Clearstar vs RockawayX: Which DeFi curator fits? (2026)

Both Clearstar and RockawayX curate DeFi strategies, but curation is framed differently in each business. Clearstar presents risk research as a central part of its work: it describes scored protocol and asset assessments, qualitative diligence covering governance and contract permissions, and continued monitoring of collateral, oracles and liquidity. It also works on vault setup, strategy operations and incident response.

RockawayX is a broader crypto firm. Alongside onchain risk curation, it describes market-neutral yield strategies, liquidity provision, validator infrastructure and venture investing. That range may appeal if you are considering the firm as a wider institutional partner, but it does not mean its curated products are safer. The central decision is whether you value Clearstar’s explicitly risk-first process or RockawayX’s broader set of crypto activities.

RockawayX has the higher reported TVL, at about $304.5 million, compared with Clearstar’s roughly $188.3 million. Clearstar lists activity across 11 chains, while RockawayX lists 10. Their chain selections overlap on Ethereum, Base and Monad, but each also covers networks the other does not. Check that the particular vault or strategy you want is available on your preferred chain; a firm’s overall chain list does not establish that every product is offered everywhere.

TVL and chain coverage describe scale and reach, not expected returns, liquidity or the risk of an individual deposit. RockawayX’s strategies cover stablecoins, ETH, BTC and SOL, while Clearstar’s description emphasizes its role in curating and operating vault strategies. Product-level details should guide a decision more than headline TVL.

Neither Clearstar nor RockawayX publishes a general fee schedule. Clearstar says advisory engagements appear to be bespoke, and points prospective clients to a contact form. For deposits, any management or performance charge may be shown on the platform hosting the particular vault. RockawayX also does not state management, performance or curator fees; it says users considering a vault should check the vault’s fee settings and fund terms.

Do not assume that the two firms charge the same way, or that a fee on one product applies to another. Before committing funds, inspect the specific vault page for its current fee settings and read the terms for any institutional product. If those details are not available to you, ask the provider to clarify them before making a decision.

Neither company has audits listed for its curated products. That does not establish that a product is unsafe, but it leaves you without published audit coverage to assess here. Clearstar describes ongoing monitoring of collateral health, oracle integrity and liquidity, with alerts that can lead to protective action. Its risk reports are described as scored and tiered, though the scoring methodology is not shown publicly.

RockawayX describes itself as a risk curator but does not describe an independent review of its curated strategies. Its market-neutral approach is intended to reduce price exposure, but it does not remove smart-contract, collateral, oracle or curator risk. For both firms, assess the underlying protocol and the exact vault permissions and terms. Neither publishes regulatory status or incident history in the information summarized here, so do not treat those points as verified safeguards.

Choose Clearstar if your priority is a curator that explicitly emphasizes scored risk assessments, qualitative diligence and continuous onchain monitoring. Its work spans strategy design, integration, operations and incident response, which may suit allocators seeking a risk-focused partner across a product’s lifecycle. Its TVL is lower than RockawayX’s, and its fees and audit coverage are not published.

Choose RockawayX if you want a firm with higher TVL and a wider business spanning curation, market-neutral yield strategies, liquidity, validators and venture investing. Its strategies target institutional and high-net-worth clients, and public details on retail access and minimums are unclear. Neither is an obvious choice based on fees or audits: both leave those details unpublished. Compare the exact product, terms and risks before depositing, rather than choosing on TVL alone.