Sommelier Review
Apache-licensed cellars, audits unverified
of 10
Sommelier's cellars can charge annualised management fees and high-watermark performance fees, both in basis points, with the platform fee deprecated. The contracts are Apache 2.0, but no official audit page could be reached and custody is not addressed.
No money changes hands. This is a non-commercial project: no advertising, no sponsored placements, and no affiliate or referral links. Links to the services below earn us nothing. Every overall score is the plain average of the criteria shown on the page, so you can check the arithmetic yourself — see our rating methodology and how the site is funded.
Management fee
Annualised flat fee on cellar TVL, in basis points
Performance fee
Above a high-watermark, in basis points
Platform fee
Deprecated
Licence
Apache 2.0
Audits
Not verified from an official page
Scores
Each criterion carries equal weight. The overall score is the average of these 5 scores — (6.0 + 8.0 + 2.0 + 3.0 + 4.0) ÷ 5 = 4.6.
Pros
- Management fees documented as flat annualised fees on cellar TVL, in basis points
- Performance fees charged only above a high-watermark, in basis points
- The platform fee is stated to be deprecated
- Apache 2.0 licence on the cellar contracts
Cons
- No official audit page could be reached; only third-party audit references exist
- Custody is not addressed on the fetched page
- Fees are described as configurable per cellar rather than as fixed figures
- Strategy allocation and historical performance are not documented on the page read
A well-structured fee model
Sommelier's cellars can assess two fees: an annualised management fee charged as a flat rate on total cellar TVL, and a performance fee earned only when a cellar generates profit past its high-watermark. Both are expressed in basis points, and the older platform fee is stated to be deprecated. The high-watermark condition — charging performance only on genuine new gains — is a fair structure, documented clearly.
Open source
The cellar-contracts repository carries the Apache 2.0 licence, a recognised open-source licence.
The gaps
No official Sommelier audit page could be reached — the only audit references found are third-party, so we do not report them as verified — and custody is not addressed on the page we read. Because the fees are configurable per cellar rather than fixed, and no strategy allocation or historical performance is documented, several scores here reflect what could not be confirmed rather than what was found wanting.
How it compares
Yield Yak
MIT-licensed, no deposit or withdraw fees
Harvest Finance
Named audits, ISC only in package.json
Idle Finance
Apache-licensed with net APY and named audits
Pendle
Yield tokenisation with a flat 5% fee
Aura Finance
MIT-licensed with a published fee ceiling
Origin (OUSD)
Rebasing yield stablecoin, MIT and net APY
Beefy
Eight named auditors, no licence file
Convex Finance
MIT-licensed with fees published to the basis point
Yearn Finance
AGPL-licensed with a named audit record
Sources
Scored from published primary sources rather than hands-on use. Every figure above comes from one of the pages below, on the date shown. Manufacturers change prices and specifications without notice — if something here no longer matches the source, tell us and we will correct it.
- 1.Sommelier — fees and reserves — checked
- 2.Sommelier — cellar-contracts LICENSE (Apache 2.0) — checked
Frequently asked questions
What fees do Sommelier cellars charge?
An annualised management fee on cellar TVL and a performance fee above a high-watermark, both in basis points. The platform fee is deprecated.
Is Sommelier audited?
No official Sommelier audit page could be reached on 24 July 2026; only third-party audit references exist, which we do not report as verified.
Nothing here is financial advice. Editorial policy · How we score · How we're funded.