At a glance
Euler V2 ↗ and Radiant Capital ↗ tackle DeFi lending from opposite angles. Euler V2 is a modular platform that lets anyone deploy customized vaults with the Euler Vault Kit, commanding ~$1B TVL across four chains. Radiant Capital is a cross-chain money market forked from Aave v3 and built on LayerZero, currently holding ~$0.05B in three networks. One bets on flexibility and recovery; the other on cross-chain composability but carries a heavier post‑exploit burden.
Euler V2 suits builders and yield strategists who want granular control over vault parameters. Radiant is aimed at users who need seamless borrowing across Arbitrum, BNB, and Ethereum, though its limited liquidity may be a constraint.
Key differences
TVL separates the two by an order of magnitude. Euler V2 manages ~$1B, while Radiant Capital hovers around $0.05B. This gap affects available liquidity and borrowing depth, making Euler V2 the more practical venue for large positions.
Chain coverage also diverges. Euler V2 runs on Ethereum, Base, Swell, and BOB. Radiant lives on Arbitrum, BNB, and Ethereum. Euler’s inclusion of Swell and BOB gives it exposure to newer L2 ecosystems, whereas Radiant’s strength is its built‑in cross‑chain communication via LayerZero, linking its three chains natively.
Audit pedigree differs in depth. Euler V2 underwent reviews by Spearbit, Certora, and ChainSecurity. Radiant’s audits came from Peckshield, Zokyo, and BlockSec. While all are reputable, Spearbit and Certora are among the most sought‑after for complex smart‑contract verification.
Exploit history shapes risk perception. Euler suffered a major exploit in March 2023, but the team repaid all losses and rebuilt as Euler V2 with enhanced security. Radiant was hacked in October 2024 and still operates in safe mode while its DAO plans remediation—a less resolved state.
Security and track record
Both protocols carry the stain of past exploits, but Euler V2’s narrative is one of recovery. After the 2023 incident, Euler returned ~$240M in stolen funds and re‑launched with fresh audits from Spearbit and Certora, earning trust through restitution. Radiant’s 2024 exploit forced markets into safe mode, and remediation remains ongoing. Euler’s longer operational history (since 2021) and the voluntary return of funds give it a more battle‑tested reputation. Radiant, despite its LayerZero integration, has yet to demonstrate comparable resilience.
Fees and costs
Specific fee structures are not disclosed in our data for either protocol. Euler V2 vaults set their own parameters, so costs vary per market; governance token EUL may offer discount mechanics. Radiant’s fees are tied to its Aave v3 fork model and RDNT tokenomics. For current numbers, see each protocol’s documentation directly.
Which should you choose
Pick Euler V2 if you need deep liquidity (~$1B TVL), want to deploy or use modular vaults, or prioritize a protocol that has fully recovered from a past exploit with stronger audits. Its four‑chain footprint (Ethereum, Base, Swell, BOB) also offers broader L2 access.
Pick Radiant Capital if your strategy depends on cross‑chain borrowing and you are comfortable with a smaller, post‑exploit money market. Its LayerZero bridge connects Arbitrum, BNB, and Ethereum seamlessly, but liquidity is extremely thin at ~$0.05B, and safe‑mode operations introduce additional risk.
Verdict
Euler V2 wins across the metrics that matter for most users: deeper liquidity, wider chain support, top‑tier audits, and a proven recovery track. Radiant Capital’s cross‑chain focus is a niche advantage, but its diminished TVL and unresolved security status make it a harder sell in the current landscape.