Aave Labs has put forward one of the most consequential governance proposals in the protocol’s history. The plan, titled “Aave Will Win,” would redirect 100 percent of revenue generated by Aave-branded products to the Aave DAO, reshaping how value flows across one of DeFi’s largest lending ecosystems.

 

The proposal arrives at a sensitive moment. Aave remains a dominant force in decentralized finance, but internal debates over revenue allocation, brand ownership, and governance control have intensified over the past year. At the center of it all is a fundamental question: who should capture the economic upside of the Aave brand, the development company building products, or the decentralized autonomous organization that governs the protocol?

 

 

A Structural Reset for Revenue

Under the proposed framework, all gross revenue from Aave-branded products would be sent directly to the DAO treasury. That includes income generated through the aave.com front end, the Aave mobile app and card products, institutional and enterprise offerings, real world asset initiatives, as well as interface level swap fees and other third party integrations.

 

Revenue would be defined as gross product revenue minus any shares owed to external partners. In practical terms, Aave Labs would no longer retain earnings from these business lines. Instead, the DAO would collect and manage those funds, centralizing economic control under token holder governance.

 

For token holders, this represents a clearer path to value accrual. Historically, the DAO controlled protocol fees generated directly by lending markets, while product level revenues tied to branded interfaces and integrations flowed through Labs. That dual structure created friction and, at times, mistrust. The new proposal attempts to eliminate that ambiguity and reset expectations around who benefits from ecosystem growth.

 

Aave DAO has seen a sharp rise in revenue over the past year as DeFi volumes rebounded and lending demand strengthened. With tens of millions flowing through the ecosystem, questions around value capture became harder to ignore.

 

Tensions escalated after community members scrutinized how certain front end integration fees were routed, particularly when some income streams were directed to wallets associated with Labs rather than to the DAO. Delegates argued that product level income tied to the Aave brand should belong to token holders by default.

 

The debate expanded quickly. What began as a discussion about swap fees evolved into broader conversations about intellectual property, trademark ownership, and the long term governance structure of the ecosystem. Some community members floated proposals to transfer brand ownership to a DAO controlled entity, while others pushed for more aggressive structural changes to redefine the relationship between Labs and the DAO.

 

“Aave Will Win” appears to be an effort to consolidate those discussions into a single framework. Rather than renegotiating revenue stream by stream, the proposal places all branded product revenue under DAO oversight in one move.

 

Stani Kulechov, Founder of Aave Labs stated that “The framework formalizes Aave Labs’ role as a long-term contributor to the Aave DAO under a token-centric model, with 100% of product revenue directed to the DAO,” he added that, “As onchain finance enters a decisive new phase, with fintechs and institutions entering DeFi, this framework positions Aave to capture major growth markets and win over the next decade."

 

 

The Governance Trade Off

Supporters argue that the change would align incentives more cleanly. If all branded product revenue flows to the DAO, token holders directly benefit from ecosystem expansion, whether that growth comes from retail users interacting through the front end or institutions deploying capital through enterprise channels. That clarity could strengthen valuation narratives and reduce uncertainty for larger investors evaluating the protocol’s sustainability.

 

It also reinforces the idea that Aave is not a company with a token attached, but a token governed protocol that contracts service providers to execute development.

 

Critics, however, raise practical concerns. Fully decentralizing revenue control may slow execution. DAOs, by design, move more deliberately than centralized teams. Budget approvals, development funding, and strategic pivots require governance cycles that can stretch for weeks. There is also the question of incentives. If Aave Labs no longer retains product revenue, its compensation model would need to rely on DAO approved budgets or grants. That shift increases transparency, but it also introduces a new layer of dependency on governance votes.

 

In short, the proposal strengthens decentralization while introducing new operational constraints. Whether that trade off proves beneficial will depend on how efficiently the DAO can allocate capital.

 

 

Aave V4 and Expansion Ambitions

The revenue overhaul is intertwined with broader strategic goals, including formal ratification of Aave V4. The next iteration of the protocol is expected to emphasize modular architecture, cross chain liquidity coordination, and expansion into new asset categories. In exchange for this new proposal, Aave Labs is asking for $25 million in stablecoins, 75,000 AAVE tokens (worth roughly $8.3 million), and a mandate to build Aave V4. This has raised some questions among the Aave community.

 

Real world assets remain a central focus. Institutional interest in tokenized treasuries and structured credit products has accelerated, and Aave has positioned itself as infrastructure for that emerging market. By routing all product revenue to the DAO, the protocol would strengthen its treasury and, at least in theory, expand its capacity to fund long term initiatives in both crypto native and traditional finance adjacent markets.

 

The framing of the proposal suggests confidence rather than retreat. It presents consolidation under the DAO as a competitive advantage, not merely a governance concession.

