Renzo excels at rapid ecosystem integration and developer adoption due to its multi-chain strategy and native ezETH token. For example, Renzo's deployment on Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Linea has propelled its Total Value Locked (TVL) to over $3.5 billion, making it one of the largest LRTs by market share. Its focus on integrating with key DeFi primaries like Pendle Finance, Aave, and Curve provides immediate utility and composability for its restaked assets.
LABS
Comparisons
Renzo vs Kelp DAO: Liquid Restaking Token (LRT) Operator Platforms
A technical comparison of Renzo and Kelp DAO, focusing on their core operational models, fee structures, AVS delegation strategies, and risk profiles for protocol architects and CTOs.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction
A data-driven comparison of Renzo and Kelp DAO, the leading Liquid Restaking Token (LRT) operators on EigenLayer.
Kelp DAO takes a different approach by prioritizing native chain expansion and a community-centric governance model via its rsETH token. This strategy results in a strong foothold in specific ecosystems like Polygon zkEVM and Scroll, but can lead to slower deployment on alternative Layer 2s compared to Renzo. Kelp's model emphasizes direct staker rewards and protocol-owned liquidity, creating a different value accrual mechanism for its users.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing DeFi composability and liquidity across multiple chains in the short term, choose Renzo. If you prioritize deep integration within specific Ethereum scaling ecosystems and a governance model that emphasizes community rewards, choose Kelp DAO.
tldr-summary
RENZO VS KELP DAO
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for the two leading Liquid Restaking Token (LRT) operators.
01
Renzo's Strength: EigenLayer Native Strategy
Deep EigenLayer Integration: Renzo is built as a native restaking strategy for EigenLayer, acting as a unified interface for all Actively Validated Services (AVS). This matters for protocols seeking maximum AVS exposure and yield without manual management.
02
Renzo's Strength: Multi-Chain Expansion
Aggressive Cross-Chain Deployment: After launching on Ethereum, Renzo rapidly deployed on Arbitrum, Base, Blast, Linea, and Mode. This matters for users and protocols operating in high-growth L2 ecosystems who want to avoid mainnet gas fees for ezETH interactions.
03
Renzo's Weakness: Centralization & Smart Contract Risk
Operator-Centric Model: Renzo's node operator set is permissioned and curated, concentrating trust. The protocol also uses a proxy upgrade pattern, introducing ongoing smart contract risk. This matters for security-conscious institutions prioritizing decentralization and immutable contracts.
04
Kelp DAO's Strength: Native Restaking with Stader
LST Foundation: Built by the team behind Stader Labs, a major multi-chain liquid staking provider. This matters for users already in the Stader ecosystem and for protocols valuing a team with deep staking infrastructure experience.
05
Kelp DAO's Strength: Multi-Asset Restaking
Beyond ETH: Supports restaking of ETH, stETH, and mETH (Stader's Mantle ETH). This matters for users with diverse LST holdings who want to aggregate restaking rewards across multiple assets through a single token, rsETH.
06
Kelp DAO's Weakness: Slower Multi-Chain Rollout
Ethereum-First Focus: Primary deployment is on Ethereum mainnet, with a more measured approach to expansion. This matters for DeFi teams building on specific L2s who require immediate native liquidity and integrations for their rsETH collateral.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Renzo vs Kelp DAO: Liquid Restaking Token (LRT) Operator Platforms
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for LRT platforms, focusing on TVL, supported networks, and protocol integrations.
| Metric | Renzo | Kelp DAO |
|---|---|---|
Total Value Locked (TVL) | $3.2B+ | $1.0B+ |
Native Chain / Primary Hub | Ethereum | Ethereum |
Supports EigenLayer AVSs | ||
Supports Non-EVM Restaking (e.g., Solana, Bitcoin) | ||
Native Token (Governance / Points) | ezETH, REZ | rsETH, KEP |
Supported L2s / Alt-L1s | Arbitrum, Base, Linea, Mode | Arbitrum, Base, Scroll, Manta |
Integrated DeFi Protocols | Pendle, Aave, Balancer, Curve | Pendle, Balancer, Maverick, Stargate |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Renzo vs Kelp DAO: Liquid Restaking Token (LRT) Operator Platforms
A technical breakdown of the leading LRT platforms. Use this to evaluate which operator aligns with your protocol's security, yield, and integration priorities.
01
Renzo's Pro: Multi-Chain & AVS Breadth
Native multi-chain strategy with deployments on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Linea, and Blast. Supports a wide portfolio of 30+ Actively Validated Services (AVS) including EigenDA, AltLayer, and Hyperlane. This matters for protocols seeking maximum restaking yield diversification and cross-chain liquidity deployment from day one.
02
Renzo's Con: Centralized Points & Governance
Criticized for opaque points programs and a centralized governance model where the Renzo team holds significant control over treasury and upgrades. The ezETH token lacks a direct governance function. This matters for DAOs and protocols prioritizing decentralized decision-making and transparent reward mechanisms.
