lst.ink

← All comparisons

ether.fi vs Puffer

How ether.fi and Puffer differ on token, backend, TVL and approach.

ether.fiPuffer
TypeEigenLayer LRTAnti-slashing LRT
LRT tokeneETH / weETHpufETH
How it worksStake ETH (or an LST) for eETH, restaked via EigenLayer (and beyond) to earn staking + AVS rewards; weETH is the wrapped, DeFi-friendly version. Uniquely, users keep control of their withdrawal keys. Also runs the ether.fi Cash card.Native liquid restaking: pufETH is yield-bearing (mirrors wstETH) with Puffer’s anti-slashing tech to cut validator penalties; it accrues Puffer + EigenLayer points. Puffer also builds a based rollup.
Restakes onEigenLayer (+ Symbiotic)EigenLayer
TVL*~$6B+~$106M
Best forThe safe default — liquidity & integrationsSlashing-conscious restakers

ether.fi

  • Largest LRT by far (~65% share)
  • Deepest DeFi liquidity & integrations
  • Non-custodial withdrawal keys
  • Yield not always the highest
  • Systemic weight / concentration

Puffer

  • Anti-slashing tech (reduces penalties)
  • Native restaking, not just an LST wrapper
  • Puffer + EigenLayer points
  • Smaller TVL than ether.fi/Renzo
  • Anti-slashing adds complexity

Bottom line

Pick ether.fi for the safe default — liquidity & integrations; pick Puffer for slashing-conscious restakers.

* TVL = dated snapshot (DefiLlama + provider reports, 2026).