Compound V3 vs Maple: two different lending models, scored side by side
Compound V3 scores 8.21/10 and Maple 8.15/10 on data collected October 19, 2026, ranking #4 and #5 among 15 [lending platforms](/ratings/lending/). Both are fully measured, and neither has a hack recorded under its own name in DefiLlama's database. The 0.06-point gap is a trade between Compound V3's wider chain reach and Maple's longer record. The more important difference, which the score does not capture, is who borrows. Compound V3 runs open on-chain money markets. Maple describes its business as overcollateralized loans to institutions.
Data collected October 19, 2026 · No affiliate links · How scores are built
Compound V3 scores higher: 8.21/10 against 8.15/10. It leads on 1 of 4 criteria, Maple on 1.
Criterion by criterion
Same category, same weights, heaviest criterion first. Open a row for each side’s reasoning and evidence.
Scale of value trusted33% of the scoreLevelCompound V39Maple9Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Security audits31% of the scoreLevelCompound V36Maple6Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Track record22% of the scoreMaple leadsCompound V39Maple10Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Multi-chain reach14% of the scoreCompound V3 leadsCompound V310Maple8Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Where the 0.06 points come from
- Reach: +0.28 for Compound V3. 10 chains against 2.
- Track record: +0.22 for Maple. Maple's age counts from a documented 2021 launch (from July 1, 2021, because the record gives the year only). Compound V3's counts from its September 2022 DefiLlama listing, which is a floor.
- Net: 0.28 − 0.22 = 0.06 for Compound V3. Maple holds almost twice the value locked ($2.71B against $1.41B), but both fall in the same log-scale band and score 9.
What the score cannot compare
- Borrower type and credit risk. In an open money market like Compound V3, any wallet can borrow against approved collateral, and liquidations run automatically. Maple says its loans are overcollateralized and go to institutional borrowers through its own products. A borrower default is a credit loss, not a hack, so it would not appear in a hack database. Read Maple's own disclosures on collateral, terms and past loan performance before depositing.
- Rates, lockups and withdrawal terms. Not scored. Institutional lending products may have different access and withdrawal rules from an open pool.
- Other ratings. Maple also has a separate DeFi protocols rating (8.33, #4) under different weights. The two scores are not interchangeable.
Which fits which reader
- If you want open, permissionless markets across many chains, Compound V3 has the wider deployment (10 chains).
- If you specifically want exposure to institutional credit, Maple is the protocol here built for that, with the longer documented record. That exposure carries borrower and credit risk that this score does not measure.
- Either way, confirm the specific market or pool, its collateral and how withdrawals work.
The numbers side by side
| Measured | Compound V3 | Maple |
|---|---|---|
| Value locked | $1.41B | $2.71B |
| Published audits | 1 | 1 |
| Track record | 4.1 yr | 5.3 yr |
| Chains | 10 | 2 |
Where each one falls short
Compound V3
Security audits: 1 published audit with links (DefiLlama) — read the findings yourself. Audits reduce risk, they do not remove it.
Maple
Security audits: 1 published audit with links (DefiLlama) — read the findings yourself. Audits reduce risk, they do not remove it.
Which to choose
Which scores higher, Compound V3 or Maple?+
Compound V3, with 8.21/10 against 8.15/10 on the October 19, 2026 data.
Does either have a hack on record?+
DefiLlama lists no hack under "Compound V3" or "Maple" as of October 23, 2026. A $147M entry from 2021 belongs to Compound V2, a separate product.
Is Maple's 8.15 the same as its DeFi protocols score?+
No. Maple scores 8.33 in the DeFi protocols category, which uses different weights. Compare scores only within the same category. More comparisons: Venus Core Pool vs Compound V3 · Morpho Blue vs Maple (DeFi protocols) · Full lending ranking