Renzo (ezETH) Review
Fee split and withdrawal delays published layer by layer
of 10
Renzo's ezETH scores 7.6 and leads liquid restaking, the plain average of five equally weighted criteria. A published 10% reward fee, itemized exit delays and four named auditors carry the score; a BUSL-1.1 licence and general slashing disclosure hold it back. Based on primary sources checked on 1 November 2026.
Score arithmetic
(9 + 6 + 9 + 5 + 9) / 5 = 7.6
Ranking position
First of the rated liquid restaking services (1 Nov 2026)
Fee
10% of restaking rewards: 50% treasury, 50% node operators
Withdrawal
About 7 days with buffer, 10 to 15 without; no standard withdrawal fee stated
Licence
BUSL-1.1, change date 1 December 2026 to MIT
Auditors
Halborn, Sigma Prime, Code4rena, Nethermind; Immunefi bug bounty
Scores
Each criterion carries equal weight. The overall score is the average of these 5 scores — (9.0 + 6.0 + 9.0 + 5.0 + 9.0) ÷ 5 = 7.6.
Pros
- Commission clarity 9/10: 10% of restaking rewards, split 50/50 treasury and operators
- Exit 9/10: beacon, EigenLayer and Renzo queue delays each stated, with expected totals
- Audit disclosure 9/10: reports from Halborn, Sigma Prime, Code4rena and Nethermind
- States that 100% of EigenLayer rewards are passed through to holders
Cons
- Licence 5/10: contracts under BUSL-1.1 until the 1 December 2026 change to MIT
- Slashing 6/10: slashing acknowledged, but restaked-service conditions are not detailed
- No insurance or loss-absorbing reserve is described
- Instant-withdrawal fee bounds are not published; protocol withdrawals are mainnet only
This review grades Renzo's ezETH, an ETH liquid restaking token backed by stake restaked through EigenLayer, in our liquid restaking ratings. Renzo leads the category at 7.6. The score rests on what Renzo publishes about its fee, exit timing, slashing risk, code licence and audits, checked against its documentation and public GitHub repository on 1 November 2026. It is desk research, not a hands-on test. Renzo's September 2026 rename to Renzo Finance and its newer basis-trading product are outside this rating.
How Renzo scores in liquid restaking
Five criteria, each marked 0 to 10, carry equal weight. The overall score is their plain average: (9 + 6 + 9 + 5 + 9) / 5 = 38 / 5 = 7.6.
All five marks were re-checked against current sources for this update and none changed. The licence mark reflects the Business Source License still in force; its 1 December 2026 change date has not yet arrived.
| Criterion | What we found | Mark |
|---|---|---|
| Commission clarity | A 10% fee on restaking rewards, split 50/50 between the treasury and node operators; Renzo states it passes 100% of EigenLayer rewards to users. No published fee on standard withdrawals. | 9 |
| Slashing & risk disclosure | The legal disclaimer says others may seize collateral "in a slashing event". The specific slashing conditions added by restaked services are not set out, and no insurance is described. | 6 |
| Exit & redemption | The withdrawals page lists each delay: 9 to 10 days for the beacon-chain exit, a 14-day EigenLayer minimum and a 3-day Renzo queue buffer, with expected totals of 7 days (buffer funded) or 10 to 15 days (buffer empty). | 9 |
| Licence & code openness | Public contracts under the Business Source License 1.1, with a change date of 1 December 2026 to MIT. | 5 |
| Audit disclosure | Reports listed from Halborn (three, November 2023 to May 2024), Sigma Prime and Code4rena (June 2024) and Nethermind (2025), plus an Immunefi bug bounty. | 9 |
Strongest criteria: fees, exit and audits
Commission clarity (9)
Renzo publishes a rate, a base and a destination. The ezETH documentation says the fee is 10% of restaking rewards, half to the treasury and half to node operators, and that EigenLayer rewards pass through in full. Under that schedule, 1 ETH of restaking rewards leaves 0.9 ETH accruing to ezETH holders. The fee comes out of rewards, not principal. The mark stops short of 10 because the instant-withdrawal fee is variable and its minimum and maximum are not printed on the page.
Exit & redemption (9)
The withdrawals page itemizes where the wait comes from rather than giving a single number. Requested ezETH is locked, stops earning, and is burned when the underlying is claimed. Renzo's stated totals are shorter than the layers added together because a withdrawal buffer pays out from collateral that is already liquid; when the buffer is empty, Renzo expects 10 to 15 days. Two limits keep this short of a full mark: protocol withdrawals work on Ethereum mainnet only, and the expected totals are company statements, not guarantees.
Audit disclosure (9)
Renzo's audit page links reports from four firms across 2023 to 2025 and a separate vault review. That covers the core restaking contracts over several versions. An audit is a point-in-time code review and does not insure deposits.
Weakest criteria: licence and slashing
Licence & code openness (5) is the lowest mark and a deficiency on the date of review. The contracts are public, but the LICENSE file is Business Source License 1.1, which restricts production reuse until the change date. That date is 1 December 2026, when the licence becomes MIT. The mark reflects the licence in force on 1 November 2026; the change date is a trigger to re-check this criterion.
Slashing & risk disclosure (6) is partly a deficiency. Renzo acknowledges that collateral can be seized in a slashing event and that restaking adds counterparty and liquidity risk from integrated protocols. What it does not publish is which restaked services the stake secures, what each can slash for, or how a loss would be shared across ezETH holders. Restaking stacks service-specific slashing on top of Ethereum's own penalties, so that detail matters more here than for plain liquid staking. No insurance or loss-absorbing reserve is described.
What the score does not cover
- Market price. ezETH can trade below its backing on secondary markets; in April 2024, before protocol withdrawals were live, it fell sharply on some venues. Price behavior is not a criterion.
- Yield. Restaking rewards vary and are not graded.
- Other Renzo tokens. pzETH (Symbiotic), ezSOL and similar products are not part of this entry.
- Access. The restaking terms exclude US residents, citizens and anyone located in the United States. Availability does not enter the score.
- Bridged ezETH. Copies on layer-2 networks add bridge risk, covered in our explainer on how bridges work.
Renzo vs the closest rated peers
| Service | Overall score |
|---|---|
| Renzo (ezETH) | 7.6 |
| ether.fi (eETH / weETH) | 7.2 |
| YieldNest (ynETH) | 6.8 |
| EigenLayer | 6.6 |
| Symbiotic | 6.6 |
Scores are as published on 1 November 2026. Renzo is 0.4 points ahead of ether.fi, 0.8 ahead of YieldNest and 1.0 ahead of EigenLayer and Symbiotic. The lead comes from three marks of 9, for a fixed fee split, a layer-by-layer exit schedule and a multi-firm audit list. Its two lower marks, 5 for licence and 6 for slashing disclosure, are the criteria on which it has the most room to move.
Who this rating suits
The score is most useful to readers who want to know in advance what they will pay and how long an exit should take. It says less to anyone whose main concern is slashing exposure, where Renzo's disclosure is general. A 7.6 is a measure of published disclosure, not a statement that ezETH is safe or a recommendation to buy it; the scoring rules are set out in our methodology.
How it compares
ether.fi (eETH / weETH)
A long audit record and plain slashing disclosure
YieldNest (ynETH)
Open BSD code backed by a long list of dated audits
EigenLayer
A long audit record and plain slashing disclosure
Symbiotic
Audit disclosure and documented slashing mechanics
Mellow
Audit disclosure: dated reports from six firms on one page
Kelp DAO (rsETH)
A long audit record and two published exit routes
Swell Restaking (rswETH)
A 10% reward fee that matches the live contract setting
Eigenpie (mLRT)
A published fee and three linked audits; exits paused
Sources
Scored from published primary sources rather than hands-on use. Every figure above comes from one of the pages below, on the date shown. Manufacturers change prices and specifications without notice — if something here no longer matches the source, tell us and we will correct it.
- 1.Renzo docs: ezETH (fee and token model) — checked
- 2.Renzo docs: withdrawals — checked
- 3.Renzo docs: instant withdrawals — checked
- 4.Renzo docs: audits — checked
- 5.Renzo docs: bug bounty — checked
- 6.Renzo docs: disclaimer — checked
- 7.Renzo docs: terms of service (1 Dec 2023) — checked
- 8.Renzo: contracts-public LICENSE (BUSL-1.1) — checked
- 9.Aave governance: LlamaRisk on ezETH (9 Aug 2024) — checked
Frequently asked questions
Why does Renzo score 7.6?
It is the plain average of five equal marks: 9 for commission clarity, 6 for slashing and risk disclosure, 9 for exit and redemption, 5 for licence and code openness and 9 for audit disclosure. They sum to 38, and 38 divided by five is 7.6.
What holds Renzo's score back?
The code licence and the slashing disclosure. The contracts are under the Business Source License 1.1 until 1 December 2026, and Renzo does not set out which restaked services can slash the stake or how a loss would be shared.
Will the licence change affect the score?
The licence is due to become MIT on 1 December 2026. The current mark reflects the licence in force when we checked on 1 November 2026, and the change date is logged as a reason to re-check that criterion.
What was actually measured?
Only published disclosure: Renzo's fee and withdrawal documentation, its legal disclaimer, its audit page and the LICENSE file in its public GitHub repository. No deposits or withdrawals were made, and yield and market price were not graded.
How does Renzo compare with YieldNest and Symbiotic?
Renzo scores 7.6, YieldNest 6.8 and Symbiotic 6.6 in the same category under the same five criteria. Renzo's lead comes from marks of 9 on fees, exit and audits.
Nothing here is financial advice. Editorial policy · How we score · How we're funded.