Raydium AMM

Rejected venues wait the longest for re-review; a rejection has to earn another look before the scheduled date.

Raydium is a Solana exchange spanning constant-product and concentrated-liquidity pools. It held about $1.31B across more than 1,300 pools at the 2026-08-14 survey. Raydium’s own documentation defines impermanent loss as the shortfall against simply holding and shows that tighter CLMM ranges magnify it. Its December 2022 admin-key compromise is relevant operating evidence, but not the dispositive reason here. The memo applies the amm-lp rule to the inventory payoff and does not claim an individual protocol review.

Kill criteria: the events that revoke this verdict
• Ships a product line without impermanent-loss exposure that merits its own review

The research file

The mechanism

Raydium offers CPMM pools using the x*y=k inventory curve and CLMM positions that allocate liquidity to selected price ranges. In either design, arbitrage rebalances the LP toward the relatively weaker token. CLMM positions earn fees only while their range is active and can finish single-sided; token extensions, transfer fees and farm rewards add pool-specific behavior that headline APY does not capture.

Control and operating record

Pools are permissionless, so token issuer, mint authority, freeze authority and pool configuration must be assessed separately from Raydium’s programs. On 16 December 2022, an attacker gained control of the legacy AMM v4 Pool Owner authority and withdrew pool funds. Raydium’s post-mortem says concentrated-liquidity pools and RAY staking were not affected and documents the authority remediation. The event establishes real key-management history; it does not make every current pool equivalent.

The exit

A CPMM LP burns its pool token for its pro-rata inventory; a CLMM owner removes active liquidity and collects the two-token result. Neither path promises the original token mix or dollar value. During a token collapse, thin liquidity or a frozen token can make the nominal withdrawal economically unusable even when the program executes correctly.

Why the class rule decides

The amm-lp class rule rejects the two-sided inventory exposure before any pool-level ranking can qualify it for client use. Raydium’s throughput, mature products and incident response are not ignored; they simply cannot remove the payoff the rule excludes. A non-AMM Raydium product with distinct cash flows and exits would reopen review.

Sources

The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.

• Raydium Docs — impermanent-loss mechanics · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: impermanent-loss mechanics
• Raydium Docs — protocol and pool references · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: protocol, pool references
• Raydium — December 2022 exploit post-mortem · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: December 2022 exploit post-mortem
• Raydium Docs — AMM attack vectors · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: AMM attack vectors

Inherited controls

The verdict above grades the protocol layer. Every position also inherits the asset it holds and the chain it settles on. The least safe layer sets the position’s grade, and the position table names which one that is.