Skip to content

Liquid Staking Infrastructure

In short

Liquid staking lets a holder stake assets to secure a proof-of-stake network while keeping that capital usable through a receipt token that trades in DeFi and accrues yield. The hard part is validator integration and yield accounting, not the wrapper token.

261%
APR (4-year locks)
$20M+
staked in 90 days
$730M
governance TVL
$52M+
staking TVL
Trusted by teams building on-chain

Liquid staking is the mechanism that lets a holder stake assets to secure a proof-of-stake network and still keep that capital usable. It works by issuing a transferable receipt token (a liquid staking token, or LST) that represents the staked position and accrues its yield. Native staking locks capital in a single-use position; liquid staking turns every staked unit into a composable DeFi asset that can serve as collateral, an LP position, or a yield-bearing instrument.

For a chain or protocol, that locked capital is a growth ceiling: users avoid staking when it means losing access to their assets, and institutional allocators bypass ecosystems without a liquid, composable staking primitive. Protofire builds the infrastructure that makes that possible.

We are an engineering-led blockchain development firm with 250+ projects shipped since 2016, and a concrete staking track record: the Aethir staking module with its stATH liquid staking token, and the ve8020 Launchpad that grew governance-aligned TVL on Balancer. The same senior engineers design the receipt token, integrate the validator layer, build the yield accounting, and ship the frontend, working as one accountable team rather than a hand-off chain.

Most teams underestimate the operational layer under an LST: validator delegation, unbonding and withdrawal queues, yield accounting, and slashing exposure. We build the full stack so staked capital becomes liquid without compromising the security that locking it was meant to provide.

The LST stack we own end to end

Each layer integrates with the next so staked capital becomes a composable DeFi asset without breaking the security model.

01

Staking Module

Accepts deposits, delegates to validators, and tracks each user's staked position on-chain.
02

LST Token

The transferable ERC-20 (or ERC-4626 vault) receipt that represents the staked position and accrues yield.
03

Reward Accounting

Reconciles network rewards to the receipt token and manages on-chain protocol-fee distribution.
04

Withdrawal Queue

Handles the unbonding period and exit requests predictably, without exposing users to validator-layer settlement risk.
05

Subgraph

Indexes staked balances, yield history, and queue status to power the staking frontend in real time.
01

What we build in a liquid staking stack

The receipt token is the product. We design and ship the LST that represents a staked position: its supply mechanics (rebasing vs. value-accruing), its standard (ERC-20 for broad DeFi compatibility, or an ERC-4626-based tokenized vault when a strategy requires it), and how it tracks the underlying stake and yield.

Poor receipt-token design quietly kills composability, so we define the target DeFi integrations (lending collateral, DEX pairs, yield strategies) before a line of the token is written, and build for them. Benefits: a transferable, composable claim on staked capital · standards DeFi already accepts · a receipt token other protocols can build on.

02

Liquid staking development for PoS chains and protocols

Liquid staking development is the engineering of the whole stack between a proof-of-stake validator set and a composable DeFi token. The visible wrapper is only a small part of that work. We work with two kinds of teams. The first is a PoS chain or protocol with native staking but no LST: capital is locked and single-use, a ceiling on DeFi growth and a reason institutional allocators stay out.

We build the LST primitive that converts that dormant stake into something lending markets, DEXes, and yield aggregators can use, and that allocators can hold. The second is a chain that already shipped an LST that is underperforming, with low migration and thin composability, where the fix is usually in the receipt-token design, the validator integration, or the product UX rather than a rebuild from zero.

In both cases the prerequisites are concrete: a stakeable consensus mechanism or a utility token, a validator or staking-source integration path, and reliable RPC. The deliverable is a liquid staking token your ecosystem can actually build on.

