CONSIDERED · safer path (LST)

Is stETH safe to hold or use as fixed-rate carry?

Lido stETH (liquid staking token)

The SPA Rates Desk does NOT refuse stETH on structural grounds. It is a plain liquid-staking token (LST), not a liquid restaking token (LRT) — it does not carry the stacked restaking / operator-slashing tail that gets ezETH, weETH and rsETH refused. It is still not risk-free. This is paper research, not a live-capital position.

Why it is structurally safer

Plain staking, not restaking. No extra restaking / operator-slashing layer on top of ETH staking; the deepest LST liquidity on-chain; historically tracks its ETH redemption value closely (the 2022 discount resolved without insolvency). This is the LST path the desk treats as structurally safer than any LRT — the peg-breakdown tail is far smaller than the refused restaking tokens.

Safer is not risk-free

Safer is not risk-free: stETH still carries Lido smart-contract risk, validator-slashing risk, ETH price risk, and a secondary-market discount in a fast exit. 'Structurally safer than an LRT' is not 'safe'. Whether a specific fixed-rate PT book on stETH clears the desk's carry gate depends on live pricing and haircuts — see the live refusal log for the current verdict.

Check us Refusal log (hash-chained) → Liquidation-NAV by size → The tiers we run →

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.