Kaspa's base layer holds no TVL at all. It has no general smart contracts, by design. Every dollar counted as "Kaspa TVL" sits on two layer-2 networks, Kasplex and Igra, both of which opened for business in 2025 and 2026. The number is small because the surface capital can sit on has only existed since mid-2025, not because capital looked at Kaspa and walked away.
Total value locked is the dollar value of assets people have deposited into a chain's smart contracts, liquidity sitting in decentralised exchange pools, collateral parked in lending markets, tokens committed to staking contracts.
The reason anyone cares is that TVL is a trust measure. It is capital that someone deliberately handed over to a piece of code and left there, accepting the risk that the code fails. People do not do that casually. A chain with real TVL has convinced real money that its contracts work.
What TVL is not. It is not the value of the network, not trading volume, not a user count, and not a measure of how good the technology is. A chain can have excellent engineering and near-zero TVL simply because nothing has been built on it yet. That is precisely Kaspa's situation.
Kaspa's base layer is a UTXO chain, close in design to Bitcoin. It moves coins and secures them with proof-of-work; it does not run arbitrary programs. There is nowhere on layer 1 to lock value, so the honest figure for Kaspa L1 TVL is zero.
Bitcoin is in the same position, and it's a useful sanity check. Bitcoin's several billion dollars of counted TVL doesn't sit on Bitcoin's base chain either. It sits in wrapped assets and sidechain-style constructions built alongside it. Nobody reads Bitcoin's low base-layer programmability as a flaw.
Smart contracts on Kaspa sit one layer up.
So whenever you see "Kaspa TVL", read it as "Kaspa layer-2 TVL". It is a measure of how far the smart-contract ecosystem has come, not of Kaspa itself.
These apply to every chain, not just Kaspa, and they're the reason TVL headlines are so often misleading.
If the price of the assets locked falls 20% and not a single person moves a coin, TVL falls 20%. A large share of the "TVL growth" reported across crypto in any bull market is just price appreciation on capital that was already there. The inverse is worse. A chain can be gaining real deposits while its TVL chart falls, purely because the market is red. Always check the direction of TVL against the direction of price before you conclude anything.
Chains and protocols routinely pay for deposits with token emissions. That capital is mercenary. It arrives for the yield and exits the week the yield stops. A TVL chart that spikes vertically on the back of an incentive programme tells you about the size of the budget, not the depth of the interest.
Deposit an asset into protocol A, receive a receipt token, deposit that receipt into protocol B, and the underlying dollar shows up in two TVL figures. In mature ecosystems built on looping and restaking, this inflates headline numbers substantially. It's less of a factor on a young chain like Kaspa, which is one of the few advantages of being early. The number is comparatively clean.
All figures come from DefiLlama when the page loads, so this table is current whenever you're reading it.
| Chain | TVL | vs. Kaspa |
|---|---|---|
| loading… | ||
The gap is enormous, and pretending otherwise would be useless to you. Kaspa's DeFi ecosystem is well under 1% of the total. What that reflects is age. Kaspa's layer 2s have only existed since mid-2025 (Kasplex), with Igra following in 2026. The relevant question isn't whether Kaspa has caught up, it obviously hasn't, but whether the line is moving in the right direction from a standing start.
At this size, the absolute number is close to meaningless. Three readings are not.
That last point deserves emphasis. At a total in the low millions, Kaspa's TVL is not yet a statistically robust signal. One whale, one bridge deployment, one incentive campaign can dominate the chart. Treat weekly moves as anecdotes and monthly direction as data.
Kaspa's total value locked is the combined TVL of its two EVM layer-2 networks, Kasplex and Igra. Today's figure is published on this page, pulled directly from DefiLlama. Kaspa's base layer holds no TVL because it does not run general smart contracts.
Kaspa layer 1 is a UTXO proof-of-work chain, similar in design to Bitcoin. It has no general smart contract platform where DeFi capital is pooled, so the TVL counted for Kaspa sits on its two layer 2s. Since the Toccata hard fork of 30 June 2026, layer 1 also runs covenant contracts inside UTXOs, which we count on our covenant page rather than in TVL.
On two EVM-compatible layer 2s, Kasplex, running since mid-2025, and Igra, which followed in 2026. The base layer runs covenant contracts since the Toccata hard fork, but the DeFi capital counted as TVL sits on the layer 2s.
It reflects age more than rejection. Kaspa's smart-contract layers launched in 2025 and 2026, so the capital on them has had little time to arrive. At this size the absolute figure is not a robust signal. The direction of TVL against price, the split between the two layer 2s and the ratio of TVL to DEX volume are more informative.
Kasplex is the first of Kaspa's two EVM layer 2s. Its TVL is shown in the split on this page, tracked separately from Igra's and refreshed from DefiLlama.
Igra's mainnet launched in March 2026. Its TVL and its share of total Kaspa TVL are shown in the split on this page, refreshed from DefiLlama.
follow kaspa pulse