03

How an engagement works

1

Design

We model the receipt token, the yield accounting, and the validator integration, and validate the staking source and operational model. Deliverable: a staking architecture and the target DeFi integrations the LST must serve.
2

Implementation

We build the contracts, the staking frontend, and the test suite, and run the code through hardening before it reaches an external auditor.
3

Launch

Mainnet rollout and handover, with the orchestration and monitoring the stack needs to run. The core build typically runs about 6-10 weeks; external audit scheduling can extend that. Commercials follow a revenue-share model: a one-time implementation fee plus an ongoing share of protocol revenue, so our incentives track your TVL rather than a fixed deliverable.
04

What clients build with us

Liquid staking token (LST) launch on a PoS chain
Validator-linked receipt token
Yield distribution & on-chain accounting
ERC-4626 staking vaults (tokenized positions)
Liquid restaking (LRT) and restaking vaults
Staking frontend & wallet integration
Composable staking yield for DeFi
Institutional LP onboarding
Reviving an underperforming LST deployment
05

An engineering-led staking team since 2016

Protofire is an engineering-led blockchain development firm with 250+ shipped projects across 60+ networks and 95+ protocols since 2016. Our staking track record is concrete: the ve8020 Launchpad that grew Balancer governance-aligned TVL from $120M to $730M across 41 protocols; the Aethir staking module (a stATH liquid staking token on a ve8020 model, reaching 261% APR for 4-year locks) that drew over $20M in staked value within 90 days of mainnet and lifted governance participation from 12% to over 25%; and the KyberDAO non-custodial staking-delegation contracts on which StakeDAO onboarded $52M+ in TVL.

We maintain Solhint, the open-source Solidity linter used by 1M+ developers, and harden every contract before it reaches an external auditor, because in a system that holds staked capital, the receipt token and the yield accounting have to be exactly right.

06

Approach → outcome (first-hand: Aethir)

When Aethir, a DePIN GPU-cloud network, finished its token generation event, it faced two problems at once: sell pressure on a large newly circulating supply, and only ~12% of holders participating in governance. The instinct would have been to ship a plain staking contract. Instead, we adapted the proven Balancer 80/20 (ve8020) pool architecture into a custom, ERC-20-compatible staking module with multiple pools (an Ecosystem pool on the 80/20 ATH/stablecoin model, a Container pool with GPU-utilization-based APR, and a Checker pool with slashing protection for node operators) and issued stATH, a liquid staking token that let stakers keep DeFi exposure while their stake was locked.

The outcome: over $20M staked within 90 days of mainnet, governance participation more than doubled to over 25%, and tens of thousands of active stakers, all built on an audited base rather than a vote-escrow system designed from scratch.

“Native staking locks capital and stops DeFi growth; liquid staking turns every staked unit into a composable asset that can serve as collateral, liquidity, or a yield strategy.”

Shipped liquid staking infrastructure
261% APRLiquid staking token

stATH, a liquid staking token on a ve8020 model, reached 261% APR for 4-year locks; $20M+ was staked within 90 days of mainnet and governance participation more than doubled.

AethirView project →
$52M+ TVL in 90 daysNon-custodial delegation

Non-custodial staking-delegation proxy contracts enabled StakeDAO to onboard $52M+ in TVL within 90 days, while supporting 7,000+ stakers with trustless reward distribution.

KyberDAOView project →

Staking Capital: Locked vs Liquid

Native Staking (Locked Capital)Liquid Staking Infrastructure
Capital composabilitySingle-use: stake means security onlyTransferable LST: use as collateral, liquidity, or yield strategy in DeFi
DeFi participationNone (capital locked, unavailable)Full access (LST trades, lends, yields while staking earns rewards)
Validator integrationSimple direct stake or delegationComplex: receipt token design, yield accounting, unbonding queues, validator ops
TVL growth barrierLocked capital is adoption ceiling; allocators avoidComposable asset attracts institutions; capital recycled across DeFi
Operational burdenLow (direct staking)Higher, but Protofire handles: validator integration, yield accounting, frontend, monitoring
Governance alignmentNo (stake = security only)Can layer vote-escrow governance on top if strategy requires

