diff --git a/erc4626/BeefyWrapperReview.md b/erc4626/BeefyWrapperReview.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..51c190c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/erc4626/BeefyWrapperReview.md
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+# ERC4626 Vault: `BeefyWrapper`
+
+## Details
+- Reviewed by: @franzns
+- Checked by: @danielmkm
+- Deployed at:
+    - [sonic:0x7870ddFd5ACA4E977B2287e9A212bcbe8FC4135a](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x7870ddFd5ACA4E977B2287e9A212bcbe8FC4135a#code)
+- Audits:
+    - [4626 wrapper audit](https://github.com/beefyfinance/beefy-audits/blob/master/2023-08-03-Beefy-Zellic-4626-Wrapper-Audit.pdf)
+
+
+## Context
+A 4626 wrapper that can wrap the various Beefy vaults. Its created using their factory at [sonic:0x234f7f81434e340910a84f45f8e89d07fa86611a](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x234f7f81434e340910a84f45f8e89d07fa86611a). 
+
+## Review Checklist: Bare Minimum Compatibility
+Each of the items below represents an absolute requirement for the ERC4626. If any of these is unchecked, the the ERC4626 is unfit to use.
+
+- [x] Tests based on the [balancer-v3-monorepo](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v3-monorepo/tree/main/pkg/vault/test/foundry/fork) pass for the given ERC4626 vaults, which can be found [here](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v3-erc4626-tests/blob/main/test/sonic/ERC4626BeefyUsdcSilo.sol).
+- [x] The required Vault implements the required operational ERC4626 Interface
+
+## Review Checklist: Common Findings
+Each of the items below represents a common red flag found in ERC4626 contracts.
+
+If none of these is checked, then this might be a pretty great ERC4626! If any of these is checked, we must thoroughly elaborate on the conditions that lead to the potential issue. Decision points are not binary; a ERC4626 can be safe despite these boxes being checked. A check simply indicates that thorough vetting is required in a specific area, and this vetting should be used to inform a holistic analysis of the ERC4626.
+
+### Administrative Privileges
+- [ ] The ERC4626 Vault is upgradeable. 
+
+
+### Common Manipulation Vectors
+- [x] The ERC4626 Vault is susceptible to donation attacks.
+    - comment: The ERC4626 wrapper calls the vaults balance for totalAssets() which is part of the `totalAssets` used in the `converToAssets` calculation.
+
+    ```solidity
+    /**
+     * @notice Fetches the total assets held by the vault
+     * @dev Returns the total assets held by the vault, not only the wrapper
+     * @return totalAssets the total balance of assets held by the vault
+     */
+    function totalAssets() public view virtual override returns (uint256) {
+        return IVault(vault).balance();
+    }
+    ```
+    The vault calculates it based on underlying balance inside the vault plus the balance inside the strategy.
+    ```solidity
+    /**
+     * @dev It calculates the total underlying value of {token} held by the system.
+     * It takes into account the vault contract balance, the strategy contract balance
+     *  and the balance deployed in other contracts as part of the strategy.
+     */
+    function balance() public view returns (uint) {
+        return want().balanceOf(address(this)) + IStrategyV7(strategy).balanceOf();
+    }
+    ```
+
+    The underlying balance can be inflated by donating underlying assets to the vault.
+
+## Additional Findings
+To save time, we do not bother pointing out low-severity/informational issues or gas optimizations (unless the gas usage is particularly egregious). Instead, we focus only on high- and medium-severity findings which materially impact the contract's functionality and could harm users.
+
+## Conclusion
+**Summary judgment: USABLE**
+
+The outlined ERC4626 Vaults should work well with Balancer pools.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/erc4626/registry.json b/erc4626/registry.json
index f833343..b2c2c8f 100644
--- a/erc4626/registry.json
+++ b/erc4626/registry.json
@@ -157,6 +157,13 @@
       "summary": "safe",
       "review": "./StaticATokenLMAvalonReview.md",
       "warnings": []
+    },    
+    "0x7870ddFd5ACA4E977B2287e9A212bcbe8FC4135a": {
+      "asset": "0x29219dd400f2Bf60E5a23d13Be72B486D4038894",
+      "name": "Beefy USDC Wrapper for SiloV2",
+      "summary": "safe",
+      "review": "./BeefyWrapperReview.md",
+      "warnings": []
     }
   },
   "sepolia": {
diff --git a/rate-providers/BeefyUsdcSiloRateprovider.md b/rate-providers/BeefyUsdcSiloRateprovider.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c297d8b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/rate-providers/BeefyUsdcSiloRateprovider.md
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+# Rate Provider: `ERC4626RateProvider`
+
+## Details
+- Reviewed by: @franzns
+- Checked by: @danielmkm
+- Deployed at:
+    - [sonic:0x5fded3206608d3f33175a8865576431906cdb43b](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x5fded3206608d3f33175a8865576431906cdb43b#code)
+- Audits:
+    - [4626 wrapper audit](https://github.com/beefyfinance/beefy-audits/blob/master/2023-08-03-Beefy-Zellic-4626-Wrapper-Audit.pdf)
+
+
+## Context
+The ERC4626 Rate Provider fetches the rate of the Beefy vault for USDC deposited into Silo v2. The rate provider was created using the ERC4626 Rateprovider factory which calls convertToAssets on the ERC4626 to expose the rate. The rate of the ERC4626 is calculated by `shares.mulDiv(totalAssets() + 1, totalSupply() + 10 ** _decimalsOffset(), rounding)`.