 

Recent movements in AAVE’s token price have reflected sensitivity to governance headlines. Signals that token holders could receive a more direct claim on ecosystem revenue are often interpreted as constructive. That said, price volatility does not resolve deeper governance questions. The more significant issue is whether the DAO can responsibly manage an expanded treasury while continuing to fund innovation at a pace that keeps Aave competitive.

 

 

The Bottom Line

The proposal will move through Aave’s standard governance pipeline, beginning with community discussion and formal requests for comment before progressing to an on chain vote. Approval would mark a structural turning point, formalizing Aave’s evolution into a more explicitly DAO centric economic system. Rejection or substantial amendment would signal that the community remains divided on how far decentralization should extend.

 

Either outcome carries implications beyond Aave. As mature DeFi protocols generate meaningful revenue and develop recognizable brands, informal arrangements between core contributors and token holders become harder to sustain.

 

Aave is confronting that tension directly. The result may help define how the next generation of decentralized protocols balance decentralization, execution speed, and economic alignment in a sector that is no longer experimental, but increasingly institutional.

TRON Sets Revenue Record as Ecosystem Surges

 

TRON posted an all-time quarterly revenue high of US $1.2 billion in Q3 2025, marking a significant milestone for the blockchain’s growth trajectory. Research firms including Messari, Presto Research and RWA.io cite a powerful confluence of stable-coin dominance, high transaction volume and ecosystem expansion as the main levers behind this surge.

---

What’s Driving the Growth?

Stablecoin and Settlement Layer Leadership

TRON has become a major global settlement layer for dollar-pegged stablecoins, especially USDT. According to Presto Research, the chain handled more than US $24 billion worth of USDT transfers daily, enabled some 9.19 million transactions per day across over 334 million accounts. It now leads stable-coin volumes in numerous emerging markets including India, Brazil, Nigeria and Vietnam.
This burgeoning stable-coin activity has powered a substantial share of TRON’s earnings.

DeFi, Futures and Ecosystem Expansion

Messari’s Q3 report highlights TRON’s DeFi sector as a standout performer. The platform’s core lending protocol (JustLend) grew its total value locked from about US $3.4 billion to US $5.0 billion in the quarter, a near 46 % increase. A newly launched perpetual futures exchange (SunPerp) achieved over US $1.6 billion in trading volume within weeks.
These emerging layers show that TRON isn’t only a settlement chain but is also building deeper financial products.

User Growth and Engagement

On‐chain indicators reflect the momentum: wallet activity, new addresses, stable-coin transfers and non-traditional transaction types all rose. One report noted wallet transfers increased by ~10 % month-over-month; stable-coin transfers also ticked up modestly, while “other” transaction categories surged 38 %. The network remains heavily weighted toward wallet transfers and stable-coin operations but the increasing share of DeFi and niche transactions hints at diversification.

Network Revenue Mechanics

Revenue drivers include transaction and protocol fees, staking and token burns. TRON’s transparent performance shows that high volume of low-fee transactions can still translate into meaningful revenue when scale is achieved. TRON leap-frogged multiple chains in reported protocol revenue for recent quarters, underscoring its efficiency and utility.

---

Why It Matters

Competing with Big Chains

While many blockchains focus on smart-contract ecosystems, TRON’s standout performance in revenue and stable-coin throughput sets it apart. In Q3 TRON’s earnings outpaced chains typically seen as more dominant. This reversal positions TRON as a serious contender not only in emerging-market rails but also in institutional settlement layers.

Emerging Markets Play

TRON’s strength in markets with high inflation, currency instability and demand for dollar-pegged alternatives gives it a structural advantage. That focus enables it to capture users and flows that legacy chains may not serve as efficiently.

Institutional and Product Implications

High revenue and strong engagement bolster TRON’s story when seeking institutional partnerships, product integrations and global reach. With large-scale stable-coin activity, it becomes an attractive infrastructure layer for enterprises, exchanges and regional payment systems.

What to Watch

• How TRON continues evolving its DeFi and perpetual-futures stack.

• Whether stable-coin volumes continue growing or face regulatory or competitive headwinds.

• TRON’s ability to retain or grow share in emerging-market payment rails.

• Impact on TRX token economics, governance, staking yields and decentralization narrative.

---

Final Thoughts

TRON’s record US $1.2 billion Q3 revenue isn’t a flash in the pan — it reflects a mature settlement platform capturing high-volume dollar-denominated flows, combining scale, utility and global market reach. While many chains rely on speculative traffic, TRON’s business model leans into transactional utility and emerging-market settlement rails.

 

If TRON can continue building deeper financial products, retain stable-coin leadership and serve emerging-market needs, it may shift from being a strong competitor to becoming a foundational layer in global digital finance.