FAQ

What is liquid staking?
Liquid staking lets you stake assets to secure a proof-of-stake network while keeping that capital usable. When you stake, the protocol issues a transferable receipt token (a liquid staking token, or LST) that represents your staked position and accrues its yield. You earn staking rewards as usual, but the LST stays liquid: you can use it as collateral, provide it as liquidity, or deploy it in yield strategies across DeFi, instead of leaving the capital locked in a single-use position. Behind that simple promise sits an operational layer most teams underestimate: validator delegation, unbonding and withdrawal queues, yield accounting that reconciles to real network rewards, and slashing exposure. Aethir's stATH token is a working example: stakers kept DeFi exposure while their stake was locked, and over $20M was staked within 90 days of mainnet. Building that full stack is what turns locked capital into a composable, trustworthy asset.
What's the difference between an LST and an LRT?
An LST (liquid staking token) is the receipt token for assets staked to secure a base proof-of-stake network; it represents your stake plus its yield and stays usable in DeFi. An LRT (liquid restaking token) goes one layer further: it represents assets that have been restaked, re-delegated to secure additional services or networks beyond the base chain, earning a second layer of yield on top of base staking rewards in exchange for additional risk. We build both, often as ERC-4626 tokenized vaults when a strategy requires it. The Aethir stack is a concrete example. Alongside its core staking pools (an Ecosystem pool on the 80/20 model, a Container pool with GPU-utilization-based APR, and a Checker pool with slashing protection for node operators), it included restaking vaults, so the same architecture served both base staking and restaking yield without rebuilding the receipt-token logic for each.
We're a PoS chain (or protocol). When does liquid staking actually make sense for us?
When composability and DeFi TVL are strategic goals. If your native stake is locked and single-use, it's a ceiling on ecosystem growth; an LST converts it into a primitive that lending markets, DEXes, and yield aggregators can build on, and that institutional allocators can hold. The prerequisites are concrete: a stakeable consensus mechanism (for a chain) or a utility token (for a protocol), a validator or staking-source integration path, and reliable RPC. We work with two kinds of teams here. The first has native staking but no LST, where the build converts dormant stake into a composable asset. The second already shipped an LST that's underperforming, with low migration and thin composability, where the fix is usually in receipt-token design, validator integration, or product UX rather than a rebuild from zero. In both cases the deliverable is a liquid staking token your ecosystem can actually build on.
Isn't an LST just a wrapper token?
The wrapper is one part. Validator integration, yield accounting, slashing handling, and product UX are what make an LST usable and trustworthy, and they're where most builds slip. A receipt token that doesn't reconcile to real network rewards, or that no DeFi protocol will accept as collateral, grows no TVL. That's why we treat the receipt token as a product: we define the target DeFi integrations (lending collateral, DEX pairs, yield strategies) before a line of the token is written, and choose its mechanics (rebasing vs. value-accruing) and standard (ERC-20, or an ERC-4626 vault) for those integrations. Yield accounting is built to reconcile on-chain, with an off-chain orchestrator and oracle integration where the design calls for it, so the number in the contract matches the rewards the network actually paid. The wrapper is the easy 10%; the operational stack underneath is the rest.
How long does a liquid staking build take?
The core build typically runs about 6-10 weeks, across three phases. In design, we model the receipt token, the yield accounting, and the validator integration, and validate the staking source and operational model. In implementation, we build the contracts, the staking frontend, and the test suite, and run the code through hardening before it reaches an external auditor. Launch is mainnet rollout and handover, with the orchestration and monitoring the stack needs to run. External audit scheduling can extend the overall timeline, since that depends on the auditor's calendar, not ours. As a reference point from delivered work, the Aethir staking module reached over $20M staked within 90 days of mainnet and lifted governance participation from 12% to over 25%. We confirm the exact timeline after a short discovery call that scopes your validator path and customization.
How is liquid staking infrastructure priced?
On a revenue-share model rather than a flat package price: a one-time implementation fee plus an ongoing share of protocol revenue, so our incentives track your TVL instead of a fixed deliverable. We build the receipt token, validator integration, yield accounting, and frontend to grow staked value, and the revenue share means we're paid as that value grows, not for shipping contracts alone. Each engagement is scoped to the deployment: the validator-integration path (the most common reason a build's effort varies), the level of customization to your chain or token, the standards and product UX involved, and the revenue split all factor in. We size it on the first call and confirm the full scope before any work starts, so there are no surprises once the build is under way.

Reviewed by Luis Medeiros, Field CTO at Protofire · Last reviewed: June 2026

Book a call with Alejandro Losa

Schedule a call with our Business Development Manager to receive practical recommendations and a prompt proposal for upgrading your solution.

Protofire 2026. All rights reserved