This week Aave governance advanced a framework proposal called “Aave Will Win” by passing a temperature check, which is an early, non-binding signal vote that precedes a formal onchain proposal. The vote passed narrowly: 52.58% in favor, 42% against, and 5.42% abstain, with about 622,300 votes on the yes side.
At a high level, the framework is trying to resolve an awkward reality: crypto’s biggest DeFi borrow/lend protocol is governed by a DAO, but much of the user-facing product layer has been built and operated by the centralized company, Aave Labs. “Aave Will Win” proposes routing 100% of revenue from Labs-run products back to the DAO treasury (net of partner payouts), formally positioning Aave v4 as the long-term technical foundation, and pairing that with a major funding request of $25 million in stablecoins plus 75,000 AAVE.
The problem is that this vote is landing in the middle of a governance credibility crisis. A dispute over interface fees and control escalated into broader accusations that Labs-linked voting power can effectively decide outcomes, and key groups have announced plans to step back this spring and summer.
As Taylor Monahan put it on Uneasy Money: “What the heck is the AAVE token going to be useful for moving forward?”
In the rest of this article, we’ll cover
- Whether AAVE is actually a good investment after the DAO drama, not just a “big DeFi name”
- The bull case and the bear case, and what has to happen for each to be true
- Real value capture: fees, buybacks, treasury flows, and what is real versus aspirational
- What Aave v4 changes economically, and what it breaks if it ships late or ships wrong
- Whether Aave can defend its moat if key builders and governance stewards keep leaving
Grab the limited-time offer!
Subscribe to read the rest.
Get a 2-week free trial
Renews at $25/month
UpgradeWhy serious investors subscribe:
-
Clear thinking during macro regime changes
-
Fewer trades, better decisions
-
Avoiding one bad allocation often matters more than finding one great trade
