Autofarm excels at providing a broad, multi-chain yield hub with deep integrations. Its core strength is its extensive network, supporting over 15 chains including BNB Chain, Polygon, and Avalanche, and aggregating yields from protocols like PancakeSwap, Aave, and Curve. This results in a vast selection of over 200 vaults, offering users a one-stop-shop for diversified yield farming across the DeFi ecosystem.
LABS
Comparisons
Autofarm vs. Beefy Finance
A technical comparison of two leading cross-chain yield aggregators, analyzing their vault strategies, fee structures, tokenomics, and risk profiles to inform capital deployment decisions.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction
A data-driven comparison of Autofarm and Beefy Finance, the leading cross-chain yield aggregators, to inform infrastructure decisions.
Beefy Finance takes a different approach by prioritizing capital efficiency and sophisticated yield optimization. Its strategy focuses on automated compounding strategies and gas-efficient transactions, often leveraging layer-2 solutions and sidechains. This results in a trade-off of a more curated vault selection, but with a strong emphasis on maximizing APY through frequent compounding and innovative strategies like liquidity provision optimizer (LPO) vaults on networks like Arbitrum and Optimism.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum chain coverage and vault diversity for user choice, choose Autofarm. If you prioritize peak yield optimization and gas efficiency on selected high-performance networks, choose Beefy Finance. Your decision hinges on whether breadth of access or depth of optimization aligns with your protocol's target users and technical stack.
tldr-summary
Autofarm vs. Beefy Finance
TL;DR: Key Differentiators
A data-driven breakdown of the two leading multi-chain yield optimizers. Choose based on your protocol's specific needs for capital efficiency, risk profile, and chain strategy.
01
Choose Autofarm for...
Maximum Capital Efficiency & Aggregation: Autofarm pioneered the vault aggregator model, sourcing yields from 30+ protocols like PancakeSwap, ApeSwap, and Venus. Its AutoSwap feature optimizes token routing for lower slippage. This matters for protocols seeking the absolute highest APY from a single deposit point.
30+
Integrated Protocols
02
Choose Beefy Finance for...
Deep Multi-Chain Integration & Security Focus: Beefy operates on 15+ chains (Arbitrum, Polygon, Base) with a strong security-first culture, employing multiple audits and a timelock-controlled treasury. Its BIFI staking and revenue-sharing model creates aligned incentives. This matters for teams prioritizing cross-chain deployment and a battle-tested, conservative vault architecture.
15+
Supported Chains
03
Autofarm's Trade-off
Aggregation Complexity Risk: While maximizing yield, sourcing from many protocols increases smart contract exposure. Its historical exploit on BSC (2021) underscores this model's inherent risk. This matters if your protocol's treasury mandates a minimal attack surface and prefers fewer, more audited dependencies.
04
Beefy Finance's Trade-off
Potentially Lower Peak Yields: Beefy's conservative, security-focused approach can sometimes mean slower integration of newer, higher-risk/higher-reward farms compared to aggressive aggregators. This matters for protocols willing to accept marginally higher risk for frontier yields on emerging DeFi primitives.
AUTOFARM VS. BEEFY FINANCE
Head-to-Head Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for yield aggregators on BNB Chain and beyond.
| Metric | Beefy Finance | Autofarm |
|---|---|---|
Supported Chains (Primary) | 20+ | 6 |
Total Value Locked (TVL) | $1.5B+ | $200M+ |
Average APY (BNB Chain, Top 10 Vaults) | 8-15% | 5-12% |
Native Token Utility | ||
Auto-Compounding Frequency | Multiple times per hour | Once per day |
Audit Status (Major Firms) | ||
Insurance Fund for Exploits |
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Autofarm vs. Beefy Finance: Tokenomics & Fee Structure
Direct comparison of revenue models, fee structures, and token utility for yield aggregators.
| Metric | Autofarm | Beefy Finance |
|---|---|---|
Performance Fee on Yield | 4% | 4.5% |
Treasury Fee on Harvest | 0.5% | 0% |
Native Token Buyback & Burn | ||
Native Token Staking (ve-model) | ||
Supported Blockchains | 4 | 20+ |
Deposit/Withdrawal Fees | 0% | 0% |
Auto-Compounding Frequency | Multiple times per day | Multiple times per day |
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Autofarm vs. Beefy Finance
Autofarm for Yield Optimization
Verdict: Best for multi-chain diversification and high-volume, established vaults. Strengths: Operates across 14+ chains (BSC, Polygon, Avalanche, etc.), offering a vast menu of strategies. Its AUTO tokenomics with buyback-and-burn from protocol fees can create deflationary pressure. The platform is geared towards users seeking exposure to a wide array of base yield sources like PancakeSwap, QuickSwap, and Trader Joe. Considerations: Strategy complexity and risk can vary significantly per chain and vault. The multi-chain focus means less depth on any single chain compared to specialists.
