Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
LABS
Comparisons

Gamma vs Steer Protocol

A technical analysis comparing Gamma and Steer Protocol, two leading on-chain automated liquidity managers for concentrated liquidity positions. This guide evaluates core architecture, strategy diversity, fee models, and network support to help CTOs and protocol architects make an informed infrastructure decision.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS

Introduction: The Battle for Automated Liquidity Efficiency

A data-driven comparison of Gamma and Steer Protocol, two leading platforms for concentrated liquidity management on EVM chains.

Gamma excels at providing a robust, multi-chain vault infrastructure for passive liquidity providers (LPs). Its strength lies in deep integration with major DEXs like Uniswap V3 and its proven track record, managing over $200M in Total Value Locked (TVL) across Ethereum, Polygon, and Arbitrum. Gamma's automated vaults handle complex rebalancing and fee compounding, abstracting away the active management required for concentrated positions.

Steer Protocol takes a different approach by offering a modular, developer-first platform for creating custom, data-driven liquidity strategies. This results in a trade-off: less out-of-the-box simplicity for far greater flexibility. Steer enables protocols to deploy hyper-optimized, on-chain automated market makers (AMMs) with strategies that react to real-time price feeds, volatility, or specific protocol incentives, moving beyond simple range management.

The key trade-off: If your priority is secure, high-yield passive management for established assets on major L2s, choose Gamma. If you prioritize building bespoke, adaptive liquidity solutions or need granular control over strategy logic for a novel token, choose Steer Protocol.

tldr-summary
Gamma vs Steer Protocol

TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance

Key strengths and trade-offs for DeFi's leading concentrated liquidity management protocols.

01

Gamma's Strength: Multi-Chain Liquidity Hub

Broadest chain support: Deployed on 15+ chains including Ethereum, Arbitrum, Polygon, and Base. This matters for protocols needing a single, unified management interface across a fragmented multi-chain portfolio.

15+
Supported Chains
02

Gamma's Strength: Sophisticated Strategy Engine

Advanced rebalancing logic: Features like Just-in-Time (JIT) liquidity and volatility-adjusted ranges. This matters for maximizing fee yield in volatile markets and competing with professional market makers.

03

Steer's Strength: Hyper-Optimized Gas & Cost

Lower operational overhead: Native integration with Gelato for gas-efficient, automated rebalancing. This matters for projects deploying high-frequency strategies or managing thousands of positions where gas costs are prohibitive.

<$0.01
Avg. Rebalance Cost (L2)
04

Steer's Strength: Modular & Composable Vaults

Vaults as building blocks: Strategies are deployable as standalone, composable smart contracts. This matters for protocols that want to embed active liquidity management directly into their dApp (e.g., a lending protocol's own liquidity pool).

05

Choose Gamma If...

You are a large DAO or institution managing liquidity across multiple chains and need:

  • A single dashboard for all positions.
  • The most granular control over complex rebalancing logic.
  • A battle-tested system with deep integrations (e.g., The Graph, Chainlink).
06

Choose Steer If...

You are a developer or new protocol prioritizing:

  • Low-cost, set-and-forget automation on Arbitrum, Polygon, or Avalanche.
  • Composability to bake active liquidity into your product.
  • Rapid iteration with customizable, on-chain strategy logic.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON

Gamma vs Steer Protocol: Head-to-Head Comparison

Direct comparison of key metrics and features for concentrated liquidity management protocols.

Metric / FeatureGammaSteer Protocol

Primary Deployment Chain

Polygon, Arbitrum, Celo

Arbitrum, Polygon, Mantle

Supported DEXs

Uniswap V3, QuickSwap, Camelot

Uniswap V3, PancakeSwap V3, THENA

Active Strategy Count

100+

30+

Native Token Required

Strategy Automation

Dynamic Range (Gamma V2)

Custom Logic via Smart Vaults

Avg. Strategy APY (30d)

15-40%

10-35%

Protocol Fee on Yield

10%

10%

pros-cons-a
Gamma vs Steer Protocol

Gamma: Strengths and Trade-offs

Key architectural and operational differences for protocol architects choosing a liquidity management framework.

01

Gamma's Strength: Capital Efficiency

Concentrated Liquidity V3 Specialist: Gamma provides advanced, automated strategies for Uniswap V3, enabling dynamic fee tier selection and range optimization. This matters for protocols seeking to maximize yield on a fixed capital base, especially for volatile or trending assets.

Up to 4000x
Capital Efficiency vs V2
02

Gamma's Trade-off: Protocol Scope

Primarily an Automation Layer: Gamma focuses on optimizing existing AMM liquidity (Uniswap V3, PancakeSwap V3). It is not a standalone protocol for creating new market types like order books or exotic derivatives. This matters for teams needing a full-stack DEX infrastructure rather than a yield optimizer.

04

Steer's Trade-off: Development Overhead

Requires Smart Contract Expertise: While flexible, creating effective strategies on Steer demands significant development and auditing resources. This matters for projects with limited engineering bandwidth that prefer a managed, strategy-as-a-service model like Gamma's.

pros-cons-b
Gamma vs Steer Protocol

Steer Protocol: Strengths and Trade-offs

A data-driven comparison for CTOs and architects evaluating automated liquidity management solutions. Focus on core differentiators in composability, execution, and ecosystem fit.

