Skip to content
Quantix Security Labs

Fenwick Lending

Over-collateralised lending with a kinked interest-rate model.

An isolated-market lending protocol deployed on Arbitrum. Each market pairs collateral and debt assets with its own interest-rate curve, liquidation threshold and oracle configuration. Core accounting was formally specified and verified.

Ecosystem
ARBArbitrum
Category
Lending
Languages
Solidity
Launched
Mar 2025
86.9AALow risk

Grade AA · Low risk

Strong posture with minor, documented weaknesses.

+3.4 since Nov 2025 · +2.2 since Jul 2026

Quantix Protocol Research · as of 24 Oct 2026 · About this data

Risk Index

How the score is built

Six weighted components, each scored 0–100 where higher means less risk. Points are the component value multiplied by its weight; the gap is what the component costs against a perfect score.
ComponentWeightValuePointsGap
Code Security30%9027.0−3.0
Operational Security20%8416.8−3.2
Governance Risk15%8612.9−2.1
Economic Security15%8512.8−2.3
Infrastructure Resilience10%828.2−1.8
Transparency10%929.2−0.8
Quantix Risk Index100%86.9−13.1
CodeOperationalGovernanceEconomicInfrastructureTransparencyFenwick Lending, Code: 90Fenwick Lending, Operational: 84Fenwick Lending, Governance: 86Fenwick Lending, Economic: 85Fenwick Lending, Infrastructure: 82Fenwick Lending, Transparency: 92
Risk Index components: Fenwick Lending Code 90, Operational 84, Governance 86, Economic 85, Infrastructure 82, Transparency 92
ComponentFenwick Lending
Code90
Operational84
Governance86
Economic85
Infrastructure82
Transparency92

Grade scale

  1. AAA90–100
  2. AA85–89.9
  3. A80–84.9
  4. BBB75–79.9
  5. BB70–74.9
  6. B65–69.9
  7. CCC60–64.9
  8. CC55–59.9
  9. C50–54.9
  10. D0–49.9

Score history

12 monthly snapshots

Each point is the Risk Index computed from that month’s component values. Markers below the chart show the events that moved a component.
Fenwick Lending Quantix Risk Index by month
PeriodQuantix Risk Index
Nov ’2583.5
Dec ’2584.0
Jan ’2684.0
Feb ’2684.0
Mar ’2684.0
Apr ’2684.4
May ’2684.4
Jun ’2684.7
Jul ’2684.7
Aug ’2684.7
Sep ’2686.9
Oct ’2686.9
  1. 18 Sept 2026

    Research assessment

    Research assessment completed: Formal Verification

    5 findings (1 high, 2 medium, 1 low, 1 informational). All critical and high findings addressed.

    Read the research assessment
    • Code Security+6
    • Transparency+4
  2. 15 Jun 2026

    Disclosure

    Risk framework published

    Listing criteria and parameter methodology made public.

    • Transparency+3
  3. 21 Apr 2026

    Infrastructure

    Oracle router migrated

    Sequencer-aware feeds with staleness checks per market.

    • Infrastructure Resilience+4
  4. 8 Dec 2025

    Economic

    Isolated market caps introduced

    Per-market supply and borrow caps for long-tail collateral.

    • Economic Security+3

Risk factors

What keeps the score from being higher, most severe first.
  • MediumEconomic SecurityProfile analysis

    Liquidation depth in long-tail markets

    Isolated markets limit contagion, but liquidators may not absorb large positions in low-liquidity collateral during fast moves, leaving bad debt in that market.

  • LowInfrastructure ResilienceProfile analysis

    Correlated oracle provider outages

    Each market reads two providers; an outage affecting both pauses borrowing protocol-wide on Arbitrum.

Recommendations

Each recommendation raises one component to a target value. The score effect is recomputed with the Risk Index model, holding every other component fixed.
  • Economic Security: 85 → 90

    Supply caps scaled to on-chain liquidity

    Tie collateral caps to measured DEX depth and refresh them on a schedule.

    +0.7

    → 87.6

  • Infrastructure Resilience: 82 → 88

    Independent fallback oracle

    Add a third, independently operated feed used only when the primary pair disagrees.

    +0.5

    → 87.4

Analysis

Contract, governance and operations

Contract analysis

Source
Verified
Upgradeability
Transparent proxy
Administrative control
Fenwick governance with a 72-hour timelock
Enforced delay
72 hours
External dependencies
Two price-feed providers per market; Arbitrum sequencer uptime feed
  • PassSource verified. All market contracts verified.
  • PassFormal verification. Core accounting properties machine-checked.
  • PassSequencer awareness. Borrowing and liquidations pause during sequencer downtime plus a grace period.
  • PassUpgrade delay. 72-hour timelock on proxy upgrades.
  • CautionLong-tail listings. Governance can list low-liquidity collateral with conservative but nonzero caps.

Governance exposure

Low

Token governance with a 72-hour timelock; market parameters and listings follow a published risk framework.

Operational resilience

Strong

Oracle router fails closed on stale or sequencer-impacted prices; liquidation keepers are permissionless.

Monitoring

Monitoring history

3 recorded security events for Fenwick Lending, most recent first.
  1. 24 Oct 2026InformationalLiquidations at 1.8× the usual rateContract Activity · LiquidationEngineResolved
  2. 19 Jan 2026MediumBorrow of 2.6% of WETH market supplyWhale Activity · MarketCoreResolved
  3. 3 Dec 2025MediumARB price deviation of 1.4% for two roundsSecurity Alert · OracleRouterResolved

Research assessment

QX-TSA-2026-002Formal VerificationPublished

Core accounting, interest accrual and liquidation engine, verified against 12 specified properties.

Review 31 Aug 2026 – 18 Sept 2026 · published 30 Sept 2026

Critical0
High1
Medium2
Low1
Informational1
  • 3 resolved
  • 0 partially resolved
  • 2 acknowledged
  • 0 open

Continue with

Comparable protocols

Compare side by side

Research

Relevant research

Publications on the risks that matter most for a lending protocol.

Architecture

System components

MarketCore
Supply, borrow, repay and withdraw accounting per market
InterestRateModel
Kinked utilisation-based borrow and supply rates
LiquidationEngine
Health checks and partial liquidations with close factor
OracleRouter
Price feeds with sequencer-uptime and staleness checks

Turn risk factors into a remediation plan.

A research assessment traces each weakness to code, configuration or process, and verifies the fix before the score moves.