rsETH vs ezETH: Kelp vs Renzo Liquid Restaking 2026
Kelp's rsETH and Renzo's ezETH are two prominent challengers to EtherFi's LRT dominance. Each takes a different approach to restaking. RsETH accepts multiple LSTs while ezETH focuses on native ETH with multi-chain expansion.
Fundamental Approaches
rsETH (Kelp) accepts multiple LSTs (stETH, ETHx, sfrxETH) as collateral, providing flexibility for users with existing liquid staking positions. This multi-asset approach creates a diversified underlying base. ezETH (Renzo) accepts native ETH and focuses on multi-chain expansion with native deployments across L2s. This provides chain-specific optimizations and broader ecosystem reach.Collateral Models
rsETH Multi-LST Model
Advantages:- Flexibility for existing LST holders
- Diversified underlying risk
- No need to exit LST positions
- Multiple yield sources
- Complex underlying composition
- Compound smart contract risks
- Variable underlying yields
- More difficult to value
ezETH Native ETH Model
Advantages:- Simple, clean model
- Direct ETH exposure
- Easier to understand
- Lower contract complexity
- Must deposit ETH (not LSTs)
- Single underlying asset
- Less flexibility
Yield Comparison
rsETH Yields
- Underlying LST Yield: 3.5-4% (varies by LST)
- AVS Rewards: Variable
- Kelp Miles: Points program
- Total: 6-10%+
ezETH Yields
- Base Staking: ~3.5-4%
- AVS Rewards: Yield-optimized
- ezPoints: Points program
- Total: 6-12%+
ezETH often shows higher headline yields; rsETH provides more stable underlying.
Ecosystem Strategy
Kelp's Focus
- Ethereum mainnet primary
- LST aggregation play
- DeFi integration depth
- Partnership expansion
Renzo's Focus
- Multi-chain native presence
- L2-specific optimizations
- Broader ecosystem reach
- Aggressive expansion
Risk Profiles
rsETH Risks
- Multiple LST dependencies
- Underlying peg risks (if LST depegs)
- More complex smart contracts
- LST-specific protocol risks
ezETH Risks
- Multi-chain deployment risks
- Bridge vulnerabilities (when cross-chain)
- Aggressive AVS strategies
- Rapid expansion challenges
Use Case Optimization
Choose rsETH When:
- You hold stETH, ETHx, or sfrxETH
- You want LST diversification
- You prefer not to exit LST positions
- Kelp's AVS strategy appeals
Choose ezETH When:
- You're starting with ETH
- Multi-chain presence matters
- You want aggressive yield optimization
- L2-native exposure appeals
Conclusion
rsETH excels for users with existing LST positions who want restaking exposure without changing their underlying holdings. The multi-LST model provides unique flexibility. ezETH wins for users seeking aggressive yields and multi-chain native restaking. Its expansion strategy captures opportunities across ecosystems.Choose based on your current holdings (rsETH if you have LSTs) or chain preferences (ezETH for multi-chain).
Compare LRT yields on Fensory.