Restaking from Delta-Neutral Strategies excels at risk mitigation and capital efficiency because it leverages hedged positions to isolate yield from price volatility. For example, a strategy using GMX's GLP token or a Uniswap V3 LP position can generate fees while being largely market-neutral, allowing you to restake the derivative token (e.g., a GMX staked GLP receipt) into EigenLayer without direct exposure to ETH's price swings. This approach effectively creates a double yield: one from the base strategy and another from the restaking rewards.
LABS
Comparisons
Restaking Tokens from Delta-Neutral Strategies vs. Restaking One-Sided Assets
A technical comparison of the risk-adjusted returns, capital efficiency, and operational complexity of restaking hedged strategy tokens versus volatile single assets on EigenLayer and other AVS networks.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Core Trade-off in Restaked Asset Selection
Choosing between delta-neutral and one-sided restaking strategies defines your protocol's risk profile and capital efficiency from day one.
Restaking One-Sided Assets takes a different approach by prioritizing simplicity and maximal crypto-economic security. This involves directly restaking a native asset like stETH, rETH, or cbETH. This results in a trade-off: you gain direct exposure to the underlying asset's price appreciation and benefit from its deep liquidity and established trust, but you forgo the sophisticated yield amplification and volatility insulation of a delta-neutral vault. Your security contribution to the Actively Validated Service (AVS) is also more straightforward to model.
The key trade-off: If your priority is capital efficiency and isolating restaking yield from market beta, choose delta-neutral strategies via protocols like Kelp DAO or Renzo Protocol. If you prioritize operational simplicity, direct asset exposure, and maximizing the base crypto-economic security of a blue-chip asset, choose one-sided restaking of liquid staking tokens (LSTs) through EigenLayer's native deposits.
tldr-summary
Delta-Neutral vs. One-Sided Restaking
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A direct comparison of risk-adjusted yield strategies for sophisticated DeFi participants.
01
Delta-Neutral: Superior Risk-Adjusted Returns
Hedged market exposure: Strategies like Pendle's yield tokens or Aevo's pre-launch token pools allow you to earn staking/Slashable rewards while neutralizing the underlying asset's price volatility via perpetuals or options. This matters for institutions and treasuries seeking consistent yield with minimal balance sheet variance.
10-20%
Typical APY (hedged)
02
Delta-Neutral: Capital Efficiency & Composability
Unlock liquidity from locked assets: By tokenizing future yield (e.g., Pendle's SY), you can deploy capital elsewhere. This matters for active DeFi managers running leveraged strategies on EigenLayer or building on Ethena's USDe synthetic dollar, where hedged staking yield is the foundational revenue stream.
03
One-Sided: Simplicity & Maximum Upside
Direct exposure to asset appreciation: Native restaking via EigenLayer, Karak, or Symbiotic captures the full upside of the restaked asset (e.g., ETH, stETH) alongside AVS rewards. This matters for long-term believers in a specific L1/LST who are willing to accept higher volatility for potentially higher total return.
5-15%+
APY + Asset Appreciation
04
One-Sided: Protocol Alignment & Security
Deep integration with the restaking stack: Directly supporting AVSs like EigenDA, Lagrange, or Hyperliquid often requires native, slashable deposits. This matters for protocol architects and DAOs choosing dependencies, as it ensures maximum security guarantees and often grants governance weight or priority access.
RESTAKING STRATEGY COMPARISON
Feature Comparison: Delta-Neutral Tokens vs. One-Sided Assets
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for restaking strategies.
| Metric | Delta-Neutral Tokens | One-Sided Assets |
|---|---|---|
Primary Risk Exposure | Smart Contract & Strategy Failure | Underlying Asset Volatility |
Typical APY Range | 5% - 15% | 3% - 8% |
Capital Efficiency | High (Utilizes leverage) | Low (Direct exposure) |
Impermanent Loss Protection | ||
Protocol Dependencies | EigenLayer, Kelp DAO, Pendle | Lido, Rocket Pool, Benqi |
Complexity for Integrators | High | Low |
TVL Concentration (Top 3 Protocols) | $4B+ | $40B+ |
pros-cons-a
DELTA-NEUTRAL TOKENS vs. ONE-SIDED ASSETS
Pros and Cons: Restaking Delta-Neutral Strategy Tokens
Key strengths and trade-offs for restaking yield-bearing tokens from hedged strategies versus standard liquid staking tokens (LSTs).
01
Delta-Neutral Token Pros: Superior Risk-Adjusted Yield
Higher baseline yield: Combines staking rewards with strategy fees (e.g., funding rates, basis capture). Protocols like Pendle's yield tokens (YT) or Ethena's USDe can offer 15-30%+ APY before restaking, versus ~3-5% for standard LSTs. This matters for maximizing capital efficiency in a single asset position.
02
Delta-Neutral Token Pros: Built-In Market Neutrality
Reduces directional exposure: Tokens like Ethena's sUSDe or Lyra's hedged vault tokens are designed to be delta-hedged, insulating restaked capital from underlying asset volatility. This matters for protocols seeking stable, uncorrelated yield to support their economic security without adding market risk.
