8
- Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it3/10 here; TermMax scores 6
- The price of leaving early7/10 here; Exponent Yield Exchange scores 8
- Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses8/10 here; TermMax scores 10
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 fixed-rate yield protocol shows where it lands for you.
What will Spectra V2 cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your stake
- $32k
- Expected gross yield
- 5%
How safe is Spectra V2?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Spectra V2
Compare all 4- 4Exponent Yield Exchange4 points above · stronger on maturity handling (8 against 6)75
- 5Loopscale1 point above · stronger on maturity handling (7 against 6)72
- 7TermMax1 point below · stronger on rate lock integrity (6 against 3)70
For your setup
Find out if Spectra V2 fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Spectra V2 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 fixed-rate yield protocolNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Spectra V2 ranks #6
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (18.6 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+6.148.010#6/7Loading evidence…
263+2.504.06#5/7Loading evidence…
247+5.387.09#4/7Loading evidence…
188+4.618.010#4/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Loopscale, #5
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 69–72 and ranks #5–#7
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 Spectra V2’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 happens at maturity 6 → 7 on its ladder · passes Loopscale+172#6 → #5
Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it 3 → 5 on its ladder · passes Loopscale+274#6 → #5
The price of leaving early 7 → 9 on its ladder · passes Loopscale+274#6 → #5
Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses 8 → 10 on its ladder · passes Loopscale+273#6 → #5
What happens at maturity 6 → 5 on its ladder · TermMax passes it−169#6 → #7
Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it 3 → 2 on its ladder · TermMax passes it−169#6 → #7
The price of leaving early 7 → 6 on its ladder · TermMax passes it−169#6 → #7
Smallest climb: what happens at maturity 6 → 7 passes Loopscale, #5.
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
- What happens at maturity — 6/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it — 3/10 against a category best of 6/10
- The price of leaving early — 7/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses — 8/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- Spectra sells the cleanest fixed-rate mechanism in this category and the thinnest market to exit it in. The 1:1 redemption invariant is published, its exception is named, its loss rule is given as a formula, and all of it is confirmed on chain: previewRedeem returned exactly 1.000000 USDC per PT and getPTRate() exactly 1e27 at Base block 49,888,155. But on 2026-09-28 the protocol's own API showed a median live market carrying $1,332.62 of AMM depth, with 75.4% of all $4.54m of exit liquidity sitting in two Flare pools (stXRP and sw-sFLR) and 28 of the 41 priced markets under $10k. Buy a Spectra PT only if you intend to hold it to maturity; treat the early exit as unavailable outside the top two markets. Two things a buyer will not learn from the product page. First, the docs never say what an unredeemed PT earns after maturity — nothing, but you must infer it from the contract's rate freeze at expiry. Second, and the reason rate-lock integrity scores 3 rather than 7: a 3-of-5 Safe (v1.3.0, threshold 3, 5 owners), published by Spectra only as a fee recipient, holds ADMIN, UPGRADE, PAUSER and FEE_SETTER roles with an execution delay of ZERO, and the AccessManager maps upgradeToAndCall on the Principal Token to that admin role. No timelock stands between three signatures and an implementation change on an open position. Note also that the September 2025 Sherlock audit covered gatekeepers, the registry, the wrapper and zaps — not the core Principal Token, whose last audits were Code4rena and Pashov in early 2024 and whose repository has not been pushed since 2025-04-25. This sits inside a category consolidating rather than growing: Pendle's DefiLlama TVL fell from $8,509,165,143 on 2025-08-11 to $1,183,733,243 on 2026-08-12, an 86.1% decline read from the API. Spectra's own governance concedes the squeeze — SGP-20 passed on the finding that "Roughly $1,567 per week is emitted against about $1,522 per week of gross fees."
Competitive position
Where Spectra V2 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 / 714.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#6 / 714.0 of 30 · best 17.6
Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 78.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Spectra V2 leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- What happens at maturity#6 / 7
- Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it#5 / 7
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.
Loopscale#5 of 7 · score 72 · 1.0 point ahead
Spectra V2 leads on
- The price of leaving early7 vs 6
Loopscale leads on
- What happens at maturity7 vs 6
- Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses9 vs 8
Largest single reason Loopscale is ahead: published criteria (+1.6 display points).Scenario cost: Loopscale has no verified pricing for this scenario.
