Aave Ethereum V3
01Summary
This governance proposal activates the Aave V3 Ethereum pool by completing initial setup, listing 7 assets (WBTC, WETH, wstETH, USDC, DAI, LINK, AAVE), creating an ETH correlated eMode category, transferring emergency admin role to Aave Guardian, and granting POOL_ADMIN permissions to asset listing stewards who will handle individual asset listings before renouncing their permissions.
- Type
- protocol addition
Key changes
- Activate Aave V3 Ethereum pool with 7 initial assets (WBTC, WETH, wstETH, USDC, DAI, LINK, AAVE) with pre-approved configurations(high)
- Create ETH correlated eMode category with 90% LTV and 93% liquidation threshold for WETH and wstETH(high)
- Transfer emergency admin role from Aave Governance V2 Short Executor to Aave Guardian(high)
- Grant POOL_ADMIN permissions to asset listing stewards for distributed asset onboarding(medium)
- Set interest rate strategies and reserve configurations for each asset including supply/borrow caps, borrowing status, and flashloan status(high)
Notable concerns
- AAVE token has borrowing disabled and no flashloan availability unlike other listed assets
- wstETH has relatively low borrow cap of 3,000 units compared to its supply cap of 200,000
- AAVE token has zero reserve factor while all other assets have reserve factors between 10-20%
Generated by Kvorum
02Description
Simple Summary
This governance proposal activates the Aave V3 Ethereum pool (3.0.1), by completing all the initial setup and listing WBTC, WETH, wstETH, USDC, DAI, LINK, and AAVE, already pre-approved by the community. All the Aave Ethereum V3 addresses can be found in the aave-address-book.
Motivation
While AAVE V3 was deployed to various networks right after the release, the Ethereum pool was still running V2. After careful consideration, the community decided to deploy a fresh V3 instead of upgrading the V2 pool, for increased compatibility between the V3 pools and less general complexity. The assets to be listed & respective configurations have been discussed in the governance forum and been decided in the following snapshot.
Specification
This proposal's payload does the following:
- Create the eMode category for eth correlated assets via
POOL_CONFIGURATOR.setEModeCategory(1, 90_00, 93_00, 10_100, address(0), 'ETH correlated') - Swap of emergency admin to Aave Guardian via
ACL_MANAGER.removeEmergencyAdmin(AaveGovernanceV2.SHORT_EXECUTOR)followed byACL_MANAGER.addEmergencyAdmin(GUARDIAN_ETHEREUM) - grant
POOL_ADMINpermissions to all the asset listing stewards created inside theconstructor()viaACL_MANAGER.addPoolAdmin(stewards[i])
The Steward pattern is taken from V3-listing stewards. Each Steward will handle the listing of one specific asset and then renounce to the granted POOL_ADMIN role. This process is needed as otherwise, the proposal's gas limit would be really gas-expensive.
Configuration snapshot
What you can see here is a formatted excerpt of the configuration snapshot with the relevant configurations after proposal execution. You can find the full snapshot in the proposal repository.
