Aave Founder Strongly Opposes Proposed Ethereum Changes: 'This Could Cause Significant Harm'

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-08-04Last updated on 2026-08-04

Abstract

The founder and CEO of Aave, Stani Kulechov, has strongly opposed a proposed Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) aimed at capping staking rewards. The proposal suggests reducing staking yield to 0% if the staked ETH supply exceeds 50% of the total. Kulechov argues this would make yields unpredictable and unprofitable, damaging Ethereum's ecosystem and ETH's appeal as an investment asset. He warns that institutional investors, who value predictable cash flows, may turn to alternative blockchains offering more stable returns. Furthermore, zero staking rewards would render many ETH-based lending and yield strategies ineffective, potentially shrinking Ethereum's lending markets. Kulechov believes this proposal could weaken ETH's long-term viability and cause market participants to shift focus to other networks. He urges careful consideration of any changes to Ethereum's economic incentives, emphasizing that the network should not be penalized for its success.

Aave founder and CEO Stani Kulechov has spoken out against an EIP proposal that has emerged in the Ethereum community, aimed at limiting staking rewards. Kulechov argued that regulation would not achieve the desired results and could instead harm the Ethereum ecosystem and the attractiveness of $ETH as an investment asset.

The proposal involves reducing staking rewards to 0% if the share of staked $ETH exceeds 50% of the total supply. According to Kulechov, such a structure could make staking rewards unpredictable, making the activity unprofitable for many participants.

Aave CEO Kulechov stated that institutional investors, in particular, value predictable cash flows when building positions in $ETH. He noted that if returns become uncertain, these investors might turn to alternative blockchain networks offering more stable yields, which could create significant costs for Ethereum adoption.

Kulechov also argued that reducing staking yields to zero would render strategies for borrowing and earning yield through $ETH largely ineffective. In such a scenario, he said, the primary use for borrowing $ETH might be limited to short selling.

Kulechov stated that investors using yield products tied to $ETH might turn to stablecoins or other interest-bearing assets, suggesting that this proposal could significantly shrink Ethereum-based lending and yield markets.

In his personal assessment, Kulechov stated that this proposal would weaken the viability of $ETH as an asset and limit its long-term potential. Expressing hope that the proposal would not be adopted, the Aave CEO said that otherwise, many market participants might shift their focus to other blockchain networks.

Kulechov argued that Ethereum should not be punished for its growth, noting that any changes to the network's economic incentive structure should be carefully considered in terms of their impact on DeFi, staking, and institutional adoption.

*This is not investment advice.

end-content

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the core argument made by Aave founder Stani Kulechov against the proposed Ethereum EIP?

AStani Kulechov argues that the proposal to limit staking rewards would not achieve its goals and could instead significantly harm the Ethereum ecosystem and ETH's appeal as an investment asset.

QWhat specific condition in the EIP does Kulechov criticize, and what would be its direct effect?

AKulechov criticizes the proposal to reduce staking rewards to 0% if the staked ETH share exceeds 50% of the total supply. He states this would make staking returns unpredictable and unprofitable for many participants.

QAccording to Kulechov, how might the proposal affect institutional investors and their strategies?

AKulechov claims institutional investors value predictable cash flows. If yields become uncertain, they may turn to alternative blockchain networks offering more stable returns, creating significant adoption costs for Ethereum.

QWhat impact does Kulechov predict for Ethereum-based lending and yield markets if the proposal is implemented?

AHe predicts that lending and yield-generation strategies using ETH would become largely ineffective. The main use for borrowing ETH might be limited to short selling, and investors could move to stablecoins or other yield-bearing assets, shrinking Ethereum's lending markets.

QWhat is Kulechov's overall assessment of the proposal's long-term effect on ETH as an asset?

AKulechov's personal assessment is that the proposal would weaken the viability of ETH as an asset and limit its long-term potential. He hopes it won't be adopted, warning that otherwise, many market participants may shift their focus to other blockchain networks.

Related Reads

Michael Saylor: Bitcoin Halved, My Digital Credit is Making Money

Michael Saylor discusses Bitcoin, digital credit, and corporate treasury strategies in a recent roundtable. He explains that while Bitcoin remains "digital capital" with no counterparty risk, its ~40% annual volatility makes it unsuitable for most institutional and retail capital. To attract this capital, he advocates for Bitcoin-backed "digital credit" and "digital currency" products. These offer low volatility against fiat currencies, generate yield, and compete with traditional money market funds, stablecoins, and other yield-bearing crypto assets. Saylor clarifies that these products are not meant to replace direct Bitcoin ownership but to onboard capital that otherwise wouldn't enter the Bitcoin ecosystem. He provides examples: during a period when Bitcoin fell 50%, his company's digital credit products (STRC, SATA) delivered positive returns of 3-4%, demonstrating their ability to strip out ~90% of Bitcoin's volatility. He frames "digital currency" as a fiat-referenced, yield-bearing, stable-value asset backed by Bitcoin, designed to meet the needs of the global capital pool. This approach, he argues, can expand the Bitcoin network's reach by 10x to 100x more effectively than pure education. The discussion also covers corporate finance for Bitcoin treasury companies. Saylor argues that equity issuance is not inherently dilutive if done above net asset value per share and if the acquired asset (Bitcoin or cash) supports future value creation. He distinguishes between debt with maturity dates and hybrid capital like preferred shares (e.g., STRC), which offer issuer options and do not force liquidation. Evaluating these companies requires modeling based on future Bitcoin price and volatility assumptions, not relying on a single metric like mNAV (market-adjusted net asset value). The business models are still evolving, and investors must analyze full disclosures to form a complete view.

marsbit2h ago

Michael Saylor: Bitcoin Halved, My Digital Credit is Making Money

marsbit2h ago

Getting Ahead of the Tide and Drowning First: The Fall of 'Crypto x AI' Pioneer ai16z

"ai16z, an early pioneer of the 'crypto x AI' narrative, has officially shut down. In late 2024, its token launch sparked a massive speculative frenzy around AI Agent tokens, briefly propelling the project to a $2.6 billion valuation. However, by 2026, as functional AI agents from companies like Anthropic and OpenAI became mainstream reality, the crypto-native AI projects built largely on hype began to collapse. The founder of its underlying project, Eliza OS, announced the termination in a bitter post, citing legal threats from token holders and a depleted foundation. He expressed disillusionment with the crypto community, contrasting it with the 'optimistic' builders in pure AI. While the Eliza framework itself remains active as open-source software—ironically with contributions from AI like Claude—the token-dependent venture failed. The story highlights a core flaw: the crypto market often prices narratives far ahead of functional technology. When the promised AI future arrived, it was delivered by traditional tech companies with sustainable business models, not token projects. The episode suggests the initial path of 'tokenizing AI concepts' is broken. However, integration may still occur in reverse—with AI tools enhancing crypto analytics and trading—or in coordinating real resources like decentralized compute, as seen in projects like Bittensor and Render."

marsbit2h ago

Getting Ahead of the Tide and Drowning First: The Fall of 'Crypto x AI' Pioneer ai16z

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片