Uniswap V4

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

Uniswap v4 keeps v3’s concentrated-liquidity design and adds hooks, custom code that pools can run at each step of a trade, plus gas savings from a single-contract architecture. It held about $582M across seven chains at the 2026-08-14 survey. The LP economics still include concentrated inventory rebalancing; hooks can additionally alter fees, curves, accounting and external dependencies at pool lifecycle points. Uniswap Foundation’s own security framework says hooks are not reviewed, audited or certified by the Foundation. The amm-lp rule is already dispositive before hook-specific underwriting. This is a class disposition, not an individual rejection of v4 core.

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

V4 places pools in one PoolManager and uses flash accounting to net token deltas before transaction settlement. It retains v3-style concentrated liquidity. A pool may attach an immutable hook address whose callbacks run around initialization, swaps, liquidity changes and donations; hooks can implement dynamic fees, custom curves, oracle logic or even bypass the standard concentrated-liquidity swap calculation.

Control and operating record

The PoolManager is shared core infrastructure, while hook code and its admin model are pool-specific and permissionless. Uniswap’s security framework identifies accounting, token handling, external-call, reentrancy, precision, upgradeability and dynamic-fee risks, and expressly says the Foundation does not certify a hook’s score or safety. V4 has a shorter production record than v3; no incident claim is needed to apply the class rule.

The exit

Removing liquidity settles the position’s current token inventory, not the original deposit mix. An out-of-range concentrated position can be entirely one token and inactive. A hook can add fees, access restrictions, external calls or custom accounting, so an exit must also be simulated against that exact hook rather than inferred from the Uniswap name.

Why the class rule decides

The amm-lp rule excludes the base market-making payoff even for a hookless pool. Hooks then create a second, pool-by-pool underwriting problem; they do not cure inventory loss. Accordingly this memo neither condemns v4 core nor treats all hooks alike. A distinct Uniswap product that does not expose the client to LP inventory would reopen review.

Sources

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

• Uniswap v4 Core white paper · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: Uniswap v4 Core white paper
• Uniswap Developers — hooks and singleton architecture · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: hooks, singleton architecture
• Uniswap Developers — concentrated liquidity in v3 and v4 · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: concentrated liquidity in v3, v4
• Uniswap Developers — v4 hook security framework · primary · accessed 2026-08-14
  Supports: v4 hook security framework

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.