FORESHOCK

Every protocol here carries a dated score and the share of it backed by independently verified evidence. Where that share is still thin the assessment says so, is marked Low-signal rather than given a risk band, and holds every unevidenced category at the neutral midpoint instead of assuming it safe. Every score and its reasoning are free to read; the underlying dependency, incident and audit records are part of a plan. Each reading here is fixed at the date beside it. Re-scoring never stops, but a changed reading reaches plan holders on the day it changes rather than this page, which is what a plan is for. How a score is built, how to read one, and how the rubric was tested against real exploits are all in the methodology.

Coverage grows three ways: protocols Foreshock selects at its own discretion, protocols requested through the Request coverage button, and sponsored assessments delivered on an agreed timeline. No path has a guaranteed date except sponsorship.

Scores run from 0, the safest reading, to 100, the riskiest, where 50 is the neutral midpoint every unverified category is held at. Red marks a protocol scoring 50 or above, the band called Elevated: worse than neutral on the evidence gathered. Amber marks one below it, called Moderate. The boundary is fixed. It does not move as coverage grows, and it is not fitted to any backtest result.

MUX Perps

MUX Perps official site N/A

Multi-Chain

:

  • Evidence: this reading is based on 100% of the scored weight, verified against named sources. Categories without verified data are held at the neutral midpoint at their full weight, never counted as safe.
  • Validation: measured against 1 comparable incident/control in this protocol's TVL, age and category bucket.
In short

Foreshock's independent reading of MUX Perps is Moderate risk, 40.8 out of 100, as of 15 September 2026. The largest single contributor to that reading is audit profile: 1 audit on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 7 High and 5 Medium severity issues. This reflects code quality at the time of that audit only, not a claim that these specific issues are still unresolved today. All nine scored categories are backed by verified evidence. Foreshock publishes the reading and the reasoning behind it. It is not a verdict on whether to use this protocol, and it is not investment advice.

Is MUX Perps safe?
Foreshock does not answer that as a yes or a no. Its independent reading of MUX Perps is Moderate risk, 40.8 out of 100, as of 15 September 2026, led by audit profile: 1 audit on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 7 High and 5 Medium severity issues. This reflects code quality at the time of that audit only, not a claim that these specific issues are still unresolved today. The score and the reasoning are published in full so the reading can be checked rather than trusted.
Has MUX Perps been audited?
1 audit on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 7 High and 5 Medium severity issues. This reflects code quality at the time of that audit only, not a claim that these specific issues are still unresolved today. An audit describes the code at the time it was reviewed. It is not a statement that the protocol is safe today.
Who controls MUX Perps?
Admin key: 48h timelock in place, open source. Top 10 holders control 15.23%, adjusted figure may still include pooled custody (untagged exchanges, infrastructure contracts) due to tagging coverage limits; exclusions require positive identification.
Has MUX Perps been exploited before?
No known own or inherited incidents. Foreshock records an incident against a protocol whether it originated there or was inherited from something it depends on.
When was this MUX Perps assessment last updated?
15 September 2026. Readings are recomputed as evidence changes, and every category carries the date of the evidence behind it.
Why this rating
Audit profile17.0

1 audit on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 7 High and 5 Medium severity issues. This reflects code quality at the time of that audit only, not a claim that these specific issues are still unresolved today.

Dependency risk6.0

Uses 1 oracle (MUX V1's LiquidityPool does not read a third-party on-chain price oracle (no Chainlink, Pyth, or similar reference found in the contracts pages or docs). Pricing is supplied by MUX's own "dark oracle", a private, off-chain price feed aggregating from centralized-exchange sources including Binance, read by an off-chain "broker" service that MUX itself operates, which then calls OrderBook to fill orders at that price. MUX's own docs (Multiplexing Layer page) state directly: "While most MUX protocol components are decentralized, the multiplexing layer infrastructures are currently off-chain", a first-party admission that the price-setting path is centralized and controlled by the MUX team, not a third-party oracle network or a decentralized signer set. No bridge sits in LiquidityPool's core custody path: each chain's pool custodies its own deposited assets independently ("unified liquidity" is achieved by the off-chain broker routing orders to whichever chain's pool has capacity, not by moving funds between chains). The one cross-chain mechanism in the docs, muxTokens, redeemable on another chain if a single chain's pool cannot cover a withdrawal, is described as a fallback path, not the core deposit/withdraw flow, so it is not recorded as bridges_relied_on per this project's core-accounting convention.).

TVL profile5.5

TVL is 89% below this protocol's own peak; TVL change (12%) is within a stable range.

Code characteristics3.0

Admin key: 48h timelock in place, open source.

Governance attack surface2.5

Top 10 holders control 15.23%, adjusted figure may still include pooled custody (untagged exchanges, infrastructure contracts) due to tagging coverage limits; exclusions require positive identification.

Historical incidents2.3

No known own or inherited incidents.

Team factors1.8

Doxxed team, track record: unknown.

Protocol age1.5

1409 days live, past the ~1yr floor; treated the same as any older protocol, not scored progressively safer with more age.

Bug bounty1.2

Has a bug bounty program, up to $100 000, hosted on Immunefi.

Assets held (8)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Dependencies (1)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Incident history (0)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Audit history (1)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Also covered on Multi-Chain

This assessment follows Foreshock's published methodology. Exact category weights, scoring rules, thresholds, and aggregation logic are proprietary and not shown here. How to interpret this assessment

This reading will change.

This reading is fixed at the date above it, and it stays there. We keep re-scoring MUX Perps as the evidence moves, a new audit, a changed admin control, an incident, and this page is free to read and always will be. The updated reading is what a plan buys: you are told by email on the day it changes, instead of finding out the next time you happen to look.