The Structure, Risks, and New Cycle of the On-Chain Lending Market

marsbit2026-01-28 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-01-28 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

On-chain lending is evolving from a tool primarily for leverage into a fundamental infrastructure for capital allocation, now representing 53.54% of the total DeFi TVL at approximately $64.3 billion. Aave dominates the sector with around 50% market share. The integration of Real-World Assets (RWA), such as credit assets and U.S. Treasuries, is emerging as a key growth driver, supported by improving macroeconomic conditions and regulatory clarity. However, the market faces significant risks including liquidity volatility, collateral liquidations, credit defaults, and cross-chain security vulnerabilities. Future trends point toward institutional adoption, tokenization of securities, fixed and floating rate products, and a bifurcation between compliant and high-risk lending layers. The sector is transitioning into a mature component of the global financial system.

Author: CoinW Research Institute

Key Takeaways

On-chain lending functionality is gradually transforming, evolving from an early tool primarily for leverage into a fundamental infrastructure for capital allocation. On-chain lending has become a crucial component of the DeFi ecosystem. Currently, the TVL of on-chain lending protocols is approximately $64.3 billion, accounting for about 53.54% of the total DeFi TVL.

Aave has become the leading protocol in the on-chain lending sector, with a TVL of about $32.9 billion, representing roughly 50% of the total lending sector TVL. Meanwhile, protocols like Morpho continue to consolidate their market share, resulting in a competitive landscape characterized by one dominant player and several strong contenders.

Credit-based assets have become a significant part of on-chain Real World Assets (RWA). As more types of debt instruments are introduced on-chain and institutional demand for compliant, traceable collateral increases, RWA lending is poised to become another major growth engine. Simultaneously, improvements in both the macroeconomic monetary environment and regulatory frameworks are collectively reducing the costs associated with capital flow and compliance, creating smoother external conditions for market development.

On-chain lending protocols also face multiple risks. Firstly, they are highly dependent on collateral value and market liquidity, making them susceptible to liquidations during market volatility. Secondly, the introduction of unsecured lending and RWA increases credit default and counterparty risks. Additionally, over-reliance on token incentives can artificially inflate scale, and cross-chain expansion exposes vulnerabilities in bridge security. Therefore, on-chain lending protocols must balance security, liquidity, and compliance while pursuing growth.

With the gradual tokenization of securities and the entry of compliant assets like U.S. Treasuries onto the chain, on-chain lending is evolving from a crypto-native financing tool into mainstream financial infrastructure, with a more robust collateral foundation. In this process, inter-institutional on-chain lending is expected to be a significant source of growth. At the same time, the coexistence of fixed and floating interest rates will drive the maturation of the on-chain interest rate system. Regulatory and capital logic may also lead to a market structure divided into a compliant, stable layer and a high-risk, innovative layer. On-chain lending will accelerate its integration into the global capital market through asset compliance and institutional alignment.

Table of Contents

I. Overview of the On-Chain Lending Market

  • 1.1. Market Size and Capital Flow
  • 1.2. Macro and Industry Drivers
  • 1.3. Regulatory Dynamics and Compliance

II. Classification of On-Chain Lending Markets

  • 2.1. Collateralized Lending Protocols
  • 2.2. Uncollateralized Lending Protocols
  • 2.3. Modular Lending Protocols
  • 2.4. Integration of RWA and Lending

III. Competitive Landscape

  • 3.1. Leading Protocol Landscape and TVL Changes
  • 3.2. Revenue Structure and Profit Model Comparison
  • 3.3. User Profile and Asset Structure
  • 3.4. Multi-Chain Deployment and Ecosystem Integration

IV. Risks, Dilemmas, and Challenges

  • 4.1. Liquidity Risk
  • 4.2. Credit Default Risk
  • 4.3. Incentives and Growth Illusion
  • 4.4. Cross-Chain Risk

V. Potential Development Trends

  • 5.1. On-Chain Transformation of Inter-Institutional Lending
  • 5.2. On-Chain Tokenization of Securities and Collateral Potential
  • 5.3. U.S. Treasuries as Core Lending Assets
  • 5.4. Coexistence of Fixed and Floating Interest Rates
  • 5.5. Two-Tier Structural Differentiation in the Lending Market

VI. Conclusion

References

On-chain lending protocols have become a vital part of the DeFi ecosystem. Evolving from initial tools for leverage expansion, they now encompass diverse capital markets including stablecoins and RWA. These protocols not only steadily carry liquidity but are increasingly becoming centers for capital pricing and crucial hubs for capital allocation. Currently, the TVL of on-chain lending protocols is approximately $64.3 billion, accounting for about 53.54% of the total DeFi TVL (nearly $120.2 billion). Specifically, Aave alone holds about 50% of the lending TVL, approximately $32.9 billion; protocols like Morpho hold respective market shares.

