Aave Labs Proposes 100% Product Revenue to DAO, V4 Migration and New Foundation
Aave Labs submitted the “Aave Will Win” governance proposal to route 100% of revenue from Aave‑branded products (UIs, institutional tools and services) to the Aave DAO treasury. Instead of retaining product income, Aave Labs would request an annual budget from the DAO paid in stablecoins and AAVE to fund development and go‑to‑market efforts. The proposal also calls for creating a separate foundation to hold trademarks, domains and branding assets to resolve IP and brand‑control disputes. Central to the plan is rolling out Aave V4 as the protocol’s core architecture, with a proposed migration from V3 to V4 within eight to twelve months pending DAO approval and subsequent activation and funding votes. Proponents say the model aligns incentives between Aave Labs and token holders, increases governance transparency and simplifies launching new markets. Critics argue the move effectively functions as a large funding request (reported around $50M), risks concentrating influence, and could turn governance into theater if a single party sways votes with token holdings. Some community members ask for extended stress testing before major capital migrations. Traders should watch AAVE governance votes, budget requests, and migration timelines for potential on‑chain activity, token unlocking or treasury spending that may affect AAVE liquidity and price.
Neutral
The proposal is structurally significant but carries mixed implications for AAVE price. Positives: routing 100% product revenue to the DAO and aligning Labs with token holders could strengthen on‑chain governance, increase treasury size and support long‑term protocol development—factors that are typically constructive for token fundamentals. V4 migration promises product improvements and new market launches, which can boost utility and demand over time. Negatives/risks: the plan effectively converts product revenue into an annual budget request (reported ~ $50M), raising concerns about large treasury outflows, centralization of influence, and governance contention. Short term, governance votes, budget proposals, and migration events may create volatility—sell pressure if token holders cash out treasury allocations or if uncertainty prompts risk‑off trades. Conversely, clear approvals and transparent budgets could be price‑supportive. Overall, the immediate impact is likely neutral: potential long‑term bullish fundamentals are offset by near‑term political and execution risks that can produce episodic volatility rather than a clear directional move.