The short answerAura applies Convex's model to Balancer: liquidity providers get boosted BAL rewards without locking, at a fee of roughly 19–25% of rewards. Its own contracts have never been exploited, and it inherits every vulnerability of the underlying protocol it depends on.
Best forBoosted Balancer yields
Strategy disclosureweight 25%
8.5avg 8.0
Contract securityweight 25%
8.0avg 7.5
Net yieldweight 20%
8.0avg 7.4
Risk controlsweight 15%
7.5avg 7.5
Feesweight 15%
6.5avg 7.4
this service category average across 15Score = Σ mark × weight. Works well for a specific use case, weaker outside it. Methodology.
| Criterion | Mark | What we found | Source | Checked |
|---|
| Strategy disclosure | 8.5 | not sourced yet | not sourced yet | — |
| Contract security | 8.0 | not sourced yet | not sourced yet | — |
| Net yield | 8.0 | not sourced yet | not sourced yet | — |
| Risk controls | 7.5 | not sourced yet | not sourced yet | — |
| Fees | 6.5 | not sourced yet | not sourced yet | — |
What we liked, and what fell short
Liked- Significantly boosts Balancer LP returns without locking BAL
- Clean record with no exploit of its own contracts
- Transparent, mechanical strategy
Fell short- Inherits Balancer's vulnerability history
- Fee take is at the high end of the category
Why the marks landed where they did
Balancer's veBAL model has the same problem as Curve's: boosted rewards require a multi-year lock that most liquidity providers will not accept. Aura solved it the same way Convex did, and became the default routing layer for Balancer liquidity as a result.
Mechanics
Deposit Balancer LP tokens through Aura, receive boosted BAL and AURA rewards, with the protocol pooling locked veBAL to provide the boost. auraBAL represents a liquid claim on locked BAL. Fee is around 19–25% of rewards, at the high end of the category.
The inherited risk
Aura's contracts have held without incident. Balancer's have not — the 2023 boosted-pool vulnerability forced emergency withdrawals and a 2025 exploit affected specific pool types again. A depositor in Aura is exposed to Balancer's pool contracts by construction, so the relevant security question is not only Aura's record but the specific Balancer pool underneath.
Governance dynamics
Aura controls a large share of veBAL, which gives it substantial influence over Balancer's emissions and creates a bribe market similar to Convex's. Value flows to AURA lockers from that influence.
Who should use it
Balancer liquidity providers who will not lock BAL, having checked which pool type they are entering and its incident history. The convenience is real; the underlying protocol risk is the thing to evaluate.
FAQ
What is Aura Finance?+
A protocol that pools locked veBAL so Balancer liquidity providers can receive boosted rewards without locking BAL themselves, for a fee of roughly 19–25% of rewards.
Has Aura been exploited?+
Its own contracts have not. It is exposed to Balancer's pool vulnerabilities, which have caused losses in 2023 and 2025.
What is auraBAL?+
A liquid token representing locked BAL held by the protocol, allowing holders to exit via secondary markets rather than waiting out a lock.
Aura or Convex?+
They serve different underlying protocols — Aura for Balancer, Convex for Curve. Convex's underlying protocol has the cleaner security record.
