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

Stride vs pSTAKE: Cosmos Ecosystem Liquid Staking

A technical analysis comparing Stride and pSTAKE for liquid staking derivatives across the Cosmos ecosystem. This guide evaluates IBC-native architecture, governance alignment, multi-asset support, and security models for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS

Introduction: The Interchain Liquid Staking Dilemma

Choosing a liquid staking provider in the Cosmos ecosystem is a critical infrastructure decision that balances native integration against multi-chain flexibility.

Stride excels at deep, native integration within the Cosmos ecosystem because it operates as a dedicated, app-specific blockchain (appchain). This architecture, secured by its own validator set and leveraging Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC), provides optimized performance and direct governance for stakers of assets like ATOM, OSMO, and INJ. Its dominance is reflected in a Total Value Locked (TVL) exceeding $150M, making it the largest liquid staking protocol in Cosmos by a significant margin.

pSTAKE takes a different approach by building as a multi-chain, smart contract-based protocol. Initially launched on Persistence (a Cosmos SDK chain) and expanding to Ethereum and BNB Chain, it offers a unified experience for staking assets like ATOM, BNB, and ETH. This strategy results in a trade-off: it provides broader chain accessibility and leverages established DeFi ecosystems like Ethereum, but can introduce additional layers of complexity and potential smart contract risk compared to a native appchain model.

The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing security, yield, and sovereignty within the Cosmos IBC ecosystem, choose Stride. Its appchain design and massive TVL offer proven, optimized infrastructure. If you prioritize managing staked assets across multiple ecosystems (Cosmos, Ethereum, BSC) from a single interface, choose pSTAKE. Its multi-chain architecture is better for portfolios that are not exclusively Cosmos-native.

tldr-summary
STRIDE VS PSTAKE

TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance

Key strengths and trade-offs for Cosmos liquid staking protocols.

01

Stride: Native Interchain Integration

Deep Cosmos SDK integration: Stride is a purpose-built, app-specific blockchain (Zone) for liquid staking. This provides native IBC compatibility for stTokens, enabling seamless use across 50+ IBC-connected chains like Osmosis and Neutron. This matters for protocols building multi-chain DeFi applications.

50+
IBC Chains
02

Stride: Governance & Decentralization

Community-owned protocol: Stride is governed by its native STRD token holders. This allows the community to vote on critical parameters like supported assets, fee structures, and security models. This matters for users and DAOs prioritizing decentralized, credibly neutral infrastructure over a corporate product.

03

pSTAKE: Multi-Chain Strategy

Beyond Cosmos deployment: While strong on Cosmos, pSTAKE also offers liquid staking for BNB Chain, Ethereum, and Persistence. This provides a unified experience for users with cross-ecosystem portfolios. This matters for institutions or large holders looking to consolidate liquid staking positions across multiple major L1s.

4
Major Chains
04

pSTAKE: Institutional-Grade Features

Enterprise-focused tooling: Developed by Persistence One, pSTAKE offers features like slashing insurance (via third-party providers) and deep integrations with custodians and wallets. This matters for funds, validators, and high-net-worth individuals requiring risk mitigation and professional-grade interfaces.

HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON

Stride vs pSTAKE: Liquid Staking Comparison

Direct comparison of key technical and economic metrics for Cosmos liquid staking protocols.

MetricStridepSTAKE

Native Chain

Stride Zone (Appchain)

Persistence (Appchain)

Supported Assets

ATOM, OSMO, INJ, DYDX, etc.

ATOM, OSMO, STARS, XPRT

Liquid Token (stToken)

stATOM, stOSMO, etc.

stkATOM, stkOSMO, etc.

Unbonding Period

21-28 days (source chain dependent)

21-28 days (source chain dependent)

Slashing Protection

Governance Participation with stToken

Protocol Revenue Model

10% of staking rewards

10% of staking rewards

Total Value Locked (TVL)

$150M+

$50M+

pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS

Stride vs pSTAKE: Cosmos Ecosystem Liquid Staking

Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading Cosmos liquid staking solutions. Choose based on your protocol's need for native integration, yield strategy, or multi-chain reach.

01

Stride: Native Zone Integration

Specific advantage: Stride operates as a sovereign Cosmos app-chain ("zone") with IBC-native stTokens. This matters for protocols building natively on Cosmos as it ensures seamless composability with IBC-enabled DeFi apps like Osmosis and Mars Protocol. Stride's architecture is purpose-built for the ecosystem.

02

Stride: Governance & Revenue Share

Specific advantage: STRD token holders govern the protocol and receive 100% of the staking revenue from all supported chains. This matters for long-term alignment and sustainability. The model incentivizes a robust, community-driven network, with over $150M in Total Value Locked (TVL) secured by its own validator set.

03

pSTAKE: Multi-Chain Strategy

Specific advantage: pSTAKE offers liquid staking across Cosmos, Ethereum L2s, and BNB Chain via a unified interface. This matters for users and protocols with a multi-chain presence who want to manage staked assets like ATOM, ETH, and BNB from a single platform, leveraging infrastructure from Persistence Core-1.

04

pSTAKE: Dual-Asset Yield

Specific advantage: pSTAKE issues stkASSET tokens that can earn staking rewards + DeFi yield simultaneously. This matters for maximizing capital efficiency. Users can stake ATOM, receive stkATOM, and then supply it as collateral on platforms like Venus on BNB Chain to generate additional yield streams.

05

Stride: Consideration - Ecosystem Focus

Specific trade-off: Stride's deep Cosmos integration is a strength but can be a limitation. It is primarily optimized for the IBC ecosystem. For teams whose primary users or assets reside on Ethereum or other non-IBC chains, the onboarding and composability benefits are reduced.