Beefy Finance for Yield Optimization
Verdict: Best for sophisticated, auto-compounding strategies and deep liquidity on select chains. Strengths: Renowned for its gas-efficient auto-compounding vaults and innovative strategy design (e.g., leveraged yield farming via partnerships). Strong community governance via BIFI token staking and revenue sharing. Often has higher TVL concentration on chains like Fantom, Polygon, and Avalanche, indicating deep trust. Considerations: Supports fewer chains (~10) than Autofarm. The focus is on quality and complexity of strategies over sheer quantity of vaults.
risk-profile
Autofarm vs. Beefy Finance
Risk Profile & Security Posture
A technical breakdown of security models, audit history, and operational risks for two leading cross-chain yield optimizers.
01
Autofarm: Multi-Chain Strategy Diversification
Operational Risk Mitigation: Deploys across 10+ chains (BNB Chain, Polygon, Avalanche). A failure on one chain does not cascade to others, isolating risk. This matters for protocols seeking broad exposure without single-point-of-failure reliance.
Established Track Record: One of the earliest yield aggregators, launched in 2020. Has processed over $9B in total volume, demonstrating battle-tested smart contracts through multiple market cycles. This longevity is critical for institutional due diligence.
02
Autofarm: Centralization & Governance Concerns
Admin Key Control: Historically relied on a multi-sig for critical upgrades and vault migrations, introducing a centralization vector. While common, this contrasts with more progressive, time-locked governance models.
Protocol-Owned Liquidity Reliance: The $AUTO token's utility is heavily tied to protocol-owned liquidity and buyback mechanisms. A decline in TVL or fee revenue directly impacts the security budget for ongoing audits and bug bounties, creating a cyclical risk.
03
Beefy Finance: Progressive Decentralization & Defense-in-Depth
Time-Locked, Multisig Governance: All contract changes are executed via a 10/16 Gnosis Safe on Ethereum with a 48-hour timelock. This allows for community scrutiny and reaction before any upgrade, a gold standard for trust minimization.
Comprehensive Audit Stack: Maintains a rigorous audit cycle with top firms (Certik, Peckshield) and runs continuous bug bounty programs on Immunefi. This layered approach matters for protocols where capital preservation is the absolute priority.
04
Beefy Finance: Complexity & Integration Risk
Strategy Complexity Risk: Operates 250+ vaults across 15+ chains, each with unique yield strategies (LPs, lending, staking). This vast surface area increases the potential for a niche exploit in a less-audited, chain-specific integration (e.g., a new DEX on an L2).
Gas Cost on Ethereum: While multi-chain, its core governance and $BIFI staking are on Ethereum L1. Executing governance actions or claiming rewards can be prohibitively expensive for small holders, potentially reducing active security participation.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict & Decision Framework
A data-driven breakdown to guide your protocol's choice between two leading yield aggregators.
Autofarm excels at providing a broad, multi-chain yield hub with deep liquidity pools, particularly on BNB Chain and Polygon. Its core strength is offering a vast selection of over 200 vaults and a unified dashboard for managing positions across 10+ supported chains. For example, its historical TVL dominance on BNB Chain, once exceeding $2 billion, demonstrates its established liquidity network and user trust within that ecosystem. This makes it a powerful tool for protocols seeking maximum exposure and farming options across a diversified portfolio.
Beefy Finance takes a different approach by prioritizing security, gas efficiency, and sophisticated yield optimization strategies. This results in a more curated, security-first platform with features like multi-chain deployments via its unique BIFI tokenomics, automatic compounding frequency optimization, and rigorous vault audits. The trade-off is a potentially smaller absolute number of vaults compared to Autofarm, but each is fine-tuned for optimal APY and risk management, appealing to protocols where capital preservation and operational security are paramount.
The key trade-off: If your protocol's priority is maximizing reach and offering users the widest array of farming opportunities across many chains, choose Autofarm. Its extensive vault catalog and multi-chain dashboard are ideal for growth-focused, liquidity-aggregating applications. If you prioritize security, gas-cost predictability, and sophisticated, automated yield strategies on a core set of high-quality vaults, choose Beefy Finance. Its optimized compounding mechanics and strong security focus make it the superior dependency for protocols managing large, sensitive treasuries or building user-facing products where reliability is critical.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall