If you are interested in Restaking or AVS (Active Verification Service), this article will provide a simple comparison of @eigenlayer, @symbioticfi and @Karak_Network, and introduce related concepts, which should be helpful to you.
AVS stands for Active Validation Services, a term that essentially describes any network requiring its own validation system (e.g., oracles, DA, cross-chain bridges, etc.). In this article, AVS can be understood as projects using restake services.
Conceptually, restaking is a method of “reusing” staked ETH for additional validation/services to earn more staking rewards without unstaking it. Restaking generally comes in two forms:
Through restaking, restakers and validators can secure thousands of new services by pooling security. This helps reduce costs and provides the security guarantees needed for new trust networks to get started. Among these restaking protocols, @eigenlayer (EL) was the first to launch.
At a high level, @eigenlayer (EL) consists of four main components:
Stakers
These parties work together to allow stakers to delegate assets and validators to register as operators within EigenLayer. AVS on EL can also customize their quorum and slashing conditions for their own systems.
Restaking
EL supports both native restaking and liquid restaking. Among its approximately $15 billion in TVL (Total Value Locked):
EL has about 160,000 restakers, but only around 1,500 operators. Approximately 67.6% (about $10.3 billion) of the assets are delegated to operators.
EL provides AVS with a high degree of flexibility for self-design, allowing them to decide on:
and their own AVS contracts…
EL controls:
Validators wishing to become EL operators must register through EL. The Strategy Manager is responsible for balancing restaking participants’ accounts and works in conjunction with the Delegator Manager to execute operations.
Each AVS has its own slashing conditions. If an operator engages in malicious behavior or violates EL’s commitments, they will be slashed by the slasher, each of whom has their own slashing logic. If an operator chooses to participate in two AVSs, they must simultaneously agree to the slashing conditions of both AVSs.
In cases of “erroneous slashing,” EL has a VSC that can reverse the slashing outcome. EL itself does not act as a standard committee but allows AVS and stakeholders to establish their preferred VSCs, thereby creating a market for VSCs tailored to different solutions.
Summary
In short, EL offers:
@symbioticfi positions itself as a “DeFi hub” for restaking by supporting the staking of assets such as ENA and sUSDe. Currently, 74.3% of its TVL is wstETH, and 5.45% is sUSDe, with the remainder composed of various LSTs. Native restaking has not yet been launched but may be supported soon.
Symbiotic ERC20
Unlike EL, @symbioticfi mints corresponding ERC20 tokens to represent deposits. Once the staked assets are deposited, they are sent to a “Vault,” which then delegates them to the respective “operator.”
In Symbiotic, AVS contracts/token pools are referred to as “Vaults.” A Vault is a contract established by AVS that uses the Vault for bookkeeping, delegation design, and more. AVS can customize the staking and operator reward processes by inserting external contracts.
Similar to EL, Vaults can be customized, including options for multi-operator Vaults. A notable difference from EL is the presence of immutable pre-configured Vaults that deploy using pre-set rules to “lock in” settings and mitigate the risks of upgradable contracts.
The Resolver is roughly equivalent to EL’s Veto Committee. In the event of erroneous slashing, the Resolver can veto the penalty. In @symbioticfi, Vaults can request multiple Resolvers to oversee staked assets or integrate with dispute resolution solutions (e.g., @UMAprotocol).
In short, Symbotic provides:
Karak employs a system called DSS, similar to AVS. Among all restaking protocols, @Karak_Network supports the most diverse range of staking assets, including LSTs, stablecoins, ERC20 tokens, and even LP tokens. Staked assets can be deposited through multiple chains such as ARB, Mantle, and BSC.
Out of Karak’s approximately $800 million TVL, most deposits are in LST form, with the majority on the ETH chain. Additionally, around 7% of the assets are held through K2, an L2 chain developed by the Karak team and backed by DSS.
To date, Karak V1 provides platforms for:
Vaults + Regulators
Asset Delegation Regulators
Architecturally, Karak offers a Turnkey SDK + K2 Sandbox, simplifying development. Further information is needed for more in-depth analysis.
