‘Undisclosed voting power’ – ACI’s exit claim sends AAVE tumbling 10%

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-03-04Last updated on 2026-03-04

Abstract

Aave Chan Initiative (ACI), a key service provider, announced its exit from the Aave ecosystem, citing Aave Labs' "undisclosed voting power" and aggressive control as reasons. This follows a similar departure by BGD Labs last month. The ongoing governance crisis, which began with accusations of Aave Labs seizing DAO revenue, deepened after a controversial $50 million proposal passed narrowly. In response, Aave's CEO stated the protocol remains unaffected. However, investor confidence wavered, causing a 10% drop in the AAVE token price. Data shows major whales reduced their holdings by nearly half since January, reflecting growing concerns over centralization and governance.

The Aave governance crisis continues to spook service providers and investors alike.

On Tuesday, the 3rd of March, Aave Chan Initiative (ACI), another key service provider, announced it will exit the Aave ecosystem in four months.

Like BGD Labs, which made a similar move last month, ACI cited Aave Labs’ aggressive control and lack of transparency as the reasons for the exit.

“There is no role for an independent service provider in an environment where the largest budget recipient (Aave Labs) holds undisclosed voting power and uses it on its own proposals.”

In response, Aave Labs CEO and Founder Stani Kulechov acknowledged ACI and Marc Zeller’s contributions but maintained that their exit won’t affect the ecosystem.

“The protocol continues to operate as normal, and incentive programs are unaffected. Aave Labs will work with the DAO’s other service providers to make sure this transition is smooth for the community.”

Even so, the broader community reactions were mixed, and investor confidence appeared low.

Impact on the AAVE market

The ongoing governance crisis began in late 2025, after ACI’s Marc Zeller accused Aave Labs of stealing DAO revenue streams and brand rights.

To make amends, Aave Labs requested $50 million upfront in exchange for sharing 100% of revenue from products it built with the Aave DAO.

This Aave Labs’ proposal passed narrowly with a 52.58% majority, leaving critics such as ACI with no option but to leave.

For some analysts, the DAO has now lost control of the protocol roadmap and decision-making to Aave Labs. While others believe Aave will emerge stronger and continue to lead the lending sector, the governance rift has dented investors’ confidence in the near term.

Notably, the ACI exit update led to a nearly 10% drop in the Aave [AAVE] token price, from $127 to a low of $107 on the 3rd of March.

While the token remained within the $100-$130 price range seen since February, a closer look at whale positions revealed deeper concerns.

According to Santiment data, key whale wallets holding 1 million to 10 million AAVE tokens (purple) have reduced their exposure by nearly half since late January. They trimmed the exposure from 4.7 million AAVE to 2.58 million AAVE.


Final Summary

  • Aave service provider ACI said it will exit the ecosystem in four months, further deepening the ongoing governance rift.
  • Some investors appeared worried as key whales reduced their AAVE exposure by half in 2026.

Related Questions

QWhy did Aave Chan Initiative (ACI) announce its exit from the Aave ecosystem?

AACI cited Aave Labs' aggressive control and lack of transparency, specifically pointing to Aave Labs holding undisclosed voting power and using it on its own proposals, as the reasons for its exit.

QWhat was the immediate market impact of ACI's exit announcement on the AAVE token?

AThe announcement led to a nearly 10% drop in the AAVE token price, from $127 to a low of $107 on March 3rd.

QHow did Aave Labs' CEO, Stani Kulechov, respond to ACI's decision to leave?

AStani Kulechov acknowledged ACI and Marc Zeller's contributions but maintained that their exit would not affect the ecosystem, stating the protocol would continue to operate normally and that Aave Labs would work with other service providers to ensure a smooth transition.

QWhat did the data from Santiment reveal about whale activity prior to the announcement?

AAccording to Santiment data, key whale wallets holding 1 million to 10 million AAVE tokens had reduced their exposure by nearly half, from 4.7 million AAVE to 2.58 million AAVE, since late January.

QWhat was the catalyst that started the ongoing governance crisis in late 2025?

