KVORUM
aaveSource: Aave governor v2 · #153

Add rETH to Aave Ethereum V3 pool

executedFeb 12, 2023, 12:01 PM UTCby320x329c…3ed4

01Summary

AISummary by Kvorumclaude-haiku-4-5

Proposal to onboard rETH (Rocket Pool Ethereum) as a collateral and borrowable asset on Aave v3 Ethereum mainnet with specified risk parameters including 67% LTV, 1,200 borrow cap, and 10,000 supply cap.

Type
protocol addition

Key changes

  • Add rETH as collateral and borrowable asset to Aave v3 Ethereum with 67% LTV and 74% liquidation threshold(high)
  • Implement supply cap of 10,000 rETH and borrow cap of 1,200 rETH to limit risk exposure(high)
  • Configure interest rate curve with base 0%, slope1 7%, slope2 300%, and optimal utilization 45%(medium)
  • Enable flashloan functionality for rETH(medium)
  • Set 7.5% liquidation bonus and 15% reserve factor(medium)

Notable concerns

  • Proposal introduces new liquid staking derivative (LSD) to Aave, which requires careful risk management given market volatility
Contracts0xae78736Cd615f374D3085123A210448E74Fc63930xC51e6E38d406F98049622Ca54a6096a23826B4260x2dbbb5a1248bbbeddc2adee52a0995ed85f56006
Generated by Kvorum
model: claude-haiku-4-5
provider: anthropic
profile: anthropic-fast-v1
prompt: v1.0
generated: 2mo ago
Read the description ↗

02Description

237 words

Simple Summary

This AIP proposal presents Aave with the opportunity to onboard rETH to the Ethereum v3 Liquidity Pool.

Motivation

Supporting Liquid Staking Derivative (LSDs) diversity is part of the Aave-Chan Initiative (ACI) delegate platform.

The ACI does not have any link nor is paid by Rocket Pool or any entity to present this AIP.

The risk parameters provided introduce rETH as a collateral asset.

Supply and borrow caps are suggested for this asset to limit risk exposure, the caps have bet proposed by a join collaboration between Gauntlet & Chaos Labs.

Specification

Ticker: RETH

Contract Address: 0xae78736Cd615f374D3085123A210448E74Fc6393

Risk ParameterValue
Isolation ModeNO
Enable BorrowYES
Enable CollateralYES
Loan To Value67%
Liquidation Threshold74%
Liquidation Bonus7.5%
Reserve Factor15%
Liquidation Protocol Fee10%
Borrow Cap1200
Supply Cap10K
Debt CeilingN/A
Base0%
Slope17%
Uoptimal45%
Slope2300%

The proposal payload uses the GenericListingEngine to perform a new asset listing with the following parameters:

IGenericV3ListingEngine.Listing({
      asset: RETH,
      assetSymbol: 'rETH',
      priceFeed: RETH_USD_FEED,
      rateStrategy: 0x24701A6368Ff6D2874d6b8cDadd461552B8A5283,
      enabledToBorrow: true,
      stableRateModeEnabled: false,
      borrowableInIsolation: false,
      withSiloedBorrowing: false,
      flashloanable: true,
      ltv: 67_00,
      liqThreshold: 74_00,
      liqBonus: 7_50,
      reserveFactor: 15_00,
      supplyCap: 10_000,
      borrowCap: 1_200,
      debtCeiling: 0,
      liqProtocolFee: 10_00,
      eModeCategory: 0
    });

References

A list of relevant links like for this proposal e.g.

Security Considerations

The proposal Payload was reviewed byBored Ghost Developing.

Deployed Contracts

Copyright

Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.

03Mismatch analysis

AIMismatch analysis by Kvorummedium confidenceclaude-sonnet-5
Consistent

The proposal follows the standard Aave governance pattern: a single top-level action that calls execute() on a dedicated payload contract, which internally performs the actual asset listing via the GenericListingEngine. The decoded calldata shows exactly this — one action, target matching the 'Deployed Contracts' address cited in the description, function execute()/fallback() with no arguments, since the specific listing parameters (LTV, caps, rate strategy, etc.) are encoded in the payload contract's bytecode rather than in the top-level proposal calldata. This is expected and not a red flag for this proposal type. Because the decoded action set doesn't expose the internal parameter values, I cannot directly cross-verify each risk parameter (LTV, caps, etc.) against on-chain calldata, but there is no evidence of mismatch, and the target address, action type, and overall intent (listing rETH) align between the description and the decoded action. No omissions, extra claims, or value/target mismatches were found within what is verifiable from the provided data. Confidence is medium rather than high because full verification of the granular risk parameters would require introspecting the payload contract's bytecode, which is outside the scope of the decoded action list provided.

