Allocation to Clearstar Curated Vaults for top risk/return profile for Moonwell users

Proposals
1

Summary

This proposal suggests a pilot allocation from Moonwell’s treasury or product flows into Clearstar curated vaults. The goal is to improve net yields while tightening downside risk through active, programmatic risk management. Governance would review results after a defined trial and decide on scaling or adjusting the allocation.

Motivation

Yields across curators often look similar on the surface, but the differences appear when markets move. Moonwell can improve its users’ return profile by pairing competitive base yields with active controls that proactively de-risk positions when assets or venues show credible alerts.

Who We Are

Clearstar is an onchain strategy curator. We have deployed strategy vaults across Morpho, Euler, IPOR and others. We are backed by a Swiss family office with about €1B AUM and combine backgrounds in private equity, investment banking and DeFi.
Our expertise has been developed through the continuous effort of providing top infrastructure, yield optimization and risk management to a crypto fund managing 30M USD.
We design vaults with institutional rigor but make them easy to integrate into consumer-facing products. For more background see this recent piece: Yields are not created equal, Clearstar’s are superior and our Website.

What Makes Us Different

Most curators use static, passive rules that do not change once set. Clearstar vaults are built with a multilayered approach to risk and return. We integrate Hypernative directly into our systems so that our proprietary infrastructure automatically rebalances out of positions that show signs of risk. This safeguard sits on top of our automated yield optimization stack and standard passive risk management. The result is curated strategies that aim to capture competitive yields while actively protecting deposited assets.

Proposal

We propose that Moonwell diversify risk by allocating into Clearstar’s ETH and USDC denominated Morpho vaults. These curated vaults combine optimized yield generation with active safeguards to reduce exposure to at-risk assets. We are already integrated and trusted by Harvest Finance’s USDC autopilot as well as working closely with other actor’s in the space such as Liquity, Resolv, Spectra, YieldFi, fxProtocol, IPOR and others.

List of vaults (cannot add links since it breaches the limit of 2 links per post):
• High Yield Clearstar USDC Vault
• Clearstar Reactor OpenEden Boosted USDC
• Clearstar ETH Reactor

Disclosures

Risk cannot be fully eliminated. The design of Clearstar vaults seeks to materially reduce downside risk compared to passive approaches, but governance and community should remain aware that DeFi strategies and allocations always carry systemic and market risks.

Next Steps

We welcome questions and discussion from the Moonwell community to address any doubts, refine the allocation size, and move forward with implementation.

3

As a member of the Moonwell DAO, I’m pleased to start a discussion on Clearstar’s proposal to pilot an allocation from our treasury into their ETH and USDC Morpho vaults. They claim competitive yields with active risk management via Hypernative, complementing our existing vaults (currently at 2.6% APY for ETH and 2.39% for USDC as of September 8, 2025. To move toward a governance vote, the community needs clear, verifiable data. Below are key questions for Clearstar to address, aligning with Moonwell’s focus on transparency and security.

Questions for Clearstar:

  1. Performance Metrics: What are the historical APYs and maximum drawdowns of your ETH and USDC Morpho vaults over the past 12 months, and how do they compare to Moonwell’s current yields of 2.6% (ETH) and 2.39% (USDC)?
  2. Risk Management Efficacy: Can you provide documented examples of Hypernative’s real-time alerts preventing losses in past DeFi incidents, and have your vaults been audited by reputable firms (e.g., Halborn, Code4rena)?
  3. Cost Structure: What are the gas costs for your vaults’ rebalancing, curator fees, and any integration expenses, and how do these compare to Moonwell’s existing low-cost vault operations?
  4. Integration Compatibility: Will your vaults integrate seamlessly with Moonwell’s application and the ERC-4626 standard, ensuring no added complexity for users?
  5. Transparency and Governance: How will you provide real-time performance and risk data to the Moonwell community, and what is your experience engaging with decentralized governance models?
  6. Pilot Framework: What allocation size and trial duration do you propose for the pilot, and what specific metrics (e.g., APY, drawdowns, risk events) will you provide to evaluate success?
3 Likes
4

Thank you for the questions! The answers can be found below:

  1. Performance Metrics: For the historical APYs, I will refer you to the Morpho API where the data I present can be verified. Also based on my examination, the your current USDC and ETH vaults have the following performances, correspondingly: 7.26% and 2.6%.
    Our ETH Reactor Morpho vault is very new so the historical data is not very relevant but the performance is exceeding anything else that is.

