The depegs, defaults, exploits, and collapses that shape the Trust Score. A rating is only as good as its memory: this is the record of what has failed under stress, how badly, and whether it came back. Recovery counts as much as the failure.
Incidents logged
8
Critical
1
Recovered
5/8
MajorExploit·Aug 26, 2025No full recovery
Beefy GLP vaults retired after GMX exploit
mooGLPGLP
Beefy retired its GMX GLP vaults on Arbitrum and Avalanche following an exploit in the underlying GMX v1 GLP system. Beefy's own API has since reported both vaults as status "eol" with retireReason "exploit" and an APY of zero. The vaults no longer accept deposits.
What it means for the score
A Track Record and Backing event for wrapper products. The lesson RWTS took from it is about our own process rather than Beefy's: the vault left our upstream data feed silently, and the rate we published simply froze at its last value. We carried 14.5% on a retired vault, and described it as the highest yield we tracked, for roughly twelve months. Discovered 2026-08-24 during a corpus audit. The asset is now marked retired and excluded from rankings, and a daily liveness check has been added that reads issuer lifecycle status directly.
Mountain Protocol USDM wound down after Anchorage acquisition
USDM
Following Anchorage Digital's acquisition of Mountain Protocol, the USDM yield-bearing stablecoin was wound down in phases. The issuer set the reward rate to 0% from 12 June 2026 and moved remaining reserves later in the summer. Holders were given a redemption path.
What it means for the score
An orderly wind-down rather than a failure: redeemability was honoured throughout, which is the distinction the Redeemability dimension exists to capture. It is logged because RWTS continued to publish a 4.50% rate on a product paying zero, for the same reason as the Beefy entry: our refresh job had no way to notice that a product had stopped existing.
Recovery: Orderly wind-down with redemption honoured. RWTS listing corrected 2026-08-24.
MajorDepeg·Mar 11, 2023Recovered
USDC depeg after Silicon Valley Bank failure
USDCDAI
Roughly $3.3B of USDC cash reserves were stranded at the failed Silicon Valley Bank. USDC fell to about $0.88 before US regulators backstopped deposits, and it repegged within three days.
What it means for the score
A reserve-quality and counterparty event, not a protocol failure. Redeemability held once banking reopened. The scar sits on banking-dependency, and it recovered.
Recovery: Repegged within ~72 hours.
MajorExploit·Mar 13, 2023Recovered
Euler Finance flash-loan exploit
Euler
A donation and flash-loan attack drained about $197M from the Euler lending protocol. Unusually, the attacker returned almost all of the funds weeks later.
What it means for the score
A smart-contract and audit-dimension event. The near-full recovery is rare and noted, but it underlines that 'audited' does not mean 'unhackable.'
Recovery: Almost all funds returned.
MajorDefault·Dec 5, 2022No full recovery
Maple / Orthogonal Trading default
MaplesyrupUSDC
Orthogonal Trading defaulted on about $36M of undercollateralized loans in Maple's lending pools after concealing FTX exposure, impairing lender funds.
What it means for the score
The core risk of uncollateralized private credit: redeemability depends on a borrower's solvency, not on reserves. Unsecured pools score low on backing and redeemability.
Recovery: Partial recoveries; pools restructured.
ModerateDepeg·Jun 13, 2022Recovered
stETH liquidity depeg in the 3AC / Celsius unwind
stETHwstETH
stETH traded as low as ~0.93 ETH on secondary markets as forced sellers exited during the Celsius and Three Arrows Capital collapses. Withdrawals were not yet live, so it was never a redemption failure, and it reconverged to 1:1 after the Merge.
What it means for the score
A clean illustration of the redeemability dimension: a market-price depeg is not a backing failure. Track record was restored once 1:1 redemption proved out.
Recovery: Reconverged to 1:1 after withdrawals went live.
CriticalCollapse·May 9, 2022No full recovery
Terra UST algorithmic peg collapse
USTLUNA
The algorithmic stablecoin UST lost its dollar peg and spiralled as its mint-and-burn link to LUNA broke, erasing roughly $40B of value in days.
What it means for the score
The defining Tier-4 lesson: backing that depends on a sister token's price is not backing. Algorithmic pegs score at or near zero on the backing dimension.
MajorMechanism·Mar 12, 2020Recovered
MakerDAO 'Black Thursday' zero-bid liquidations
DAIMKR
A ~50% ETH crash plus Ethereum congestion let some Maker liquidation auctions clear at $0, leaving the system about $4M undercollateralized. It was recapitalized through an MKR debt auction.
What it means for the score
A mechanism and audit-design failure rather than a backing one. Maker recapitalized and hardened the auction system; track record reflects both the incident and the recovery.
A curated log of the material failures in tokenized RWA and DeFi — depegs, defaults, exploits, and collapses — that inform the Trust Score. Each entry records what happened, how severe it was, whether it recovered, and which scoring dimension it stresses. It currently lists 8 incidents.
Does an incident permanently lower an asset's Trust Score?+
No. Under methodology v1.1, the Track Record dimension is conditional: an asset that suffers an incident and then demonstrably recovers can regain points over time. A market-price depeg that reconverges is treated very differently from a backing failure that wipes out holders. Recovery is part of the record, not just the failure.
Why track blowups at all?+
Because a rating that only ever looks at today's snapshot is worthless the moment something breaks. The whole point of the Track Record dimension is memory: which designs have failed under stress, which recovered, and what that implies for the ones that look similar today. We rate. You decide.
How incidents feed the rating
Track Record is one of the six Trust Score dimensions. See how it is scored, and how recovery restores points.