06

pSTAKE: Consideration - Centralized Reliance

Specific trade-off: pSTAKE utilizes a permissioned set of professional node operators and has historically relied on bridges with centralized elements for non-Cosmos chains. This matters for protocols prioritizing maximum decentralization and trust-minimization in their stack, as it introduces different risk vectors compared to a sovereign chain model.

pros-cons-b
STRIDE VS PSTAKE

pSTAKE: Pros and Cons

Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading Cosmos liquid staking solutions at a glance.

01

Stride: Native IBC Integration

Protocol-native interoperability: Stride is a dedicated Cosmos appchain, making stTokens like stATOM and stOSMO native IBC assets. This enables seamless, trust-minimized transfers across the entire Interchain (Osmosis, Juno, Kujira). This matters for protocols building multi-chain DeFi strategies.

02

Stride: Governance & Revenue Share

Direct protocol alignment: Stride is governed by its own STRD token holders, who vote on chain parameters and supported assets. Stakers earn 100% of staking rewards, with protocol revenue from MEV and commissions funding a buyback-and-distribute model for STRD stakers. This matters for users seeking governance influence and a stake in the protocol's success.

03

pSTAKE: Multi-Chain Strategy

Ecosystem-agnostic design: pSTAKE operates on Persistence Core-1 and supports assets from Cosmos (ATOM, OSMO), Ethereum (stkETH), and BNB Chain (stkBNB). This matters for institutions or portfolios that need a unified liquid staking interface across multiple major ecosystems, not just Cosmos.

04

pSTAKE: Non-Custodial Security

Smart contract-based delegation: User assets are delegated via audited smart contracts on the Persistence chain, with keys held by the user or their wallet. This reduces reliance on a centralized set of validators for slashing protection. This matters for security-conscious users who prioritize self-custody models over shared-security appchains.

05

Stride: Trade-Off (Appchain Overhead)

Requires separate chain security: As an appchain, Stride must secure its own validator set and consensus. Users must trust Stride's $200M+ secured validator set for slashing protection. This adds a layer of complexity compared to a pure smart contract model, which may be a consideration for some architects.

06

pSTAKE: Trade-Off (Cross-Chain Complexity)

Bridge-dependent for some assets: While Cosmos assets are native, Ethereum-based stkETH relies on the pSTAKE Bridge, introducing an additional trust assumption and potential latency. This matters for teams prioritizing minimal, native cross-chain flows within the Cosmos ecosystem over multi-chain expansion.

CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY

Decision Framework: When to Choose Which

Stride for DeFi

Verdict: The default choice for native Cosmos DeFi composability. Strengths: Stride's stTokens (e.g., stATOM, stOSMO) are native IBC assets, enabling seamless integration with major Cosmos DEXs like Osmosis, lending protocols like Mars, and collateralized borrowing. The protocol's governance is decentralized via the STRD token, aligning with Cosmos ethos. Its high TVL dominance (over 70% of Cosmos liquid staking) provides deep liquidity and network effects.

pSTAKE for DeFi

Verdict: A strategic choice for multi-chain or Ethereum-centric DeFi strategies. Strengths: pSTAKE's wrapped staked assets (e.g., stkATOM) are Persistence-native representations, bridging to Ethereum via the pSTAKE bridge. This unlocks access to Ethereum's massive DeFi ecosystem (Aave, Curve, Uniswap V3) and other EVM chains. It's ideal for protocols seeking EVM compatibility and exposure to Persistence's app-chain infrastructure for specialized finance applications.

verdict
THE ANALYSIS

Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation

A data-driven breakdown of the architectural and strategic trade-offs between Stride and pSTAKE for Cosmos liquid staking.

Stride excels at providing a seamless, native Cosmos experience because it is built as a dedicated appchain using the Cosmos SDK and IBC. This results in superior integration depth, direct governance by STRD stakers, and predictable, on-chain fees. For example, with over $150M in Total Value Locked (TVL) and support for 10+ major Cosmos chains like Osmosis and Injective, it offers the most mature and widely adopted liquid staking solution within the ecosystem. Its stTokens are natively compatible with DeFi protocols across the Interchain.

pSTAKE takes a different approach by leveraging a dual-chain architecture, minting liquid staking tokens (stkASSETs) on a destination chain like Ethereum or Persistence. This strategy maximizes liquidity and composability within established DeFi ecosystems like Ethereum's, but introduces bridge dependency and potential smart contract risk. Its strength lies in cross-chain flexibility, allowing users to stake assets from chains like Cosmos and BNB Chain while utilizing the liquidity on Ethereum, where its stkATOM has significant presence.

The key architectural trade-off is between native integration and cross-chain reach. Stride's appchain model offers sovereignty and deep Cosmos-native composability, while pSTAKE's smart contract model prioritizes bridging liquidity to external hubs like Ethereum.

Consider Stride if your priority is building a deeply integrated Cosmos-native application. It is the definitive choice for protocols requiring maximum security through Cosmos consensus, predictable gas costs in the native token, and seamless IBC compatibility for stTokens across the Interchain. Its governance model also allows for direct influence over the protocol's future.

Choose pSTAKE when your strategy demands tapping into the deep liquidity and mature DeFi tooling of ecosystems like Ethereum or BNB Chain. It is better suited for users and protocols that value the flexibility to stake assets from one ecosystem and farm yield in another, accepting the associated bridge and smart contract risks for greater cross-chain capital efficiency.

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
Stride vs pSTAKE: Cosmos Liquid Staking Comparison | ChainScore Comparisons