Reserve Configurations
| symbol | ltv | liqThreshold | liqBonus | liqProtocolFee | reserveFactor | borrowingEnabled | supplyCap | borrowCap | eModeCategory | isFlashloanable |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WBTC | 70.00% | 75.00% | 6.25% | 10% | 20% | true | 43'000 BTC | 28'000 BTC | - | true |
| WETH | 80.00% | 82.50% | 5.00% | 10% | 15% | true | 1'800'000 WETH | 1'400'000 WETH | ETH correlated | true |
| wstETH | 68.50% | 79.50% | 7.00% | 10% | 15% | true | 200'000 wstETH | 3'000 wstETH | ETH correlated | true |
| USDC | 74.00% | 76.00% | 4.50% | 20% | 10% | true | 1'760'000'000 USDC | 1'580'000'000 USDC | - | true |
| DAI | 64.00% | 77.00% | 4.00% | 20% | 10% | true | 338'000'000 DAI | 271'000'000 DAI | - | true |
| LINK | 50.00% | 65.00% | 7.50% | 10% | 20% | true | 24'000'000 LINK | 13'000'000 LINK | - | true |
| AAVE | 60.00% | 70.00% | 7.50% | 10% | 0% | false | 1'850'000 AAVE | - | - | false |
InterestRateStrategies
| strategy | BaseVariableBorrowRate | VariableRateSlope1 | VariableRateSlope2 | optimalUsageRatio | maxExcessUsageRatio | assets |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0x24701A6368Ff6D2874d6b8cDadd461552B8A5283 | 0% | 7.00% | 300.00% | 45.00% | 55.00% | WBTC, LINK, AAVE |
| 0x53F57eAAD604307889D87b747Fc67ea9DE430B01 | 1.00% | 3.80% | 80.00% | 80.00% | 20.00% | WETH |
| 0x7b8Fa4540246554e77FCFf140f9114de00F8bB8D | 0.25% | 4.50% | 80.00% | 45.00% | 55.00% | wstETH |
| 0xD6293edBB2E5E0687a79F01BEcd51A778d59D1c5 | 0% | 4.00% | 60.00% | 90.00% | 10.00% | USDC |
| 0x694d4cFdaeE639239df949b6E24Ff8576A00d1f2 | 0% | 4.00% | 75.00% | 80.00% | 20.00% | DAI |
EMode categories
| label | ltv | liqThreshold | liqBonus |
|---|---|---|---|
| ETH correlated | 90.00% | 93.00% | 1.00% |
Security procedures
The proposal execution is simulated within the tests and the resulting pool configuration is tested for correctness.
In addition this proposal has been tested one the aave interface using forks.
Aave Companies have reviewed the proposal code.
Deployed Contracts
References
- Discussion: upgrade vs fresh deployment
- Discussion: asset listings & parameters
- Code: ListingEngine
- Code: ProposalPayload
Copyright
Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.
03Mismatch analysis
The decoded calldata contains only a single generic action: an execute() call to the address 0xc5a0ba13a3749c5d4a21934df8fd64821ac3fce7, which matches exactly the 'ProposalPayload' contract address listed in the proposal's 'Deployed Contracts' section. This is the standard Aave governance pattern where the executor delegatecalls into a payload contract that internally performs the eMode category creation, emergency admin swap, POOL_ADMIN grants, and asset listings described in the Specification section. Because the calldata trace stops at this opaque execute() call and does not expose the internal sub-calls (eMode parameters, admin address swap, steward grants, asset configs), it is not possible to directly verify each specific numeric claim (LTV, liquidation thresholds, caps, rate strategy parameters) against on-chain calldata. However, there is no evidence of a target mismatch, extra action, or omitted action at the level we can observe — the single action's target aligns with the contract the description names as responsible for these changes. Given the inability to decode and verify the internal logic, confidence in a detailed comparison is low, but nothing here contradicts the description, so the assessment is 'consistent' rather than a discrepancy verdict.,,}, wait invalid.,,, please ignore stray text.,,
Generated by Kvorum
04Actions
- Target
- 0xc5a0…fce7
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- fallback()
- Arguments
{}- Calldata
05Tally
Summed from votes
06Voters
| Voter | Choice | % of total | Rationale | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 320x329c…3ed4 | For | 219.1K | 31.02% | — | 4y ago |
| 070x0703…961b | For | 90.1K | 12.75% | — | 4y ago |
| DC0xdc1f…e432 | For | 90K | 12.74% | — | 4y ago |
