← BlazeStakereviewed 2026-09-07 · 24 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read BlazeStake against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.
Read this first
These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.
“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.
Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.
disputed
1 claimThe reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.
- #17[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Validator Decentralization and MEV Posture
“roughly 32 of Solana's 1,800+ active validators”
reviewerMore than one-third of all staked SOL flows to roughly 32 of Solana's 1,800+ active validators.The '32 validators controlling one-third of stake' portion is directly confirmed by BlazeStake's own delegation-strategy documentation, but the '1,800+ active validators' total is stale: multiple independent 2026 sources put Solana's active validator count between roughly 770 and 1,414 (most commonly cited around 900) following a 2025 validator-pruning event, not 1,800+.Proposed correction (not yet applied)roughly 32 of Solana's roughly 900 active validators
unverifiable
4 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #5[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Protocol Mechanics
“an 'instant unstake' that pulls SOL directly from pool liquidity for a reported fee around 0.1%”
reviewerInstant unstake carries a reported fee around 0.1%, drawn from secondary sources rather than a primary fee-schedule page.The page itself already flags this figure as indicative/unverified; independent verification against a primary fee page was not achieved in this review either. - #9[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Security Audits and Bug Bounty
“Secondary sources describe an active Immunefi bug bounty reportedly worth up to $3 million and additionally cite audits by Neodyme, OtterSec, Halborn, and Certik as covering BlazeStake more broadly, but these secondary claims (bounty size, Certik involvement) were not independently verified against a primary BlazeStake or Immunefi page during this investigation and should be treated as lower-confidence.”
reviewerSecondary sources describe an Immunefi bug bounty worth up to $3 million and additional audits by Certik among others, unverified against primary sources.The page already flags this as lower-confidence and unverified; this review did not find independent confirmation either way. - #16[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Adoption, TVL, and Market-Share Context
“Solana Compass ranks SolBlaze as its #3 liquid-staking listing by its own methodology, but this ranking's underlying criteria were not independently verified.”
reviewerSolana Compass ranks SolBlaze as its #3 liquid-staking listing.Could not independently confirm the specific #3 ranking; the page already flags this as unverified. - #24[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“BlazeStake liquid staking protocol launches on Solana, issuing bSOL against pooled SOL delegated across a broad validator set (date approximate, per prior AVOID.NET investigation and general project history).”
reviewerBlazeStake launched on Solana in approximately May 2022.The page already labels this date as approximate; this review could not independently confirm or refute the specific May 2022 month.
partially supported
2 claimsThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #8[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Security Audits and Bug Bounty
“BlazeStake's documentation lists eight security audits performed on the Solana Labs stake-pool program it relies on: Kudelski (Jul 2021), Neodyme (Oct 2021), Quantstamp (Oct 2021, initial and re-review), Neodyme (Dec 2022), Neodyme (Jan 2023), Halborn (Jan 2023), OtterSec (Jan 2023), and Neodyme (Nov 2023).”
reviewerBlazeStake's documentation lists eight named security audits with the specific auditors and dates given.The count, auditors, and months/years all match the primary source exactly. The added detail that the single Quantstamp entry covered 'initial and re-review' passes could not be confirmed from the fetched audits page, which lists only one dated Quantstamp entry with no re-review notation. - #15[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Adoption, TVL, and Market-Share Context
“third-party research (Solana Compass, mid-2026 commentary) describes total Solana LST supply exceeding $8 billion”
reviewerThird-party research describes total Solana LST supply exceeding $8 billion.The jitoSOL market-share portion of this sentence is confirmed against the cited URL, but the specific $8 billion total-LST-supply figure was not found in that same source when fetched directly; it may originate from a different, uncited Solana Compass page.
confirmed
17 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Protocol Mechanics
“Users deposit SOL into a stake pool and receive bSOL (BlazeStake Staked SOL), an SPL token whose redemption value in SOL rises each epoch as staking rewards compound; bSOL itself does not rebase.”
reviewerbSOL is an SPL token whose redemption value in SOL rises each epoch as rewards compound; bSOL does not rebase.Standard non-rebasing exchange-rate LST design; consistent across independent descriptions of BlazeStake found in this review. - #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Protocol Mechanics
“which it markets as the largest validator set of any Solana stake pool”
reviewerBlazeStake markets a validator set exceeding 200 validators and calls it the largest validator set of any Solana stake pool.Independently corroborated outside BlazeStake's own marketing by a third-party guide. - #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Protocol Mechanics
“program ID SPoo1Ku8WFXoNDMHPsrGSTSG1Y47rzgn41SLUNakuHy per BlazeStake's developer documentation”
reviewerThe stake pool uses program ID SPoo1Ku8WFXoNDMHPsrGSTSG1Y47rzgn41SLUNakuHy per BlazeStake's developer documentation.Verbatim match against primary source. - #4[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Protocol Mechanics
“BlazeStake advertises a 0% pool commission on staking rewards, according to a third-party project review.”
reviewerBlazeStake advertises a 0% pool commission on staking rewards, per a third-party project review.Claim is narrowly and honestly attributed to a secondary source; no contradiction found. - #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Custody, Upgrade Authority, and Admin Control
“BlazeStake states it is 'fully non-custodial' and that the underlying stake-pool program is designed so that 'no way for anyone else to steal your SOL from the stake pool' exists”
reviewerBlazeStake's security-overview page states the protocol is fully non-custodial and that no one, including the pool operator, can steal user SOL.Near-verbatim match to the primary source. - #7[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Custody, Upgrade Authority, and Admin Control
“The same page states the program's upgrade authority is governed by 'a robust ecosystem multisig that is overseen by the Solana Foundation,' intended to prevent malicious deployments.”