Furthermore, the diversity of funding sources and asset classes in on-chain lending is increasing, with RWA becoming a new engine for protocol growth. The structure of the on-chain lending market faces a situation of coexisting growth and challenges. On one hand, protocol TVL has gradually recovered, showing a overall market recovery trend. On the other hand, the market still faces structural challenges: severe liquidity fragmentation, dispersed funds across protocols and chains, and a lack of efficient liquidity integration mechanisms; traditional stablecoin lending is nearing saturation, while RWA and institutional credit supply remains insufficient, leading to interest rate differentiation and differences in risk appetite. Below, this report will provide a systematic analysis of the operational logic, current development status, and trends of the on-chain lending sector from the perspectives of market overview, market classification, and competitor landscape.

Full report available at: https://www.coinw.com/zh_CN/research/on-chain-lending-market-structure-risks-and-the-new-cycle/106

İlgili Sorular

QWhat is the current Total Value Locked (TVL) in on-chain lending protocols and what percentage of the total DeFi TVL does it represent?

AThe current TVL in on-chain lending protocols is approximately $64.3 billion, which represents about 53.54% of the total DeFi TVL.

QWhich protocol is the dominant leader in the on-chain lending sector and what is its market share?

AAave is the dominant leader in the on-chain lending sector, holding a TVL of approximately $32.9 billion and accounting for about 50% of the total lending market TVL.

QWhat are two major risks faced by on-chain lending protocols mentioned in the article?

ATwo major risks are: 1) High dependence on collateral value and market liquidity, making them vulnerable to liquidations during market volatility. 2) The introduction of unsecured lending and Real World Assets (RWA) increases credit default and counterparty risk.

QWhat emerging asset class is highlighted as a new growth engine for on-chain lending?

ACredit-type assets, particularly Real World Assets (RWA), are highlighted as a new and important growth engine for on-chain lending.

QWhat is one predicted future trend for the structure of the on-chain lending market according to the article?

AOne predicted trend is the market bifurcating into a two-tiered system, with a compliant and stable layer coexisting with a high-risk innovation layer, driven by regulatory and capital logic.

İlgili Okumalar

STAR 50 Soars 10.73%, Why Did A-Shares Stage a "V-Shaped Reversal"?

After a prolonged decline, the Chinese A-share market staged a strong rally on July 21. The STAR 50 index surged 10.73%, its largest single-day gain in nearly a year, leading a broad-based "V-shaped" reversal. The Shanghai Composite Index rose 1.79%, the Shenzhen Component Index gained 4.81%, and the ChiNext Index jumped 7.05%. Total market turnover reached 2.97 trillion yuan, an increase of 256.1 billion yuan from the previous session, with over 3,100 stocks advancing. The semiconductor sector spearheaded the rebound, with related ETFs posting significant gains. Analysts attribute the surge to three converging factors. First, coordinated capital inflows from "national team" institutions, insurance funds, listed company buybacks, and fund house self-purchases have bolstered market liquidity and confidence. Second, supportive policy signals, including commitments from regulators to ensure stable market operations, provided a favorable backdrop. Third, a stabilization and recovery in overseas markets, notably South Korea, created a positive external environment. Institutions suggest the most severe panic selling phase for the tech sector has likely passed, following a significant digestion of crowded positions and leveraged funds. While short-term volatility may persist, the medium to long-term outlook remains underpinned by enduring trends like AI computing demand expansion and semiconductor localization. The market's focus now shifts to the sustainability of supportive fund flows, earnings reports, and upcoming catalysts from the global AI industry chain.

marsbit4 dk önce

STAR 50 Soars 10.73%, Why Did A-Shares Stage a "V-Shaped Reversal"?

marsbit4 dk önce

U.S. Tech Momentum Stocks Post Largest Single-Day Gain Ever, But Is the Plunge Over?

US tech momentum stocks staged a sharp rebound on Tuesday (July 21st). Morgan Stanley's TMT Momentum Factor surged over 12%, marking its largest single-day gain on record, exceeding even peaks from the 2000 dot-com bubble. Key momentum indices from Goldman Sachs also posted their strongest daily performances in years. The rally was led by semiconductors, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index jumping 4.6%. This rebound followed three consecutive down days and a cumulative 33% plunge in momentum stocks, one of the steepest drawdowns since the dot-com era. Analysts attribute the surge largely to a short squeeze. Heavy selling had pushed high-beta momentum stocks into deeply oversold territory, forcing many short sellers, particularly in Asia, to cover their positions, creating a self-reinforcing buying spiral. However, the rebound's internals appear weak. Trading volume was notably low, and advancing stocks still lagged decliners on the S&P 500, indicating a narrow, concentrated rally rather than broad market participation. Diverging views emerge on the outlook. BTIG warns the bounce has hit key resistance and recommends selling into strength, citing extreme volatility and historical parallels to past market tops. Conversely, Goldman Sachs and UBS believe the momentum unwind is nearing its end, suggesting it may be time to gradually add exposure, as positioning has been significantly reduced. They caution, however, that high volatility warrants a measured approach, potentially using defined-risk strategies. The upcoming earnings season, particularly reports from major tech firms like Alphabet, is seen as a critical test for the rally's sustainability. Simultaneously, bond markets flashed a warning, with yields rising partly due to spiking oil prices. Analysts note that if long-term Treasury yields break decisively higher, it could pose a significant headwind for equities, especially growth stocks.

marsbit11 dk önce

U.S. Tech Momentum Stocks Post Largest Single-Day Gain Ever, But Is the Plunge Over?

marsbit11 dk önce

U.S. Tech Momentum Stocks Record Largest Single-Day Gain Ever, but Has the Rout Ended?

