Aave's Internal Conflict Escalates, Morpho Quietly Doubles: Is the Lending Throne About to Change Hands?

marsbitPublished on 2026-03-01Last updated on 2026-03-01

Abstract

The article discusses the escalating internal conflicts within Aave and the rising prominence of Morpho in the decentralized lending space. Aave, the current market leader, is facing significant governance disputes, including a controversial $51 million funding proposal and accusations of financial mismanagement, leading to internal friction and potential delays in decision-making. In contrast, Morpho has transitioned to Morpho Blue, a modular, permissionless lending protocol that allows isolated markets with risk parameters set by independent curators rather than global DAO votes. This design reduces governance friction and enables faster adjustments. Morpho has demonstrated strong growth, with TVL surpassing $9.5 billion, active loans exceeding $3.5 billion, and quarterly revenue around $50 million. User growth has also been robust, expanding from 30,000 to 400,000 active addresses. A significant catalyst for Morpho is the involvement of Apollo Global Management, which plans to acquire 90 million MORPHO tokens (9% of supply) over 48 months, valued at approximately $162 million. This partnership may signal Apollo’s strategic move to leverage Morpho’s infrastructure for enhancing yields on its tokenized real-world assets (RWA), addressing liquidity challenges in the RWA market. While Aave’s governance issues may hinder its progress, Morpho’s innovative structure and institutional backing position it as a potential challenger for the lending throne. However, risks remain, i...

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | DingDong (@XiaMiPP)

Altcoins are dead—this is a consensus that crypto users have been reluctant to admit but have had to face over the past year. Even former blue-chip tokens have fallen into prolonged sideways movement or gradual decline amid the continuous market weakness, showing little sign of recovery.

However, amidst this overall slump, the MORPHO token has rebounded from a low of $0.96 in early February to the range of $1.8-$1.9, doubling against the trend. From the daily chart perspective, this rebound has largely formed a rounded bottom pattern, potentially signaling a bottom reversal. Is this surge merely driven by short-term market sentiment, or is it the start of a trend fueled by the resonance of fundamental and structural variables?

When the Old Dynasty Begins to Consume Itself

Morpho is a lending protocol launched in 2021. Initially, its mechanism was similar to lending protocols like Aave and Compound. However, in 2023, Morpho began rolling out Morpho Blue (the current main version), completely transforming into an independent, permissionless lending base layer, steadily ranking among the top lending ecosystems on Ethereum.

Nevertheless, in the lending sector, Aave remains the largest in scale and the strongest in brand—an undeniable fact. But recently, Aave has once again plunged into serious governance controversy due to a $51 million "Aave Will Win" funding framework proposed by its founder, Stani.

This fund was originally planned to support new product development, and the proposal explicitly stated that future related brand revenue would be 100% returned to the DAO treasury—a move that seemed like an ideal operation of "surrendering control and benefiting the community" but unexpectedly ignited long-simmering internal conflicts within the DAO.

The reason is that DAO governance representative and ACI founder Marc Zeller publicly released an "audit" report on February 25, accusing Labs of low fund utilization, having taken approximately $86 million from the DAO over the past few years without transparent disclosure. Meanwhile, core DAO developer BGD Labs announced it would exit in April 2026 due to governance friction. The founder's high voting power once again dominated the controversial proposal, further pushing the entire DAO into an open tug-of-war over power and fund distribution. As early as December last year, cracks had already appeared within the Aave community. For details, refer to Will AAVE Still Be Worth Buying After the Second-Biggest Holder Dumped Their Bag Amid Deep Divisions?

Now, while Aave is slowing down due to governance friction, the "simplicity" of Morpho's governance model is beginning to attract attention. Aave can be considered the first-generation lending governance paradigm of "DAO-led, global parameter adjustment," where all risk parameters (such as collateral factors, liquidation thresholds) are determined by global DAO voting. While this design ensures overall robustness, it easily falls into a governance bottleneck—any minor parameter adjustment requires broad community consensus, and any disagreement can lead to delays, especially during contentious periods, potentially paralyzing decision-making.

In contrast, Morpho follows a second-generation path of modularity and market-driven mechanisms: the protocol itself is highly permissionless, allowing anyone to create isolated markets at any time. The risk parameters for each market (such as LTV, interest rate curves, liquidation incentives) are set by independent professional risk managers (curators), rather than relying on全网 DAO voting. This means risks are strictly localized within individual markets, with responsibility分散到 specific curators, significantly speeding up decision-making. Curators can quickly iterate parameters based on actual market conditions without waiting for global consensus. The advantage of this design is that it greatly reduces governance friction and decision-making delays.

When the old dynasty begins to consume itself internally, it might be the opportunity for new forces to overtake on the curve.

Data Verification: Does It Deserve This Window of Opportunity?

Let's look at Morpho's fundamentals to see if it has the potential to challenge Aave's lending throne. According to Tokenterminal data, in Q3 and Q4 of 2025, Morpho protocol's TVL remained above $9.5 billion, an increase of about 80% compared to the first half of the year;

The active loan size within the protocol also stayed above $3.5 billion in both Q3 and Q4, a year-on-year increase of about 80%.