+
+## Review Checklist: Bare Minimum Compatibility
+Each of the items below represents an absolute requirement for the Rate Provider. If any of these is unchecked, the Rate Provider is unfit to use.
+
+- [x] Implements the [`IRateProvider`](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v2-monorepo/blob/bc3b3fee6e13e01d2efe610ed8118fdb74dfc1f2/pkg/interfaces/contracts/pool-utils/IRateProvider.sol) interface.
+- [x] `getRate` returns an 18-decimal fixed point number (i.e., 1 == 1e18) regardless of underlying token decimals.
+
+## Review Checklist: Common Findings
+Each of the items below represents a common red flag found in Rate Provider contracts.
+
+If none of these is checked, then this might be a pretty great Rate Provider! If any of these is checked, we must thoroughly elaborate on the conditions that lead to the potential issue. Decision points are not binary; a Rate Provider can be safe despite these boxes being checked. A check simply indicates that thorough vetting is required in a specific area, and this vetting should be used to inform a holistic analysis of the Rate Provider.
+
+### Administrative Privileges
+- [ ] The Rate Provider is upgradeable (e.g., via a proxy architecture or an `onlyOwner` function that updates the price source address).
+
+
+### Oracles
+- [ ] Price data is provided by an off-chain source (e.g., a Chainlink oracle, a multisig, or a network of nodes).
+
+- [ ] Price data is expected to be volatile (e.g., because it represents an open market price instead of a (mostly) monotonically increasing price).
+
+### Common Manipulation Vectors
+- [x] The Rate Provider is susceptible to donation attacks.
+    - comment: The ERC4626 wrapper calls the vaults balance for totalAssets() which is part of the `totalAssets` used in the `converToAssets` call and therefore in the `getRate` calculation.
+
+    ```solidity
+    /**
+     * @notice Fetches the total assets held by the vault
+     * @dev Returns the total assets held by the vault, not only the wrapper
+     * @return totalAssets the total balance of assets held by the vault
+     */
+    function totalAssets() public view virtual override returns (uint256) {
+        return IVault(vault).balance();
+    }
+    ```
+    The vault calculates it based on underlying balance inside the vault plus the balance inside the strategy.
+    ```solidity
+    /**
+     * @dev It calculates the total underlying value of {token} held by the system.
+     * It takes into account the vault contract balance, the strategy contract balance
+     *  and the balance deployed in other contracts as part of the strategy.
+     */
+    function balance() public view returns (uint) {
+        return want().balanceOf(address(this)) + IStrategyV7(strategy).balanceOf();
+    }
+    ```
+
+    The underlying balance can be inflated by donating underlying assets to the vault.
+
+## Additional Findings
+To save time, we do not bother pointing out low-severity/informational issues or gas optimizations (unless the gas usage is particularly egregious). Instead, we focus only on high- and medium-severity findings which materially impact the contract's functionality and could harm users.
+
+
+## Conclusion
+**Summary judgment: SAFE**
+
+Overall this Rate Provider should work well in pool operations with Balancer pools. 
diff --git a/rate-providers/registry.json b/rate-providers/registry.json
index 82a3acc..c49f873 100644
--- a/rate-providers/registry.json
+++ b/rate-providers/registry.json
@@ -2871,6 +2871,15 @@
           "entrypoint": "0xD31E89Ffb929b38bA60D1c7dBeB68c7712EAAb0a",
           "implementationReviewed": "0xb9fa01cbd690dfd5be3d8d667c54bbdd9e41e57d"
         }]
+    },
+    "0x5fded3206608d3f33175a8865576431906cdb43b": {
+      "asset": "0x7870ddFd5ACA4E977B2287e9A212bcbe8FC4135a",
+      "name": "Beefy USDC SiloV2 Rateprovider",
+      "summary": "safe",
+      "review": "./BeefyUsdcSiloRateprovider.md",
+      "warnings": [""],
+      "factory": "0x00de97829d01815346e58372be55aefd84ca2457",
+      "upgradeableComponents": []
     }
   }
 }