Skip to main content

What are the best alternatives to ERC-4626 vaults?

ERC-4626 is a standard, not a product, so an alternative to it means an alternative to the structure it encodes: capital pooled in a contract, your claim represented as a share token, and your result determined by the pool's aggregate rather than a position sized for you.

That structure suits a large class of products, and fits others badly enough that separate standards exist to work around it. This page covers what the standard actually specifies, where it fits badly, and what the alternatives are.

Four ways to hold a yield position​

ERC-4626 vaultERC-7540 async vaultNon-standard vaultSelf-custodial delegated agent
Where assets sitPooled in the vault contractPooled in the vault contractPooled in the vault or programIn your own wallet
What you holdAn ERC-20 share tokenAn ERC-20 share plus a pending requestA protocol-specific claimThe wallet and its balance
Exit pathRedeem atomically, up to the vault's limitRequest redemption, then claim once fulfilledProtocol-specific lock-up or notice periodRevoke access, close the position, withdraw
ComposabilityHigh — the share is an ERC-20 usable elsewherePartial — pending requests are not transferable sharesLow — usually confined to its own venueNone — a wallet balance is not a token others can integrate
Who sets strategyThe vault's strategist or governanceThe vault's manager, often off-chainThe vault leader or protocolYou choose the agent's mandate up front
ExamplesYearn yVaults, Ethena's sUSDeCentrifuge RWA pools; Ondo and Backed institutional variantsHyperliquid vaults, Drift vaultsDeploy Finance agents

What ERC-4626 actually standardizes​

EIP-4626 defines a common API for tokenized vaults representing shares of a single underlying ERC-20 asset. It builds on ERC-20 for the share token itself, with optional EIP-2612 support for approvals.

The spec standardizes roughly fifteen functions across three groups: conversions (convertToShares, convertToAssets), deposits (deposit, mint, plus preview and max variants), and withdrawals (withdraw, redeem, plus preview and max variants), alongside asset() and totalAssets().

Its stated motivation was integration burden. Before the standard, lending markets and yield protocols each exposed different implementation details, so every integrator wrote its own adapters — which the spec describes as error prone.

What the spec itself warns about​

The standard's own security considerations are worth reading before treating any 4626 vault as interchangeable with another:

  • Interface conformance is not specification conformance. The spec warns that permissionless use cases can encounter malicious implementations that satisfy the interface without honoring the specification.
  • Preview functions are manipulable. They reflect on-chain conditions that can be altered, and the spec states they are not always safe to use as price oracles.
  • Rounding direction matters. The standard prescribes opposing rounding directions across methods — down to favor the vault, up to favor users — specifically to close exploit paths.
  • Fees can be opaque. Implementations may charge deposit or withdrawal fees that cause conversion and preview functions to diverge, producing unexpected slippage.

Where the vault structure fits badly​

Settlement is assumed to be atomic. ERC-4626 is built for deposits and redemptions that complete in a single transaction, up to a limit. Once that limit is reached, no new deposits or redemptions can be submitted at all. Any system with an inherent delay — real-world assets, undercollateralized lending, cross-chain positions, liquid staking, insurance safety modules — fits this model poorly. That mismatch is precisely why ERC-7540 exists.

Your result is the pool's result. A share is a proportional claim on an aggregate book. Another depositor's timing, and the strategy's behavior at the pool level, determine your outcome. There is no position sized or managed for you individually.

The share price is the entire interface. The standard expresses value per share. It does not express what the strategy is doing to produce it, which is why evaluating two 4626 vaults against each other means leaving the standard and reading each protocol's own documentation.

The alternatives​

ERC-7540: asynchronous vaults​

Finalized in March 2024, ERC-7540 extends ERC-4626 rather than replacing it — compliant vaults must still implement 4626, with overrides for the async behavior. It adds Requests: you call requestDeposit or requestRedeem, the vault registers a pending request, and it is fulfilled at a later block after off-chain settlement, an oracle update, or governance approval.

Centrifuge implemented 7540 across its RWA pools in mid-2024, and Ondo and Backed have shipped 7540-compliant variants for institutional pools.

Choose this when settlement genuinely cannot be atomic. Note what it does not change: capital is still pooled, and you now hold a claim plus a queue position.

Non-standard vaults​

Not every vault is an ERC-4626 vault. Hyperliquid vaults and Drift vaults run on non-EVM or venue-specific architectures with their own accounting, lock-ups, and leader profit-share terms. They keep the pooled structure while dropping the standardized interface — which means less composability and per-venue terms you have to read individually.

Direct positions​

You open and manage the position yourself. Maximum control, no share accounting, no manager — and the full operational burden of execution, sizing, and monitoring.

Self-custodial delegated execution​

Funds stay in a wallet you control while a defined strategy trades them under a scoped, revocable permission. No vault contract takes custody, no share token is issued, and nothing is pooled with other users.

Deploy Finance: a position, not a share​

Deploy Finance runs autonomous trading agents funded and settled in USDC. The live agents are Income: Funding Rates and Superstar.

The structural difference from a vault is where the assets sit. You are not depositing into a contract and receiving a claim — the USDC stays in a wallet built on Privy's embedded-wallet infrastructure, with exportable keys. The agent receives a separate session key scoped to trading that cannot transfer or withdraw funds, and you can revoke it at any time.

That changes what leaving looks like. There is no redemption against a pool, no queue, and no limit that can be reached by other depositors. You revoke the agent's access, close the position, and withdraw from your own wallet.

Sign in with email or Google, fund the wallet with USDC, and choose an agent. The approval screen shows exactly what the session key permits before you grant it.

What you give up​

Composability, which is what ERC-4626 was created to provide. A vault share is an ERC-20: it can be posted as collateral, supplied to a liquidity pool, wrapped, or integrated by any protocol that speaks the standard. A wallet balance under an agent's mandate is not a token anyone can integrate. If your goal is a yield-bearing asset that plugs into the rest of DeFi, a vault share does that and a delegated position does not.

When to choose each​

Choose an ERC-4626 vault when:

  • You want a yield-bearing token other protocols can integrate as collateral or liquidity.
  • Atomic deposits and redemptions suit the underlying strategy.
  • You are comfortable with a proportional claim on a pooled book.

Choose an ERC-7540 vault when:

  • The underlying asset or strategy cannot settle atomically — RWAs, institutional credit, cross-chain exposure.
  • You accept a request-and-fulfill cycle in exchange for access to those assets.

Choose a delegated agent when:

  • You want capital held individually in your own wallet rather than pooled.
  • You want a strategy mandate defined before you allocate, rather than a share price to interpret afterward.
  • You want to exit by revoking access rather than redeeming against a pool's available liquidity.
  • You do not need the position itself to be composable elsewhere.

Different primitives: ERC-4626 and ERC-7540 are interface standards for pooled vaults. A delegated agent is a different structure entirely, with no share token and no pool. Comparing them means comparing what you hold, not two implementations of the same thing.

Choose the approach that matches the job​

Use a vault when you want a composable, transferable claim and pooled execution suits the strategy. Use an async vault when settlement delays are inherent to the asset. Use a delegated agent when you want the capital to stay in your wallet and the mandate defined up front, and you can trade away composability to get that.

Two ways to use Deploy Finance​

Income: Funding Rates

Choose this agent if you want funding-spread yield held as a position in your own wallet rather than a share in a pooled vault.

Superstar

Choose this agent for a directional stance across spot, perpetuals, and HIP-3 markets, which the vault-share model is not designed to express.

Learn more​

Start with Deploy Finance​

Create a self-custodial Deploy Finance wallet and review the live agents.