This is a due-diligence guide, not a yield chase or momentum list. The point is to give Radar readers a repeatable way to compare protocols before surface growth, points farming, or TVL momentum starts doing too much of the talking.
Good yield diligence starts by refusing to be hypnotized by TVL. On Sui, several yield surfaces now look interesting enough to deserve research, but the important work is checking whether the strategy underneath stays coherent when conditions become less friendly.
Core Comparison Criteria
- Reward source: The first job is to understand whether the yield comes from real usage, leveraged recycling, emissions, or some mix of the three.
- Strategy concentration: A protocol that depends on one narrow flow can still be useful, but it should not be mistaken for broad robustness.
- Exit realism: If many users wanted out together, could the protocol actually process that demand cleanly?
- Communication quality: Clear explanation is not cosmetic; it is a sign that the team respects user risk.
Red Flags
- TVL growth being used as a substitute for strategy explanation.
- Reward math that only looks stable if inflows keep climbing.
- Withdrawal language that sounds smooth but lacks operational detail.
- A protocol surface that requires too much trust in one hidden assumption.
Decision Loop
- Identify what is paying the user and whether that source is durable.
- Map where the strategy is concentrated and what could disturb it.
- Pressure-test the exit path before the dashboard ever needs it.
- Only then decide whether the protocol belongs on your personal Radar board.
A good comparison framework slows you down in the right places. If the protocol still looks attractive after these checks, then the interest is more likely to be durable instead of purely cosmetic.
Continue this cluster
Stay inside the same cluster so the logic compounds instead of resetting on the next click.
