Source: data/coverage_2026-09-21-tvl-by-ecosystem.md in the repository, rendered here without changes. Source file
A first measurement, from open data only (DefiLlama's /protocols for TVL per chain, matched by protocol name to the labels of the targets each oracle tracks; for Robinhood Chain also hoodscan's public project registry). It is an estimate with a stated method and known errors, not an audit, and it measures listed TVL, not risk.
Robinhood Chain's 99.0% needs four manual corrections to the name match, because the protocol is tracked under another label: Steakhouse Financial ($511M, tracked through its Morpho vaults), Lighter ($96.5M, its escrow proxy), up v2 ($1.2M, governed by the same Safe as the tracked up v3) and Arcus pTokens ($0.6M). Without them the raw match reads 60.5%. The remaining $16.3M is spread thin: the largest is $2.2M.
Name matching errs both ways.EigenCloud on Ethereum is EigenLayer's new name and is tracked; Hyperliquid Bridge on Arbitrum is tracked in the Hyperliquid oracle; a protocol counted as tracked may be tracked through one contract of several.
TVL is not custody. SSV Network ($14.1B) and Binance staked ETH ($9.6B) are staking-attestation figures: the ETH sits behind validators' withdrawal credentials, not in a contract whose authority this oracle would score. Counting them as gaps overstates the gap; bridges and vault layers are the opposite, they hold real funds and their TVL understates how much trust they carry.
Named because the figures are large and the contracts hold funds; each needs a full authority trace before anything is claimed about it:
Maple (Ethereum, $3.0B, lending pools) and USDT0 (Ethereum, $3.3B, an OFT adapter that locks USDT);
the Steakhouse and Gauntlet vault layer on Base ($2.15B together): the Morpho Blue singleton is tracked, the vaults' owner and curator Safes are not (the Robinhood Chain vault scorer already does this for its own vaults);
the L1 bridge contracts of Arbitrum and Base ($3.5B and $3.0B), whose authority is an Arbitrum DAO and Security Council path partly tracked from the L2 side;
on Robinhood Chain, hoodscan's registry lists 115 projects, 79 with confirmed contracts, and 54 with contracts and no tracked one by name. The custody-shaped ones are lending (accountable, termmax, ripe-protocol, gage, own, ravenhood), bridges (debridge, across, relay), lockers and launchpads (hoodlock, pons, par-family). Their TVL is small; their shape (funds or bridged authority) is why they are listed.
It does not say 99% of the risk is covered: TVL is one lens, and a small bridge or launchpad can hold a large tail risk.
The name match is approximate and was corrected by hand only for Robinhood Chain.
Adding a target is a scoring project (an authority trace, a scorer, tests, an append on the oracle pushed by the maintainer); this note only says where the value is.