Gauntlet vs Steakhouse Financial: Which Fits Your Strategy? (2026)

Both projects curate DeFi risk and offer vaults through non-custodial arrangements, but their emphasis differs. Gauntlet describes vaults that lend, restake and allocate across multiple strategies, markets, protocols and chains. It also presents a quantitative risk-management approach with human oversight and has published research, documentation and risk dashboards. Steakhouse Financial is more specifically centered on stablecoin lending vaults, mainly on Morpho, while also curating on Kamino and offering services to businesses. Its offerings include white-label products, advisory and capital-raising support. Public sources report about $1.54B in TVL for Gauntlet and about $2.76B for Steakhouse. Neither figure establishes expected returns or eliminates the risks of the underlying markets. Both are active and have no native token listed.

Gauntlet is the broader choice if you want a curator whose listed strategies include lending, restaking and multi-strategy allocations. It also builds strategies around particular assets, including stablecoins and tokenized assets. Steakhouse is the more direct fit for stablecoin lending: its review describes Morpho vaults for treasury and fund capital, plus curation on Kamino. It also has a Coinbase DeFi Lend offering for eligible Coinbase users lending USDC through Steakhouse-curated Morpho vaults. Both work with fintechs, exchanges and asset managers, and both support products that other apps or platforms can embed. Our review of Steakhouse also describes a USDG vault onboarding Robinhood Stock Tokens as collateral; that adds a distinct tokenized-collateral use case, not a general assurance about those assets. Choose based on the specific vault, collateral and strategy you intend to use, rather than the curator’s headline positioning alone.

Neither of our reviews provides a general fee schedule or a published rate for vault-level charges. Gauntlet’s data says its vault fee structures, including any management or performance fees, are not published. It does note that users of at least one integration, KAST Earn, pay no gas fees and that protocol rewards are auto-redeemed and compounded; that detail should not be assumed to apply to every Gauntlet vault. Steakhouse likewise does not publish fee terms on its homepage, and public sources say the rate for any performance fee on an individual vault is not public. For either curator, check the specific vault page and its documentation before depositing. If you are considering a business service rather than a vault, Steakhouse also advises checking the service agreement for build or advisory work. Public sources are not enough to declare either one cheaper.

Neither project has audits listed, so that information alone does not establish that either is audited or unaudited. Gauntlet names Hypernative for onchain monitoring, Zeroshadow for round-the-clock response monitoring and Chainalysis for tracing. These are monitoring measures, not substitutes for reviewing audits of the specific vault contracts. Gauntlet vaults can also carry risks from underlying protocols such as Morpho and Pendle, as well as market risks including depegs or liquidity crunches. Steakhouse’s vaults use third-party platforms such as Morpho and Kamino, and its risks include the curator’s collateral and market choices alongside platform risk. Its review specifically notes that tokenized stocks can bring issuer, oracle and liquidity risks. Neither curator’s risk management removes the possibility of loss. Before depositing, review the vault’s collateral, contract information, underlying protocol risks and any available audit reports. Regulatory status and insurance are not stated.

Choose Gauntlet if you value a wider mix of curated strategies, its stated quantitative risk-management framework, and its published research and dashboards. Its data lists 14 chains, compared with 11 for Steakhouse, and its features span lending, restaking and custom allocations. Choose Steakhouse if your main interest is stablecoin lending, Morpho vaults, or business-focused services such as white-label products, advisory and capital raising. It has the higher reported TVL, but TVL is not a safety score or a promise of yield. For either choice, the decisive comparison should be between the individual vaults: their assets, collateral, underlying protocols, fees and available security documentation. If you need a published fee schedule or clearly listed audits before deciding, neither of our reviews supplies that information. Do not treat curator selection as a guarantee against losses.