Skip to main content

Head-to-head · Lending & Borrowing

Morpho vs Compound Morpho leads by 4 points.

Morpho scores 4 points above Compound, led by oracle liquidation price and blast radius. Morpho ranks #3 and Compound #6 of 8 published lending & borrowing. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.

Morpho78
Compound74
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #3 and #6 of 8
Methodology v2026.10.18Ranking snapshot Evidence verified through 4 published criteria5 score dimensions Receipt #cc-VS-MORPHO-VS-COMPOUND-63e774c1
Published verdictRanking snapshot 3 November 2026

Morpho leads by 4 points

Morpho scores 4 points above Compound, led by oracle liquidation price and blast radius.

Morpho #3 of 878
Compound #6 of 874
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termMorpho leads on 2 of 4 published criteria; Compound on 1. The terms sum to the gap.
TermMorphoCompoundWeightPoints
Oracle liquidation price7/106/107.7+2.0for Morpho+1.0 of 32
Blast radius9/107/105.8+3.0for Morpho+1.5 of 32
Shortfall record7/108/104.8−1.2for Compound−0.6 of 32
Net of the terms+3.7
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread−0.1
Reproduced gap+3.6
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below7874+4.0

Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.

Quick facts

At a glance

3 of 4 rows read the same for both.
FactMorphoCompound
PricingSnapshotA Morpho depositor's cost is the vault curator's fee. The Vault V2 page (https://docs.morpho.org/learn/concepts/vault-v2/, fetched 28 September 2026) caps it: "Supports both a performance fee (up to 50% on yield) and a management fee (up to 5% on total assets)." Live values are API fields, not page text: https://api.morpho.org/graphql on 28 September 2026 returned performanceFee 0 and managementFee 0.009999999973584 on Paypal USD Main, 0.1 and 0 on Sentora RLUSD Main, and 0.15 and 0 on Sentora PRIME Main - three of the four largest Ethereum Vault V2s. On all three the setPerformanceFee and setManagementFee timelocks read 0 seconds, so the curator can change the fee without notice. Supply rates float with each market's AdaptiveCurveIRM, so no fixed APY is quoted.Compound III charges no subscription, listing or curator fee; the protocol's take is the spread between separate supply and borrow curves that governance sets. The Interest Rates page (https://docs.compound.finance/interest-rates/, fetched 28 September 2026): "Users with a positive balance of the base asset earn interest, denominated in the base asset, based on a supply rate model; users with a negative balance pay interest based on a borrow rate model. These are separate interest rate models, and set by governance." Compound publishes the size of that spread only per proposal on its forum. For the Ethereum WETH Comet, Gauntlet's 5 August 2026 post (https://www.comp.xyz/t/ethereum-weth-comet-borrow-rate-irm-updates/7999, fetched 28 September 2026) states "Compound v3 has no reserve factor parameter" and prints the implied reserve factor as "0.00%" at the kink and "10.00%" at full utilisation, adding "The comet currently retains none of the interest borrowers pay at its optimal utilization." Comets being wound down are repriced by the same route: a 2 September 2026 forum proposal sets the Ethereum wstETH Comet's supply rate to zero ahead of deprecation. Live per-market APYs are on-chain only, so no APY is quoted.
Asset coverageEditorial——
Region fitSnapshotglobalglobal
Custody modelEditorialNon-custodial: no company holds the coinsNon-custodial: no company holds the coins
From the published criteria

Which should you pick?

Morpho

78#3 of 8
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Morpho if oracle liquidation price matters most — it scores 7/10 to Compound's 6/10 there (weight 32).
Strength
Rate authorship — 9/10
Tradeoff
Before you supply, run Morpho's own bad-debt query with the listed filter OFF — and note that the filter, not the risk, is what changes. Morpho publishes a per-market outstanding bad-debt figure through https://api.morpho.org/graphql, which is more than most of this category does, but the curated view lies by omission: across the 590 markets Morpho marks listed, outstanding bad debt on 2026-08-17 was $0.00 against $4.42bn of borrows; drop that one flag and the same API at the same moment reports 27 markets carrying $255,015,878.47, every single one of them listed=false — $88.2M in wstUSR/USDC on Ethereum, $86.9M in xUSD/USDC on Arbitrum One, $28.8M in RLP/USDC and $23.0M in sdeUSD/USDC on World Chain, a chain on which Morpho has no listed markets at all. Morpho has published no post-mortem for any of it; its own newsletter for the month those losses formed (https://morpho.org/blog/morpho-effect-november-2025, 01 Dec 2025) does not contain the words 'bad debt', 'loss', 'deficit' or 'incident' once (fourteen such terms were checked, each zero times) and instead reports that "Curators are generating $300,000 in fees per week". The mechanism that produced those numbers is the one you are buying: Morpho does not choose oracles — "Market curators (not Morpho) are responsible for selecting and implementing appropriate oracles for their markets." — and it explicitly supports "Fixed-Price Oracles" that report a constant, so a collateral token can be marked at $1 in the contract while trading at five cents. Morpho documents exactly what happens if that feed REVERTS (borrow and liquidate stop, lenders and repaying borrowers can still exit) at https://docs.morpho.org/curate/concepts/security-considerations, but nothing at all catches a feed that keeps answering with the wrong number, and the kill switch that would is something the same page tells the CURATOR to build. Two smaller things to check before signing: if your vault was minted by the MetaMorpho Factory V1.1 it "do[es] not realize bad debt", so its share price will look clean while a loss sits inside it and the first person out is paid at your expense; and on three of the four largest Ethereum Vault V2s — which share one curator address and one owner address and held ~$1.05bn between them on 2026-09-28 — setPerformanceFee and setManagementFee carry a 0-second timelock, so the 50%-of-yield and 5%-of-assets caps can be reached with no notice at all, whatever the docs say about "a window to exit".

