Balancer Eyes Wind-Down as V3 Revenue Fails to Replace V2 Income

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-09-15Actualizado a 2026-09-15

Resumen

Balancer, a decentralized finance protocol, is considering a graceful shutdown after its restructuring efforts failed to boost revenue following a $128 million hack. Despite reducing costs and launching new products after closing Balancer Labs in March, revenue remains heavily reliant on older V2 pools, with the new V3 pools failing to generate sufficient income. CEO Marcus Hardt acknowledged fulfilling product launch promises but not creating revenue. A governance proposal posted Monday outlines a wind-down plan. Balancer's treasury, holding over $9 million, would distribute funds pro-rata to BAL token holders. Revenue has plummeted since a November 2025 exploit on the V2 platform, falling from $1.13 million in October 2025 to just $56,781 by August 2026. The plan involves ceasing business development next month, giving liquidity providers until October 30 to withdraw funds. Protocol fees will drop to 0%, and only withdrawal infrastructure will remain operational from November 1, with the DAO shutting down. The wind-down is estimated to cost $400,000. Hardt warns delaying would further deplete treasury resources without benefit. BAL token holders will vote on the proposal via snapshot from September 25-29. If approved, the first fund disbursement is expected in May 2027, requiring token burning. Subsequent disbursements will handle remaining funds. If rejected, Balancer will continue under its current structure.

Balancer is contemplating a graceful shutdown due to its restructuring efforts failing to increase revenue after a $128 million hack. The protocol managed to reduce cost and launch new products following the closure of Balancer Labs in March. But revenue still relied a lot on the old V2 pools, while the new V3 pool failed to create enough revenues to replace them. “We fulfilled our promise of launching products that were announced to the BAL token holders but we were unable to create revenues,” commented CEO Marcus Hardt.

The Revenue Fall May Force Balancer Out of Business

The plan by Hardt to shut down the project has been posted on the governance forum of Balancer on Monday. Balancer’s treasury has over $9 million at present, according to treasury figures. The proposal would involve giving out these funds on a pro-rata basis to the BAL token holders. The company has been experiencing a fall in its revenue since the November 2025 exploit on the Balancer’s V2 platform. DefiLlama figures show a drop in monthly revenue from $1.13 million in October to $371,000 in November. Revenue further fell in 2026 and touched $56,781 in August.

Wind-Down Plan Concentrates on Treasury Savings

This plan calls for the cessation of business development from next month, allowing liquidity providers time to withdraw funds up until October 30. Unpausable pools will stay operational, but the protocol fees will be reduced to 0 percent. Starting from November 1, the project will keep running its withdrawal infrastructure solely. The Balancer DAO would be shut down too. However, during the transition period, a smaller team will be handling the process. This shutdown plan is estimated to cost Balancer up to $400,000. Hardt stated that postponing the shutdown would continue burning treasury resources without any effect.

Governance Decision Required by BAL Token Holders

First disbursement is expected in May 2027 whereby holders will burn their tokens in order to receive their share of the total number of funds. The second disbursement will take care of leftover money from winding down and any funds not received following the first disbursement. The third disbursement will happen six months later. The decision by BAL token holders will take place during a snapshot voting process from September 25-29. In case the voters fail to accept the proposal, Balancer will continue running with its present structure.

Highlighted Crypto News:
Democrats Prepare CLARITY Act Counterproposal Ahead of Senate Vote

TagsBALBalancerBlockchainCryptocurrencyexchangeIncomeUS Treasury

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the primary reason Balancer is considering a shutdown?

ABalancer is considering a shutdown because its restructuring efforts, including new product launches, failed to increase revenue. Revenue remains heavily dependent on the old V2 pools, while the new V3 pools have not generated enough income to replace the lost revenue, especially following a major hack.

QHow much did Balancer's monthly revenue drop following the November 2025 exploit on its V2 platform?

AFollowing the November 2025 exploit, Balancer's monthly revenue dropped from $1.13 million in October 2025 to $371,000 in November 2025, according to DefiLlama figures.

QWhat will happen to protocol fees according to the proposed wind-down plan?

AAccording to the proposed wind-down plan, the protocol fees for Balancer will be reduced to 0 percent. Unpausable pools will remain operational, but business development will cease.

QWhat is the estimated cost of executing the shutdown plan for Balancer?

AThe estimated cost of executing the shutdown plan for Balancer is up to $400,000.

QHow will BAL token holders receive funds from the treasury if the shutdown proposal is approved?

AIf the shutdown proposal is approved, BAL token holders will receive funds from the treasury on a pro-rata basis through three disbursements. The first disbursement is expected in May 2027, where holders must burn their tokens to receive their share.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Viktor Pershikov compares cryptocurrency regulation in the US and Russia: market rules vs strict control

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has published proposals to regulate specific segments of the U.S. crypto market, focusing on retail trading involving leverage, margin, or financing. These proposals introduce a voluntary federal registration pathway for platforms, but lack authority to mandate registration for all exchanges without Congressional action. Expert Viktor Pershikov compares these U.S. proposals with Russia's Federal Law 282-FZ, identifying six common principles: mandatory licensed intermediaries, integration into existing regulatory frameworks, asset admission filters, retail investor protection, AML controls, and client asset safeguarding. However, he highlights five key differences: scope (U.S. focuses on leveraged/margin trading; Russia covers circulation, accounting, mining, and prohibits crypto payments), mandatory nature (U.S. is voluntary; Russia is compulsory), treatment of payments (prohibited in Russia), asset listing (platform responsibility in U.S. vs. regulator's closed list in Russia), and legal basis (extension of CFTC authority vs. a new federal law in Russia). The analysis concludes the approaches serve fundamentally different objectives. The U.S. aims to build a regulated market for high-risk trading, applying proven commodity market tools to protect clients within a specific segment. Russia seeks comprehensive state control over the entire circulation of digital currencies, preventing their use as payment and strictly limiting retail access. The U.S. views crypto as a commodity/financial instrument, while Russia treats it as a special object subject to state-controlled circulation.

cryptonews.ruHace 15 min(s)

Viktor Pershikov compares cryptocurrency regulation in the US and Russia: market rules vs strict control

cryptonews.ruHace 15 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片