Research summary
This research assessment is adverse. This entry is confirmed distinct from Sanctum Infinity, already rejected elsewhere in this registry. It is the aggregate of over 1,300 separate single- and multi-validator liquid staking tokens Sanctum has issued for individual brands and validators (Jupiter's jupSOL, Bybit's bbSOL, and hundreds of smaller, thinly-liquid tokens), each backed by its own on-chain stake pool rather than a diversified basket. Sanctum itself, not the named validator, holds day-to-day pool-management authority for every one of these tokens. That is a real, disclosed safeguard against a compromised validator stealing funds. But the same structure means a client evaluating "Sanctum Validator LSTs" as a single entry cannot actually evaluate any specific position: the risk, liquidity, and validator quality differ token by token across well over a thousand separate pools. Sanctum's own account of the 2025-10-11 market crash confirms "some Solana LSTs began to depeg" that day while its diversified Infinity pool stabilized and even profited. This directly shows that individual validator LSTs are more fragile under stress than a diversified pool, without naming which specific tokens depegged or by how much.
Observable review triggers
- This entry is replaced by, or a client instead evaluates, a specific named validator LST with its own diligenced liquidity and operator quality, rather than the undiligenceable aggregate
- Named validator LSTs and depeg magnitudes from the October 2025 stress event are disclosed
- The shared Reserve/Infinity liquidity backstop is sized and disclosed per-LST rather than as one common pool
- A twelve-month track record with no further stress-event depeg across a representative sample of validator LSTs
Facts on file
- Verdict
- Rejected
- Type
- Staking
- Chains examined
- Solana
- Reviewed
- Last confirmed