Provider at a glance
- Category
- Restaking
- Entity
- All 2 Swell products
- Official website
- swellnetwork.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 66 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Swell (rswETH)
EigenLayer liquid restaking token
Restaking
#6 Overall
Ranked #6 of 7 restaking in the published ranking
66
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Swell (rswETH) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one?7/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide?5/10 here; the category best is 8
- What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it?7/10 here; the category best is 9
- Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today?2/10 here; Puffer Finance (pufETH) scores 5
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Europe, Asia, Latin America, Africa, Middle East & North Africa, Canada, Australia.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best restaking protocol shows where it lands for you.
What will Swell (rswETH) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your stake
- $32k
- Expected gross yield
- 5%
How safe is Swell (rswETH)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Swell (rswETH)
Compare all 4- 4Puffer Finance (pufETH)4 points above · stronger on dependency currency (5 against 2)70
- 5Renzo (ezETH)1 point above · stronger on dependency currency (5 against 2)67
- 7Kelp DAO (rsETH)3 points below · stronger on dependency currency (4 against 2)63
For your setup
Find out if Swell (rswETH) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Swell (rswETH) 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 restaking protocolNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Swell (rswETH) 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 (18.0 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 1 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
345+5.445.08#3/7Loading evidence…
267+5.827.07#1/7Loading evidence…
267+5.827.09#3/7Loading evidence…
142+0.905.05#7/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Renzo (ezETH), #5
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 64–68 and ranks #5–#6
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 Swell (rswETH)’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 exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide? 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes Renzo (ezETH)+168#6 → #5
How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one? 7 → 8 on its ladder · passes Renzo (ezETH)+168#6 → #5
What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it? 7 → 8 on its ladder · passes Renzo (ezETH)+168#6 → #5
Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today? 2 → 4 on its ladder · passes Renzo (ezETH)+268#6 → #5
What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide? 5 → 3 on its ladder · Kelp DAO (rsETH) passes it−262#6 → #7
How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one? 7 → 5 on its ladder · Kelp DAO (rsETH) passes it−263#6 → #7
What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it? 7 → 5 on its ladder · Kelp DAO (rsETH) passes it−263#6 → #7
Smallest climb: “What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide?” 5 → 6 passes Renzo (ezETH), #5.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one? — 7/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide? — 5/10 against a category best of 8/10
- What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it? — 7/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today? — 2/10 against a category best of 5/10
Record watch-outs
- Read this before committing: the contract is live and redeems, but the team has left. Swell has redirected the company to Faro on Hyperliquid because "The restaking ecosystem has matured more slowly than anticipated", it shut its own L2 on 30 June 2026, its last blog post of any kind was 28 April 2026, and every risk, FAQ, bug-bounty and AVS-selection page renders a last-updated stamp of two years. The homepage was nonetheless republished on 29 July 2026 still advertising rswETH as securing a chain that no longer runs, and still printing a TVL of $292,353,232 against $32,171,919 on DefiLlama on 2026-09-28 — 9.09x — and an APR of 2.63% against about 0.56% a year realised on-chain between 2026-08-16 and 2026-09-28. Its user counts contradict each other on the same page. Nothing here says your ETH is at risk today: the withdrawal disclosure is genuinely good, the 28-day worst case sits above EigenLayer's 14-day floor, the fee is 10% of rewards and nothing on principal, the eight node operators are named with their EigenLayer addresses, the oracle is named, and no depositor-loss event is on record — including through the quarter a direct peer lost $292M. What it says is that no one is minding the store: the AVS set your capital ultimately secures is still an empty page marked "More soon" two years on, no slasher, veto window or maximum slash fraction appears anywhere in 101 documentation pages, and the vendor publishes no pause or upgrade authority at all. On that last point, do not assume there is none. On chain, rswETH is an upgradeable EIP-1967 proxy whose ProxyAdmin (0xd750b84845f1cadfeac63f96ec74635e949bfd14) is owned by a timelock (0xba829003e6b5dd858fbed3945719939a6dc3073b) with delay() = 604800 seconds — exactly 7 days — controlled by a 4-of-7 Gnosis Safe v1.3.0 (0x20fdf47509c5efc0e1101e3ce443691781c17f90). Seven keys can still rewrite this contract on a week's notice, that week is shorter than the 28-day exit the vendor itself publishes, and you will not learn any of it from Swell. Treat rswETH as a position to exit in an orderly way, not a position to open. Note also that the vendor's own terms bar U.S. persons from this exact product, and name the counterparty as LD Technologies Foundation, a Panama company.
Competitive position
Where Swell (rswETH) 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#5 / 712.0 of 20 · best 14.0
Published criteria#5 / 713.5 of 30 · best 17.4
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 Swell (rswETH) leads
- What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide?#3 / 7
- How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one?#1 / 7
- What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it?#3 / 7
Where it trails
- Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today?#7 / 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.
