SushiSwap V3

SushiSwap V3 receives a C+ risk grade (38/100) from Hindenrank, where lower scores indicate lower risk. Moderate-to-high risk — wide multi-chain coverage and battle-tested Uniswap V3 codebase are offset by persistent governance instability, aggressive token emissions, and the security challenge of monitoring 40+ chain deployments SushiSwap V3 is a decentralized exchange deployed across 40+ blockchains, offering concentrated liquidity pools where you can provide liquidity within custom price ranges for higher capital efficiency. Born as a Uniswap fork in 2020, it has evolved into a multi-chain DEX with an aggregator that hit $20B in volume. With $69M TVL, it is a mid-size DEX with broad chain coverage but a troubled governance history.

The key risks identified for SushiSwap V3 are: (1) SushiSwap has a rocky history: the founder sold his tokens in 2020, there have been multiple leadership changes, and governance disputes over treasury spending. This pattern of instability means the protocol may not respond quickly to security threats (2) The protocol is deployed on 40+ different blockchains. Keeping all of them secure simultaneously is extremely difficult — a vulnerability on one chain could go unnoticed while the team focuses elsewhere (3) SUSHI token emissions were tripled from 1.5% to 5% per year. This means your SUSHI holdings are being diluted faster, and if the increased emissions do not attract enough new liquidity, the token price will suffer

SushiSwap V3 scores 38/100 across eight risk dimensions: Mechanism Novelty: 2/15, Interaction Severity: 8/20, Oracle Surface: 2/10, Documentation Gaps: 4/10, Track Record: 12/15, Scale Exposure: 3/10, Regulatory Risk: 2/10, Vitality Risk: 5/10. The highest risk area is Track Record at 12/15.

Among 111 rated DEX protocols on Hindenrank, SushiSwap V3 ranks #75 by safety (lowest risk score = safest). Its 38/100 risk score and C+ grade place it among the riskier DEX protocols.

SushiSwap V3 scores 12/15 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.