ICHI or Kodiak Islands: Which Liquidity Tool Fits You in 2026?

ICHI is the broader option by listed chain coverage: it names many EVM networks and Hedera. Its vaults are designed to accept one token and deploy it into a Uniswap V3 concentrated-liquidity pool. That can suit token holders, projects or treasuries that want to manage liquidity without supplying a pair of assets themselves. But the current site counters show zero vaults and networks, so the long chain list does not establish that you can deposit today.

Kodiak Islands is the narrower choice: it is for liquidity provision through Kodiak DEX on Berachain. Pick it if you already use Berachain and want to explore that ecosystem’s pools. Its exact supported assets and position options are not published, so check the app before connecting your wallet. In either case, chain availability is not the same as a live, suitable pool. Confirm the token, contract and withdrawal process before committing funds.

Neither product publishes a general, clear fee schedule. ICHI says vault depositors can earn trading fees from the underlying Uniswap V3 pool, but those amounts depend on trading activity and liquidity conditions; they are not a fixed rate. Check the particular vault for deposit, withdrawal, management or performance charges before approving a transaction. You will also need the network’s native currency to pay gas.

Kodiak does not publish exact fee rates or a clear breakdown of provider rewards. Pool-level trading fees or incentives may apply, but you should not count on a particular amount—or assume KDK incentives are available—without checking the specific pool’s terms. Gas also applies to on-chain actions. For both services, price movements and pool mechanics can make your position worth less than simply holding the assets. Compare the costs and risks with the expected pool activity, and do not treat displayed yields or past fees as promised returns.

Both list two audits, but an audit count alone does not tell you whether the contracts you will use were reviewed or what issues were found. For ICHI, verify the reports and confirm that their scope matches the current vault contracts. ICHI describes its protocol as non-custodial, but that does not protect you from a contract exploit, a flawed strategy or market losses.

Kodiak’s audit names, dates, findings and contract coverage need checking, and its custody model is not published. Treat every deposit as a smart-contract interaction: verify contract addresses, understand wallet approvals and avoid signing prompts you cannot explain. Neither product can make liquidity provision risk-free. Pool positions can lose value relative to holding the assets, and incentives or fee income may not offset that loss. If you cannot confirm the live contracts and understand the pool strategy, do not deposit until you can.

Neither is a simple savings product: both involve on-chain liquidity and variable outcomes. ICHI has a more specific deposit design—one token goes into a vault that deploys it to a Uniswap V3 pool—but that does not remove the need to understand concentrated liquidity. You need a compatible wallet, the correct network, the deposit token and gas. The biggest practical obstacle is availability: its current counters show no vaults or networks, so first confirm a live option.

Kodiak Islands may be the more direct starting point if you already use Berachain and want to provide liquidity through Kodiak Finance. Still, the supported wallets, pool assets and detailed steps are not published. Check that you have the right network selected, verify token and contract addresses, and read each approval. A familiar chain or interface does not make a deposit safe. If published terms and predictable outcomes are essential to you, neither is an easy fit until you can verify the pool, fees and withdrawal process.