U.S. tech momentum stocks staged a dramatic rebound on Tuesday, July 21st. Key momentum indices like the Morgan Stanley TMT Momentum Factor and Goldman Sachs' High Beta Momentum Long Index posted historic or near-historic single-day gains, fueled largely by semiconductor stocks. This sharp rally followed a severe three-day sell-off that saw momentum stocks plunge 33%, marking one of the steepest pullbacks since the dot-com bubble. Analysts attribute the bounce primarily to a short squeeze, as forced covering from over-leveraged traders, particularly in Asia, created a buying spiral. However, the rally's health is questioned due to weak market breadth—overall trading volume was low, and decliners outnumbered advancers in the S&P 500 despite the index's gain—suggesting a narrow, concentrated surge rather than broad recovery. Opinions on the sustainability diverge. BTIG strategists warn the rebound has hit key resistance levels, citing extreme volatility and historic stock dispersion as signs of an ongoing broader correction, and recommend selling into strength. Conversely, Goldman Sachs and UBS view the aggressive momentum unwinding as nearing its end, noting reduced positioning and a lack of new fundamental catalysts. They suggest the sell-off presents a selective opportunity to add exposure, albeit cautiously and gradually using defined-risk strategies. The immediate trajectory hinges on the ongoing earnings season, with market focus on Alphabet's capital expenditure guidance for AI investment clarity. Meanwhile, bond markets present a risk, with rising Treasury yields—potentially heading toward 5.5%—and widening credit spreads for mega-cap tech companies posing a threat to equity valuations. The combination of technical factors, earnings results, and macro conditions leaves the durability of the rebound in doubt.

链捕手14 dk önce

U.S. Tech Momentum Stocks Record Largest Single-Day Gain Ever, but Has the Rout Ended?

链捕手14 dk önce

Long-Divided Must Unite, Long-United Must Divide: When L1 Becomes Its Own Rollup, What Is Ethereum's Endgame?

"The Inevitable Cycle: When L1 Becomes Its Own Rollup – What is Ethereum's Endgame?" For years, the Ethereum community grappled with concerns that L2s were fragmenting the ecosystem and eroding L1's value. While L2s provided cheaper execution, they also splintered liquidity and the unified user experience of a single chain. This has prompted a fundamental reassessment of the relationship between L1 and L2. Ethereum's roadmap is evolving. The "Scale" initiative merges L1 and L2 expansion into a holistic framework. L1 itself is advancing with higher gas limits, statelessness, and zkEVM verification, no longer content to be just a low-throughput settlement layer. Consequently, the primary value proposition of L2s is shifting from merely providing cheap blockspace to offering L1 cannot easily provide: application-specific optimizations, privacy features, and flexible governance models. L2s are becoming a spectrum of execution environments with varying degrees of security inheritance from Ethereum. A critical challenge in this multi-chain future is interoperability. The vision is to make Ethereum "feel like one chain again." This relies on advancements in native account abstraction (like EIP-7702) and intent-based architectures (Open Intents Framework), where users declare desired outcomes, and solvers handle the complex cross-chain execution. Furthermore, shortening Ethereum's finality time from minutes to seconds is crucial, as it underpins trust between chains for bridges, stablecoins, and cross-chain applications. Perhaps the most provocative idea is that Ethereum L1 itself could become a form of "its own Rollup." As zkEVM and proof systems mature, high-performance nodes could execute transactions and generate validity proofs. Regular validators would then verify these proofs instead of re-executing all transactions. This blurs the traditional L1/L2 hierarchy, making "Rollup" more of a general execution-verification architecture. Native Rollup aims to integrate L2 validation more directly into the Ethereum protocol, allowing L2s to inherit L1's security more fully and move away from reliance on security councils. In the end, L2s are not destined to replace L1 or be made obsolete by it. The likely future is a unified system where diverse execution environments—each optimized for specific use cases like DeFi, gaming, or privacy—coexist. They will share a common foundation of security, liquidity, and verifiable state, seamlessly connected to restore a cohesive user experience. The next phase for Ethereum is not just about scaling through separation, but about intelligently reintegrating what was separated back into a coherent whole.

链捕手30 dk önce

Long-Divided Must Unite, Long-United Must Divide: When L1 Becomes Its Own Rollup, What Is Ethereum's Endgame?

链捕手30 dk önce

İşlemler

Spot
活动图片