Regarding one of the core metrics for DeFi protocols—protocol revenue—aside from a relatively weak performance in Q2, it remained stable at around $50 million in other quarters.

User growth is even more直观, with its quarterly active addresses rapidly expanding from about 30,000 in Q1 to the 400,000 level, showing strong organic growth momentum.

Although Morpho's current TVL and active loan size still lag behind Aave's, its user growth rate has made it one of the most aggressive "dark horses" in the lending赛道. Especially against the backdrop of the entire DeFi sector generally facing pressure and experiencing阵痛 in 2025, Morpho's performance can be considered achieving counter-trend high growth,足以证明 its product model has withstood the market test. Protocols that can continuously attract capital and users during a bear market often possess stronger爆发力 in the next cycle.

Institutional Variable: When Traditional Capital Starts Betting

Good fundamental data performance only proves that the protocol has a solid foundation, but the bigger catalyst that truly changes the market cap curve is the entry of traditional financial giants.

On February 13, Wall Street asset management giant Apollo Global Management signed a重磅 cooperation agreement with the Morpho Association, the non-profit organization behind Morpho. Specifically, Apollo plans to gradually acquire up to 90 million MORPHO tokens over the next 48 months, equivalent to approximately 9% of Morpho's total supply. At the current price of $1.8, this is worth about $162 million.

From a purely trading perspective, this will bring sustained buying demand for MORPHO. But if you know Apollo, you'll understand that this is more like its strategic penetration into DeFi.

Apollo manages assets接近 $940 billion, and its private credit business is known for pursuing high yields. The on-chain world can provide opportunities for leverage amplification and global instant liquidity. It began dipping its toes into the crypto industry in 2024, with RWA as its main battlefield, partnering with Securitize to tokenize its diversified credit strategy into ACRED, which has now reached a scale of $130 million.

However, the core challenge after bringing RWA on-chain has never been issuance, but liquidity release. Assets can be tokenized, but without efficient lending markets and leverage environments, their yield potential is difficult to unleash. Looking at Apollo's布局, it's not unreasonable to speculate that it likely intends to use Morpho's lending markets to amplify the yield of its credit products. Because Morpho's modular lending structure provides a天然适配场景 for RWA—isolated markets, independent risk parameters, customizable leverage environments. These mechanisms are far more attractive to institutions than parameter games under unified governance.

This conjecture is not without basis, because although Morpho is highly permissionless, key parameter options still need to be expanded through Morpho DAO governance. If Apollo holds a significant amount of MORPHO tokens, it will gain corresponding voting power and could promote the addition of RWA-friendly parameters. If Apollo's intentions materialize as推测, Morpho's modular design could attract accelerated inflows of more institutional capital, making it key infrastructure for the on-chain amplification of institutional credit products. This institutional-level endorsement would not only strengthen Morpho's competitive advantage but also narrow the gap with Aave—especially while Aave is deeply mired in internal governance issues.

Conclusion

Aave's governance crisis may continue to drag down its market cap and liquidity in the short term, while Morpho, leveraging its product structural advantages and institutional catalysts, is quietly rewriting the competitive landscape of the lending赛道. However, whether Morpho can truly shake Aave's throne still depends on observing its continued TVL追赶 and the follow-up of more TradFi players. But至少 for now, the power transition for the "second-generation lending leader" has already begun.

Risk提示: MORPHO tokens will undergo a large unlock in March, belonging to the Morpho DAO, Morpho Association treasury, and core contributors. Short-term liquidity impact requires attention.

Related Questions

QWhat is the main reason for the recent governance controversy within Aave?

AThe controversy stems from founder Stani's proposal for a $51 million 'Aave Will Win' funding framework, which, despite intending to support new product development and return 100% of future brand revenue to the DAO treasury, ignited internal conflicts. This was exacerbated by an audit report from ACI founder Marc Zeller accusing Labs of low fund utilization and lack of transparency, alongside governance friction leading to core developer BGD Labs announcing their departure.

QHow does Morpho's governance model differ from Aave's, and what advantage does it offer?

AMorpho employs a modular, market-driven governance model where independent risk managers (curators) set parameters for isolated markets, reducing reliance on global DAO votes. This allows for faster decision-making, minimized governance friction, and localized risk, unlike Aave's DAO-led model which requires broad consensus for any parameter adjustments, often leading to delays and paralysis during disputes.

QWhat significant partnership did Morpho recently secure, and what are its potential impacts?

AMorpho partnered with Apollo Global Management, which plans to acquire up to 90 million MORPHO tokens (about 9% of total supply) over 48 months, valued at approximately $162 million at current prices. This partnership is strategic, potentially enabling Apollo to leverage Morpho's lending markets to amplify yields for its tokenized credit products (RWA), attracting more institutional capital and enhancing Morpho's competitive position.