AThe governance crisis began after ACI's Marc Zeller accused Aave Labs of stealing DAO revenue streams and brand rights.

Related Reads

It Took Me a Year to See the Bitter Truth About Agent Payments

After a year building infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, and Coinbase, the author shares a sobering analysis of the current state of Agent payments. The core finding is a stark lack of genuine, immediate demand across most envisioned use cases. The article breaks down four key market segments: 1. **Agent-to-Merchant (Consumer Shopping):** For most product categories (e.g., clothing, electronics), conversational AI shopping is a step backwards from visual e-commerce interfaces. While agents excel at understanding needs, they can't replace side-by-side product comparison. Real merchant interest is defensive "Agent Engine Optimization," not driven by current customer demand. Potential exists for high-frequency, low-decision purchases (like food delivery) or navigating complex store UIs, but these require massive B2C distribution channels dominated by giants like Amazon. 2. **Agent-to-API (Developer Services):** Developers already have subscriptions and billing relationships for APIs (compute, data). Prepaid balances solve micro-payment issues for low transaction volumes. A deeper structural problem is that major SaaS vendors' business models rely on enterprise contracts, resisting granular pay-per-call pricing. While protocols like MPP and x402 serve the long tail of niche services, this market is small and developers are historically low-willingness-to-pay. 3. **Agent-to-Agent:** This remains largely theoretical with minimal transaction volume. While it represents a long-term bet on a fundamentally new transaction infrastructure (sub-second, micro-penny to million-dollar, multi-party settlements), it does not constitute a present market. 4. **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with existing, paying demand. Integrating AI into financial workflows (trading, portfolio management) is a natural evolution and enables new capabilities like autonomous rebalancing. However, competition favors established, regulated institutions. The "real problem" is not moving money between agents, but the broader challenge of **coordination**—orchestrating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and settling results. Payment is just one component of settlement, which is itself part of coordination. Companies that solve the coordination layer will subsume payment, not the other way around. While well-funded incumbents build defensively for a long-term future, startups must find where the market is today—which, for the author's team, lies outside these four categories in an area of real, growing, and underserved activity.

marsbit12m ago

It Took Me a Year to See the Bitter Truth About Agent Payments

marsbit12m ago

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

**Title: It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments** Over the past year, I've worked on infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, Coinbase, and numerous startups. The findings reveal a stark reality: genuine, widespread demand for Agent-based payments does not yet exist. **Key Observations:** * **Agent-to-Merchant (Shopping):** The user experience for AI shopping often falls short, especially for visual product discovery. While AI excels at understanding needs, conversational interfaces can't yet replace browsing and comparing multiple products visually. Current merchant interest is largely defensive ("Agent Engine Optimization") for a future that hasn't arrived. High-frequency, low-friction purchases (like food delivery) are potential fits, but lack open APIs and face high AI inference costs. Simpler, more affordable, or cross-language interactions for complex UIs are a niche opportunity but require massive consumer distribution to scale. * **Agent-to-API (Developer Tools):** Developer payment needs for APIs (computing, data, models) are already met through subscriptions and prepaid credits. The core challenge is not payment friction but supplier economics: most large SaaS providers prefer enterprise contracts over micropayments for API calls. Protocols like MPP and x402 suit the long-tail of smaller services but cater to a developer market historically reluctant to pay for these tools. Major infrastructure needs at the top of the stack are already being addressed. * **Agent-to-Agent (Machine Commerce):** This is a long-term vision with almost no current transaction volume. While a future with high-speed, high-frequency, multi-party machine-to-machine transactions would require novel infrastructure, it remains theoretical. The market is not here yet. * **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with clear, present demand. Financial professionals and DeFi users already pay for tools, and AI augmentation is a natural evolution. Autonomous AI agents can enable entirely new financial strategies. However, competition is fierce from established, regulated incumbents who can more easily layer AI onto their existing products. **The Core Insight:** Companies, especially giants with long time horizons, are building defensively for a potential future of mass machine commerce. For them, early investment is a low-cost hedge. For startups, the current market reality is different. The primary challenge isn't just moving money between agents (payments). The larger, unsolved problem is **orchestration** – coordinating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and then settling. Payment is just a part of settlement, which is just a part of orchestration. Companies that solve the orchestration problem will subsume payments, not the other way around. After a year of building, we see the real, growing, and underserved market opportunity lies in this broader domain of orchestration.