03
Delta-Neutral Token Cons: Smart Contract & Custody Risk
Increased complexity risk: Exposure to strategy manager contracts (e.g., Euler, Aave for leverage), perpetual DEXs, and centralized custodian dependencies (for cash-and-carry strategies). A failure in any layer beyond the consensus layer can impact the token's backing. This matters for security-critical AVS operators who prioritize simplicity.
04
Delta-Neutral Token Cons: Liquidity & Peg Stability Concerns
Potential for de-pegs and slippage: Synthetic assets or yield tokens can trade at a discount/premium to NAV, especially during market stress (see UST depeg). Exiting large positions may incur significant slippage on DEXs. This matters for operators who may need to slash or unbond assets quickly.
05
One-Sided Asset Pros: Maximum Simplicity & Security
Direct consensus-layer exposure: Restaking Lido's stETH, Rocket Pool's rETH, or native ETH involves only the underlying chain's security and the LST's mint/burn mechanics. The attack surface is minimized. This matters for foundational AVSs like EigenLayer or Babylon where security is non-negotiable.
06
One-Sided Asset Pros: Deepest Liquidity & Composability
Unmatched market depth: Major LSTs like stETH ($30B+ TVL) have liquidity across all DeFi (Curve, Aave, Uniswap V3). This ensures minimal slippage for entry/exit and seamless use as collateral. This matters for protocols building leveraged restaking positions or needing fungible, liquid collateral.
pros-cons-b
DELTA-NEUTRAL vs. ONE-SIDED RESTAKING
Pros and Cons: Restaking One-Sided Volatile Assets
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs managing high-value treasury strategies.
03
Delta-Neutral Restaking (e.g., Pendle, Aevo)
Complexity & Protocol Risk: Introduces dependency on derivative protocols and smart contract risk from platforms like Pendle. The hedge can break during extreme volatility or liquidity crunches. This matters for teams with lower risk tolerance for third-party dependencies beyond core restaking layers.
04
One-Sided Volatile Asset Restaking (e.g., native ETH, SOL)
Direct Exposure to Drawdowns: Portfolio value is fully correlated with the asset's market price. A 30% market correction means a 30% loss in restaked principal value. This matters for protocols with tight runway calculations or those using restaked assets as collateral in DeFi (e.g., MakerDAO, MarginFi).
RESTAKING STRATEGIES
Technical Deep Dive: Risk Modeling and Protocol Dependencies
Comparing the security assumptions, yield profiles, and systemic dependencies of one-sided and delta-neutral restaking strategies for DeFi protocols and AVS operators.
One-sided restaking typically offers a higher base yield. This is because you are directly exposed to the native staking rewards and any restaking rewards from a single asset like ETH or SOL. Delta-neutral strategies, like those using Pendle or Gearbox, aim for a more stable return by hedging price exposure, which often caps the upside of the underlying staking yield in exchange for reduced volatility.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Strategy
Delta-Neutral Restaking for Risk-Adjusted Yield
Verdict: The superior choice for maximizing risk-adjusted returns. Strengths: By pairing a long staked asset position (e.g., stETH) with a short perpetual futures position, you isolate the staking yield while hedging underlying price volatility. This creates a synthetic USD-denominated yield stream. Protocols like EigenLayer and Kelp DAO enable this strategy, allowing you to capture ~15-20% APY from combined staking and restaking rewards with minimal directional market exposure. Trade-offs: Requires active management of funding rates and collateral ratios on perpetual DEXs like GMX or Hyperliquid. Complexity and gas costs are higher.
One-Sided Restaking for Risk-Adjusted Yield
Verdict: Simpler but carries full asset volatility risk. Strengths: Directly restake assets like ETH, AVAX, or SOL via EigenLayer, Babylon, or native protocols. This is operationally simple and captures base staking + restaking rewards (e.g., 5-8% total). Ideal for long-term holders unconcerned with short-term price swings. Trade-offs: Your total return is heavily correlated with the asset's price performance. A -30% price drop can erase a year's yield, making the risk-adjusted return inferior to a hedged position.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A data-driven breakdown of the risk-reward calculus between delta-neutral and one-sided restaking strategies.
Restaking Delta-Neutral Tokens excels at mitigating underlying asset volatility and providing a stable yield base. This is achieved by pairing a long position in a liquid staking token (LST) like stETH with a corresponding short position via perpetual futures on dYdX or GMX. For example, during the May 2024 market correction, delta-neutral positions saw impermanent loss reduced by over 60% compared to holding the LST alone, as the hedge offset the asset's price decline while still capturing EigenLayer restaking rewards.
Restaking One-Sided Assets takes a different approach by accepting full cryptoasset exposure to maximize potential total return. This strategy results in a higher-risk, higher-reward profile where the restaker benefits from both the native token's appreciation and the additional yield. Protocols like Ether.fi's eETH and Renzo Protocol's ezETH have amassed billions in TVL by catering to this bullish conviction, but their value is directly tied to the often volatile performance of assets like ETH.
The key trade-off is between risk insulation and return maximization. If your protocol's priority is capital preservation and predictable cash flow for treasury management or as a stable yield source for DeFi primitives, choose the delta-neutral path. If you prioritize maximizing absolute returns for a risk-tolerant treasury and have a strong bullish conviction on the underlying asset's long-term trajectory, choose one-sided restaking. The decision ultimately hinges on your organization's risk tolerance and whether you view the restaked asset as a yield vehicle or an appreciating investment.
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