TermMax#7 of 7 · score 70 · 1.0 point behind
Spectra V2 leads on
- The price of leaving early7 vs 2
TermMax leads on
- Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it6 vs 3
- Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses10 vs 8
Largest single reason Spectra V2 is ahead: published criteria (+0.5 display points).Scenario cost: TermMax has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Exponent Yield Exchange#4 of 7 · score 75 · 4.0 points ahead
Spectra V2 leads on
- Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses8 vs 6
Exponent Yield Exchange leads on
- What happens at maturity8 vs 6
- Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it4 vs 3
- The price of leaving early8 vs 7
Largest single reason Exponent Yield Exchange is ahead: published criteria (+4.7 display points).Scenario cost: Exponent Yield Exchange has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 71 · gap 9.0Why Exactly Protocol ranks above Spectra V2
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 9.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisExactly ProtocolGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight14.017.6−9.4, 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 criterionThisExactly ProtocolPoints
What happens at maturity · w3269−3.07, worse
Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it · w2634−0.83, worse
The price of leaving early · w2479−1.54, worse
Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses · w1887+0.58, better
Net7180−9.0
Your scenario
Spectra V2 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 7 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
7 of 7 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 #7 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 happens at maturitystrength 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.Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change itstrength 3 · weight 26Report 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.The price of leaving earlystrength 7 · 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.Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy missesstrength 8 · weight 18Report 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 (Spectra V2 3/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Is the rate actually fixed, and who can change it · 26%
- Insolvency failure (Spectra V2 8/10): the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by Who owes you the fixed leg if the strategy misses · 18%
- Exit failure: you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by What happens at maturity · 32% (Spectra V2 6/10)Scored by The price of leaving early · 24% (Spectra V2 7/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, 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
- docs.spectra.finance/docs/spectra/tokenomics/fees (the old /tokenomics/fees path now redirects there), re-fetched 28 September 2026 (HTTP 200) and unchanged: under Pool Swap Fees, "Spectra collects a swap fee from all swaps on the IBT/PT pools. The collected fee is distributed the following way:" — "60% to veSPECTRA voters", "20% to LPs", "20% to Curve DAO." Under Yield Fees: "Spectra takes a 3% fee on all yield accrued by YT, including points. Points are considered to be yield, and protocols integrated on Spectra should deduct the 3% fee when distributing points to user wallets." The same page names the recipient — "Spectra DAO (Multichain): 0xe59d75C87ED608E4f5F22c9f9AFFb7b6fd02cc7C". The yield fee is confirmed on-chain: Registry 0x786Da12e9836a9ff9b7d92e8bac1C849e2ACe378 on Base returned getYieldFee() = 30000000000000000 (3e16 on a 1e18 base) and getTokenizationFee() = 0 at block 51,899,114 (28 September 2026). THE SWAP FEE LEVEL IS NOT PUBLISHED AS A NUMBER: the FAQ says only "The Spectra App automatically adjusts the pool fee based on the Target APY and maturity parameters to enable an efficient trading environment" and "Advanced users can customize the pool fee parameter through the contracts"; the rewritten Fixed Rates page lists "Pool Fee and Price Impact" among "costs already reflected in the quote". The app's pools API (app.spectra.finance/api/v1/mainnet/pools) carries a raw per-pool feeRate field — "feeRate":"4754578" on ynRWAx(USDC) 2026/10/15 — whose unit no page documents. For the MetaVault layer, dev.spectra.finance/docs/metavaults/fee-model states "MetaVaults charge a performance fee on positive yield generated during each epoch. There is no management fee or deposit/withdrawal fee.", "The maximum allowed fee is 30% (3000 bps), enforced by the MAX_FEES constant" and "feesInBps is set at vault initialization and can be changed by the owner."Spectra V2 — official page at docs.spectra.finance ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDSpectra V2 — official page at docs.spectra.finance ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum, Base, Optimism, Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Avalanche, Sonic, Flare, Hemi, Katana, HyperEVM, Monad
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Spectra V2: 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 71, #6 of 7. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 15 October 2026
2026.10.10The live-data rule names the researched market measurements a criterion reads- changed The live-data rule names a second kind of figure a score reads: a researched, dated market measurement a criterion's ladder is built on, read again on the 45-day review. /methodology/live-data lists the 14 criteria that read one; no score, rank or order changes.
- changed A saved decision is checked again on the answers the reader saved. The drift check had merged a priority suggested by the market (price swings, gas) into those answers, so a market reading could move a saved decision's #1; the published ranking never read it.
- added On every build a test reads every criterion's published ladder: one that names a market quantity or a market-data source must be declared, and every scored row of a declared criterion must carry the source and the date its figure was read.
- 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 fixed_rate_yield:spectra_v2:2026.10.18:a04e0c0443cf
Are you Spectra V2? 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.