Concentrator vs Convex: fees, chains and yield (2026)

Both protocols aggregate yield around Curve-related ecosystems, but they package the experience differently. Concentrator centers on vaults that auto-compound rewards from Curve, Convex, Frax and related protocols. Its compounders include options such as aFXN, arUSD, fxSAVE and asdPENDLE, while its harvesters span many Curve-style pools. Convex pools eligible Curve, Frax and f(x) liquidity positions so users can receive group-boosted rewards. It also offers cvxCRV staking and CVX locking for gauge voting.

The scale and chain reach differ. Concentrator lists Ethereum alone and has about $86.2 million in TVL. Convex lists Ethereum, Fraxtal, Arbitrum and Polygon, with about $525.6 million in TVL. Those figures describe scale, not a guarantee of future yield or safety.

Concentrator publishes a limited fee schedule: a 10% treasury fee and a 1% harvest fee on yield from arUSD and aFXN. Those charges are collected during harvesting. Fees for its other compounders and harvesters are not published, so check the details for the particular vault before depositing. Ethereum gas costs also apply to its Ethereum activity, and underlying protocols may have their own fees.

Convex's fee structure is not published. Its homepage shows platform revenue, but not the percentages charged or the cut taken from rewards. Network gas costs may apply when depositing, claiming or withdrawing, with the relevant network depending on where you use Convex. For either protocol, do not assume that a visible reward rate is the same as your return after fees, gas and changes in token prices. Confirm current pool terms before committing funds.

Both protocols have two audits listed, but neither publishes auditor names or report details here. Concentrator's homepage says it is audited and verified, and its documentation navigation mentions a security bounty program. It also labels the project beta and warns users to use it at their own risk. That warning matters when assessing a protocol whose vaults depend on other systems.

Convex describes its contracts as immutable and non-custodial and says third-party firms have audited them. These features do not remove smart-contract risk. Both protocols rely on other ecosystems, so a problem with Curve, Frax or other connected protocols can affect positions. Concentrator also exposes users to risks in the underlying pool assets, including potential depegs of stablecoins and derivative tokens. Reward values can change with emissions and token prices. Neither project’s audit count should be treated as a guarantee against loss.

Concentrator automates reward harvesting and reinvestment, which can reduce the need to claim and compound manually. Its app offers vaults, harvesters, farms, locking, vesting, an airdrop section and governance tools. The trade-off is a dense menu: many pool names and product choices can make it harder for a new user to identify a suitable vault. Its interface is also limited to Ethereum, where mainnet gas costs apply.

Convex describes a four-step flow: deposit, earn, claim and withdraw. It supports multiple chains and has dashboards for pools, platform revenue, treasury and emissions controlled. Users who lock CVX can participate in gauge voting, adding a governance role beyond earning rewards. Convex may therefore feel more direct for users focused on staking eligible positions, while Concentrator is more explicitly organized around auto-compounding products. In both cases, check the specific pool and withdrawal terms before using it; full fee and withdrawal details are not published.

Choose Concentrator if you use Ethereum and want vaults that automatically harvest and compound rewards from Curve-style pools and related protocols. Its broad pool selection and specialized vault tokens may suit users comfortable navigating DeFi products. Keep its beta warning, layered protocol dependencies and only-partial fee disclosure in mind; fees beyond arUSD and aFXN are not published.

Choose Convex if you want access across Ethereum, Fraxtal, Arbitrum and Polygon, a simpler deposit-to-claim flow, or boosted staking tied to Curve, Frax and f(x). Its much higher TVL indicates greater scale, but it does not establish that a position is safer or more profitable. Convex fees are not published, and reward rates vary. Neither option is risk-free, and neither is an obvious choice for someone who needs fully disclosed fees and straightforward risk exposure.