BlackHartBlackHart
Scores/BENQI

BENQI

DAMASCUS

Lending / Liquid Staking · Avalanche · $500M+ TVL · 15 contracts

Official site: benqi.fi ↗

784
3004756508251000
Confidence55%
Z-Factor0.80
Updated 2026-05-27Public score

Security Profile

Access Ctrl
70
Economic
72
Oracle
72
Compos.
70
Govern.
62
Maturity
78
Resilience
70
Supply Ch.
75
OpSec
46
Cascade
100
Min
46
Avg
72
Max
100

Audit History

Halborn
2021-08
Certik
2022-03

Bug Bounty Program

$500,000
Max payout on Immunefi
View Program

Assessment

Largest Avalanche lending protocol and liquid staking provider. 57+ months live with clean exploit history. Compound V2 fork provides proven codebase. sAVAX addition creates additional staking surface. Limited governance decentralization.

Dimension Breakdown

Methodology
Access Control
Weight 18% · 68% confidence
70
+18Compound V2 fork access model
+18Admin multisig
+18Guardian for emergency
+18Standard lending permissions
Provenance
Economic Soundness
Weight 13% · 70% confidence
72
+18Compound V2 fork economics
+18sAVAX liquid staking addition
+18Liquidation mechanism standard
+18Interest rate model proven
Provenance
Oracle Integrity
Weight 13% · 70% confidence
72
+18Chainlink oracle integration
+18Price validation
+18Standard oracle pattern
+18Avalanche-specific feeds
Provenance
Battle-Tested Maturity
Weight 12% · 75% confidence
78
+20Live since August 2021 (57+ months)
+20Largest Avalanche lending protocol
+20No protocol exploits
+20Multiple product additions
Provenance
Governance & Upgradeability
Weight 10% · 62% confidence
62
+16QI governance token
+16Community governance
+16Team controls parameters
+16Limited decentralization
Provenance
Adversarial Resilienceredacted
Weight 10% · 68% confidence
70
  • Audited
  • Compound fork reduces novel risk
  • Active bounty
  • Clean exploit history
Provenance
Operational Security
Weight 10% · 25% confidence
46
-27No branch protection detected
+12No CI/CD pipeline detected
+12Commit signing: 50% verified
-27Weak PR review coverage (0%)
Provenance
Compositional Risk
Weight 5% · 68% confidence
70
+18Avalanche ecosystem integration
+18sAVAX integration across DeFi
+18Limited cross-chain
+18Standard lending composability
Provenance
Cascade Exposure
Weight 5% · 55% confidence
100
+33Appears in 1 cross-protocol cascade chain(s)
+33Member of 1 dependency cluster(s)
+33Source: cross_protocol_composition.json dependency analysis
Provenance
Supply Chain
Weight 4% · 72% confidence
75
+19Compound V2 fork
+19Standard Solidity
+19Verified
+19Standard deps
Provenance

Top Score Drivers

Dimensions with the greatest marginal impact on BRI.

Operational Security
46+39 potential
No branch protection detected
Access Control
70+32.1 potential
Compound V2 fork access model
Governance & Upgradeability
62+23.7 potential
QI governance token
Economic Soundness
72+21.1 potential
Compound V2 fork economics
Oracle Integrity
72+21.1 potential
Chainlink oracle integration

Adversarial Risk Signals

Publicly verifiable security posture indicators.

Disclosure HistoryNot Assessed
Remediation VelocityNot Assessed
Bug Bounty ProgramNot Assessed
Audit CoverageNot Assessed
Incident HistoryNot Assessed
Deployed 2021-08-1910 dimensionsProvenance Ledger
methodology v2.1formula v1.0weights v1.0evidence sha256:sha256:b...

Score History & Verification

Score provenance tracking begins with the next reassessment.

Full provenance ledger

On-Chain Data

Protocol Slug
"benqi"
Oracle
BRORegistry (Base)
Evidence
IPFS (pinned)
Staleness Threshold
24 hours
Read Score
registry.getScore("benqi")
Reduce exploitable risk

Continuous adversarial analysis, vulnerability detection, and verified reassessment.

View PlansMethodology

Embed this score

Live, updates automatically. Free for any site. Click-through links open the full report on BlackHart.

Public
Style
Theme
Format
Preview
Copy iframe code
<iframe
  src="https://blackhart.io/embed/oracle/benqi?variant=card&theme=dark"
  title="BlackHart Risk Index: BENQI"
  width="340"
  height="290"
  frameborder="0"
  loading="lazy"
  style="border:0; max-width:100%;"
></iframe>
Believe this score contains a factual error? Submit evidence for review