Gamma
Gamma runs non-custodial, automated concentrated-liquidity vaults across a broad multi-chain DEX perimeter. The surveyed Gamma record covers LP vaults, not its separately documented perpetual-vault product. Managers select and rebalance AMM ranges, but users still own paired market-making inventory and realize divergence loss when positions move. The version-1 amm-lp dossier therefore controls regardless of the approximately $2.74M TVL observed on 2026-08-15.
- Ships a product line without impermanent-loss exposure that merits its own review
Watched nightly: a warning on its venues or files, or a cited document that changes, reopens the memo. The first confirmation is due 2026-11-15.
The research file
Mechanism applicability
Gamma LP Vaults deposit user assets into concentrated-liquidity AMMs including Uniswap v3/v4 and Algebra venues. Vaults issue proportional LP shares while Gamma manages base and limit ranges, compounds fees and rebalances when price or asset-ratio triggers fire. That automation manages, but does not replace, the paired AMM exposure captured by the shared version-1 amm-lp dossier.
Current observation and perimeter
Observed 2026-08-15: DefiLlama classified Gamma as a Liquidity Manager and reported about $2.74M across 36 listed networks, led by Ethereum, BSC, Polygon, Arbitrum, Gnosis, Linea and Base. Current Gamma documentation separately lists limit orders, LP vaults and Hyperliquid perpetual vaults. This memo applies only to the LP-vault TVL and contracts in the Gamma survey record; perpetual vaults require their own product review.
Control, loss and exit applicability
Gamma says rebalance logic is determined off-chain and executed on-chain; admin contracts can rebalance, compound and replace deposit-proxy addresses. Rebalancing can lock in impermanent loss, while fees are charged at 14% to 20% of earned fees. Users can withdraw without a stated cap by burning vault shares for the current token pair, including directly through Hypervisor contracts if the interface is unavailable.
Why the class rule decides
Non-custody, TWAP checks, audits and automated range selection are relevant controls, but none changes the claim into a single-asset yield instrument. The depositor remains an AMM market maker whose returned asset mix depends on swaps and range movement. The shared v1 amm-lp dossier therefore decides. Reopen only for a separately accounted Gamma product whose client return does not require paired or synthetic liquidity provision.
Class rule
The amm lp class is outside the approved structures, so every protocol in it is not approved until the rule changes. The rule is about the structure, not an adverse finding about this protocol, and it is not a client instruction. The events that would reopen it are listed with the memo.
Sources
The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.
- Gamma — current products and LP-vault perimeter · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: LP vaults, perpetual vault separation, limit orders, current lifecycle - Gamma — LP-vault strategies and rebalance controls · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: concentrated liquidity, base and limit ranges, off-chain rebalance logic, on-chain execution, depeg triggers - Gamma — fees, non-custody and withdrawal terms · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: withdrawal caps, fee rate, non-custody, rebalances, compounding - Gamma — vault and infrastructure contracts · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: Hypervisor, UniProxy, Clearing, TWAP checks, admin controls, incentives - Gamma — direct vault-withdrawal interface · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: deposit ratio, LP shares, withdrawal, current token pair, min-out - DefiLlama — Gamma survey record · secondary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: current TVL, current chains, Liquidity Manager category, survey observation
Inherited controls
The research above describes the protocol layer. Every position also inherits the asset it holds and the chain it settles on. The layer with the most administrative power sets the position’s effective control; that describes control, not quality or suitability.
| Chain | Verdict | Control | Control constraint |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ethereum | Approved | No freeze key | No sequencer, no upgrade key, no operator who can be compelled. Rule changes require social consensus. |
| Mantle | Rejected | Issuer can freeze | the team can push instant upgrades; there is no exit window a client could use. |
| Gnosis Chain | Approved with limits | Governed, no freeze | the chain validator path is permissionless, but its xDAI and canonical bridge exposure adds an 8-of-15 governor multisig outside the base consensus grade. |
| OP Mainnet | Rejected | Mixed control | Ethereum forced inclusion limits sequencer censorship, but the Foundation and Security Council can co-sign an immediate upgrade before a client can exit. |
| X Layer | Rejected | Issuer can freeze | OKX operates the ordering path, proof roles are permissioned, and an X Layer multisig can upgrade immediately; the operator has also suspended block production for an upgrade. |
| Avalanche | Approved with limits | Governed, no freeze | no party can freeze or seize C-Chain funds, but one vendor writes the only production client and Messari measured over a third of stake hosted on AWS. |
| Polygon PoS | Rejected | Mixed control | a public validator set orders transactions, but a 5-of-9 multisig can instantly upgrade staking and canonical bridge contracts, while a 5-of-8 controls custom child tokens. |
| BNB Smart Chain | Rejected | Issuer can freeze | the validator set concentrates around one company, and the chain has been halted by decision. |
| Arbitrum One | Approved with limits | Mixed control | a single sequencer orders >99% of transactions and admin keys can upgrade bridge contracts on a ~7-day timelock. |
| Base | Approved with limits | Mixed control | Coinbase, one regulated US company, operates the only sequencer, and admin keys can upgrade bridge contracts within ~7 days. |