Intuitively, the type of staked assets is the most apparent differentiator.
EigenLayer
EL offers native ETH restaking and EigenPods, with ETH constituting 68% of its TVL and successfully attracting approximately 1,500 operators. It will soon also accept LSTs and ERC20 tokens.
Symbiotic has established itself as a “DeFi hub” by collaborating with @ethena_labs and initially accepting sUSDe and ENA.
Karak stands out for its multi-chain staking deposits, allowing restaking across different chains and creating an LRT economy based on this. In terms of architecture, they are also quite similar. The process typically flows from stakeholders -> core contracts -> delegation -> operators, etc. Symbiotic allows multiple arbitration resolvers, whereas EigenLayer does not specify this but it is also possible.
In EL, operators who choose to join receive a 10% commission from AVS services, with the remainder allocated to delegated assets. On the other hand, Symbiotic and Karak may offer flexible options, allowing AVS to design their own payment structures.
AVS/DSS are highly flexible; they can customize slashing conditions, operator requirements, quorum of stakers, etc. EL and Symbiotic have resolvers and veto committees to support and rectify erroneous slashing actions. Karak has not yet disclosed related mechanisms.
So far, only EL has launched a token, EIGEN, requiring stakers to delegate tokens to the same operators as those for restaking (though they are non-transferable). Speculation about SYM and KARAK suggests that their tokens are key incentives driving their TVL.
Among these protocols, @eigenlayer clearly offers a more mature solution with the strongest economic security and ecosystem. AVS looking to gain security in the early stages will likely build on EL, given its $15 billion pool and 1,500 operators ready to join, supported by a top-notch team. Conversely, @symbioticfi and @Karak_Network are still in very early stages, with significant room for growth. Retail investors or stakeholders seeking returns from ETH alternatives or multi-chain assets might consider Karak and Symbiotic.
Overall, AVS and restaking technologies eliminate the burden of building underlying trust networks. Projects can now focus on developing new features and achieving better decentralization. Restaking is not just an innovation but a new era for ETH.
If you are interested in Restaking or AVS (Active Verification Service), this article will provide a simple comparison of @eigenlayer, @symbioticfi and @Karak_Network, and introduce related concepts, which should be helpful to you.
AVS stands for Active Validation Services, a term that essentially describes any network requiring its own validation system (e.g., oracles, DA, cross-chain bridges, etc.). In this article, AVS can be understood as projects using restake services.
Conceptually, restaking is a method of “reusing” staked ETH for additional validation/services to earn more staking rewards without unstaking it. Restaking generally comes in two forms:
Through restaking, restakers and validators can secure thousands of new services by pooling security. This helps reduce costs and provides the security guarantees needed for new trust networks to get started. Among these restaking protocols, @eigenlayer (EL) was the first to launch.
At a high level, @eigenlayer (EL) consists of four main components:
Stakers
These parties work together to allow stakers to delegate assets and validators to register as operators within EigenLayer. AVS on EL can also customize their quorum and slashing conditions for their own systems.
Restaking
EL supports both native restaking and liquid restaking. Among its approximately $15 billion in TVL (Total Value Locked):
EL has about 160,000 restakers, but only around 1,500 operators. Approximately 67.6% (about $10.3 billion) of the assets are delegated to operators.
EL provides AVS with a high degree of flexibility for self-design, allowing them to decide on:
and their own AVS contracts…
EL controls:
Validators wishing to become EL operators must register through EL. The Strategy Manager is responsible for balancing restaking participants’ accounts and works in conjunction with the Delegator Manager to execute operations.
Each AVS has its own slashing conditions. If an operator engages in malicious behavior or violates EL’s commitments, they will be slashed by the slasher, each of whom has their own slashing logic. If an operator chooses to participate in two AVSs, they must simultaneously agree to the slashing conditions of both AVSs.
In cases of “erroneous slashing,” EL has a VSC that can reverse the slashing outcome. EL itself does not act as a standard committee but allows AVS and stakeholders to establish their preferred VSCs, thereby creating a market for VSCs tailored to different solutions.
