Aave's Brand Control Vote Reveals Deep DAO-Labs Tension Over Governance Alignment

The Aave community has made a decisive statement about brand ownership and protocol governance. In a Christmas Eve vote that shattered participation records, token holders overwhelmingly rejected a proposal seeking to transfer Aave’s brand assets—including domains, social media accounts, and naming rights—from Aave Labs to DAO control.

Record Turnout Masks Community Division

The numbers tell a compelling story. On-chain data shows 1.8 million AAVE tokens participated, marking the highest voter engagement in the protocol’s history. However, the vote split reveals underlying fractures: 994,800 AAVE (55.29%) voted against the proposal, 741,600 (41.21%) chose to abstain, and only 63,000 tokens (3.5%) voted in favor.

Marc Zeller, founder of the Aavechan Initiative, reframed the results as a positive sign for decentralization itself. “Despite an unfair timeline and every practical disadvantage stacked against the DAO, participation broke records,” he posted. “That is not a defeat for decentralization. It is the opposite of apathy, and that is exactly what a healthy DAO should look like.”

The Revenue Dispute That Started It All

The brand proposal emerged from escalating tensions over how Aave Labs handles protocol revenues. The controversy ignited in December when governance participants discovered that Aave Labs’ integration of CoW Swap into the official app.aave.com redirect generated estimated $10 million in annual swap fees—money previously shared with the DAO treasury under the ParaSwap arrangement, but now flowing to Aave Labs–controlled wallets.

This move sparked accusations of “stealth privatization” and highlighted a fundamental misalignment: a centralized development company increasingly controlling key infrastructure decisions while token holders bear protocol risk.

Leadership Responds to Governance Friction

Stani Kulechov, Aave Labs’ founder and the proposal’s primary advocate, acknowledged the vote’s significance while maintaining his conviction. After recently disclosing a $15 million personal AAVE purchase, Stani framed the debate as “productive discussion that’s essential for the long-term health of Aave” and pledged greater transparency around economic alignment between Labs and token holders.

“This is my life’s work,” Stani said on X. “I am putting my own capital behind my conviction.” He emphasized the personal stake behind his push for onbrand governance clarity.

Evgeny Gaevoy, co-founder of Wintermute and a disclosed AAVE investor, voted against the proposal but identified the core problem: “a clear expectation mismatch between AAVE Labs and a significant number of AAVE token holders.” Gaevoy argued the proposal lacked specifics on how a DAO-controlled entity would operate, what profit structure it would maintain, and whether it would genuinely deliver value to token holders.

What This Vote Means for DeFi Governance

This rejection signals that DeFi communities increasingly scrutinize how protocol development remains aligned with token economics. Unlike traditional corporate structures, blockchain governance demands transparency about who controls resources and how revenue flows.

AAVE Token Metrics (as of latest update):

• Current Price: $156.44
• 24h Change: -4.92%
• Market Cap: $2.38B
• 24h Volume: $3.75M

The vote reveals that even with record participation, achieving consensus on sensitive governance issues remains challenging. Yet as Marc Zeller noted, the mere fact that 1.8 million voting power mobilized to engage—despite compressed timelines and holiday disruption—demonstrates the DAO framework functioning exactly as intended.

The debate continues about how Aave can maintain its onbrand commitment to decentralization while supporting a private development team. This tension will likely define the next phase of DeFi protocol governance across the ecosystem.