Generated by Kvorum
model: claude-sonnet-5
provider: anthropic
profile: anthropic-strong-v1
prompt: v1.0
generated: 2mo ago
Review the decoded actions ↗

04Actions

1 total
#0fallback()chain 0x1
Target
0x2dbb…6006
Value
0 wei
Function
fallback()
Arguments
{}
Calldata

05Tally

Summed from votes

Voters0
VP participating0
Outcome (current)—
Current support—

06Voters

0 total

No votes recorded yet.

07Forum

AIForum synthesis by Kvorumclaude-sonnet-5
sentiment · favorablethread · constructive

Arguments for

  • LSD assets are strategically valuable for Aave, replicating the success of stETH to diversify liquidity, boost revenue, and support ecosystem decentralization.— MarcZeller, Hazbobo
  • Rocket Pool is battle-tested, well-audited, and permissionless, making rETH a safe and credible asset to onboard.— Hazbobo, MarcZeller
  • Being an early or first-mover lending market for rETH creates a scalable revenue opportunity via recursive LSD/ETH borrowing loops.— Llamaxyz
  • rETH could serve as a high-quality collateral asset for expanding GHO minting opportunities.— Kentphilly
  • Listing rETH strengthens alignment and collaboration between the Rocket Pool and Aave communities.— fig
  • Aave should broaden support to other LSD-related assets, including RPL, given Rocket Pool's tokenomics and node operator demand.— krahula.eth
  • rETH's non-rebasing ERC-20 design and appreciating value over ETH make it a technically simple and attractive collateral upgrade over plain ETH.— MarcZeller

Arguments against

  • rETH has a materially weaker liquidity profile than wstETH, justifying more conservative LTV/LT parameters than initially proposed.— Pauljlei, ChaosLabs
  • Enabling eMode immediately risks quickly exhausting limited caps among a small set of leveraged borrowers, yielding less representative usage data.— miguelmtz
  • Because eMode categories share a single set of parameters across all included assets, adding rETH to the existing ETH-correlated eMode category would force changes affecting WETH and wstETH as well.— bgdlabs, ChaosLabs
  • It may be preferable to delay eMode inclusion until after further analysis and the Shanghai upgrade, when withdrawal mechanics are clearer.— ChaosLabs, Llamaxyz

Unresolved concerns

  • Whether rETH should be included in eMode at launch or only after the Shanghai upgrade was left to a multi-option snapshot vote rather than settled by consensus in the thread.— Pauljlei, miguelmtz, bgdlabs
  • The exact eMode parameter set (Option 1 vs Option 2 vs Option 3) to use if the community chose to enable eMode was not fully resolved before the vote.— Pauljlei, Llamaxyz
  • Whether to establish the rETH pool before the Shanghai upgrade and tighten risk controls afterward was raised but not directly answered.— Threader
  • Requests to extend rETH collateral support to Layer 2 deployments (e.g., Optimism, Arbitrum) were raised after the main proposal passed but left without a governance process answer in this thread.— 3.1415r, gohawi8287

Notable participants

  • MarcZellerProposer from the Aave-Chan Initiative who authored the ARC, managed parameter updates, and escalated the proposal to Snapshot and execution.
  • PauljleiGauntlet risk analyst who provided detailed joint risk parameter recommendations and eMode analysis throughout the thread.
  • ChaosLabsCo-authored risk recommendations with Gauntlet and advised caution on eMode timing.
  • LlamaxyzDelegate service that argued for first-mover advantage and weighed in on eMode option preferences.
  • bgdlabsProvided a critical technical clarification about how eMode categories and shared parameters function on Aave v3.
  • miguelmtzRaised a data-driven objection to enabling eMode immediately, preferring to wait for more representative usage data.
  • HazboboEarly supporter emphasizing rETH's audited, battle-tested status and strategic LSD value.
  • KentphillySupporter who highlighted rETH's potential role in GHO minting expansion.
  • figSupporter linking rETH onboarding to prior cbETH support and community alignment.
  • krahula.ethSuggested broader LSD onboarding including RPL alongside rETH.
Generated by Kvorum
model: claude-sonnet-5
provider: anthropic
profile: anthropic-strong-v1
prompt: v1.0
generated: 2mo ago
Open the thread ↗