lst.ink

Puffer vs Renzo

How Puffer and Renzo differ on token, backend, TVL and approach.

PufferRenzo
TypeAnti-slashing LRTMultichain LRT
LRT tokenpufETHezETH
How it worksNative 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.Deposit ETH/LSTs for ezETH; Renzo actively manages the restaking strategy and AVS selection. ezETH is pushed to Arbitrum, Blast, Linea, Mode and more, so you can use restaked exposure across L2s.
Restakes onEigenLayerEigenLayer + Symbiotic
TVL*~$106M~$1B+
Best forSlashing-conscious restakersRestaked exposure across L2s

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

Renzo

  • Most aggressive multichain (Arbitrum, Blast, Linea, Mode)
  • Managed restaking strategy + AVS selection
  • Best for L2 DeFi
  • ezETH has had a depeg episode
  • Managed = trust in operator choices

Bottom line

Pick Puffer for slashing-conscious restakers; pick Renzo for restaked exposure across l2s.

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