链捕手35m ago

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

链捕手35m ago

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

A researcher discovered a critical "infinite mint" vulnerability in the Zcash cryptocurrency's Orchard protocol using Claude Opus 4.8, leading to a swift fix but also a 50% market drop, erasing billions in value. This incident highlights a new era where powerful, accessible AI models are dramatically lowering the barrier to finding software vulnerabilities. Previously, the security community feared specialized models like Claude Mythos Preview, capable of finding decades-old zero-day exploits. The Zcash case, however, involved a publicly available, general-purpose model. This shift makes advanced security auditing—and attack capabilities—accessible to far more people, not just experts. The mass democratization of vulnerability discovery brings a dual challenge: a flood of low-quality, AI-generated false reports that overwhelm maintainers, and the real, rapid uncovering of deep, dangerous bugs. Open-source projects, often understaffed and unfunded, are particularly vulnerable to this "attention DDoS." The article cites examples like curl shutting down its bug bounty program due to the unsustainable workload. Our perceived digital safety has often been luck, relying on the high cost and effort required to find deeply hidden flaws in complex systems, as seen with historical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or Baron Samedit. AI changes this cost structure, effectively "mass-producing flashlights" to illuminate every corner of our codebase. While large companies operate extensive security chains involving external white-hat hackers and massive defensive operations, the global cybersecurity workforce faces a severe shortage, especially of experienced personnel capable of analyzing complex threats and coordinating fixes. The core dilemma emerges: AI makes *finding* bugs cheap and scalable, but *fixing* them remains a slow, expensive, and human-intensive process. The article concludes that AI won't destroy the internet but acts as a bright light, revealing that our digital existence is not inherently secure but is precariously maintained by ongoing human effort. The true cost in the AI era may not be discovery, but whether there will be enough people left willing and able to do the hard work of repair.

marsbit1h ago

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

marsbit1h ago

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

"Codex Goal Mode: How to Make AI Work Continuously Toward a Specific Goal" OpenAI's Codex "goal mode" (/goal) transforms the AI from a reactive code assistant into a proactive execution agent capable of working autonomously for hours or even days to achieve a defined objective. To maximize its effectiveness, follow these key principles: 1. **Define Clear, Verifiable Exit Criteria:** The goal prompt should be a concise, measurable success condition, not a lengthy specification. Use quantifiable metrics like "reduce build time by 30%" or "achieve 100% test parity." 2. **Provide Initial Guidance and Tools:** Direct Codex toward likely problem areas and specify available tools (e.g., browsers, testing environments) to prevent it from exploring unproductive paths. 3. **Enable Progress Measurement:** Equip Codex with ways to track advancement, such as creating comparison tools for visual tasks or evaluation sets, ensuring it can gauge its own progress. 4. **Use a Realistic Execution Environment:** For tasks like performance optimization, provide access to environments that closely mimic production (e.g., similar configs, databases) to yield valid results. 5. **Be Cautious with Visual Goals:** Avoid vague "pixel-perfect" instructions. Instead, supplement visual references with functional checklists or design system specifications to prevent Codex from obsessing over minor details. 6. **Implement Progress Tracking:** For long-running tasks, have Codex commit code to draft PRs, update progress documents, or send Slack updates to maintain visibility into its work. 7. **Review and Consolidate Results:** Once the goal is met, instruct Codex to review its work, clean up ineffective experimental code, and reflect on what strategies succeeded or failed. Ultimately, using goal mode shifts the developer's role from writing prompts to managing a persistent engineering agent—defining objectives, establishing metrics, configuring environments, and conducting final reviews.

marsbit2h ago

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

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 S (S) are presented below.

活动图片