Loading
How good is this data today
Which readers ran and when, how much of what they set out to read they reached, where our figures disagree with somebody else’s, and what we refuse to publish rather than estimate. Everything here was already somewhere on this site; no page put it together.
There is no single quality score, deliberately. One number would average a stale venue against a refused price against an unexplained gap, and those three fail differently and matter to different readers. The components are here; the composite is not.
203
Readers on a schedule
16 more are one-off tools, which cannot be late
0
Late
every reader is within twice its own interval
9
Partial reads
a total from these is a floor
3
Readers failing
a reader did not complete its last run
80
Assertions failing
independent sources that disagree, which a healthy reader cannot catch
What is claimed and what is paid for do not meet
Three measurements taken separately, for different reasons, turned out to be the same finding: the parties who declare something and the parties who get paid are, in our reading, nearly disjoint sets. Each row carries the exact populations it compares, because the same question asked with a looser definition gives a different number and both are true.
| Two populations | One side | The other | In both | Measured over |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paid on a rail, and a vault we read | 3,380 | 3,797 | 0 | Addresses ever paid for a SALE (the recipient lists a price in a catalogue we read) against open vaults, matched on the vault’s contract address. |
| Holds an ERC-8004 registration, and runs a book | 564,898 | 472 | 0 | Distinct registration owners against operators carrying an on-chain address, matched case-insensitively. |
| Declares a callable endpoint, and has been paid | 2,895 | 3,380 | 11 | Owners declaring any service kind (MCP, A2A, OASF, web, wallet, social, x402, other) against the paid addresses above. /work asks a looser version of this question (MCP and A2A only, any incoming transfer counted as paid) and answers 15 of 1,287; both are true. |
This is what we can see, not what exists. One firm can run both sides under addresses that never touch, exactly as one owner can fund payers that never pay each other. No link is visible; that is not the same as no link.
What each verdict rests on
in-line, beating and short are the sharpest thing said here about a vault: what a holder actually earned against what the venue advertises. A verdict drawn from a price that moved once is arithmetically right and describes nothing that will happen again, so this is how many of them are which. Counted over the 417 open vaults whose realised return can be compared with an advertised one at all.
| Verdict | Vaults | Movement spread | One step explains it | Series barely moved |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in-line | 362 | 353 | 1 | 8 |
| beating | 29 | 25 | 1 | 3 |
| short | 26 | 17 | 5 | 4 |
One step explains it: enough intervals moved to judge, and one of them still carries most of the window: a correction, or a fee taken in one go. Series barely moved: most of the movement sits in one interval of a price that hardly moved at all, which is a thin reading rather than a step we can account for. The two are never added: only the first is a thing we can name. Every vault says which of these applies to it in the cannotSee field of its own check.
What a realised return here is made of
A realised return missing a component is not a smaller return. It is a different measurement wearing the same name, and which way it is wrong depends on which component is missing. Counted over the 2,616 open vaults holding capital, $11.44B between them.
| Component | Vaults | Share | Capital behind it | What it means where it is missing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A value series at all | 2,546 | 97% | $11.28B | Without one there is no realised return to state, and the vault is absent from every return figure rather than counted as flat. |
| Profit stated by the venue | 1,708 | 65% | $273.35M | The venue’s own profit series. Where it is missing the return is reconstructed from value alone, which cannot separate a deposit from a gain. |
| Share price | 838 | 32% | $11.00B | What one share was worth. It is the only series that survives deposits and withdrawals untouched, so a vault without it needs flows read correctly instead. |
| Funding paid or received | 251 | 10% | $129.88M | For a perpetuals book, funding is often most of the result. Absent, the return is right in total and says nothing about where it came from. |
How old is the capital figure, venue by venue
A size read two days ago is not wrong; it is old, and the difference matters to somebody sizing an exit. A venue is called stale here after 36 hours.
| Venue | Vaults | Median age | Stale | Capital behind them |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 227 | 0.7h | 0 | — | |
| 164 | 0.7h | 0 | — | |
| 31 | 0.7h | 0 | — | |
| 25 |
Readers that are behind
Every figure is as old as the reader behind it. These are past twice their own interval, or a quarter of an hour where that is longer, so anything resting on them is older than it should be. A reader that runs weekly and completed two days ago is not here, which is the point of measuring against its own schedule rather than against a flat day.