03
Kelp DAO's Pro: Native Restaking & Stader Legacy
Built by Stader Labs, leveraging years of institutional-grade staking infrastructure. Offers native restaking on EigenLayer (not a wrapper) and a transparent, points-free rewards system via rsETH. This matters for institutions and large holders who prioritize security pedigree, audit history, and predictable yield mechanics over speculative airdrop farming.
04
Kelp DAO's Con: Ethereum-Centric & Slower AVS Rollout
Primarily focused on Ethereum mainnet, with more cautious expansion to L2s like Arbitrum. Has a smaller, more curated AVS portfolio compared to competitors. This matters for DeFi protocols that require immediate, deep liquidity on specific L2s or want exposure to the broadest possible set of nascent AVS rewards.
pros-cons-b
RENZO VS KELP DAO
Kelp DAO: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading Liquid Restaking Token (LRT) operators. Data as of Q1 2024.
01
Renzo: Superior Ecosystem Integration
Strategic EigenLayer Integration: Renzo is a core, native restaking partner for EigenLayer, ensuring deep technical alignment and early access to new features. This matters for protocols requiring maximum security and composability within the EigenLayer ecosystem.
$3B+
TVL
03
Kelp DAO: Multi-Chain LRT Issuance
Native Cross-Chain Minting: Issues its LRT, rsETH, natively on Ethereum, Arbitrum, and other L2s, reducing bridge risks and gas costs for users. This matters for DeFi teams building on L2s who need seamless, low-cost access to restaked liquidity.
5+
Native Chains
05
Renzo Con: Centralized Points & Governance
Points Program & Tokenomics Control: The ezPoints program and future REZ token distribution are managed by the Renzo foundation, introducing centralization risk in reward allocation. This matters for users prioritizing decentralized, protocol-native governance from day one.
06
Kelp DAO Con: Smaller Initial AVS Footprint
Narrower Early AVS Selection: Initially supported a more curated set of Actively Validated Services compared to broader competitors. This matters for restakers whose primary goal is to secure the maximum number of novel Ethereum services immediately.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Renzo for DeFi Yield
Verdict: The integrated yield optimizer for sophisticated strategies. Strengths: Renzo's primary advantage is its native integration with EigenLayer and EigenDA, allowing ezETH to natively accrue both Ethereum staking rewards and EigenLayer points/airdrops. Its multi-asset support (ETH, stETH, wBETH) provides flexible entry points. The protocol's focus on active restaking strategies and planned Renzo Points program makes it a powerful tool for users seeking to maximize potential airdrop eligibility and yield from the entire EigenLayer ecosystem. Considerations: The yield is more complex and tied to EigenLayer's success. Smart contract risk is concentrated on Renzo's strategy manager.
Kelp DAO for DeFi Yield
Verdict: The capital-efficient, multi-chain liquidity layer. Strengths: Kelp's core innovation is minting its LRT, rsETH, natively on multiple chains (Ethereum, Arbitrum, Polygon zkEVM via LayerZero). This provides superior capital efficiency and immediate DeFi composability without bridging delays or costs. Its Kelp Miles loyalty program directly rewards long-term stakers. For yield farmers, rsETH's native presence on L2s means it can be immediately deployed in pools on Aave, Balancer, or Pendle for leveraged yield strategies. Considerations: Relies on cross-chain messaging security (LayerZero). Native multi-chain minting adds protocol complexity.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
A data-driven breakdown to guide protocol architects and CTOs in selecting the optimal Liquid Restaking Token platform for their specific needs.
Renzo excels at providing a simplified, user-centric gateway to EigenLayer's ecosystem, particularly for retail and institutional depositors. Its strength lies in its automated, non-custodial strategy management, which abstracts away the complexity of selecting and managing individual Actively Validated Services (AVS). This focus on accessibility is reflected in its rapid Total Value Locked (TVL) growth, which surpassed $3 billion in Q2 2024, demonstrating strong market adoption and trust in its streamlined model.
Kelp DAO takes a different approach by emphasizing native chain integration and community governance through its Kelp token. Its multi-chain strategy, with deployments on Ethereum, Polygon, and Scroll, offers greater flexibility for protocols seeking specific L2 or appchain exposure. This results in a trade-off: while it provides more granular control and chain-specific opportunities, it may present a steeper learning curve compared to Renzo's unified interface, requiring users to navigate cross-chain interactions and a more complex governance structure.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing ease-of-use and security for a broad user base with a hands-off approach to AVS strategy, choose Renzo. Its automated restaking and strong institutional backing make it ideal for protocols prioritizing deposit aggregation and user onboarding. If you prioritize multi-chain flexibility, granular governance, and deeper integration with specific L2 ecosystems, choose Kelp DAO. Its native token model and cross-chain architecture are better suited for protocols building on or targeting liquidity within the Polygon or Scroll networks.
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