| 620x62a4…816a | For | 81K | 11.47% | — | 4y ago |
| B80xb83b…cf5c | For | 80K | 11.33% | — | 4y ago |
| 730x732a…b848 | For | 47.1K | 6.66% | — | 4y ago |
| B90xb933…8dd1 | For | 42.6K | 6.04% | — | 4y ago |
| 530x5382…1e21 | For | 14.4K | 2.04% | — | 4y ago |
| 7A0x7ae1…e585 | For | 10K | 1.42% | — | 4y ago |
| EA0xea17…6676 | For | 8.6K | 1.22% | — | 4y ago |
| 510x510b…9938 | For | 3K | 0.42% | — | 4y ago |
| 820x82f9…bbfe | For | 3K | 0.42% | — | 4y ago |
| 6A0x6a61…2d7b | For | 1.8K | 0.26% | — | 4y ago |
| 7C0x7c78…bf19 | For | 1.5K | 0.21% | — | 4y ago |
| C20xc2ed…dce6 | For | 1.2K | 0.18% | — | 4y ago |
| 510x5162…02c5 | For | 1.2K | 0.17% | — | 4y ago |
| 150x15b3…54ed | For | 1K | 0.15% | — | 4y ago |
| 730x7399…9179 | For | 1K | 0.14% | — | 4y ago |
| B80xb82e…35ab | For | 993.6 | 0.14% | — | 4y ago |
| E30xe335…80d6 | For | 960.2 | 0.14% | — | 4y ago |
| AB0xabc5…947a | For | 603.3 | 0.09% | — | 4y ago |
| 7F0x7f1f…e160 | For | 513.9 | 0.07% | — | 4y ago |
| 830x8354…b450 | For | 488.4 | 0.07% | — | 4y ago |
| 460x46ab…b4d1 | For | 386.1 | 0.05% | — | 4y ago |
| B90xb99d…952a | For | 351.3 | 0.05% | — | 4y ago |
| D90xd9f2…6ac3 | For | 344.1 | 0.05% | — | 4y ago |
| E50xe5a0…a90c | For | 275 | 0.04% | — | 4y ago |
| D80xd862…6a84 | For | 270.9 | 0.04% | — | 4y ago |
| 0C0x0c01…4d8b | For | 249 | 0.04% | — | 4y ago |
| 860x865b…5c64 | For | 225.5 | 0.03% | — | 4y ago |
| 310x31f0…88f8 | For | 193 | 0.03% | — | 4y ago |
| FE0xfe99…b14d | For | 171.2 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| CB0xcbe1…a3b1 | For | 153.3 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| F10xf1df…f193 | For | 143.1 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| ED0xed9c…54fe | For | 129.7 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| D20xd2e5…702f | For | 121.6 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| 580x58ac…a73d | For | 113.8 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| D30xd3b1…e1d2 | For | 112.7 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| 680x6805…b842 | For | 109.5 | 0.02% | — | 4y ago |
| 350x35dc…8a15 | For | 104.8 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| 460x469b…178a | For | 100.7 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| F80xf848…0209 | For | 100.6 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| 460x46de…78fd | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| A70xa7cc…7a0a | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| D90xd9af…4409 | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| A90xa96b…9137 | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| 6A0x6a4c…c823 | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| FD0xfd43…6289 | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| 1E0x1ec2…a460 | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| AE0xae85…1c28 | For | 100 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
07Forum
- [ARC] Aave V3 Ethereum Deployment: Assets and Configurations ↗discourse · high confidence
Arguments for
- V3 Ethereum enables the community to reassess and improve risk configurations of assets compared to V2, with new features like isolation mode and siloed borrowing for safer collateral management.— Pauljlei, sakulstra, Emilio
- A broader initial asset listing encourages migration from V2 to V3 by offering more options and strategic partnerships, including important DAO relationships with Balancer, Yearn, and other protocols.— oneski22, Emilio, Llamaxyz
- wstETH should replace stETH to avoid precision issues in contracts like liquiditySwap and repayWithCollateral that require exact balance tracking.— sakulstra, Emilio, Llamaxyz, bgdlabs
- Supply and borrow caps provide a more dynamic and flexible mechanism for conservative launches without reducing capital efficiency and user incentives to migrate from V2.— Pauljlei, jmo
- DPI should be included as it has proven on-chain demand, permissionless mint/redeem mechanics that prevent oracle manipulation, and successful track record on Aave V2.— Llamaxyz, funkmasterflex
