Onchain yield systems are increasingly built around automated vaults that abstract execution, rebalancing, and risk management away from the user. While this simplifies access, the quality of yield still depends on where returns are sourced and how risk is absorbed. Some systems rely on active market participation, while others prioritize passive capital deployment. This distinction is critical when comparing different yield models. HyperCroc and @levva_fi both use vault based structures, but they are designed for fundamentally different outcomes. @Hypercroc_xyz operates within the Hyperliquid ecosystem, a perps focused Layer 1 where yield is directly tied to trading activity. Returns are generated through market making, funding rates, liquidations, and perpetuals exposure. As a result, yield scales with volume and volatility rather than idle capital. Within the Hyperliquid ecosystem, protocol vaults such as HLP have historically produced yields ranging from roughly 0.3% to over 13% APR, with select third party strategies reaching higher levels during favorable conditions. These returns come with elevated risk, including drawdowns and periods of negative yield during market corrections. HyperCroc’s dedicated smart vaults are still early or prelaunch, with no public APY data available yet. Current participation largely revolves around XP accumulation through Croc Cards in anticipation of future incentives. Levva takes a contrasting approach by focusing on passive, AI optimized yield across Ethereum and Base. Its live vaults allocate capital across lending, staking, liquidity provision, and delta neutral strategies to smooth performance. Base organic yields typically range from 3% to 15%, with conservative vaults targeting around 5 to 7% for capital preservation. Higher risk, leveraged options can achieve significantly higher returns, but within a framework designed to manage volatility.