QWhat key metrics demonstrate Morpho's growth and resilience in the DeFi lending sector?

AMorpho's TVL remained above $9.5 billion in Q3 and Q4 2025, an 80% increase from the first half of the year. Active loans exceeded $3.5 billion in those quarters, also up 80% year-over-year. Protocol revenue stabilized around $50 million per quarter, and active addresses grew from about 30,000 in Q1 to 400,000, indicating strong organic growth despite overall DeFi pressures.

QWhat risk should investors be aware of regarding MORPHO token in the near term?

AInvestors should note that MORPHO token will undergo significant unlocking in March, with releases to the Morpho DAO, Morpho Association reserves, and core contributors, which could cause short-term liquidity shocks and price volatility.

Related Reads

Will the Next Crypto Bull Run Start with On-Chain Trading of SpaceX?

This article presents a scenario-based forecast for the crypto industry from 2026 to 2029, arguing that the next major cycle will be driven not by technological narratives but by legal access to real-world assets. The author predicts that by mid-2026, pre-IPO perpetual contracts for top private companies like SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic on platforms like Hyperliquid will become the primary gateway for accessing quality assets, as most crypto-native tokens fail to capture real value. The much-hyped AI x Crypto intersection largely fails except for prediction markets, which thrive on betting on AI model supremacy. By 2027, public blockchain foundations are forced to choose between catering to retail speculation or building compliant infrastructure for institutions, with many opting for the latter. Growth in stablecoins and tokenized private credit/equity hits a "triple ceiling" due to regulatory and political uncertainty rather than market demand. The pivotal shift is forecast for 2028. A major liquidation event in pre-IPO perpetuals exposes the structural flaw of synthetic markets lacking a real underlying asset anchor. In response, regulatory changes finally allow the public solicitation of private securities resales to verified accredited investors. This creates a legitimate secondary market for real company equity, which then becomes the core asset class of the new bull market, relegating synthetic perps to a niche role. By 2029, the industry becomes "boring" but foundational. Tokens without claims on real cash flows or assets cease trading. Stablecoin growth is steady but politically capped. Crypto infrastructure fades from view as it gets absorbed into traditional finance backends. The article's central thesis is that the key bottleneck for crypto's next phase is legal and regulatory channels for real asset ownership, not technology.

marsbit22m ago

Will the Next Crypto Bull Run Start with On-Chain Trading of SpaceX?

marsbit22m ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

**Summary: The Value Distribution of Stablecoins** The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from mere trading tools into broader channels for dollar access. It divides the stablecoin ecosystem into four layers to analyze how value is distributed: 1. **Issuance Layer:** Mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the spread between reserve yield and user costs (e.g., Tether, Circle). This layer currently earns the largest profit margin. 2. **Infrastructure Layer:** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and asset management (e.g., Bridge, BVNK). This is the "unglamorous" but critical work, building the essential bridges between crypto and real-world finance. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer:** Integrates stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and provides enterprise financial software (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase). They act as the access point for businesses. 4. **Application Layer:** The end-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, or as a store of value. They benefit from convenience but have little pricing power. The core thesis is that while the issuance layer currently dominates profits, the often-overlooked **infrastructure layer holds significant long-term potential**. The real challenge and barrier to mass adoption is not the on-chain transfer of stablecoins (which is simple), but the complex "last mile" integration into existing business workflows, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks across different countries. Companies in this layer are currently in a "land grab" phase, investing heavily to build networks, secure bank partnerships, and establish compliance pathways. While their position is currently pressured by the profitable issuers above and distribution platforms below, the article suggests that if stablecoins become a default financial rail for businesses, the infrastructure providers who have done the hard work of integration will ultimately gain strong pricing power and become entrenched, essential players.

marsbit7h ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

marsbit7h ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from a mere trading tool into a broad "dollar channel." It analyzes the industry's value chain through four layers: 1. **Issuance Layer (e.g., Tether, Circle):** The top layer that mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the thickest interest rate spread. 2. **Infrastructure Layer (e.g., Bridge, BVNK):** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling critical but complex "dirty work" like fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and cross-border settlement. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase):** Embeds stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and integrates with enterprise software. 4. **Application Layer:** End-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlement, or storing value. The author posits that while the issuance layer currently captures the most profit, the most overlooked and potentially critical layer is infrastructure. The core challenge for stablecoin adoption isn't the on-chain transfer (which is simple), but bridging the gap between blockchain and the real-world financial system. This involves solving practical problems for businesses: fiat conversion, reconciliation, tax handling, and user onboarding. Infrastructure companies are currently in a difficult "land-grab" phase—building networks, securing banking relationships, and achieving compliance country-by-country. They face pressure from both the profitable issuance layer above and distribution platforms below. However, the author suggests this layer is building a crucial moat. Once stablecoins become a default business rail, the infrastructure players who have done the hard work of integration may gain significant, durable value and pricing power.

链捕手7h ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

链捕手7h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片