Compound

74#6 of 8
Pick it when
Pick Compound if shortfall record matters most — it scores 8/10 to Morpho's 7/10 there (weight 20).
Strength
Rate authorship — 9/10
Tradeoff
Compound now has one of the cleanest RATE disclosures in this pool and one of the thinnest ORACLE disclosures, and a buyer who conflates the two will misprice it. Four specific traps. First, the page that tells you what liquidates you — https://docs.compound.finance/liquidation/ — never names an oracle at all ("This function uses the price returned by the protocol’s price feed"); Chainlink is named two clicks away on the helper-functions page, and a machine check of all nine Compound doc pages returns zero occurrences of deviation, heartbeat, staleness, median, fallback, killswitch or price bound. The one bounded feed Compound ever ran — the multisig-settable min/max and constant-price override added to rsETH after the 18 April 2026 Kelp bridge exploit — was REVERTED in May 2026 via Proposal 586, so as of today no Compound market carries a numeric price bound. Second, the docs registry is a snapshot, not live state: stamped 2026-02-28, it still advertises rsETH on the Ethereum USDC Comet at 85% borrow CF and a 1,500-token supply cap when the on-chain cap has since been set to 0, and it still lists ten mainnet networks when six of them — Polygon, Unichain, Linea, Mantle, Ronin and Scroll — are approved for deprecation with supply caps zeroed, collateral factors halved and supply rates being set to 0%. Read the Comet and the forum, not the docs table. Third, the one-week governance timelock that makes Compound's rate authorship trustworthy does NOT cover the emergency path: the Community Multi-Sig pause guardian can freeze withdrawals instantly (it did so across six networks in April 2026), and a 0% collateral factor mechanically locks collateral until debt is fully repaid — both disclosed on the forum, neither in the docs. Fourth, the named backstop is real but shrinking and undocumented at the tail: reserves on the Ethereum WETH Comet fell from 921.22 to 908.46 WETH between 10 May and 5 August 2026 because the comet "retains none of the interest borrowers pay at its optimal utilization", no Compound page says what happens once reserves are exhausted, and Compound discloses its losses well on comp.xyz and not at all on either page titled Security.
Self-identify in 10 seconds

Which one is actually for you?

MorphoLeads

Choose Morpho if oracle liquidation price matters most

  • Oracle liquidation price: 7/10 against 6/10 for Compound (weight 32)
  • Blast radius: 9/10 against 7/10 for Compound (weight 24)
Compound

Choose Compound if shortfall record matters most

  • Shortfall record: 8/10 against 7/10 for Morpho (weight 20)
Criterion by criterion

Scorecard

Published criteria · weight in points of 868 of 8 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology

Oracle liquidation price

by 1 of 10weight 7.7 of 86Morpho leads
Morpho7 out of 10
Compound6 out of 10

Rate authorship

weight 5.8 of 86Tie
Morpho9 out of 10
Compound9 out of 10

Blast radius

by 2 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Morpho leads
Morpho9 out of 10
Compound7 out of 10

Shortfall record

by 1 of 10weight 4.8 of 86Compound leads
Morpho7 out of 10
Compound8 out of 10

Score dimensions

weights sum to 86

The published score is five dimensions, each weighted for the category. "Published criteria" is the criteria block above; the other four are the engine's own terms — availability, friction, trust record, measured data. Each bar is one side's points out of that dimension's maximum; the weight beside the name is its points of the 86-point weighted total. The published criteria above can fill 24 of the block’s 30. A weight marked “constant here” belongs to a dimension every ranked product in the category holds at the same value: it still counts in the total, and it orders nothing here.

Availabilityweight 20 of 86 · constant here
Morpho14/20Compound14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Morpho19.1/30Compound17.7/30
Morpho leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Morpho2.7/10Compound2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86 · constant here
Morpho3.2/8Compound3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86 · constant here
Morpho8.3/18Compound8.3/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order

Choose Morpho unless the term Compound leads on is the one you are buying.

Pick Compound if shortfall record matters most — it scores 8/10 to Morpho's 7/10 there (weight 20).

The published order weighs every criterion the same way for everyone. To weigh them your way, run .

From the published order

Next best action

If this isn't your case

Other matchups worth comparing

How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
  • Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.
    Scored by Who sets your rate — a utilisation curve or a curator? · 24% (Morpho 9/10, Compound 9/10)
  • Oracle failure: a wrong price or outcome liquidates or settles a position.
    Scored by What price gets you liquidated, and how far can it drift? · 32% (Morpho 7/10, Compound 6/10)
  • 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% (Morpho 9/10, Compound 7/10)
    Scored by Has it lost lender money before, and did it publish it? · 20% (Morpho 7/10, Compound 8/10)
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.
Questions

Frequently asked questions

Morpho scores 4 points above Compound, led by oracle liquidation price and blast radius. Published scores, out of 100: Morpho 78 (rank 3 of 8 lending & borrowing), Compound 74 (rank 6 of 8).

Related pages

Go deeper

Reviewed Next review by Methodology v2026.10.18
How this page is reviewed

Reviewed means both products compared here 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

Free advisorNo signup needed

Skip the comparison — get your best match

Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — with rationale, tradeoffs, and a path to monitor the decision.

No signupFree first pass · PrivateNo spam · No account

Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research

Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research