Gauntlet or Steakhouse Financial: Which Fits Your DeFi Yield Needs?

Gauntlet is the broader fit if you want to compare lending, restaking and multi-strategy vaults. Its offerings span many assets and networks, and you may access them directly or through a partner app. That range also means the details can differ significantly from one vault to another.

Steakhouse Financial is more specifically centered on curated lending vaults, particularly for stablecoin users and organizations managing treasuries. It also provides white-label products and related services to businesses. One described example lets eligible Coinbase users lend USDC through Steakhouse-curated vaults on Morpho; eligibility and terms should be checked in that product.

Neither curator promises a fixed return. Lending rates can change with borrower demand, while vault strategies may depend on underlying protocols and market conditions. Treat the displayed APY as variable, not as a promised outcome, and compare the specific vault’s strategy and exit terms before choosing.

Neither publishes a single fee schedule that covers every vault. Gauntlet fees may vary by strategy or partner app, while Steakhouse does not publish a general fee schedule. Check the exact vault or partner terms for management, performance or other charges before you deposit; also check the transaction screen for network gas costs.

TVL figures listed for the two projects are about $1.59 billion for Gauntlet and $2.89 billion for Steakhouse Financial, but their as-of date is not published. Treat them as approximate context, not a current quote or a measure of how safe a particular vault is. Project-level TVL also does not tell you the fees, liquidity or withdrawal conditions for the vault you are considering.

For either option, compare the expected yield with the full costs and risks, not just the APY. Lending returns can move, and withdrawals may depend on vault rules, available liquidity or the underlying protocol. Confirm those terms before approving a transaction.

Both describe their vaults as non-custodial, but that does not remove the risk of losing funds. Your deposit may depend on vault contracts, underlying protocols and market conditions. Lending strategies can also be affected by collateral shortfalls, liquidations or borrower problems. Neither offers a guaranteed return or stated deposit protection.

No audits are listed for either curator. Gauntlet does not publish a blanket audit record covering all its strategies, and for Steakhouse you should verify whether any audit documentation covers the specific contracts and vault you plan to use. A general security claim or an audit of a different product is not proof that your chosen vault is safe.

Before depositing, identify the vault’s contracts, underlying protocols, asset allocations and withdrawal conditions. If those details—or relevant security documentation—are not clear enough for you to assess, it may be better not to deposit. Only risk funds you can afford to lose.

Neither is a simple account with one standard rate and uniform exit rules. For either service, first identify the exact vault, supported asset and chain. Then confirm fees, strategy, withdrawal terms and relevant security documentation before connecting your wallet. A typical onchain deposit requires a compatible wallet, the right asset on the right network and enough native tokens to pay gas.

Gauntlet may take more comparison because its options include lending, restaking and multi-strategy vaults, and you may encounter them through a partner. Partner apps can have their own onboarding and withdrawal process. Steakhouse’s focus on lending may make it easier to narrow your search if you already want stablecoin lending, but you still need to check each vault’s specifics.

Neither publishes one universal KYC rule or withdrawal speed for all vaults. A partner may impose eligibility checks, and onchain withdrawals can depend on the vault’s terms and liquidity. Verify everything for the product you will actually use.