Superform

Superform SuperVaults and SuperAssets route capital among third-party vaults through manager-configured hooks and cross-chain actions. The protocol API read on 2026-08-15 reported about $17.13M across ten chains, led by Ethereum and Base. Size does not change the mechanism: managers and executable hook bundles determine underlying venues, while ERC-7540 redemptions are asynchronous and depend on strategy, bridge and downstream-vault liquidity. The shared v1 delegated-allocation dossier controls.

Review triggers: events that reopen the verdict
• A named product enforces an immutable advisor-selected venue allowlist and per-venue and per-chain caps, publishes continuously reconcilable positions, and prevents manager or hook substitution
• The named product completes a proposed-size ERC-7540 redemption within a documented maximum while including bridge, escrow and downstream-vault settlement under stress

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

Superform routes deposits into external vaults, while SuperVaults execute validated hook bundles for deposits, swaps, bridges, loops and other strategy actions. SuperAssets rebalance across multiple SuperVault positions, so the depositor accepts a configurable allocation layer rather than freezing one approved exposure.

Current observation and perimeter

The DefiLlama API read on 2026-08-15 reported approximately $17.13M across Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, OP Mainnet, Polygon, Avalanche, BNB Chain, Fantom, Linea and Blast, and classified Superform as a yield aggregator. The ten-chain perimeter and its dependencies are relevant to control and exit even though delegated allocation applies regardless of size.

Control and exit applicability

Managers and governance maintain strategy permissions, authorized actions, fees and emergency controls within the SuperVault architecture. ERC-7540 redemptions are asynchronous, with shares held in escrow while requests are queued and fulfilled. Exit depends on strategy liquidity, bridges, redemption fulfillment, PPS validation and downstream vault exits.

Why the class rule decides

The shared v1 delegated-allocation dossier controls at any size because a manager-controlled hook bundle can select, replace or compose downstream venues after the advisor chooses the wrapper. Reopen only for a named product with an immutable advisor-selected venue allowlist, enforceable per-venue and per-chain caps, continuously observable positions, no manager substitution, and a proposed-size asynchronous redemption test that includes bridge, escrow and downstream-vault delays.

Class rule

The delegated allocation 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.

• Superform — current documentation · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: validated hooks, cross-chain actions, SuperVaults, SuperAssets, allocation layer
• Superform — v2 periphery contracts and audits · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: manager controls, strategy permissions, PPS validation, asynchronous redemption, escrow, audit scope
• DefiLlama — Superform survey record · secondary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: current TVL, ten-chain perimeter, yield-aggregator category, survey perimeter

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.