01

Gamma's Strength: Battle-Tested & High TVL

Established market leader: Secured over $1.5B in Total Value Locked (TVL) across 20+ chains, including Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon. This deep liquidity and multi-year track record matter for protocols prioritizing capital efficiency and risk mitigation for large-scale deployments.

$1.5B+
Peak TVL
20+
Chains
02

Gamma's Trade-off: Limited Composability

Proprietary strategy vaults: Gamma's liquidity pools are often closed systems, limiting direct integration with external DeFi logic. This matters for protocols needing custom, on-chain rebalancing triggers (e.g., based on oracle price, governance vote) or tight coupling with other smart contracts like lending markets or perps.

03

Steer's Strength: Hyper-Composable Infrastructure

Modular, on-chain automation: Steer provides a network of keeper nodes that execute arbitrary logic (via Solidity scripts) for rebalancing, limit orders, and yield strategies. This matters for protocols building novel, logic-intensive AMMs (like concentrated liquidity managers) or needing to react to real-time on-chain events beyond simple time intervals.

100%
On-Chain Logic
04

Steer's Trade-off: Newer & Lower TVL

Smaller liquidity footprint: As a newer protocol, Steer's TVL is significantly lower than Gamma's, which can impact pool depth and slippage for large trades. This matters for established DeFi applications that require immediate, deep liquidity and cannot bootstrap their own.

05

Choose Gamma For:

  • Set-and-forget liquidity provisioning on major DEXes like Uniswap V3.
  • Maximizing yield from established, audited strategy vaults.
  • Enterprise deployments where proven security and scale are non-negotiable.
06

Choose Steer For:

  • Building a custom AMM or dynamic strategy (e.g., an options vault, reactive liquidity).
  • Protocols that are their own liquidity destination and need embedded management.
  • Research-heavy teams willing to trade some ecosystem maturity for maximal composability and control.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY

Decision Framework: Optimal Use Cases

Gamma for DeFi

Verdict: The specialized, battle-tested choice for concentrated liquidity management. Strengths:

  • Deep Liquidity Integration: Directly powers major DEXs like Uniswap V3 and PancakeSwap V3. Its contracts are the de facto standard for CLMM vaults.
  • Advanced Strategy Library: Offers sophisticated, pre-audited strategies for volatile and stable pairs (e.g., volatility harvesting, stablecoin yield).
  • Proven Security: Audited by top firms; manages billions in TVL with a long operational history. Weaknesses:
  • Complexity: Requires deeper understanding of CLMM mechanics (ticks, ranges).
  • Ethereum-Centric: Primarily focused on EVM chains, with less native support for Solana or other ecosystems.

Steer Protocol for DeFi

Verdict: The flexible, multi-chain orchestrator for dynamic and cross-chain strategies. Strengths:

  • Multi-Chain & Multi-DEX: Natively deploys liquidity strategies across 10+ chains (Arbitrum, Polygon, Base) and DEXs (Uniswap, PancakeSwap, Trader Joe).
  • Modular & Composable: Functions as a "strategy layer" that can be integrated into other DeFi protocols for automated treasury management.
  • Gas Efficiency: Optimized for frequent rebalancing with lower on-chain execution costs on L2s. Weaknesses:
  • Smaller TVL Footprint: Newer entrant with less total value locked compared to Gamma's established vaults.
  • Strategy Maturity: While innovative, its bespoke strategies have a shorter public track record.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS

Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation

A data-driven conclusion on choosing between Gamma and Steer Protocol for on-chain liquidity management.

Gamma excels at providing battle-tested, capital-efficient liquidity management for established, high-volume assets on EVM chains like Ethereum and Polygon. Its vaults, which employ concentrated liquidity strategies, have secured over $1.2 billion in Total Value Locked (TVL) and are trusted by major protocols like Uniswap V3. For example, its ETH/USDC vaults on Arbitrum and Optimism consistently generate competitive yields by dynamically adjusting price ranges based on market volatility, making it a robust, low-maintenance choice for blue-chip pairs.

Steer Protocol takes a different approach by offering a modular, developer-first infrastructure for building custom, data-driven automated strategies. This results in a trade-off between out-of-the-box simplicity and ultimate flexibility. Steer's strength lies in its ability to deploy bespoke vaults for long-tail assets, leverage custom oracles like Pyth or Chainlink for rebalancing logic, and integrate directly into dApps via its SDK. This makes it ideal for protocols needing tailored liquidity solutions for novel tokenomics or specific market-making conditions.

The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing yield on major assets with minimal development overhead, choose Gamma. Its optimized, audited vaults offer a proven, set-and-forget solution. If you prioritize flexibility and need to build custom, logic-driven liquidity strategies for niche assets or specific protocol needs, choose Steer Protocol. Its infrastructure-as-code model empowers teams to innovate beyond standard AMM parameters.

ENQUIRY

Get In Touch
today.

Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.

NDA Protected
24h Response
Directly to Engineering Team
10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall
NDA Protected Directly to Engineering Team