Summary
In short, EL offers:
@symbioticfi positions itself as a “DeFi hub” for restaking by supporting the staking of assets such as ENA and sUSDe. Currently, 74.3% of its TVL is wstETH, and 5.45% is sUSDe, with the remainder composed of various LSTs. Native restaking has not yet been launched but may be supported soon.
Symbiotic ERC20
Unlike EL, @symbioticfi mints corresponding ERC20 tokens to represent deposits. Once the staked assets are deposited, they are sent to a “Vault,” which then delegates them to the respective “operator.”
In Symbiotic, AVS contracts/token pools are referred to as “Vaults.” A Vault is a contract established by AVS that uses the Vault for bookkeeping, delegation design, and more. AVS can customize the staking and operator reward processes by inserting external contracts.
Similar to EL, Vaults can be customized, including options for multi-operator Vaults. A notable difference from EL is the presence of immutable pre-configured Vaults that deploy using pre-set rules to “lock in” settings and mitigate the risks of upgradable contracts.
The Resolver is roughly equivalent to EL’s Veto Committee. In the event of erroneous slashing, the Resolver can veto the penalty. In @symbioticfi, Vaults can request multiple Resolvers to oversee staked assets or integrate with dispute resolution solutions (e.g., @UMAprotocol).
In short, Symbotic provides:
Karak employs a system called DSS, similar to AVS. Among all restaking protocols, @Karak_Network supports the most diverse range of staking assets, including LSTs, stablecoins, ERC20 tokens, and even LP tokens. Staked assets can be deposited through multiple chains such as ARB, Mantle, and BSC.
Out of Karak’s approximately $800 million TVL, most deposits are in LST form, with the majority on the ETH chain. Additionally, around 7% of the assets are held through K2, an L2 chain developed by the Karak team and backed by DSS.
To date, Karak V1 provides platforms for:
Vaults + Regulators
Asset Delegation Regulators
Architecturally, Karak offers a Turnkey SDK + K2 Sandbox, simplifying development. Further information is needed for more in-depth analysis.
Intuitively, the type of staked assets is the most apparent differentiator.
EigenLayer
EL offers native ETH restaking and EigenPods, with ETH constituting 68% of its TVL and successfully attracting approximately 1,500 operators. It will soon also accept LSTs and ERC20 tokens.
Symbiotic has established itself as a “DeFi hub” by collaborating with @ethena_labs and initially accepting sUSDe and ENA.
Karak stands out for its multi-chain staking deposits, allowing restaking across different chains and creating an LRT economy based on this. In terms of architecture, they are also quite similar. The process typically flows from stakeholders -> core contracts -> delegation -> operators, etc. Symbiotic allows multiple arbitration resolvers, whereas EigenLayer does not specify this but it is also possible.
In EL, operators who choose to join receive a 10% commission from AVS services, with the remainder allocated to delegated assets. On the other hand, Symbiotic and Karak may offer flexible options, allowing AVS to design their own payment structures.
AVS/DSS are highly flexible; they can customize slashing conditions, operator requirements, quorum of stakers, etc. EL and Symbiotic have resolvers and veto committees to support and rectify erroneous slashing actions. Karak has not yet disclosed related mechanisms.
So far, only EL has launched a token, EIGEN, requiring stakers to delegate tokens to the same operators as those for restaking (though they are non-transferable). Speculation about SYM and KARAK suggests that their tokens are key incentives driving their TVL.
Among these protocols, @eigenlayer clearly offers a more mature solution with the strongest economic security and ecosystem. AVS looking to gain security in the early stages will likely build on EL, given its $15 billion pool and 1,500 operators ready to join, supported by a top-notch team. Conversely, @symbioticfi and @Karak_Network are still in very early stages, with significant room for growth. Retail investors or stakeholders seeking returns from ETH alternatives or multi-chain assets might consider Karak and Symbiotic.
Overall, AVS and restaking technologies eliminate the burden of building underlying trust networks. Projects can now focus on developing new features and achieving better decentralization. Restaking is not just an innovation but a new era for ETH.