- paid-workflowlast run failed 23 hours ago · runs every 7d
- verify-slowlast run failed 48 minutes ago · runs every 7d
- x402-payerslast run failed 22 hours ago · runs every 1d
How we check ourselves
Four questions asked of this site every six hours, each with an answer that does not share an input with the figure it checks: the published size of the largest vaults against the contract’s own quantity at an outside price, identity registries against their own id sequence, readers that succeed and get nowhere, and registers whose published count has not moved while vaults wait. A failing answer reaches the operator the same way a stuck reader does.
Last asked 19 minutes ago.
- sanity check passedPublished capital against the chain and an outside price
59 of 59 largest vaults pass the ±25% sanity check, 0 fail it; tighter: 58 within 1%, 59 within 5%, 1 could not be asked
What this check cannot reach
- a sanity check at ±25%, not a reconciliation: our figure is as of our last refresh of each vault, the chain's quantity is read at this run's latest block, and the price is the outside feed's current quote, so the two sides can be hours apart
- askable this way: 788 vaults, $10,461,352,761; the 60 largest of them are read every run
- not ERC-4626: no standard call answers what the vault holds: 1,411 vaults, $525,927,927, not checkable this way
- Hyperliquid: an order book; the vault is a margin account, no contract holds the capital: 328 vaults, $285,443,389, not checkable this way
- Solana: the venue publishes the size; there is no contract that answers totalAssets(): 50 vaults, $85,090,034, not checkable this way
- no contract address on record: 39 vaults, $77,238,073, not checkable this way
- agreesIdentity registries against their own id sequence
20 chains, 824,628 identities held, 0 chain(s) with a hole larger than 1%
- agreesThe URLs the x402 catalogues list of ours
Coverage, measure by measure
How much of each thing we can actually see. Five separate questions with five separate populations, so the percentages are not comparable with one another and are never added up. Where capital is missing, the largest venues it sits on are named.
| What | Share | Seen, of | Largest gaps |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perp-vault capital whose open positions we read in the last three daysPopulation: open perpetual-venue vaults with a size. Capital, not notional: a vault counts by its equity, however levered its book. | 35.4% | $96.28M of $272.27M | Hyperliquid $174.16M (62) · dYdX $1.83M (0) |
| Position notional in a market whose open interest we hold, so a crowd can be sized against itPopulation: gross notional of the positions we read, per instrument. Notional over notional. It is never divided by vault capital, which would let a levered book inflate the figure. | 2.2% | $175.21M of $7.97B | venues that publish no open interest |
| Lending capital whose collateral we can see throughPopulation: open lending vaults with a size. Includes vaults that lend nothing, read as such from their own totalBorrows(). | 99.8% | $8.78B of $8.80B | Euler $21.42M (30) · Morpho Vaults V2 $487.7k (3) |
| Capital whose manager we can name as a firmPopulation: open vaults with a size. A firm, not a row. Venues create an operator per venue, so the same manager can appear several times; this counts capital joined to one firm record on evidence that is a domain or a key, never a resemblance between names. |
Where we disagree with a public source
Several figures here are also published by somebody else, and several of them differ. Each comparison carries an explanation or is marked as not having one.
13
explained
1
investigating
What we refuse to publish
These counts are a measure of honesty, not of coverage. A vault whose underlying we cannot price is published as unvalued rather than estimated. Reading the number below as a failure is the one misreading this page exists to prevent: the alternative is not a better figure, it is a made-up one.
1,175
Open vaults with no size
of 3,797 open
no price we trust for the underlying
2,626
Open vaults with no underlying read
of 3,797 open
the contract does not tell us what it holds
Methodology in force
aspern-0.3
Every published figure carries this version in its evidence block, and every assessment document is hashed under it. A figure computed under an older version stays checkable: this build can still produce the versions it has published.
How each figure is arrived at · what changed and when · the independent check