MetalX Lending

MetalX Lending receives a C risk grade (43/100) from Hindenrank, where lower scores indicate lower risk. Higher risk — standard lending mechanics but deployed on a small DPoS chain with limited decentralization, thin liquidity, bridge dependency, and sparse documentation MetalX Lending is a decentralized lending protocol built on XPR Network (formerly Proton), allowing users to deposit crypto as collateral to borrow other assets or earn interest on deposits. It supports cross-chain assets through Metallicus wrapped xTokens bridge. With approximately $32M in TVL, MetalX is the leading DeFi application on XPR Network. The protocol follows standard overcollateralized lending patterns similar to Aave, but operates on a smaller DPoS chain with limited documentation, fewer security audits, and significantly less DeFi ecosystem depth than major EVM chains.

The key risks identified for MetalX Lending are: (1) MetalX operates on XPR Network, a small blockchain with limited decentralization — if the validator set is compromised, all protocol funds could be at risk. (2) The protocol relies on a cross-chain bridge for wrapped asset collateral. Bridge hacks have caused some of the largest losses in DeFi history, and any bridge compromise would directly impact MetalX Lending. (3) Limited public documentation and audit transparency make it difficult to independently verify the security of MetalX's smart contracts compared to well-documented protocols like Aave.

MetalX Lending scores 43/100 across eight risk dimensions: Mechanism Novelty: 3/15, Interaction Severity: 6/20, Oracle Surface: 5/10, Documentation Gaps: 7/10, Track Record: 10/15, Scale Exposure: 3/10, Regulatory Risk: 5/10, Vitality Risk: 4/10. The highest risk area is Documentation Gaps at 7/10.

Among 90 rated Lending protocols on Hindenrank, MetalX Lending ranks #73 by safety (lowest risk score = safest). Its 43/100 risk score and C grade place it among the riskier Lending protocols.

MetalX Lending scores 10/15 on the Track Record risk dimension, indicating some history of security incidents or exploits. Higher scores reflect more severe or frequent incidents. Review the full risk report for details.