Silo FinanceMicro-cap

Silo Finance receives a B- risk grade (29/100) from Hindenrank, where lower scores indicate lower risk. Lower risk — isolation design genuinely limits contagion, but permissionless market creation opens the door to oracle manipulation attacks A lending protocol where each token gets its own isolated market, so a hack in one market cannot spread to others. It holds $400M in deposits with $32M in funding. Its B grade reflects solid risk isolation design, offset by the fact that anyone can create new markets for risky tokens.

The key risks identified for Silo Finance are: (1) Anyone can create a new lending market for any token. Markets for obscure, low-liquidity tokens are easy targets for price manipulation attacks that drain deposited funds (2) The V2 upgrade lets third-party developers attach custom code to lending markets. A bug in that custom code could let an attacker bypass the isolation protections within a single market (3) All markets share a common base asset like ETH or USDC. If that shared asset crashes or loses its peg, every market on the platform feels the pain at the same time

Silo Finance scores 29/100 across eight risk dimensions: Mechanism Novelty: 5/15, Interaction Severity: 6/20, Oracle Surface: 3/10, Documentation Gaps: 2/10, Track Record: 2/15, Scale Exposure: 3/10, Regulatory Risk: 2/10, Vitality Risk: 6/10. The highest risk area is Vitality Risk at 6/10.

Among 90 rated Lending protocols on Hindenrank, Silo Finance ranks #19 by safety (lowest risk score = safest). Its 29/100 risk score and B- grade place it among the safer Lending protocols.

Silo Finance scores 2/15 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.