Lido Protocol – LTM Financial & Valuation Tracker

Finance
1

This thread tracks Lido protocol fundamentals using four core indicators on a Last Twelve Months (LTM) basis.

The objective is to monitor:

  • Operating performance
  • Fiscal discipline
  • Valuation relative to revenue
  • Treasury strength

:one: LTM Revenue vs LTM Expenses

Tracks the operating engine of the protocol.

  • Revenue = derived from the dashboard’s Net Revenue and Cost of Revenue components.
  • Expenses = Operating Expenses + Liquidity Expenses
  • LTM basis smooths monthly volatility

This chart shows structural revenue trends versus cost structure.

:two: LTM Net Margin (%)

Defined as: Net Revenue / Gross Revenue

This captures fiscal discipline and operating efficiency over time.

LTM basis avoids short-term noise.

:three: LDO Market Cap vs Treasury

  • LDO market cap calculated using 100-day EMA price
  • Treasury valued using 100-day EMA ETH price

EMA pricing is used to reduce short-term volatility and better reflect structural valuation trends.

This chart compares speculative valuation vs asset backing.

:four: LTM Gross Revenue Yield (%)

Defined as: LTM Revenue / LDO Market Cap (100-day EMA basis)

This functions as a structural valuation anchor for the token relative to protocol revenue generation.

Methodology Notes

  • LTM = Last Twelve Months.
  • Revenue & Treasury data sourced from dune.com/steakhouse/lido-safu & dune.com/giraffa/lido-treasury
  • All figures reflect month-end values.
  • Treasury P&L are excluded to focus on operating dynamics.
  • LDO market cap and ETH in treasury are calculated using 100-day EMA prices to reduce short-term volatility and better reflect structural valuation trends.
  • Circulating supply includes all LDO tokens excluding the DAO Treasury.

This thread will be updated at each month-end with refreshed charts.

2

LTM protocol revenue has gradually declined over the observed period, while DAO operating expenses remained relatively stable. As a result, the spread between revenue and expenses has narrowed compared to late 2025.

image
image1050×585 65.6 KB

Net margin fluctuated across the period, reflecting both revenue changes and variations in DAO spending. Margins remain positive but below the levels observed earlier in the period.

image
image1050×585 58.5 KB

LDO market capitalization declined significantly over the period, while treasury value decreased more moderately. As a result, treasury backing represents a larger share of market capitalization than in late 2025.

image
image1049×585 65 KB

Revenue yield increased as LDO market capitalization declined while protocol revenue remained relatively stable. This reflects valuation compression relative to protocol revenue generation.

image
image1050×585 63.7 KB

Full Data Table
*(LTM = Last Twelve Months) Nov '25 Dec '25 Jan '26 Feb '26
LTM Revenue (million) $43.13 $41.56 $41.22 $40.21
LTM Expenses (million) $34.68 $36.41 $34.00 $34.61
LTM Net Revenue (million) $8.45 $5.15 $7.22 $5.60
LTM Net Margin 19.59% 12.39% 17.52% 13.93%
Circ. Supply (million) 892.09 895.5 895.5 898.1
LTM Circ. Supply Change (million) -3.68 -0.55 -0.5 0.5
LTM Circ. Supply Change -0.4% -0.1% -0.1% 0.1%
LDO 100D EMA $0.9084 $0.7642 $0.6631 $0.5225
LDO Market Cap, 100D EMA basis (million) $810.37 $684.34 $593.81 $469.26
LTM Gross Revenue Yield 5.32% 6.07% 6.94% 8.57%
ETH 100D EMA $3,604 $3,353 $3,185 $2,677
Treasury (million), 100D EMA basis $135.55 $123.52 $119.51 $103.64
Treasury Runway (years) 3.91 3.39 3.52 2.99
3

Notes on Data Sources and Reporting Infrastructure

While preparing these charts I encountered several practical challenges related to data availability and consistency.

The primary financial dashboard used for the revenue and expense data (Steakhouse) has changed structure several times over recent months. As a result, historical tracking sometimes requires manual adjustments when queries or labels change.

Treasury reporting is also less straightforward. There is currently no single official dashboard that presents the full DAO treasury composition in a clean and stable format. For the treasury values used in these charts I relied primarily on the community dashboard created by Giraffa.
However, that dashboard does not currently include the sUSDS component of the treasury. That portion had to be added manually when calculating the treasury value used in the charts.

These challenges are manageable for individual analysis, but they highlight a broader point:
consistent and standardized financial reporting would make it significantly easier for tokenholders and governance participants to monitor the protocol’s financial position.

Ideally, Lido DAO could maintain a stable and comprehensive financial reporting framework where revenue, expenses, and treasury composition are clearly documented and consistently presented.

Such infrastructure would improve transparency and allow the community to analyze protocol fundamentals with greater confidence.

4

I agree. In the age of AI taking over, transparency might not be a already digested dashboard but an endpoint with all data so anyone can point an agent to it and get whatever they want explained in detail.

2 Likes