Is rsETH safe as fixed-rate carry?
Kelp rsETH (liquid restaking token)
REFUSED on structural grounds (the same LRT peg-breakdown tail family as ezETH/weETH). We do NOT quote a measured drawdown here: our peg series does not cover rsETH's window, so — fail-closed — we refuse to fabricate a number. The refusal is structural, not price-derived.
Structural reason
Structural PEG-breakdown tail (LRT family). Measured figure withheld — no peg series in our window (honest gap, not fabricated).
Measured tail
Measured figure withheld — no peg series in our window (fail-closed, not fabricated). The refusal is structural.
SPA is a paper-stage research desk. This is a structural risk verdict, not investment advice. Measured figures are BACKTEST (real ETH-peg history), conservative lower bounds — never presented as realized returns. A CONSIDERED verdict means we do not refuse it on structural grounds — it is not an endorsement, a recommendation, or a claim of safety. The differentiator is what we REFUSE, published transparently.
Personal research project in paper validation — not investment advice, not a regulated service, not raising capital; results are simulated. Full disclaimer & risk disclosure →