a.) Clearstar Reactor OpenEden (address = 0x1D3b1Cd0a0f242d598834b3F2d126dC6bd774657)
- avgNetAPY = 9.072%
- max.Drawdown = 0%

b.) High Yield Clearstar USDC (address = 0xE74c499fA461AF1844fCa84204490877787cED56)
- avgNetAPY = 9.22%
- max.Drawdown = 0%

c.) Clearstar ETH Reactor (address = 0x09832347586E238841F49149C84d121Bc2191C53)
- avgNetAPY = 10.77%
- max.Drawdown = 0%

To find this data you can go to api.morpho.org and use this query:
query Query($address: String!, $chainId: Int) {
vaultByAddress(address: $address, chainId: $chainId) {
state {
avgNetApy
}
}
}

with the folowing variables:
{
“address”: “vault_address”,
“chainId”: 8453
}

2.) Risk Management Efficacy: Thankfully we have not had to react to real exploits yet (only false positives). However you can read this blog post from Hypernative where they feature us and we were able to protect fund assets from a live exploit. The same mechanism is live for all the vaults we curate: Beating the Hack: How Clearstar Saved Thousands Using Onchain Automation | Hypernative
Regarding audits, out vaults are deployments from using Morpho, Euler, Ipor and others factory contracts so they have the same level of smart contract risk as any other deployments from curators.

3.) Cost Structure: We cover all the gas costs from rebalancing and there are no other integration expenses. We also do not impose some predefined curator fees. We are open to negotiate and split the revenue with Moonwell so that we all end up in a win-win scenario.

4.) Integration Compatibility: Our vaults are all ERC-4626 compatible, as are all morpho or euler curated vaults. Furthermore we will do our share of distribution to bring the vault to as many eyes and distribution channels as possible.

5.) Transparency and Governance: We are a swiss firm and have had experience working under FINMA regulation (swiss financial regulation) so we have had to present audits and reporting at the highest level. Again, we are flexible with respect to transparency to cater to Moonwell DAO’s demand. We can setup Dune Dashboards, monthly or quarterly reports and also work together with a subDAO to ratify new collaterals or exposures to the vault. I personally have experience interacting with the Polygon and Arbitrum DAO, negotiating grants and preparing the reporting showing the progress and operational DD.

6.) Pilot Framework: For the pilot we suggest a 90 day trial in our ETH and USDC Morpho vaults, with allocation size left to the community’s preference. We can also setup a new set of Morpho Vaults catered to the risk profile of Moonwell and were Moonwell would remain the owner of. Success can be measured on net APY after fees, drawdown behavior compared to baseline curators, and incident response metrics such as time to reduce exposure and exposure percentage during a risk event.

Based on the performance numbers above, we are confident Clearstar vaults can significantly improve the returns Moonwell users are currently seeing. For example, our curated USDC vault shows roughly a 27 percent higher net APY compared to the Seamless USDC vault, and our ETH vaults deliver multiples of the current ETH yield. We believe Moonwell could capture stronger returns for the same onchain risk, and we would be glad to work together to reduce opportunity cost while strengthening the overall risk return profile.

5

Thanks for your prompt response and answering the questions. I apologise for my earlier 2.39% USDC error— I was quoting the incorrect vault. Moving forward can you provide more clarity on the following:

  1. Performance Metrics: Can you share this data as a screenshot or file for easier review? If not I’ll have to get a more tach savvy member to verify this for me.
  2. Risk Management: The Hypernative blog mentions a September 24 exploit save via Fordefi CARE (part of $500M+ saved across clients, 99.5% detection)—but no exploits in your vaults yet—can we have the exact amount saved and audits of your Hypernative integration beyond Morpho/Euler/IPOR factory contracts?
  3. Cost Structure: Covering gas costs and flexible revenue sharing is promising—can we get a specific split proposal?
  4. Integration: ERC-4626 compatibility and distribution are good—can we see your distribution plan (e.g., channels)?
  5. Transparency: Your FINMA experience and reporting (Dune, subDAO) look solid—can we have details on the subDAO structure and a sample Dune Dashboard?
  6. Pilot: The 90-day trial with Moonwell-owned vaults is a start—can we get a suggested allocation?
2 Likes