reviewerThe program's upgrade authority is governed by 'a robust ecosystem multisig that is overseen by the Solana Foundation'.Verbatim quote confirmed; the page's separate hedge about an unconfirmed '5-of-7 multisig with 72-hour timelock' figure is also accurate — that detail could not be found in the primary source either. - #10[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Security Audits and Bug Bounty
“No specific vulnerability findings, critical or otherwise, were identified for BlazeStake or the underlying stake-pool program in available sources, and no history of exploits or fund loss involving BlazeStake was found in a search of Solana hack retrospectives.”
reviewerNo specific vulnerability findings and no history of exploits or fund loss involving BlazeStake were found.Negative/absence claim; no contrary evidence surfaced in this review's searches. - #11[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Team Transparency
“Third-party project databases describe SolBlaze as a Solana-native ecosystem builder founded in late 2021, with a scope that has expanded beyond staking into token tooling and a permissionless platform for launching custom liquid staking tokens, but do not disclose the real-world identities, jurisdiction, or legal-entity structure behind the project.”
reviewerSolBlaze is a pseudonymous team; third-party databases describe it as founded in late 2021 with an expanded scope beyond staking.Matches independently retrieved third-party description almost verbatim. - #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Team Transparency
“No court filings, regulatory actions, or law-enforcement inquiries naming SolBlaze or BlazeStake were identified.”
reviewerNo court filings, regulatory actions, or law-enforcement inquiries naming SolBlaze or BlazeStake were identified.Negative/absence claim; no searches conducted in this review surfaced any regulatory or legal action against SolBlaze/BlazeStake. - #13[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Adoption, TVL, and Market-Share Context
“the protocol's tracked TVL was approximately $69.4 million as of August 8, 2026, having fluctuated in the roughly $60–70 million range over the preceding week.”
reviewerBlazeStake's tracked TVL was approximately $69.4 million as of August 8, 2026, fluctuating in the $60-70 million range over the preceding week.DeFiLlama figure is close to the stated $69.4M and within the stated $60-70M range; TVL is inherently a fluctuating, point-in-time figure. - #14[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Adoption, TVL, and Market-Share Context
“reported by one 2026 industry source as holding roughly 20%+ of LST market share after declining from an earlier ~35%, amid competition from Sanctum-enabled branded LSTs”
reviewerOne 2026 industry source reports jitoSOL's LST market share declining from roughly 35% to just over 20%, amid Sanctum-enabled competition.Verbatim match to the cited source. - #18[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Disputes: The April 2024 MarginFi Episode
“In April 2024, SolBlaze publicly accused the Solana lending protocol MarginFi of acting in bad faith by allegedly failing to distribute BLZE token 'emissions' rewards to MarginFi depositors as intended under SolBlaze's reward guidelines, and further alleged MarginFi had dumped SolBlaze-airdropped governance tokens rather than passing them to users.”
reviewerIn April 2024, SolBlaze publicly accused MarginFi of bad faith over failure to distribute BLZE emissions and of dumping SolBlaze-airdropped governance tokens.Accurately characterizes the dispute as reported contemporaneously. - #19[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Disputes: The April 2024 MarginFi Episode
“The accusations became public on the same day MarginFi co-founder Edgar Pavlovsky announced his resignation citing internal disagreements, a coincidence that intensified scrutiny of MarginFi and contributed to reported outflows exceeding $200 million from that protocol, as covered by CoinDesk and Decrypt.”
reviewerThe accusation surfaced the same day MarginFi co-founder Edgar Pavlovsky announced his resignation, and MarginFi saw reported outflows exceeding $200 million.The $200M+ figure is well supported by Decrypt's $214M cumulative-withdrawal reporting; The Block's $155M is a narrower net-outflow measure for the same event and does not contradict the page's claim. - #20[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Disputes: The April 2024 MarginFi Episode
“According to subsequent reporting, SolBlaze said it had since communicated with and reached a resolution with the MarginFi team, and MarginFi's engineering team reportedly acknowledged the oversight and committed to reimbursing affected users.”
reviewerSolBlaze and MarginFi reached a resolution; MarginFi's engineering team acknowledged the oversight and committed to reimbursing affected users.Matches independently retrieved reporting on the resolution. - #21[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Regulatory Environment for Liquid Staking
“Reporting indicates the SEC issued a statement (around August 2025) that liquid staking activities generally do not involve the offer and sale of securities, provided the reward amount is not fixed or guaranteed by the provider.”
reviewerThe SEC issued a statement around August 2025 that liquid staking activities generally do not involve the offer and sale of securities absent fixed/guaranteed rewards.Confirmed against the SEC's own primary press release, found independently in this review. - #22[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Regulatory Environment for Liquid Staking
“This was followed, according to industry coverage, by a joint SEC/CFTC interpretive statement around March 2026 that classified SOL as a digital commodity and stated that solo, self-custodial, custodial, and liquid staking models generally do not constitute securities transactions.”
reviewerA joint SEC/CFTC interpretive statement around March 2026 classified SOL as a digital commodity and stated staking models generally do not constitute securities transactions.Confirmed via independent legal-industry sources; the exact March 17, 2026 date matches the page's timeline entry. - #23[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Depeg and Liquidity Risk
“No confirmed historical depeg event specifically involving bSOL was identified in this investigation.”
reviewerNo confirmed historical depeg event specifically involving bSOL was identified.Absence-of-evidence claim; no bSOL-specific depeg reporting was found in this review either.
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.