Renzo (ezETH)#5 of 7 · score 67 · 1.0 point ahead
Swell (rswETH) leads on
- What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it?7 vs 6
Renzo (ezETH) leads on
- Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today?5 vs 2
Largest single reason Renzo (ezETH) is ahead: published criteria (+1.0 display points).Scenario cost: Renzo (ezETH) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Kelp DAO (rsETH)#7 of 7 · score 63 · 3.0 points behind
Swell (rswETH) leads on
- How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one?7 vs 3
- What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it?7 vs 5
Kelp DAO (rsETH) leads on
- Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today?4 vs 2
Largest single reason Swell (rswETH) is ahead: published criteria (+8.1 display points).Scenario cost: Kelp DAO (rsETH) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Puffer Finance (pufETH)#4 of 7 · score 70 · 4.0 points ahead
Swell (rswETH) leads on
- What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide?5 vs 4
- What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it?7 vs 6
Puffer Finance (pufETH) leads on
- Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today?5 vs 2
Largest single reason Puffer Finance (pufETH) is ahead: availability (+5.2 display points).Scenario cost: Puffer Finance (pufETH) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 66 · gap 14.0Why EigenLayer (EigenCloud) native restaking ranks above Swell (rswETH)
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 14.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisEigenLayer (EigenCloud) native restakingGap share
Availability · 23% weight12.014.0−5.2, worse
Published criteria · 35% weight13.516.9−8.8, 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 criterionThisEigenLayer (EigenCloud) native restakingPoints
What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide? · w3458−3.26, worse
Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today? · w1425−1.34, worse
Net6680−14.0
Your scenario
Swell (rswETH) 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 #6 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 exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide?strength 5 · weight 34Report 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 long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one?strength 7 · 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.What has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it?strength 7 · 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.Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today?strength 2 · weight 14Report 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 has actually gone wrong here, what did it cost, and did the vendor own it? · 26% (Swell (rswETH) 7/10)Scored by Does the wrapper tell me what it runs on, and is what it tells me still true today? · 14% (Swell (rswETH) 2/10)
- Control failure (Swell (rswETH) 5/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by What exactly can be taken from me, and who gets to decide? · 34%
- Exit failure (Swell (rswETH) 7/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by How long until I actually have my ETH back on the worst day, not the good one? · 26%
Not assessed by this ranking: Insolvency 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
- "The following table details the current distribution of total rewards earned for all parties involved." — Staker "90%", Node Operator "5%", Swell DAO Treasury "5%", Total "100%" (https://
docs .swellnetwork .io /swell-staking /rsweth-liquid-restaking /liquid-restaking-rewards-and-fees, fetched 28 September 2026). The page still carries the body-text stamp "Updated 26.01.2024" and renders "Last updated 2 years ago". On withdrawals the vendor FAQ states: "Swell doesn't charge a fee for withdrawals, but withdrawals are subject to Ethereum gas fees." (https:// docs .swellnetwork .io /swell-staking /faqs, fetched 28 September 2026). No deposit fee is published on either page. Arithmetic, not a printed figure: the node-operator and DAO cuts together are a ten percent take from staking/restaking rewards, not from principal. Both docs pages answer HTTP 403 to a plain request and were read over HTTP/1.1 with a browser user-agent.Swell (rswETH) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDSwell (rswETH) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum
- Markets served
- europe, asia, latam, africa, mena, ca, au
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- NOT global, and the exclusion is the vendor's own, not an inference. https://
www .swellnetwork .io /legal /terms-of-service states: "U.S. persons, including residents and entities incorporated or organized in the United States, are prohibited from accessing or using certain specific services offered by Swell." and names the restricted services explicitly — "These restricted services include the liquid staking and liquid restaking of ETH, wBTC, swETH, rswETH and swBTC" — i.e. rswETH itself. The same page bars persons "Located in, under the control of, or nationals or residents of any country subject to United Nations sanctions, United States embargo, or HM Treasury's financial sanctions regime, including but not limited to Belarus, Central African Republic, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Myanmar, North Korea, Russia, the regions of Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and Zimbabwe (collectively, "Restricted Territories")" and sets an unusual age floor: "Be at least 21 years old." The africa and mena buckets are therefore partial, not clean. The same page names the counterparty: Swell is "operated by or on behalf of LD Technologies Foundation, a company incorporated in the Republic of Panama." The token is a permissionless ERC-20 and these are contractual terms on the vendor's interface, not a technical block; no licence, registration or audit is asserted for this product and complianceLevel stays minimal.
Legal entity on file: Swell, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Swell (rswETH): 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 66, #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 restaking:swell-restaking:2026.10.18:40c0e4edee69
Are you Swell (rswETH)? 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.