SKIP TO CONTENT
Beta·March 2026·Join Early Access→
RWA ProtocolsUpdated Feb 13, 2026

Ondo Finance vs Maple Finance

Compare Ondo Finance vs Maple Finance. Analyze tokenized treasuries vs institutional lending, yields, risk profiles, and compliance approaches.

View Ondo Finance →View Maple Finance →

Feature Comparison

FeatureOndo FinanceMaple Finance
Yield Source
US Treasuries
Institutional lendingTie
Typical Yields
~5%
8-15%+Winner
Risk Level
Very low
Moderate-highTie
Default History
NoneWinner
Some (2022)
Principal Safety
Treasury-backedWinner
Credit risk
Compliance
StrictWinner
Pool-based
Yield Premium
Risk-free rate
Credit spreadWinner
Borrower Quality
US GovernmentWinner
Institutions
Accessibility
KYC required
More openWinner
Track Record
CleanWinner
Battle-tested

Ondo Finance vs Maple Finance: RWA Lending Comparison 2026

Ondo Finance and Maple Finance both serve institutional capital needs but through different mechanisms. Ondo provides tokenized treasury exposure while Maple facilitates institutional crypto lending. This comparison helps you understand their distinct offerings.

Business Models

Ondo Finance tokenizes traditional financial instruments, primarily US Treasuries, making them accessible on-chain with yield pass-through to holders. Maple Finance operates institutional lending pools where verified borrowers (market makers, trading firms) access uncollateralized or undercollateralized loans from DeFi liquidity.

Yield Sources

Ondo Yields

  • Source: US Treasury yields
  • Rate: ~5% (follows fed funds)
  • Risk: Near risk-free
  • Mechanism: Direct treasury exposure

Maple Yields

  • Source: Institutional lending interest
  • Rate: 8-15%+ variable
  • Risk: Credit/default risk
  • Mechanism: Uncollateralized lending

Risk Comparison

Ondo Risk Profile

  • US Treasury credit (essentially risk-free)
  • Interest rate risk (minimal for short-term)
  • Custody and smart contract
  • Very conservative

Maple Risk Profile

  • Borrower default risk (significant)
  • Has experienced defaults historically
  • Pool delegate selection matters
  • Higher risk for higher yield

Historical Performance

Ondo Track Record

  • Consistent treasury yield pass-through
  • No principal losses
  • Growing TVL
  • Clean execution

Maple Track Record

  • Some pool defaults during 2022 crisis
  • Recovered and improved underwriting
  • Battle-tested through bear market
  • Lessons learned integrated

Access and Compliance

Ondo Access

  • KYC required
  • Accredited investor for some products
  • Compliance-first approach
  • Global availability varies

Maple Access

  • Lenders can participate more openly
  • Pool-specific requirements
  • Less retail restrictions
  • Institutional borrower vetting

Conclusion

Ondo wins for conservative investors seeking safe, treasury-backed yields with minimal risk. Maple wins for yield-seekers willing to accept credit risk for significantly higher returns.

Choose based on your risk tolerance: Ondo for safety, Maple for yield hunting.

Monitor your RWA positions on Fensory.

Risk Analysis

**Credit Risk**: Ondo has US government credit; Maple has institutional borrower credit with default history. **Yield Risk**: Ondo yields follow fed rates; Maple yields can be higher but include default premium. **Historical Risk**: Maple experienced defaults in 2022; Ondo has maintained clean record. **Regulatory Risk**: Both face evolving regulations; Ondo's compliance may be more defensible. **Smart Contract Risk**: Both are audited; Maple's lending mechanics are more complex.

Verdict

Winner: Ondo for principal safety and conservative investors. Maple wins for sophisticated investors seeking higher yields who accept credit risk. The 3-10% yield premium at Maple comes with real default risk. Choose accordingly.

Compare live rates on both Ondo Finance and Maple Finance.

Track live yields, compare protocols, and build your DeFi portfolio with Fensory.

GET EARLY ACCESSArrow right
← BACK TO COMPARISONS