Protocol has bridge surface
Convex Finance's assessment for RD-F-147 — scored not_applicable on the v1.7.0 rubric. The evidence below is the curator's reasoning for this score.
Evidence summary #
Convex has no bridge surface. Profile §7 explicit: has_bridge_surface: false, is_a_bridge: false, cross_chain: false. Sidechain deployments (Fraxtal, Arbitrum, Polygon) are independent per-chain Booster instances with no Convex-operated cross-chain message path. This factor gates the rest of Cat 10; all remaining Cat 10 factors are not_applicable for the same reason.
Sources #
- InternalConvex Finance Protocol Profile §7 — Bridge flags.research/protocols/convex-finance/00-profile.md §7: has_bridge_surface: false, is_a_bridge: false, cross_chain: false; Fraxtal/Arbitrum/Polygon are independent per-chain deploymentsretrieved 2026-05-16
- Convex Finance Sidechain Platform Repogithub.com/convex-eth/sidechain-platform: directory contains Booster.sol, ConvexRewardPool.sol, VoterProxy.sol — no bridge or cross-chain messaging contracts present; arbi/ subdirectory contains only BoosterOwner.sol, BoosterPlaceholder.sol, VoterProxyOwner.solretrieved 2026-05-16
Methodology #
Determine whether the protocol has a bridge surface (its own bridge or a bridge-operated dependency for routing/minting).
See the full factor methodology and distribution across all protocols →
rubric_version v1.7.0 protocol convex-finance factor RD-F-147 score not_applicable collected_at 2026-05-16 02:41:28