- Including isolation mode for riskier assets allows broader asset availability while mitigating risk through debt ceilings and supply caps.— Emilio, Pauljlei, soanky
Arguments against
- Long-tail assets like DPI, ENS, YFI, and 1INCH have low TVL and limited organic borrowing demand on V2, making them economically inefficient to maintain given upcoming Chainlink feed subsidies ending.— fig, MarcZeller
- A phased launch focusing initially on high-quality collateral is more prudent given deteriorated market conditions post-CRV attack, with gradual expansion rather than broad immediate onboarding.— ChaosLabs, MarcZeller
- V2 liquidation thresholds are too high for current market conditions and should not be directly copied to V3; reducing them on V2 first avoids cascading user liquidations.— ChaosLabs
- Enabling stETH/wstETH borrowing with high caps ($500M+) creates undue liquidity concentration risk on Curve with insufficient precedent from other protocols.— ChaosLabs, recizk
- High-risk parameters should be reduced preemptively rather than corrected after incidents, as unwinding risk is costly and time-consuming as demonstrated by recent protocol events.— ChaosLabs
Unresolved concerns
- Should Gauntlet and Chaos Labs present a unified risk methodology or should the community choose between competing frameworks?— ChaosLabs, jmo
- What is the optimal approach to launch conservatively: reduce liquidation thresholds on V2, use caps on V3, or implement incentive programs for migration?— Pauljlei, ChaosLabs
- How should GHO's collateral requirements be enforced technically to prevent under-collateralization or recursive GHO-as-collateral scenarios?— MatthewGraham
- What oracle and price feed adapters are necessary for wstETH and other assets, and are sufficient Chainlink feeds available given subsidy changes?— bgdlabs, MarcZeller
- Should stETH be permitted as borrowable collateral given withdrawal contract remains undeployed and the protocol cannot control timing or market impact?— recizk
Notable participants
- PauljleiGauntlet risk manager who authored the proposal, evolved multiple asset listing options (Gauntlet 1-4), and defended parameter methodology throughout the thread.
- sakulstraEarly technical contributor who highlighted stETH precision bugs and advocated for wstETH replacement to avoid contract failures.
- oneski22Community member who pushed for broader initial listings including strategic assets (BAL, CVX, YFI, FRAX) to accelerate V2 migration.
- EmilioContributor who proposed using isolation mode extensively to allow more asset inclusion while mitigating risk, moderating between conservative and expansive approaches.
- ChaosLabsRisk manager advocating for phased conservative launch focused on GHO readiness, emphasizing market conditions deteriorated since V2 parameter setting.
- LlamaxyzDelegate supporting broader asset inclusion and proposing eModes for strategic assets like BAL, CRV, and CVX aligned with partnership goals.
- jmoGauntlet representative defending parameter recommendations, emphasizing caps over LT reductions, and committing to collaboration with other risk providers.
- MarcZellerACI member raising economic viability concerns about long-tail assets given Chainlink fee subsidy changes expected in 2023.
- bgdlabsTechnical contributor confirming assets are V2-valid, explaining oracle solutions (adapters for ETH/stETH, wstETH, WBTC), and advocating parameter consistency across V3 instances.
- figCommunity member questioning inclusion of low-marketcap assets like DPI and ENS given limited historical borrowing demand on V2.
Generated by Kvorum
08Similar proposals
- aaveexecutedAave v3 Gnosis Activation86%
- aaveexecutedAave V3.6 MegaETH Activation86%
- aaveexecutedAave Metis V385%
- aaveexecutedAave v3 Linea Activation85%
- aaveexecutedAave v3 Base Activation84%
- aaveexecutedAave v3 BNB Activation83%
- aaveexecutedAave V3.3 Soneium Activation82%
- aaveexecutedAave v3 zkSync Activation82%
- aaveexecutedAave V3.6 Mantle Activation81%
- aaveexecutedAave V3 Aptos Activation81%