Economic & Risk Services
Staking Design Review
Actionable research for teams building in fast-moving ecosystems. We combine protocol due diligence, risk mapping, and simulation-backed recommendations so you can choose the right L1/L2s, partners, primitives and ship with confidence.
150+
audits
completed
$10B+
in client
assets protected
$200B+
in transacted
value secured
300+
crit / high issues found
Consolidated clients
With 3+ years
of blockchain security experience
Staking breaks when incentives do. We analyze validator/delegator rewards, slashing, unbonding, queues, and restaking mechanics to eliminate value leakage and align behavior with protocol security and growth.
What is a Staking Design Review?
A Staking Design Review evaluates the rules and parameters that govern validator sets, delegation, rewards, slashing, unbonding, and liquid staking/“restaking” derivatives. We map agents (validators, delegates, LST/LRT holders, operators), simulate their strategies, and propose minimal-change parameter updates that reduce manipulation, centralization, and churn while preserving product goals. For full coverage, pair with a Smart Contract Audit or an Economic Audit.
Why a Staking Design Review Matters
Failures in staking systems are usually incentive bugs, not code bugs:
Stake centralization & cartel risk.
Mercenary restaking & churn.
Withdrawal & unbonding fragility.
LST/LRT depeg pressure.
A single misaligned rule can drain emissions, weaken security, and hurt users.
Our Approach to Staking Design Review
Choosing where to build isn’t about hype, it’s about picking dependencies that let you ship safely and grow. We benchmark chains/rollups, bridges, oracles, and liquidity venues, review incidents and docs, run focused scenarios, and return ranked options with safe integration patterns.
We tailor each engagement to your product, markets, and constraints. Pair where relevant with an:
We account for commission bounds, reward curves, slashing math, unbonding/withdrawal queues, MEV/censorship policy, and LST/LRT interactions. The goal is practical, high-impact recommendations that improve security, decentralization, and user experience without heavy refactors.
Common Staking Design Review Issues
Reward/commission races
curves favor large validators, long-tail starves, centralization rises.
Emissions leakage
incentives pay TVL, not security or liveness, restakers farm and churn.
Withdrawal & unbonding games
queue sniping, griefing delays, or cliff effects under stress.
Slashing contagion
correlated faults or operator overlap make “one event” system-wide.
MEV & censorship externalities
policy rewards extractive behavior, honest flow gets taxed.
LST/LRT health
oracle/discount design, fee splits, and liquidity depth allow depeg spirals.
Governance capture paths
delegation incentives entrench incumbents and block upgrades.
Instead of generic theory, we pressure-test your specific validator set, reward math, and exit flows, then recommend minimal-change guardrails you can ship quickly. If parts of the staking logic live on-chain, we pair findings with a solidity audit so design fixes and implementation safety land together.
Our Staking Design Review Process
Scoping & Planning
Define objectives (security, decentralization, growth), success metrics, and surfaces in scope, align assumptions and constraints.
System & Incentive Modeling
Map validator/delegator states, rewards, commissions, MEV, slashing, unbonding/withdrawal queues, and derivative flows.
Mechanism & Parameter Review
Evaluate reward curves, commission bounds, stake caps, slashing math, unbonding/queue policy, LST/LRT fee splits, and oracle/price rules.
Simulation & Stress Testing
Run agent-based and Monte-Carlo scenarios to test churn, bank-run dynamics, cartel strategies, and depeg pressure across parameter sets.
Findings & Tuning
Provide severity-ranked issues with practical parameter updates, policy guardrails, and acceptance criteria your team can implement.
Verification
Re-run targeted scenarios after changes and deliver a concise confirmation that outcomes align with goals.
Deliverables You Can Expect
You’ll receive a concise design review brief that explains key risks, compares candidate parameter sets, and presents a ranked set of actionable recommendations with guardrails. Where simulations are informative, we summarize the methods and headline results to support decision-making.
Post-audit support is included
with the option for full verification of fixes before deployment. Discover how we protect teams like yours in our Case Studies.
What You Gain?
Healthier validator distribution with less churn and cartel risk.
Emissions that buy security and liveness, not mercenary TVL.
Withdrawal/queue rules that hold under stress.
More resilient LST/LRT economics and lower depeg pressure.
Clear, defensible choices for leadership, partners, and the community.
Industries We Secure
Our audits have helped secure decentralized applications across multiple verticals.
DeFi &
Liquidity
Lending platforms, DEXes, staking, and collateral markets.
NFT &
Collectibles
Marketplaces, launchpads, minting tools, and creator hubs.
Gaming &
Metaverse
Play-to-earn games, trading hubs, and immersive 3D worlds.
Cross-Chain Infrastructure
Bridges, oracle networks, and cross-chain protocol layers.
Frequently Asked Questions
Check out the Stacking Design Review F.A.Q.
How is this different from a code audit?
This review targets incentives and parameters, not implementation bugs. If contract changes are in scope, we coordinate with your smart-contract auditors.
Do you simulate or only review docs?
Both. We combine documentation and incident analysis with targeted simulations where they materially inform a decision.
What inputs do you need to start?
Parameter tables, reward/slashing formulas, validator/MEV policy, unbonding and withdrawal rules, LST/LRT mechanics, and any historical metrics you track.
Do you support liquid staking and restaking designs?
Yes. We assess fee splits, oracle/price methodology, redemption flows, and interactions that can drive depeg or unsafe leverage.
How do we measure success?
Pre-agreed metrics such as stake distribution health, reduced churn, predictable yields, improved withdrawal latency under load, and lower depeg/MEV extraction risk.